Simple Question

gotmarc · #1 05-20-2007, 06:45 PM

I'm reading a book that was published about ten years ago. It keeps refering to a no limit hold 'em game as: $5-$10-$25 blind game. What does that mean? Is there three blinds, an ante, or what?

It seems like a silly question, but I donked away my first internet deposit playing NLHE and alot of it had to do with reading the original super system. Doyle Brunson kept reffering to the flop as the "Turn." It didn't make sense to me to call a bet on the flop with only two outs to see the "turn", but who am I to argue with the living legand? So I started trying to catch a set on 4th street--among other things.
Then, one day, while watching the 1983 WSOP on You tube, I noticed Bobby Baldwin calling the flop the " turn ." I almost threw my computer out the window.

googleit123 · #2 05-21-2007, 12:33 AM

Looks like a variation of a spread limit or something and as far as the "turn" being the flop, yes the flop used to be the turn. So don't get confused and think you always have to see the turn (4th street) when you don't hit your set. Use your best judgement, your first instinct, then figure the odds and whether or not you are likely to have the best hand and the tendencies of your opponents.

As far as Super System and playing winning poker...well, there's a lot more to just reading that book or any book for that matter unless you are a natural and have that God given talent alsong with some luck.

If you are serious about playing "winning" poker you will need to do a lot of thinking about the game away from the table. You probably remember that tough river decision for all your chips...well, study situations like that and other "jam" situations and that way you will have a better idea of what to do next time you are in that situation.

To do list:
1) Purchase Poker Tracker and Poker Ace HUD
2) Start at the 5c NL tables and work your way up
3) Stop going for the quick score, sometimes great things take time.
4) If you're a book guy I would suggest Psychology of Poker, No Limit Hold Em Theory and Practice, Theory of Poker, Small Stakes Hold Em and if you a absolute beginner, Getting Started in Hold Em. These are all 2+2 publications.

Good Luck my friend,

Google

gotmarc · #3 05-21-2007, 12:46 AM

Thanks. I've read all those books. . except i stopped at about halfway through the phycology of poker, becasue i had trouble finding a player to do some of the work. I've spent more money on books than I've actually played at the tables. I've tried Poker Tracker, but I can't get it to work.

The book I'm currently reading is Pot Limit & No Limit Poker by Stewart Reuben & Bob Ciaffone. He talks about relative position like sklanky and miller although I've got to admit NLHETAP does do a beter job explaining it.

On the internet I play micro limit no limit hold em, as well as other games. The blinds are 5-10, the small blind being 5 cents and the big blind is 10 cents.

Are there games, or were there games, with three blinds?

googleit123 · #4 05-21-2007, 01:05 AM

On page 449-50 of Super System there is a discussion on the three, four ante/blind structure. The button post a blind in addition to the regular small and big. So the button posted 5, the small 10 and the big 25. I'm not sure whether or not these games still exist.

BTW, there is some good stuff in Super System. I'm prolly gonna reread it this week.

Do you play in live casinos at all? I just got back from a juicy $40NL game. Total fish game...tripled up tonight. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

lucky_mf · #5 05-21-2007, 03:09 AM

[ QUOTE ]
BTW, there is some good stuff in Super System. I'm prolly gonna reread it this week.

[/ QUOTE ]

Super System is probably has the best intro material on NL Hold'em out there. You just have to use common sense. Folr example, you can't call flop with a gutshot unless you are very deep with your opponent or plan on making a play on the turn. Similar for a pocket pair. You also can't (shouldn't) c-bet 90% of the time in a typically game. Something more like 60-70 percent is probably better.

Lucky

Niediam · #6 05-21-2007, 03:18 AM

I firmly believe that if you play NL as Super System suggests in today's game that it is impossible for you to be a long term winner.

Not that there is any useful information in the chapter but it's not good as a beginners guide at all.

lucky_mf · #7 05-21-2007, 03:23 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I firmly believe that if you play NL as Super System suggests in today's game that it is impossible for you to be a long term winner.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't be serious. With exception to the c-betting frequency (the I'm going to bet 90% of the time after I raise) and ignoring some of the stuff that is clearly related to deep stack play, it offers a template for a strategy which is fully capable of beating today's game.

Lucky

googleit123 · #8 05-21-2007, 03:27 AM

I completely agree- when I first got started a couple years ago read the book and thought I had a good grasp on NL and LH. I didn't. Not by a mile. I got schooled by 3/6 B&M players all the freakin' time and I'm not even gonna get into the 4/8 kill games. Not any more... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
I actually began as a NL player and then gradually settled into Limit.

My first texts were TOP and SSH. But now that I have 500 hours of B&M limit experience and 15k hands online (.40BB/100) I feel more confident about my skills. I am officially a TA according to the PT default VPIP 18, PFR 9 and AF 2.04- I think I need a break from all the hardcore calculus and math poker books for a week and read some soft books.

Lego05 · #9 05-21-2007, 04:21 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I firmly believe that if you play NL as Super System suggests in today's game that it is impossible for you to be a long term winner.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't be serious. With exception to the c-betting frequency (the I'm going to bet 90% of the time after I raise) and ignoring some of the stuff that is clearly related to deep stack play, it offers a template for a strategy which is fully capable of beating today's game.

Lucky

[/ QUOTE ]

No I agree that if you played strictly the way that Super Systems seems to guide you, you won't do too well. Although the c-betting frequecny wouldn't be what I have the biggest issue with. I probably c-bet closer to 90% than 70%. It's the if your c-bet gets raised go all-in with a piece or any draw part. I don't want to 3 bet all-in with a naked OESD especially in lower limit games where I assume there is less fold equity than higher games (never having played higher than 200NL FR and 100 NL 6max myself). Plus Brunson said if he got raised he'd push all-in with any draw and if I don't want to with an OESD I sure as hell son't want to with a gutshot. I assume that either back then games were soooo much tighter, he left some info out and expected people to know what he really meant, or he really only meant certain good draws which kinda also fits with reason 2.

lucky_mf · #10 05-21-2007, 08:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You can't be serious. With exception to the c-betting frequency (the I'm going to bet 90% of the time after I raise) and ignoring some of the stuff that is clearly related to deep stack play, it offers a template for a strategy which is fully capable of beating today's game.

Lucky

[/ QUOTE ]

No I agree that if you played strictly the way that Super Systems seems to guide you, you won't do too well. Although the c-betting frequecny wouldn't be what I have the biggest issue with. I probably c-bet closer to 90% than 70%. It's the if your c-bet gets raised go all-in with a piece or any draw part. I don't want to 3 bet all-in with a naked OESD especially in lower limit games where I assume there is less fold equity than higher games (never having played higher than 200NL FR and 100 NL 6max myself). Plus Brunson said if he got raised he'd push all-in with any draw and if I don't want to with an OESD I sure as hell son't want to with a gutshot. I assume that either back then games were soooo much tighter, he left some info out and expected people to know what he really meant, or he really only meant certain good draws which kinda also fits with reason 2.

[/ QUOTE ]

He didn't really leave the info out. He said, that you have to play straightforward against bad players (players that will not fold so that you have 0 fold equity). This is what I was talking about when I said you need to use "common sense" and that Super System provided a "template." Of course you can't push every time you flop a draw and get played with or every time you flop second pair and you get played with. You can (and should) sometimes though because when you are aggressive people will play back at you light and you can't just keep laying down your hands. If you get called you will be taking the worst of it - fine. He is right the little pots that you pick up along the way compensate you for the times you do get called and have to take the worst of it. See the hands I posted in the going all in PF with AK thread for some current day examples of this (I 4-bet pre-flop with AQ and AJ in a 600NL game).

I've been playing using a "common sense" SS approach since I read the book and doing rather well at limits ranging from 100NL to 1000NL. I probably raise and play more hands than he advocated, but I am playing shorthanded and he was really referencing full ring.

Oh - and I'm not sure what limits you are playing, but when you start playing with good players, opening a fair number of pots, and c-betting 90 percent of the time, they are goinng to [censored] with you a lot.

Lucky