Gigabet's hand histories - Page 3

pineapple888 · #21 02-04-2006, 05:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I truely understand poker, so I understand that watching any really good player play and figuring out why he approached a situation different than I would is a great learning tool, regardless if I adapt that approach in my game or not.

If you haven't figured that out yet, you have alot to learn still

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the lecture. I have nothing to learn from Gigabet about how to beat the 22s. See you at the tables.

pineapple888 · #22 02-04-2006, 05:14 AM

[ QUOTE ]
because if i take any random nl cash player who is decent he will do the same. i'm not saying that gigabet is terrific at these things, i'm saying that he at least attempts them, while most of the forum does not.

c

[/ QUOTE ]

What possible relevance could NL cash have to the Party 22s?

pineapple888 · #23 02-04-2006, 05:18 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As I've said 2348270398472134 times, short of esoteric data mining and table selection, there is just no way to beat the 11s and 22s except to wait for good hands and value bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically what you're saying is that there's no way a bluff can ever be profitable at a lower level.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please, don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say that at all. There are some spots. CBs with outs are the most common. But trying to force a 22 player off a hand with nothing is just the height of idiocy.

costanza_g · #24 02-04-2006, 05:19 AM

[ QUOTE ]
. I have nothing to learn from Gigabet about how to beat the 22s

[/ QUOTE ]

wow.

Paul Thomson · #25 02-04-2006, 05:20 AM

Fair enough Michael C. I see your point. The HHs were a way of verifying whether or not Gigabet completed the prop bet within the stated confines of the bet. They weren't intended as a learning tool.

If gigabet doesn't want me or anyone else to share specific hands or any part of the HHs, then I won't. You make a good point.

PT

pineapple888 · #26 02-04-2006, 05:22 AM

[ QUOTE ]
while i entirely agree with greke, there was another point you missed out on.

pineapple said "wait for good hands and then value bet"

really, you just have to hit the flop harder than your opponents to value bet.

this doesn't require great cards.

your opponents are bad. often playing more flops with them can be quite profitable.

that's all from me for tonight.
c

[/ QUOTE ]

Hitting the flop hard is a good hand. That's not a counter-argument at all.

But with 800 chips, just how often can you limp with random crap and wait to hit the flop hard?

I thought so.

pineapple888 · #27 02-04-2006, 05:22 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
. I have nothing to learn from Gigabet about how to beat the 22s

[/ QUOTE ]

wow.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for your insightful post.

pr0crast · #28 02-04-2006, 05:24 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
. I have nothing to learn from Gigabet about how to beat the 22s

[/ QUOTE ]
THUS FAR, I'd have to agree. I've watched three of the 22s HHs so far, found 3 completely missed +EV pushes, and a very questionable play where he cold called with AKo in EP. I made a post about that one, btw. SO FAR, aside from those plays, I have found no difference between gig and myself in these games other than him being a little looser from EP/MP with hands like AJo in level 4. That's not to say that I still won't learn a lot from the rest of the HHs, but thus far, they aren't as awe-inspiring as many people built them up to be. So I don't see what the "wow" is for, unless you've already been through all these HHs and you have actual reason to agree.

Barrett's Last Privateer · #29 02-04-2006, 05:28 AM

Citanul,

Hoping you could explain something to me.

In your post which I'm replying to, you said

[ QUOTE ]
paying $100 for 600 hand histories of any winning player at each stakes is worht it to pretty much any player looking to improve.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which seems to contrast quite sharply with a comment you made in this thread.

[ QUOTE ]
i am genuinely surprised that people actually think that these hand histories are going to be quite so valuable to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now, maybe my cycnicism detector wasn't/isn't working, but as you're a poster whose opinion I respect I was wondering if you could explain this apparent discrepancy?

Cheers,

BLP

Paul Thomson · #30 02-04-2006, 05:30 AM

I think different styles of play work at different levels of poker...albeit differently. Curtains is testament that an ABC style of poker (including bubble strategy) works even at the top level of SNGs.

At the same time, Strassa has argued on his blog that even at the lower levels players should open up their game at the early levels so they can play more hands with the donks before the donks are knocked out.

They are both winning players. I think Lacky was right when he said you have to learn to incorpate different techniques, strategies and tactics into YOUR own game.