PNL & the Jocks vs Nerds issue

phydaux · #1 07-29-2007, 10:00 PM

I'd like to start this thread by thanking Matt, Sunny & Ed for the excelent job they did on Professional No Limit. I'm looking forward to vol 2.

In other threads, many people have commented on what they want to see in vol 2. Several posters have stated that they would like to see vol 2 focus entirely on 6-max.

This is an extention on the whole 6-max vs FR issue, or what I have dubbed "the Jocks vs the Nerds." Some people don't like my name for the issue. All I have to say is that some people commenting one way or the other show far less maturity than I would expect from a typicle high school kid.

Vol I of PNL is excellent. Great job, guys. You have provided a framework for thinking about NL problems that readers can apply to any NL situation.

Now, you have stated that you have much more in you, much more that can be said about NL hold'em that currently just doesn't appear in print anywhere. I'm going to ask you guys to please keep going on the track you're going. Include as much broad spectrum information in vol II as you can.

And then, I'm going to plead with you to do an entire book dedicated to 6-max.

I'm asking this mostly as a FR player, not a 6-max player. I'd prefer PNL vol II to be a more general book, devoted to principles that apply to all NL situations rather than situations that only arrise on a 6-max table.

However, I do recognise that most pro cash game players play 6-max, since it offers them the greatest oportunity to outplay weak players after the flop when the mistakes are most expensive. Therefore, 6-max really does deserve in depth treatment. And I belive, after reading PNL vol I, that you guys are eminently qualified to address this huge gap in poker litrature.

Gelford · #2 07-29-2007, 10:25 PM

At a full table the players preflop edge is very big, so play becomes more player dependent and this more demanding and fun

- Aba20 (my wording from memory)

It is one game whether you play short of full, shorthanded players have a tendency to get easily bored at full tables as there is less room to operate on.

But you are right, the book should be on NL hold'em not NL hold'em with six players seated or something like that.

Still I like Matt and Sunny to have a shorthanded focus as I feel Sklanky has the market cornered on limping say 77 in mp and checking three streets to extract after flopping top set advice.

binions · #3 07-29-2007, 10:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I feel Sklanky has the market cornered on limping say 77 in mp and checking three streets to extract after flopping top set advice.

[/ QUOTE ]

LMAO

phydaux · #4 07-30-2007, 12:36 AM

Not entirely sure what that quote has to do with my OP, but thanks, Gel, for driving home the "Jocks vs Nerds" point for me.

I think I saw one of the kids from the school band behind the library. Why don't you go make fun of his tuba?

Pov · #5 07-30-2007, 02:24 AM

No comment on Jocks vs. Nerds, but I definitely support keeping Vol. 2 general as opposed to a having a 6-max focus. As a B&M player, I find myself in both full and short games all the time and I am much more likely to purchase a book covering either full or both full and short than a book that's only good for me after 3am. Thanks for listening.

Gelford · #6 07-30-2007, 08:25 AM

Heh Phy, those 6-max games must have scared you [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

But I predict that in 3-6 months time, you'll grow bored of full ring and will be back crushing [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

cjk73 · #7 07-30-2007, 09:16 AM

Let me also toss my vote in for volume two to NOT be focused on 6 max. I agree, there is certainly a market for 6-max books and who better to write one then the folks that have brought us the outstanding work in PNL Volume 1, however, please, please do it outside of the PNL series. A chapter, sure makes sense, but I do think it would hurt the series to dedicate the entire volume 2 to such a specific area. Almost like if Harrington dedicated volume two to turbo rebuys or something.

Gonso · #8 07-30-2007, 10:18 AM

I'll throw a vote in for anything 6-max thru HU, if you're going to cover NLHE cash at all. 6-max player may never sit at FR, but every online player will have to play a short table from time to time. UNless, you leave every time it gets short.

If you have a couple goofballs at the table and a few seats become vacant (and remain so for a while), are you going to leave these guys just because you're only 6 handed?

Plus, how much material do you need to cover playing the early positions in a FR game?

NickMPK · #9 07-30-2007, 11:27 AM

What is "Jocks vs Nerds"? I understand the rest of your post, but I don't understand the title of the post at all. Are you saying jocks play one type of game and nerds play another? Is this a common shorthand from one of the forums I don't read or something?

phydaux · #10 07-30-2007, 01:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]

What is "Jocks vs Nerds"? I understand the rest of your post, but I don't understand the title of the post at all. Are you saying jocks play one type of game and nerds play another? Is this a common shorthand from one of the forums I don't read or something?

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of good NL cash game players, and most NL cash game pros, play 6-max. This is for several good reasons that I won't get into right now. However many players, myself included, prefer to play FR NL cash games.

This has lead to a dynamic, at least on this forum, where the "cool kids" play 6-max, and if you play NL cash games but you don't play 6-max then you're just not one of the cool kids. Further some 6-max players, at least the ones with little more maturity than your average 14 year-old pimple factory, are fond of making long and elaborate posts on why 6-max players are the best and most skilled players and how anyone who plays FR will never approach the skill level of a 6-max player. And of course the favorite place for these 6-max players to post their boasts and taunts is in the FR strategy forum.

I have observed that this is little different from the jocks vs nerds taunting and bullying common in high schools and jr. high schools. So far as I know I'm the only one who calls it this. I hope the name catches on, because I think it's particularly appropriate.

So when Matt & Sunny asked what readers wanted to see in vol II of PNL and several "jocks" said that they wanted vol II to be 100% 6-max, I made this tread asking them to make vol II more general but to then go ahead and write another book devoted entirely to 6-max. I believe 6-max deserves through treatment, but I think that vol II would be better if, like vol I, it is full of concepts that can apply to any NL situation.