SSHE is the nuts!

[headofmike]

I'm now learning to adjust to online tag play. Passive players would allow you to draw to a five outer in comfort. Todays online players are not so kind. Often times when I raise with middle pair to buy outs/protect my hand in a large pot I am 3 bet and led into on the turn. Which is a nightmare. I'm now reading holdem for advanced players. But struggle with some concepts like not raising pocket jacks/Aqo in a multi way pot. SSHE says RAISE FOR VALUE, RAISE FOR VALUE, or else you suck at poker. Where as HPFAP says just call and hope you flop a set. Why not raise for value here also? SSHE has also left my heads up play weak. I often feel lost with a hand like overcards or middle pair. I bet they raise, or I get check raised. And I'm left wondering do they know I"m full of [censored] or do they have a hand. Anyway just my personal struggle. I have still managed to maintain a 2bb100 winrate online and of course I destroy live games up to 15-30.

[NickMPK]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with you given the site/levels you are talking about. However there are lower limit games online like .05/.10 and these are more comparable to the live $3/$6 and $4/$8 games.

Maybe these lower limit online games were the ones he was referring to?

[/ QUOTE ]

These aren't really the games Ed Miller was referring to. He was referring to the $1/$2 up to $3/$6 games online that really were that loose before the sites started letting you play 8 tables at the same time. For instance, two years ago, Pacific Poker only allowed you to play one table at a time. Because of this, the fish always vastly outnumbered the sharks, and you saw VPIPs of 50%+ at 3/6 tables routinely. Multitabling really ruined low-stakes online poker.

[blee24]

[ QUOTE ]
struggle with some concepts like not raising pocket jacks/Aqo in a multi way pot. SSHE says RAISE FOR VALUE, RAISE FOR VALUE, or else you suck at poker. Where as HPFAP says just call and hope you flop a set. Why not raise for value here also?

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats interesting.. I remember something from SSHE where it says, (paraphrasing from a distant memory) there are times where keeping the pot small can increase the chance that your opponents will make a mistake, but that you should build a pot anyways to capitalize on the mistake they already made, which was playing weak hands preflop. I guess one thing about tighter tables is that your opponents aren't making nearly as many preflop mistakes, so there are a lot of situations where you can't raise for value when you would have in a loose passive game...

[jfk]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm now reading holdem for advanced players. But struggle with some concepts like not raising pocket jacks/Aqo in a multi way pot...Why not raise for value here also?

[/ QUOTE ]

There's a fundamental difference in the premise of the two books. SSHE presumes that your opponents are frequently bad players who make plenty of bad mistakes. HEFAP presumes that your opponents may often be tough and thinking.

In the case of AQo or JJ, you may not have much of an equity edge in a multiway pot in a tough game. Sometimes limping can be correct in the games Sklansky described. Of course, the key word is "sometimes". HEFAP demands less orthodoxy than SSHE as the games it describes require constant adjustments.

In some ways limit hold 'em has outpaced the literature. For those who've read the Peter Rus article in the March 2+2 magazine he advocates plays like isolating with small pairs, and representing any board postflop, all within the confines of TAG play. SSHE doesn't offer answers to these types of developments.

I'd agree with those who contend that SSHE is no longer the book to choose for developing winning play in an online environment. HEFAP is the more flexible book for the tough games to be found online (and don't overlook King Yao).

[JJay1231]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with you given the site/levels you are talking about. However there are lower limit games online like .05/.10 and these are more comparable to the live $3/$6 and $4/$8 games.

Maybe these lower limit online games were the ones he was referring to?

[/ QUOTE ]

These aren't really the games Ed Miller was referring to. He was referring to the $1/$2 up to $3/$6 games online that really were that loose before the sites started letting you play 8 tables at the same time. For instance, two years ago, Pacific Poker only allowed you to play one table at a time. Because of this, the fish always vastly outnumbered the sharks, and you saw VPIPs of 50%+ at 3/6 tables routinely. Multitabling really ruined low-stakes online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

exactly! The fish dont have to wait too long to get good hands when playing 2 or > tables. Someone needs to write a book on SSHE "online".

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
exactly! The fish dont have to wait too long to get good hands when playing 2 or > tables. Someone needs to write a book on SSHE "online".

[/ QUOTE ]

They already did. It's called Internet Texas Holdem by Hilger. A lot of the examples in the book are from older higher limits, but that doesn't matter. The game is the same.

[JJay1231]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
exactly! The fish dont have to wait too long to get good hands when playing 2 or > tables. Someone needs to write a book on SSHE "online".

[/ QUOTE ]

They already did. It's called Internet Texas Holdem by Hilger. A lot of the examples in the book are from older higher limits, but that doesn't matter. The game is the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have this book and it was one of the first I bought. The online SSHE games in general are tighter now than when this book first came out. Even the begginer/ intermediate charts are almost useless when it comes to online low limit games these days as you will be folding far too often and just not being aggressive enough. I know there's an advanced section in there but the begginer would want to get on the advanced material ASAP and disregard the starting hand chart.

anyway just my 2 cents.

[Frond]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't SSHE written specifically with the loose passive "LIVE" LLHE games in mind and not online LLHE?

[JJay1231]

[ QUOTE ]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't SSHE written specifically with the loose passive "LIVE" LLHE games in mind and not online LLHE?

[/ QUOTE ]

certainly doesn't say in the book that it was meant for live play ONLY. And you couldn't assume it either as it clearly states in the book that "they want you to make $50,000 a year plaing " online ".

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
certainly doesn't say in the book that it was meant for live play ONLY. And you couldn't assume it either as it clearly states in the book that "they want you to make $50,000 a year plaing " online ".

[/ QUOTE ]

First, it's not for live play only. It's for specific game conditions only. It just so happens those conditions exist live, but rarely online. Second, it was Sklansky who said it was no big deal to make $50,000, and he's wrong. It might have been possible to make good money at $3/6 for a short time, maybe even as long as 1 year, multitabling. But those conditions don't exist. It certainly WOULD be a "big deal" to make $50,000 playing $3/6. Third, Miller plays very little online, so he doesn't talk much about it. That was his "admission" at one time, anyway.