The Well: Adanthar (1/16/07)

[uclabruinz]

[ QUOTE ]
What did you score on the LSAT?

[/ QUOTE ]

Anyone want to place a prop bet on my LSAT score vs. Adanthar's? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(Also, when you answer this question, keep in mind we're one week away from pics of a 19 year old snorting coke off a naked hooker and everybody sort of halfway accepting this as normal/standard behavior)

[/ QUOTE ]

link?

[/ QUOTE ]

yvesaint, BBV...search through last week.

[ QUOTE ]

Please compare and contrast full ring vs. 6 man NLHE.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's hard to do this in one post. Let's say that while a 30/20 style can work in 6 max, it'd get slaughtered in FR. 18/12 is actually standard and maybe even on the loose side. Also, when your overpair gets raised on the flop, the correct play is usually to fold (only half kidding.) It's a nitfest, but it has its own set of rules and can be killed just like any other game...but not using the same playstyle as 6 max.

[ QUOTE ]

I think you brought this up in one of your Sat threads...You thought you could win a step 5 on PP for less than $20 and wanted a $1000+ prop bet on it. Did that ever happen / how did it turn out?

[/ QUOTE ]

It was less than $30, and I gave up with $8 left in the account because it was so godawfully boring [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] I did get to a step 3, though, just took a couple of bad beats.

rebuys/sats: I don't play super loose in regular rebuys, either, but yes it's probably a worse idea in satellites. However, you should push your big hands/draws very hard during the rebuy period anyway, since going busto isn't that bad.

[ QUOTE ]

What did you score on the LSAT?

[/ QUOTE ]

brag: 172 on the first PR diagnostic, after which they kicked me out and told me to go get a tutor
beat: had to wait for 3 hours outside the building because the guy with the tests didn't show up, in 95 degree weather with 400 other nervous people; when he did, the building's air conditioning was set to like 60, and no one had anything to eat the whole time, so everyone was shivering/nervous/hungry
variance: 173, but 6 of the 10 I got wrong were in the first section that I'd have probably aced otherwise =/
variance: if I'd done better I'd probably have gone to Columbia and no poker for me, so the above's more of a brag

[StregaChess]

[ QUOTE ]

Fire away guys. Please note that 2+2 is slow as hell for me right now so answers may take some time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jesus me too, it crawls.....
So my question is, why is 2+2 so damn slow...

[LearnedfromTV]

1. [ QUOTE ]
it's probably better for a talented player to move up too soon than to delay development too long, but that's another story...)

[/ QUOTE ]

Elaborate.

2. What are your long term, big picture poker goals? I.e., assuming you plan to still be playing in five to ten years, what would you consider success at that point?

3. You talk about quitting your day job. What are your thoughts on online poker's longterm viability? I assume you've done some weighing of "relative chances the ban is enforced/games dry up/everything is fine" with your ability to get a real job if necessary with live poker options and whatever investment opportunities you are looking at. Just curious what your thought process is.

4. How many hours of poker did you play in 2006? How many do you expect to play in 2007? For both what is the breakdown between nl cash games/other cash games/tournaments.

5. If you have to get a fulltime law job would you prefer big firm or working for yourself?

[zoobird]

You've mentioned before (and in passing in this thread) that your playing style is very read-dependent. Some questions about that:

1. At a table of ok to pretty good (but not very good) players, what specifically are you looking for?

2. Do you base reads on frequencies that a player does something, even if there's no showdown to confirm what they had? For example, I cbet the first three heads up flops I see...can you draw any assumptions from this? I open raise twice from MP the first time around after I'm moved to your table...anything to do with this knowledge?

3. Do you consider reads to be more valuable against good players, or against bad players?

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
oh, the person I talked to was a 2p2er and meant you were too tight in general, not just at the pca. thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

*shrug* One thing I can think of is that when I'm on autopilot, I definitely also play very tight, maybe 13/10ish in PT. If I have other things to do, I play on autopilot a lot, so that could be it, too.

A bunch of this is because I don't care about LP steals all that much, really (especially in the last six months when tournaments have started playing more aggro). In fact, with a healthy stack I rarely steal at all. One resteal is worth almost 3 steals, y'know...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
adanthar, a fair number of intelligent posters talk about how easy sngs are to beat and yet, few of them seem to want to play them. why stop beating the 55s on pacific?

[/ QUOTE ]

I played on Pacific(2yrs ago maybe?) to bonus whore and you could only play one table at a time. I've heard now you can play 4 although I'm not 100% sure. This table limit makes it a waste of time to play there since you could be playing 8 tabling at other sites with thousands more players.

Also, SNGs have a profit ceiling and once you hit that at the 215s, 530s, or whatever the kids are playing these days, the general progression has been a switch to cash games where there is more money to be made.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never played at Pacific myself (a guy PM'd me he used my strategy there and it worked through a decent sample size, heh), but basically, this. Playing the 530's requires a very specific skillset, memorizing pushbot charts endlessly, and then gets you (5% x # tables)/hour...so, a very highly trained monkey could do it, and then on top of that, in order to net actual money, you need to do 20 tables of them at a time, so you also go through 1500 break even stretches over the course of, say, a week. It's enough to kill yourself and I've got no idea how people still do it.

[ QUOTE ]
You've mentioned before (and in passing in this thread) that your playing style is very read-dependent. Some questions about that:

1. At a table of ok to pretty good (but not very good) players, what specifically are you looking for?

2. Do you base reads on frequencies that a player does something, even if there's no showdown to confirm what they had? For example, I cbet the first three heads up flops I see...can you draw any assumptions from this? I open raise twice from MP the first time around after I'm moved to your table...anything to do with this knowledge?

3. Do you consider reads to be more valuable against good players, or against bad players?

[/ QUOTE ]

These are good questions, but the answers are pretty specific and I don't want to give away too much. Okay...let's say we're playing on Stars. Stars has the mighty 4x raise tell, which alone is worth a ton, but basically *any* raise size on Stars that isn't a 3x slider raise is some kind of tell 80%+ of the time. Then it's just a question of whether those people call light or are giving off reverse tells, etc.

Now let's say we're playing at Bodog. Bodog doesn't really have default bet size tells, but it does have (to name two things) big stacks that limp light (but don't raise light) and a high share of bubble stallers. So, there, I try to pwn limpers fairly often and abuse the bubble like crazy - it works far better than at Stars, where people have been trained to call light on the bubble for months now.

That's how the basic, site level reads should work (and yes, they exist for every site/are extremely important for some.) To go further, you take that default profile and modify it based on the person's PA HUD stats, what you've seen him show down, how likely it is that that reraise you saw was a squeeze, and so on.

Whether a player is good or bad is nowhere near as important as the type of good or bad he actually is and what the metagame is at the moment. There are some really bad LAGs that are very hard to exploit ordinarily if they're, say, on your left in a tournament when everyone has 20 BB, and there are some normally really good, tight players that nonetheless make ridiculous bubble folds/just don't understand their implied odds in a given situation aren't what they think they are. Basically, it's not whether they're good or bad, it's whether they're accidentally playing (in)correctly at the moment and what you can do about it.

[registrar]

This is another teenage list question. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] There is a 6-handed poker invitational and you make the final table. The money is worth winning enough to be motivational but not enough to skew the point of the question. Which five players would you most like to pit yourself against?

[adanthar]

I get the point of the question, but I don't care too much about being the best, just winning the most money. Game selection matters enough to me that you'll never see me at a table with anyone remotely 'good' unless it's in a tournament or there's a gigantic fish or six to balance it out.

but to answer your actual question, Ivey, Negreanu, Cunningham, Patrick Antonius and Barry G. would probably be it...and then they'd own me so I'd win no money, which sucks. Therefore, I'd like to pit myself against five people that have never heard of the word 'poker' before. That works out well.

[NYWalker]

1. Do you see much differences in action/play styles between online MTT vs live MTT? If so, what are they?

2. Do you consider playing online MTTs as practice and live events as real war field?

3. Do you any negative parts (if there are any) of online poker by allowing teenagers to play real money poker before they reach 21?

[zoobird]

Hmmm...now I'm going to have to post those questions on MTT and see if anyone else is willing to spill the beans. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Another question - how much time do you spend analyzing/learning vs. actually playing? Was the % breakdown different when you weren't that good yet?