The Prahlad Post

[Nookx]

So what happened to prahlad?

[TheMadHeater]

[ QUOTE ]
So what happened to prahlad?

[/ QUOTE ]

Fallen so far from grace

[Micturition Man]

[ QUOTE ]
Good that the post of AJ once again got some attention, cuz it shows why I went to "war" with this "micturation_man" earlier, who just REFUSED stopping to apply pure game theory in spots like the AK-one.

[/ QUOTE ]


Actually we "went to war" because you kept making inaccurate statements about game theory while claiming that I was the one who did not understand it.

Whether you are interested in trying to apply GT or not is a separate question which is of no interest to me.

[MDMA]

No, you are still incorrect; YOU started by bringing in game theory into the equation by saying something like "you all realize that you are pretty much folding all your hands if your folding a hand this strong since it's about the strongest hand we can have, isn't this extremely exploitable?" That is what angered/annoyed me, when it's not true UNLESS you use a game theoretic approach to calling which we DO NOT, and AJo's post illustrates this pretty well, that's why I mentioned it.

[viciouspenguin]

tl;dr omg dramabomb

[dlpnyc21]

[ QUOTE ]

2. The River Check-Raise
Pra is better at this than any other player I've observed.
Most opponents aren't proficient at this tactic (they don't do it often enough as pure bluff) and so when you are confronting a player who does use it well, it can be difficult to figure out the proper adjustments. Most of the adjustments you need to make as an opponent occur on the turn.
It's hard to come up with great examples here, but often what happens vs Pra is that you'll check the turn for pot control and he'll put you on a hand at this point so that when you bet the river, he'll raise to take you off.
Here's a hand that occurred recently....
i raise with 3d4d, pra calls.
board is 4h4c5h.
pra bets out, i raise, he reraises.
i decide to just call (don't focus on this decision for now).
turn is a Th
action is check check
river is 8c
he checks, i bet, then he goes all-in for some absurd amount. i fold.

it's not that unlikely that he had nothing and took me off of a hand here on the river b/c of my turn check.



[/ QUOTE ]


this hand makes no sense. what are stack sizes and how small is your river bet to make him going all in for "some absurd amount" even possible given action?

i have only played prah 6max and by far the toughest part for me was his overbetting of nutted hands on drawy boards. Like, if he has 99 on 1096dd board, he will just overbet cr shove and you'll have AA and call and u'll be up [censored]'s creek without a paddle.

Also, his aggresion post flop out of position also makes him very hard to play. if you check flop behind he will pot pot into you very frequently.

i used to LOVE to watch him play, because he was extremely creative and did things no other player did, but I'm not so sure his style wasn't too high variance for him to be successful in the long run (meaning he was most likely underrolled).

Also, his style worked in his prime two, three years ago when the games were much more passive. strategy has advanced a lot and now players are a lot better at estimating his ranges, etc.

as an aside, last i talked to him when he was 1 tabling ftp he said he was playing a lot live and that he was even better live than he is online. i don't know if this is true. would seem like an amazing poker brain to pick and i know he coached a few of his friends.

dlpnyc21

ps. i've heard he has a house in malibu so i'm sure he made a ton back in the day when the highest game was 50/100, which is pretty awesome.

[Acemanhattan]

can anyone post a linke to the AJo thread? I see the AK one, but cant find the other one mentioned.

[Stinger88]

fwiw I'm pretty sure poopers on PS is Prah

[dlpnyc21]

[ QUOTE ]
fwiw I'm pretty sure poopers on PS is Prah

[/ QUOTE ]

what are his stats that you have on him filtered for between 3-6 players. if you post them, i will do my best to confirm as i have a ton of datamined hands on him.

thx,
dlpnyc21

[CrushinFelt]

[ QUOTE ]
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...rt=all&vc=1

One of the single best posts I've ever read on 2p2 buried in there:

[ QUOTE ]
let me clarify my question. it seems like a lot of you are saying something like: well you have to call here because top two pair is such a strong hand and if you just fold top two pair when P pushes you will get run over. so in other words you are using the hand strength here as a way to control how often we call when P pushes the river. i.e. call with AK or better, that way we call him x% of the time, if we call less than x% P will abuse us.

i know you don't think you are doing this but i'm pretty sure you are. because if we had KQ i don't think you would all say oh easy call P is bluffing. and yet most of you would agree that the vast majority of the time, P has either less than KQ or greater than AK.

it seems to me that this is sort of a game-theoretic approach. i.e. x% is optimal for calling P river push, and so i will call with AK or better to get to that x%. the problem of course is every scenario is different. THIS is the kind of thinking that makes P so successful, not the guys who are saying to fold. because when you think like this you are giving up already. you are not even trying to read him. you are just saying, my hand falls into the x% when i should call, i hope i win. he knows that you do this.

and that's why the x% is not going to work out for you. it's gonna seem like you're getting unlucky but you're not. it is by design that a good chunk of your x% calls will be against the nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a very important piece of information which kind of makes this post useless is how often P pushes the river. Using GT to call here based on our hand strength rather than the frequency of P's pushes is very incorrect. I haven't read through the argument between MDMA and MM but maybe that was part of MM's point. What AJ is describing is just a matter of absolute hand strength and which is not what game theory is about.