|
|
#171
03-05-2007, 01:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: the well: KRANTZ
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Krantz, calling pfr with pp only is very exploitable? How so? [/ QUOTE ] It's very easy for people to bluff or value bet you accordingly knowing that every time you cold call, you will have a pocket pair. And at the same time, they'll even be able to get away from huge hands, if they're paying attention, when it's obvious you have a set. Now mind you, a lot of these hands won't go to showdown, so it won't be that obvious that you ALWAYS have a pocket pair when you cold call, but if someone is paying close attention it will eventually become apparent. [/ QUOTE ] so how do you counter this? rr w. pps every time? start cold calling with a wider range of hands? 
|
|
#172
03-05-2007, 01:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: the well: KRANTZ
[ QUOTE ]
Given that I'm in the final 8, what are the odds that I win the MSNL HU tournament, and what kind of anarchy will break if I do? How can my ego possibly get bigger? I'm pretty bored so I will ask random questions. Favorite half dozen movies or so? A movie that perhaps isn't mainstream or that everyone doesn't like that you really enjoy and would recommend? [/ QUOTE ] i'm not sure who's left, but i'd say you have a legit shot. you played good against KoW and exercised some really nice pot control in spots where others would have gone overboard. although i contend that if KoW caught a few more big hands he could have ran you over. movies off the top of my head: the incredibles, star wars, indiana jones, all that jazz, spirited away, varsity blues, lord of the rings, matrix 1... many, many more but i'm tired and don't feel like thinking too hard obscure movie: the mosquito coast (harrison ford) random movie story - in high school my two friends and i brought "kids" over to this house with three girls we had been hooking up with. we watched it end to end, the girls got really weirded out and made us leave. my friend adam, whose idea it had been to bring kids (and he was the only one who knew what it was or had seen it), later came out of the closet.
|
|
#173
03-05-2007, 02:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: the well: KRANTZ
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Krantz, calling pfr with pp only is very exploitable? How so? [/ QUOTE ] It's very easy for people to bluff or value bet you accordingly knowing that every time you cold call, you will have a pocket pair. And at the same time, they'll even be able to get away from huge hands, if they're paying attention, when it's obvious you have a set. Now mind you, a lot of these hands won't go to showdown, so it won't be that obvious that you ALWAYS have a pocket pair when you cold call, but if someone is paying close attention it will eventually become apparent. [/ QUOTE ] so how do you counter this? rr w. pps every time? start cold calling with a wider range of hands? [/ QUOTE ] cold call with a wider range AND mix up reraising with them
|
|
#174
03-05-2007, 02:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: the well: KRANTZ
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Krantz, calling pfr with pp only is very exploitable? How so? [/ QUOTE ] It's very easy for people to bluff or value bet you accordingly knowing that every time you cold call, you will have a pocket pair. And at the same time, they'll even be able to get away from huge hands, if they're paying attention, when it's obvious you have a set. Now mind you, a lot of these hands won't go to showdown, so it won't be that obvious that you ALWAYS have a pocket pair when you cold call, but if someone is paying close attention it will eventually become apparent. [/ QUOTE ] so how do you counter this? rr w. pps every time? start cold calling with a wider range of hands? [/ QUOTE ] cold call with a wider range AND mix up reraising with them [/ QUOTE ] to add to that, something is only exploitable if people you are playing against can exploit it. if not, who cares, if it works?
|
|
#175
03-05-2007, 02:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: the well: KRANTZ
[ QUOTE ]
KRANTZ, thanks for this well. when you say you call PFRR with a wide range of hands (with the intention of making a play on alot of flops), how much do you narrow your calling range when OOP? will you typically only call IN position? sry if this Q is a bit confusing. [/ QUOTE ] my pleasure, i've enjoyed it. i was a lurker here long before i started posting, so i have no problem giving back. this question is hard to answer. it's not a range question, or a question of narrowing or widening, being OOP or in position. it's moreso a function of the frequency of my opponent's reraises and how i've reacted to them so far. if i really feel like a good opportunity has presented itself to call OOP, then i'll call. meaning there will be a time when i raise 45s UTG+1, BTN reraises and i fold. and there will be a time when that same setup happens, same villain reraises, and i call.
|
|
#176
03-05-2007, 02:04 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: the well: KRANTZ
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] KRANTZ, thanks for this well. when you say you call PFRR with a wide range of hands (with the intention of making a play on alot of flops), how much do you narrow your calling range when OOP? will you typically only call IN position? sry if this Q is a bit confusing. [/ QUOTE ] my pleasure, i've enjoyed it. i was a lurker here long before i started posting, so i have no problem giving back. this question is hard to answer. it's not a range question, or a question of narrowing or widening, being OOP or in position. it's moreso a function of the frequency of my opponent's reraises and how i've reacted to them so far. if i really feel like a good opportunity has presented itself to call OOP, then i'll call. meaning there will be a time when i raise 45s UTG+1, BTN reraises and i fold. and there will be a time when that same setup happens, same villain reraises, and i call. [/ QUOTE ] [censored]. to expand, i think as you're learning and experimenting and playing more comfortably, you should just stick to the mantra: as tight as possible OOP, looser and more liberal in position. and that's a good guideline to live by.
|
|
#178
03-05-2007, 02:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: the well: KRANTZ
[ QUOTE ]
One last question: I really wonder why someone like Antonius is sick good, he doesn't seem to be that smart at all (judging from interviews), at least not a Game Theory genius. Isn't someone like VanVeen way ahead of him when it comes to theoretical understanding of the game? What does it really takes to reach world-class status, how do you see this change within 5-10-20 years? [ QUOTE ] Krantz I'm really glad you buried this post 220 responses into a small stakes post. [/ QUOTE ] The opportunity costs are way too high for anyone smart enough to come up w/ something like this. [/ QUOTE ] i would say vanveen is ahead of nearly anyone, theoretically speaking. zeejustin, if i remember correctly, started a really great post on this issue awhile back in HSNL (i think there's an active link to it in mid-high shorthanded, right now, titled for those of us who don't read the NL forums) - it was something about why poker players play non-rationally. after awhile, poker, and even more specifically NL, becomes a game of adaptation, pattern mapping and adaptive, unconscious thinking. since the theoretical playing field is leveled, the best player will be one whose intuition can outplay everyone else's intuition. and by that logic, those with the best theoretical grasp won't even be able to hold a candle to the 'feel' players. you've got some guys who just aren't extremely intelligent otherwise, but are super nasty tough poker players. i guess you could draw a comparison to athletics. you can work realllllly hard, and get pretty good at a sport with no natural ability, even better than someone with a ton of natural ability who doesn't work hard. but the ceiling for the guy with that natural, innate mojo is just going to be a lot higher. on world-class status: i guess it depends on what you consider world-class? if i'm playing my a game, i'm pretty damn confident i could play with anyone in the world at any limit (and if i'm not concerned about the money). but i've never played the highest limits consistently enough to say i'm "world-class." i guess you'd have to classify it as taking a ton of money, consistently, out of the biggest games. what does it take to get there? devotion to the game. playing a ton, talking a ton of poker, analyzing constantly, studying constantly. loving it every day. cts played 53k hands in a week. that kid is going to be the best player NL has ever seen eventually. how will it change? modern poker education has gotten a LOT better, even recently. the coaching industry is relatively new, you've got a ton of discussion that wasn't occurring even a a year ago, the actual ability to play 50k hands in a week... the general, serious player pool is going to be getting a lot better. and with that, it's tough to say, but i think we're going to see a lot bigger player pool and a lot more parity at the biggest games that far down the line.
|
|
#179
03-05-2007, 02:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: the well: KRANTZ
[ QUOTE ]
Will I give up a lot of EV if I do not use PAHUD ??? [/ QUOTE ] hell yes convo with bldswttrs in vegas while playing online poker blds: what's that, is that one of those HUDs? me (surprised): huh, yeah this is pokerace. you dont use it? what do you use? blds: yeah i don't use anything. me: ... blds:yeah me: ... blds: probably cost myself a few hundred k, huh?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
