TLK v Erik1223 1k-2k ftp - Page 3

Nate tha\\\' Great · #21 10-10-2006, 12:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]
The consensus is apparently that any play at any time may or may not be correct based on "metagame" or "flow".

[/ QUOTE ]

Most of these guys from the Neverwin camp play too many hands, even considering their formidable postflop skills. Deciding to "mix it up" with K7o out of position is one such example of this. But it's a fairly unremarkable play nevertheless.

cartman · #22 10-10-2006, 12:45 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The consensus is apparently that any play at any time may or may not be correct based on "metagame" or "flow".

[/ QUOTE ]

Most of these guys from the Neverwin camp play too many hands, even considering their formidable postflop skills. Deciding to "mix it up" with K7o out of position is one such example of this. But it's a fairly unremarkable play nevertheless.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree but I also think that damn near nothing that transpires in a HU limit hand would qualify as "remarkable". Most of us have played hundreds of thousands of hands and have literally seen it all as far as what can transpire within a limit hand. We also all know that "it depends" is frequently the answer. But the nature of the game is such that once a player gets beyond a certain caliber he will very rarely make a massive error. That doesnt mean that the small errors don't matter. The "best" players are the ones who are the most adept at making the "right" choices when confronted with tough decisions--choices which are by their very nature going to be only slightly better than or worse than the nearest alternative.

I thought both rivers in my thread were misplayed and I still think they were misplayed. If they were intentionally misplayed for the purpose of creating or furthering an image or some other reason, then that is fine. But we can't create the whole picture including the flow, texture, or recnet history of the game in a few lines of a thread. That means that dicussing hands in a vacuum is about the best we can do. Of course it isn't perfect, but that doesnt mean it isn't productive.

Cartman

JAA · #23 10-10-2006, 01:01 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The consensus is apparently that any play at any time may or may not be correct based on "metagame" or "flow".

[/ QUOTE ]

Most of these guys from the Neverwin camp play too many hands, even considering their formidable postflop skills. Deciding to "mix it up" with K7o out of position is one such example of this. But it's a fairly unremarkable play nevertheless.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree but I also think that damn near nothing that transpires in a HU limit hand would qualify as "remarkable". Most of us have played hundreds of thousands of hands and have literally seen it all as far as what can transpire within a limit hand. We also all know that "it depends" is frequently the answer. But the nature of the game is such that once a player gets beyond a certain caliber he will very rarely make a massive error. That doesnt mean that the small errors don't matter. The "best" players are the ones who are the most adept at making the "right" choices when confronted with tough decisions--choices which are by their very nature going to be only slightly better than or worse than the nearest alternative.

I thought both rivers in my thread were misplayed and I still think they were misplayed. If they were intentionally misplayed for the purpose of creating or furthering an image or some other reason, then that is fine. But we can't create the whole picture including the flow, texture, or recnet history of the game in a few lines of a thread. That means that dicussing hands in a vacuum is about the best we can do. Of course it isn't perfect, but that doesnt mean it isn't productive.

Cartman

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice post...Refreshing in High Stakes especially.

- Jeff

Nate tha\\\' Great · #24 10-10-2006, 01:08 AM

[ QUOTE ]
But the nature of the game is such that once a player gets beyond a certain caliber he will very rarely make a massive error.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree in that I think pretty much every player has blind spots. Oftentimes these are obvious things like game selection or playing too many hands before the flop but they can also be more subtle like tending to continuation bet on the turn too often. However, these players also often have extraordinary gifts, such as choosing the right bluffing frequencies or being excellent at manipulating their table image. Limit hold 'em is a fairly forgiving game IMO and one in which a player's strengths will tend to outshine his weaknesses.

cartman · #25 10-10-2006, 01:28 AM

[ QUOTE ]

I disagree in that I think pretty much every player has blind spots. Oftentimes these are obvious things like game selection or playing too many hands before the flop but they can also be more subtle like tending to continuation bet on the turn too often.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure we are disagreeing. I think you are right that most players have leaks. My contention is that these leaks are the sum of many small errors. For instance continuation betting too much can be a big leak, but rarely will any one particular continuation bet be a big error.

The Funky Llama · #26 10-10-2006, 01:30 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Nice post...Refreshing in High Stakes especially.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup...i read all these forums daily and if you want to find good hand analysis your best bet is mid-high shorthanded or something.

Let me just say that if Cartman thinks a hand is even mildly interesting, I would be willing to spend the whole night analyzing it.

DeathDonkey · #27 10-10-2006, 04:06 AM

I watched a 1k/2k on Full Tilt today with TLK, Erik1223, Luigi, and Benyamine and I thought I learned some interesting things about why these guys are "the best" at limit holdem, definitely some ideas I can incorporate into my own very shorthanded game. As long as the posts aren't "OMG Antonius has a million dollars on the table!!!" I think a lot can be learned from trying to deconstruct the way these guys play.

-DeathDonkey

patrick10 · #28 10-10-2006, 05:24 AM

im not a high stakes limit player, maybe a bit of a fanboy -but i posted because i live in aus and thought some high stakes players may be interested to watch or even play that were only reading 2+2 - and they would not see it in the FTP lobby or NVG for that matter. i honestly wouldnt mind if a mod deleted the thread, but it seems like some people appreciate the notice

truthfully i think the majority of plays/ strategy goes way over my head, but hopefully some HSplayers can gain from watching

Shandrax · #29 10-10-2006, 08:06 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
could you guys just keep this high limit fanboy stuff in nvg or something, it's really dull and the reason most real players hardly post strategy anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

You can be sure that high stakes players aren't discussing strategy on such online forums. The nuts are too valuable to share them with everyone for nothing. If you pay $600/hour for lessons you may pick up a few gems, but that's about it.

I should add that there is no point in discussion high stakes HU hands either.

Q: Why did Ivey call with just queen high?
A: Because he always calls with everything > 9!

All of these hands have to be seen as part of an overall strategy. Individually they make absolutely no sense at all.

DitMeMay · #30 10-10-2006, 08:00 PM

wow TLK took a beating today. i have him down 600k with most of the ass whopping cmoing from TerrorOfSweden, winning340k. wow a 21hr session from TLK. i noticed TerrorOfSweden played TLk really agrressive compared to anyone before him, like capping alot of hands preflop, and lots of capping on flop. either TLK was tilting but it seems like most hands was capped PF.