Review: Winning in Tough Hold 'em Games by Stox/Zobags

[stoxtrader]

what microbob said.

[BobbyBass]

My confusion is where this seems to contradict the importance of folding majority of time with these hands after there is a preflop raise. In fact, in the SSH book they emphasize this being one of the biggest mistakes in poker.

Also, I would have a tough time raising with hands like 55 from say mid to late position especially with fairly loose 6-seated table, unless I know there will be multiple players. Am I wrong in thinking this way?

By the way, appreciate the feedback so far.

[Niediam]

Stox type game: fold fold fold fold fold raise...

SSH type game: call call call call call raise...

Do you see the difference?

[stoxtrader]

bobby - we made sure we were very specific throughout the book. I suggest you get more specific when talking about hands/examining situations. this should help to improve your game I would think.

[Cactus Jack]

[ QUOTE ]
Stox type game: fold fold fold fold fold raise...

SSH type game: call call call call call raise...

Do you see the difference?

[/ QUOTE ]

In every book there is a section on game selection. It's written in invisible ink.

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Stox type game: fold fold fold fold fold raise...

SSH type game: call call call call call raise...

Do you see the difference?

[/ QUOTE ]

In every book there is a section on game selection. It's written in invisible ink.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a good point - especially considering the internet/empirical foundation of WITHG, I'm surprised in retrospect that there is no discussion of the profile of a table which will fit in with the book's recommendations.

[stoxtrader]

The tools in the book are *supposed* to span game and player types.

this is where there are so many If/Then scenarios.

If passive then...

if aggro then....

if loose then....

if tight then....

but yes, not much on multiway postflop pots but then again in those hands player specific reads decrease in value (not to zero), tho there are a few parts on this.

[BobbyBass]

Thanks Stox. (As a sidenote, my previous jobs were fund wholesaling, promoting investments to guys like you [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img])

Anyway, I hope I don't come across as a complete loon here. Just looking for any tidbits of wisdom & clarity. As I go through the book an other example is that seems to be pushed hard is Ax unsuited, in one case to isolate an opponent (pg 70). The Sklansky method's general premise is to dump any Ax (below A9), and in fact is so poor a hand its not even rated in his charts.

I would have guessed most of the value gained in poker would have been exploiting loose players playing any A.

Please correct my thought process here.


Thanks in advance.

[uDevil]

[ QUOTE ]

I would have guessed most of the value gained in poker would have been exploiting loose players playing any A.

Please correct my thought process here.


[/ QUOTE ]

You're thinking in absolute terms. I'd change your statement to this: A significant portion of the value in poker comes from exploiting loose players playing hands worse than yours.

A7o is a strong enough hand to isolate a sufficiently loose player.

--NotStox

[BobbyBass]

^Well the other thing to add is that on smaller limit $3/6 or 2/4, generally speaking, its not as easily stealing blinds. So in our example would A7o raise against a loose player UTG still provide you enough equity to raise?