Kill Phil in Cash Games

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Vulture:

That may be the case but if you're someone who's fairly inexperienced and you take the Gordon analysis of BOW seriously and don't understand that it is dumbed down and you then try to play as Gordon described, it should be expensive. From my point of view, if Gordon couldn't do better than that, he should have left it out of his book.

Best wishes,
Mason

[El Diablo]

Mason,

If people try to develop a counterstrategy based on that description of his play, they will be in bad shape. The key here is what you've alluded to elsewhere in this thread - his hand range is not weighted equally across the different types of hands and this weighting is not static. Also, his bluffing frequency is very good and also very dynamic.

[RussianBear]

El D.,
How do you play him, then? What is your strategy? Do you try to avoid pots with him? What do you do when you have solid values and you're stuck in a pot with him?

[RussianBear]

[ QUOTE ]
My reasons have appeared at other times on these forums. It has to do with the fact that no limit is much more of a trapping game than other forms of poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hence...
[ QUOTE ]
...you will notice that while he advocates an extremely aggressive strategy in the very long introduction, once he starts talking about specific hands he's much more conservative (as I think he should be).


[/ QUOTE ]
As he says, if he was the preflop raiser, he bets the flop the majority of the time. Guys get used to it, so, you know, when you raise on the button preflop and someone calls you in the blind and you miss the flop completely and he checks, you maintain your preflop aggression and he either calls or check-raises. See, he knew you'd bet, so, he figures he'll let you bet his hand for him, that's when you shut it down. The game is up. At least, that's how I understood Super System when I began trying to emulate the master. Now, if I have enough outs and that guy check-raises me, then I will push my stack in. I want him to be trying to trap me with AA, KK, or even QQ. Now, had that man reraised me preflop and given me an opportunity to fold, he would have won the preflop raise I made with my 7-8 of spades. So, I lose 3 or 4 BB. However, by smooth-calling and letting me make my hand he loses his stack. That's a pretty good trap if you ask me. I steal so many blinds playing like this, i.e. raising the blinds and they fold that it pays for the pots where someone calls and I have to release the hand after they come after me on the flop, so, it's a virtual freeroll when they call and I hit my hand hard and they pay me off.
However, I know better to argue with you Mason, if I can call you Mason. You are much wiser than I and I suck at math, so, I'm sure if the concept is mathematically flawed you can point that out, or, perhaps you already have. That's just how I understood his philosophy and my results have been good.

[El Diablo]

RB,

Not meaning to be insulting, but you just adjust and play poker.

[Dominic]

LOL...nice hand, Lee...but in the tournaments I play (anywhere from $100-$500 buy-ins), you would've gotten a call from at least 3 of your opponents! So your fold equity in this spot is really not as good as you think...although, I see no other way to play the hand.

So would you adjust Kill Phil depending on the your opponents skill level?

[ephemeral]

Generally speaking, in loose games (and at least 3 players calling an early all-in as you describe qualifies as loose) it pays to hit your draws as cheaply as possible and to overplay your big hands. In such a case, you'd probably be better served to just call the flop and try to hit the straight on the turn and look to get paid off big-time. If I had a set, however, and they play that loose, I'd ship it in on the flop. A set in this spot is about a 67% favorite to win over AA, 45, and Ah 9h, the three callers I presume you had in mind, combined.

In major tournaments with lots of chips, play is rarely anywhere near this loose though, fold equity is higher, and it's more difficult to get big hands paid off if you massively overbet them.

Regards,

Lee

[RussianBear]

I understand that, but what are the adjustments you make? Are you more conservative with the type of hands you play against him? Do you try to play him only when you have position on him? I've seen you play at tables with him, but they were full tables and I don't recall you playing a pot that he was in. Also, I don't railbird nearly as much as others, so, I can't say that I observed enough to figure out any one player's strategy in that game. What do you think of what Gordon says as far as trying to play stronger draws against his potential draws? Those who have had success against him, what did they do differently than other players that have fallen victim to his style?

[Gelford]

Bear .. I have an idea


How about you take the chair between El D and BOW, and show them how to play some of that 'Take it Doyle' freerollin' poker and in the process display your grasp of the BOW game

[RussianBear]

1. The Bear is a family man, i.e., he doesn't quite have the bankroll to play that game;
2. The take it Doyle style game that I play is dependent upon opponents being more passive than they are at that level;
3. Much as I would never c-Block El D as he's spitting game to the ladies, I sure as hell would not interfere with him relieving BOW of some cash.
4. Sit between El D and BOW, could there be a worse seat at the table?
5. Why's everybody picking on me? I was just expressing my understanding of Doyle's chapter in Super System. Poker is a game of situations, obviously his style doesn't work in all situations, for example, when the money is not deep. I'm somewhat successful for the limits I play at, I know better than to bite off more than I can chew. If I learned anything from Barry G's book, it's not to go after the best players but to identify the players weaker than yourself and milk them.