Pooh-Bah post: Level 0 exploitation NLTRN

[daveT]

wwlwlwwwlwllwwlwwwlwlwwllwwlwwllwl

I went back over the past 200 games and marked how many games ended in 8 hands or less. I won 20/34 for a record of 58%. I am sure that if I showed 15 or less, these numbers would be equal.

Most of these losses were due to suck outs or cold-decks (KK vs flopped set, set under set, flush under flush, fh vs fh etc) because I ran super bad for a week in the middle of October.

I am not a losing player spouting b.s. advice. I have posted my w.r.'s in LC and you will see that my 5s are 61% over-all, and my 10s are 58% over-all.

With all of that said, if you are uncomfortable using these ideas, then don't, but if you are struggling to beat this game, then it would not hurt to rethink your game a little bit.

[HokieGreg]

Dave,

You clearly put a lot of effort into this post, so I don't want to come off like I don't respect what you are trying to do. I just don't think very many of the hh examples you provide are correct.

As I said in my previous post, the goal is to play abc poker at the low stakes. Calling large 3 bets with marginal hands and stacking off light just because they are bad players is not the best way to go about maximizing your winrate at these levels.

Congratulations on your 58% winrate at the 10's. If you were playing abc, solid poker it would be closer to 62-63% probably.

I guess you are implying I'm not a winning player too. You might be right. A 3k game sample size probably isn't enough for me to be able to say whether I am or not.

Here is my month at the 33's:

[ChicagoRy]

Brag: I have more games than Hokie in the 33s when I was 4 months into playing poker. My ROI was 7 pts higher too.

Beat: This thread might turn into a flame war.

Seriously though, lets not turn it into a flame war, you two can have a civilized debate about this stuff.

[HokieGreg]

[ QUOTE ]
Brag: I have more games than Hokie in the 33s when I was 4 months into playing poker. My ROI was 7 pts higher too.

Beat: This thread might turn into a flame war.

Seriously though, lets not turn it into a flame war, you two can have a civilized debate about this stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Our games are almost identical Ryan.

Don't be afraid to say this is bad information.

[daveT]

Due to my bad bank-rolling, my wr at the 10s is probably not what it should be, but that is another debate entirely. I was actually stuck for many many games of getting creamed (not by bad play) before I showed any kind of profit at the tens. I am sure that if I spent more time at it, I would have a wr that resembles my 5s, but I usually bounce past it and tackle the 20s and 30s and drop back down.

I was not sure if you were a winning player or not. Glad to see that you are doing well, and yes, you probably are better than me as well.

Trying to further explain myself is taxing without sounding defensive. I had several reservations about posting this. I knew it would create an out-cry. Either it would seem that it is a losing player that felt like "whatever, I got the post count, so here we go," or it would sound too solid.

As I said, it depends on the player if they are comfortable using any of these thought processes. They are there for your own interpretation. I do understand that many of these hands are marginal. The thinking process during these situations is what separate the good from the bad, and in many cases, the losers from the winners.

[cwar]

daveT while I respect the effort here you give out a lot of bad/misdirected info and the reasons you give for a lot of the hands are often completely wrong. I would accept the criticism you got here its all very valid.

[daveT]

I just took the time to read over this thread. I do agree that the criticism is valid. No doubt that better players disagree with me for a reason. I, unfortunately, do not explain myself very well, and my intention was to create discussion and present a way of thinking, not argument. I am more than willing to discuss modifications.

[cwar]

I think you touched upon some really nice ideas especially at the beginning:
-Stereotypes that we have to work off of, like the gambling on the first hand concept very valid idea and you could come up with a lot of other stereotypes that are VERY important to know when playing HU SNG
-The whole low level exploitation thing, its a very important idea trying to understand how a new player or weak player thinks, ppl often say "theres no hand reading at the 11s" etc but its not true at all, they just dont think like you. Something that analyzed the psychology behind these players I would find very interesting too.

[MxGucci]

Great post Dave!

[mb6tour]

Well I found this thread really interesting.

I agree in most part with ChicagoRy and HokieGreg. Being myself one that applies a 'feeler strategy' on the first hands, and move on from there (specially at the low stakes with so many different players).

BUT, daveT have a great point that HE NEVER USED!?!?AAU&*&*#*?

What's MOST important knowing that stuff and how to push small edges from the very first hand is the TIME issue. If you can win a game 60% of the time on the first hand, or even 55%, it's just extraordinary! You can play 5 games like that while I'm still figuring out my villain. Obv that requires a lot of math and some database exploration to become acceptable but you get the idea. Would love to see what daveT come up with those (since my db isn't big enough by any means) and also what you guys think/experienced about hourly rate.

behold!