Just the facts please - The definition of opinion is (wikipedia) - a belief about matters commonly considered to be subjective, and is the result of emotion or interpretation of facts.
The definition of fact is (wikipedia)- something that has really occurred or is actually the case. The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability, that is whether it can be proven
I like to make sure I put up these definitions because many times people get these two confused. A good example of this is when people say that “bluffing a weak player won’t work” or as Gary put it “is like trying to train a coyote to be a dog” Bluffing like many things that go on at the table is situational. Some games it’s profitable to bluff some games it’s not. Some spots you may need to bluff in some spots waiving the white flag is the correct play. Bluffing like many other things in the game is also relative and based on perception. How many times has a guys shown you his hand after you have folded thinking he bluffed you when in actuality he was bluffing with the best? In my opinion the belief that bad players can’t be bluffed is incorrect but I will talk about that in another blog. Another opinion stated as fact that I read was “your image means nothing to bad players“. How do we prove that? I’m sure that everyone has a story about the fish in the game who got lucky on them and then donked off all their chips. But does that really prove that your image means nothing? Or is it simply a matter of looking at only the results of a small sample size. One could argue that winning players craft their image at the table so thoroughly that it is almost impossible for the other players at the table not to recognize. In this day in age with all the public information about poker isn’t it unreasonable to believe that a good majority of your opponents are trying to get some sort of read on you. In fact if you asked most poker players what their strongest ability was I bet they would mention their reading ability. (I smell a poll question). How can you have a accurate read on a player without having a image for them? The point being that many times opinions are stated as fact, when reality they are not. This can be a determent not only to our psyche but also our bankroll.
All players are not created equally - In the comments to my last blog their were two hand history re-caps, in both the hero’s took what they would call a bad beat and while I agree %100 with the bad beat portion, I think that there are other aspects that both Alex and Gary are ignoring. It’s not their fault however. Poker players by nature of the game tend to be a more narcissistic group then most. The game is an individual sport, in fact one of the most common expression is “No friends at the poker table” Because of this I think many times we fail to look at the other guy’s P.O.V. For instance in Alex’s comments he mentions his opponents reasoning behind making the call was. His opponent believed he had two over’s and a straight draw for the win. My first impression upon hearing this is that …… I could understand how he could think that. In fact Alex did a good job of letting him think that with his line of betting. The way the hand was played I would expect you to turn over AK suited more than A-6 It wasn’t really unreasonable for him to think what he thought he just happened to be wrong. We have all been wrong on our reads before. I think it’s important to remember that when you sit down at the poker table many of your opponents are going through the same emotions as you. Despite what you believe or what they say no one enjoys loosing. Your opponents our not sitting down at the table to try to give you an edge, in fact they are deciphering ways to out maneuver and manipulate you just as your are them. In Alex’s hand he got unlucky, but I don’t think we can always dismiss our opponents line of thinking as nonsense simply because they outdraw us.
What’s the 411? - In Alex’s story he forgot to let us know the stack size of our opponent. Information like this is crucial in NL poker how can I judge someone’s decision when I don’t know the stakes? Time and time again I will hear players Bitch about a bad beat that they took and they will leave out the fact that Mathematically the guy would be a fool not to call. Have you ever heard a tournament player talking about getting busted from a tournament?
Player 1 “ I had AK guy called me with 10-5 off and spiked".
Player 2 “How deep were you?”
Player 1 “Uh I don’t know I had about 5k”
Player 2 “ What were the blinds?“
Player 1 “ 2000 -4000 with a $100 ante".
Poker is a situational game and certain situations call for certain decisions without knowing the specifics of a situation how can we accurately critique? Now in fairness to Alex he does explain that he’s all - in, but I still would like to know the size of his opponents stack.
The final thing that I would like to touch on in regards to the comments on the last blog is this notion that the way to win at 1-2 NL is to sit back and wait for only AA and KK and then get max value. It is my belief that the game of poker is constantly evolving and to me the tight is right strategy has gone the way the dodo bird. First off it’s hard enough to pick up enough premium hands per session to play. I have gone sometimes weeks without seeing JJ or better as starting cards, if my strategy is to wait for these hands, what do I do now? I used to be a student of the tight is right school. I once thought that the best way to win at poker is to sit and wait and only play your top tier starting hands. Much of this is because my background is in Stud and Limit poker. In Limit poker especially this can be a very profitable strategy as many of the pots will be bloated from all the pre-flop action. However NL is different, there are going to be so many times that your opponents are going to simply fold to you not only because they themselves don’t have playable starting cards but also because of the ultra tight image you have created for yourself. It is my hypothesis that to consistently beat any NL hold em games a player must have the ability to play a loose aggressive style which incorporates skills like, bluffing, pot building and Over -betting. In Low limit Vegas hold em games these skill become even more important as many of your opponents as we see will be incorporating a tight aggressive style. In my humble opinion you ability to exploit that style is a major key in building your bankroll and booking winning sessions
Bruce Williams is a Las Vegas poker pro who is know around the city as Ak...No Good.
Hey, I think you may have misinterpreted me a bit. Everything I said was absolutely opinion based and there is no single perfect way to play.
ReplyDeleteI also think you're giving 1/2 players too much credit. Remember, the title of the thread was "How to beat 1/2 NL games against bad players", not "how to beat 1/2 NL games".
Like when you mentioned "Your opponents are not sitting down at the table to try to give you an edge, in fact they are deciphering ways to out maneuver and manipulate you just as your are them".
This is completely not true when talking about bad players. They are playing their own cards not thinking about what everyone else is holding. Obviously this isn't the case every time but when discussing strategy we have to generalize a bit. Of course every situation is different but the point of the thread was to offer advice on what I find to be a typical game. And a reoccuring theme is that your own image is not recognized by weak players. I was never stating any of this as fact, just something that seems to be true more often than not. And this was the result of a large sample size, just to be clear.