the most ****** up med stakes home game EVER

[cardshark]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The strategy of a disciplined poker player requires the player to know when to fold a hand...

...by the same logic, the strategy of the same disciplined poker player also requires the player to know which games not to get involved in, in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not true, these are still numbers games and it is about being disciplined and not committing too many of your chips unless you know you have the best of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm afraid I also have to respectfully disagree and have to stand behind my statement that it does very much matter which games you choose to play in.

Just as a extreme example, if you play with a rowdy crowd that tends to go all-in pre-flop all the time, you are forced to adopt that style, if you want to play at all.

So, the games with an overwhelming frequency of pre-flop all-ins are just gambling games, i.e. the element of skill has been reduced and the element of chance has been increased. You do not get the opportunity to use some of your skills to trap your opponents as much and you would in games that actually allow for situations to develop. I do agree that you can chose to go all-in pre-flop on favorable pre-flop hands (which is an element of skill), but the moment you push that stack of chips into the pot you are waiting for random cards to be dealt out on that board. So, that kind of playing style changes the nature of the game completely because it greatly limits the set of skills you even get the chance to use throughout the evening of play.

Specifically what I most dislike about the game described above, by SykoraG, is the "dealer's choice" element. That is just not the same as a rotation game. The dealer's choice structure just screws-up the overall balance of the game. Dealer's choice games are usually just gambling games where people toss money into pots to see what happens. One of the problems with such games is that your opponents do not "play" but rather "gamble" and often force you to do the same.

[Death Valley]

Sounds like a great game.
Play tight aggro short stack poker till you double up, then play tight aggro
Leave when he tourney starts

[SykoraG]

Well just got back and barely broke even after being down 3 BI. Games played were Holdem, Holdem drop two, Omaha and Omahax2 flop, Razz. For anyone potentially worried about my 'safety' (semi Brag ahead), I'm playing with some of the most renown families (worth 200Mil +) within the area of Jeddah ... therefore there is little to no heat involved with law authorities.

I played super tight for most of the night and that prooved to work kinda well. People verbally singled me out though, as it was apparant when I was only playing one out of like every 10 hands.

[Death Valley]

hmmmm.... most renown family, playing in saudi arabia

Bin Laden?

[jjshabado]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The strategy of a disciplined poker player requires the player to know when to fold a hand...

...by the same logic, the strategy of the same disciplined poker player also requires the player to know which games not to get involved in, in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not true, these are still numbers games and it is about being disciplined and not committing too many of your chips unless you know you have the best of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm afraid I also have to respectfully disagree and have to stand behind my statement that it does very much matter which games you choose to play in.

Just as a extreme example, if you play with a rowdy crowd that tends to go all-in pre-flop all the time, you are forced to adopt that style, if you want to play at all.

So, the games with an overwhelming frequency of pre-flop all-ins are just gambling games, i.e. the element of skill has been reduced and the element of chance has been increased. You do not get the opportunity to use some of your skills to trap your opponents as much and you would in games that actually allow for situations to develop. I do agree that you can chose to go all-in pre-flop on favorable pre-flop hands (which is an element of skill), but the moment you push that stack of chips into the pot you are waiting for random cards to be dealt out on that board. So, that kind of playing style changes the nature of the game completely because it greatly limits the set of skills you even get the chance to use throughout the evening of play.

Specifically what I most dislike about the game described above, by SykoraG, is the "dealer's choice" element. That is just not the same as a rotation game. The dealer's choice structure just screws-up the overall balance of the game. Dealer's choice games are usually just gambling games where people toss money into pots to see what happens. One of the problems with such games is that your opponents do not "play" but rather "gamble" and often force you to do the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

All of the games OP described have the player making decisions. Since we can assume this is a zero-sum game there is obviously a winning strategy. None of the games OP described are "gambling games" in the sense that there is no winning strategy.

I'm not saying OP should necessarily play, since he might not want to spend the money it'll take to figure out the winning strategy, but it sounds like there's a lot of money to be made here.

Edit: Also about your all-in-preflop-games comment. Those games can be extremely profitable as long as you know when to push. Every 'skill' you have doesn't contribute to your win-rate equally. So just because you can't outplay them postflop doesn't mean you can't make money. You just get your money in when you have a hand better than the range of your opponents. Its Long Term Black Gold.