ITH Poker Forum

[AlamedaMike]

Great book in my opinion. Of course, I am not an advanced player and I play low limit. However, the opening chapter of his book is quite profound I think:

Top poker players use two primary weapons to increase profits:

o Forcing their opponents into predictability

o Being unpredictable themselves.

For a low limit player this might not seem to be that important. One night at the Bay 101 in a 8/16 game a player to my left told me that I was just to predictable for my own good - God bless his little heart. I modified my game and started to win. I won that session.

Outside of playing a solid ABC game at the low limits (1/2 online and 3/6-6/12) live I think that if you can get your opponent to be predictable you can increase you profits or lose less.

Of course, much of what Barry writes about does not apply to many low limit games but the challenge is to use what works. 90% of the time straigthforward ABC play gets the money but once in awhile "advanced" concepts can be employed.

One of my major weaknesses is reading players. This is what I think is costing me the most. That is why second best hands are so costly for me. Number two is to avoid tilt - emotional control - I have other books for that.

I stopped playing some of the low limit 6/12 games because I think that the players can read me better than I can read them. That is not a winning combination. They know where they are in a hand more that I do against them. My biggest tell is when I raise.

So, I think that ALHS is a book worth studying even if you play low limit. The key is to be selective, if the players are brain dead to begin with then there is not much you can do except play your cards.

Barry if I have misrepresented your book in any way please correct me. Any tips for applying ALHS to low limit games is greatly appreciated.

I think that "advanced thinking" can be applied to all games. I'm reading Roy Cooke's book on thinking like a pro. There is a prop that plays the lower limit games and by definition he is a professional playing 3/6 (and 6/12) if you define a professional as playing poker for a living.

[ImBetterDude]

I think playing the cards is so much more important than player reading in LH. It's all about your holding and the pot odds presented.

[nsidestrate]

I think playing the cards is so much more important than player reading in LH. It's all about your holding and the pot odds presented.

I do not mean this in an insulting way, but I strongly suspect based on this post that you are not a limit poker player.

[AlamedaMike]

I think playing the cards is so much more important than player reading in LH. It's all about your holding and the pot odds presented.

I do not mean this in an insulting way, but I strongly suspect based on this post that you are not a limit poker player.

Thanks Nside, I could not think of an appropriate response. In 2005 I though that NL was the cat's meow. It took me awhile to really appreciate the true complexities of limit hold'em.

[AlamedaMike]

Here is a little story for anyone that might be interested. I was playing in a live low limit 3/6 game. I was in seat 10 not that it mattered but I had a good view of the players. I was paying for my drink and I missed a lot of the action which is too bad. When the river card was dealt there were three players left in the hand. Players A, B and C.

C was LP (seat 2), A (seat 4) was in one of the blinds, and B was EP3/MP1 there abouts (seat 7).

The river card was a scare card. It might have paired the top flop card something like 2-5-J-4-J. A checked (he had about 7-8 chips left), B checked, C bet, A went allin, B raised and C mucked his hand.

We got to see his hand - he had 2-4 spades for two pair JJ445, A did not show, and B won the hand with A-Q high - JJAQ5 - C mucked the winner.

Player B won the hand that he was not entitled to. This is a subject covered in ALHS.

Now, in order to make this play at the river Player B needed to determine that C would bet if checked to, would call a bet and would fold for a check raise and that player A could not beat Ace high.

Players A & C were predictable in this sense. Player B might not have forced them to be predictable but he had to recognize the situation.

If player B did this often he would be predictable and would most likely lose a bunch of chips in the process. He is an experienced player that has some advanced plays to be used when the situation dictates (rarely). This might come up once a session or once a year. But, here player B won a pot that he was simply not entitled to.

This was my intended theme of my post. ALHS is well worth a study, in my opinion, and the reader's job is to find the strategies and techniques that apply to the game and setting in which they find themselves.

BTW, whether C should have checked on the river is a different story altogether. There was some 6th street chatter and player B said that he knew that player A did not have anything as he stacked his chips.

I hope that this makes sense and that you can follow my train of thought.

[rsar51]

I think playing the cards is so much more important than player reading in LH. It's all about your holding and the pot odds presented.

This is true at the lower limits when ABC poker gets you by...

Barry's book is geared for advanced middle and upper limit play where ABC poker is still a handy weapon but won't get you where you want to go...

Strange as this may sound but at the upper limits you have to dig a little deeper to climb the ladder...

[rsar51]

Great book in my opinion. Of course, I am not an advanced player and I play low limit. However, the opening chapter of his book is quite profound I think:

Top poker players use two primary weapons to increase profits:

o Forcing their opponents into predictability

o Being unpredictable themselves.

For a low limit player this might not seem to be that important. One night at the Bay 101 in a 8/16 game a player to my left told me that I was just to predictable for my own good - God bless his little heart. I modified my game and started to win. I won that session.

Outside of playing a solid ABC game at the low limits (1/2 online and 3/6-6/12) live I think that if you can get your opponent to be predictable you can increase you profits or lose less.

Of course, much of what Barry writes about does not apply to many low limit games but the challenge is to use what works. 90% of the time straigthforward ABC play gets the money but once in awhile "advanced" concepts can be employed.

One of my major weaknesses is reading players. This is what I think is costing me the most. That is why second best hands are so costly for me. Number two is to avoid tilt - emotional control - I have other books for that.

I stopped playing some of the low limit 6/12 games because I think that the players can read me better than I can read them. That is not a winning combination. They know where they are in a hand more that I do against them. My biggest tell is when I raise.

So, I think that ALHS is a book worth studying even if you play low limit. The key is to be selective, if the players are brain dead to begin with then there is not much you can do except play your cards.

Barry if I have misrepresented your book in any way please correct me. Any tips for applying ALHS to low limit games is greatly appreciated.

I think that "advanced thinking" can be applied to all games. I'm reading Roy Cooke's book on thinking like a pro. There is a prop that plays the lower limit games and by definition he is a professional playing 3/6 (and 6/12) if you define a professional as playing poker for a living.

Hi Mikey good to see you here and there and thought I'd chime in...

[jeffnc]

I think playing the cards is so much more important than player reading in LH. It's all about your holding and the pot odds presented.

I do not mean this in an insulting way, but I strongly suspect based on this post that you are not a limit poker player.

I took his quote to imply that player reads are more important in NL than in Limit, which I'd agree with, in general. In Limit, there's a limit to the size of mistake that can be made if your read is off (pun intended). But obviously it's not "all about your holding and pot odds".

I think using "advanced thinking" in LH is a little misunderstood. Some people equate "advanced thinking" with "fancy plays that work against advanced players". Not necessarily so.

The problem is that just playing your cards wins money against poor players. Making fancy plays (that require your opponents to be thinking) is as likely to lose money as win against these players. But, to conclude from that that advanced thinking won't increase your win rate is wrong.

You do need to be advanced to win optimally against poor players, and you need to think a lot about how to play your hands. There are some players who lose against the best players, lose against the worst players, and can only beat "average" or "decent" players. This kind of player simply isn't a complete player. You can be forgiven for not being able to beat the best players, but if you haven't figured out how to beat bad limit players then there are real gaps in your understanding of the game.

[nsidestrate]

I think playing the cards is so much more important than player reading in LH. It's all about your holding and the pot odds presented.

I do not mean this in an insulting way, but I strongly suspect based on this post that you are not a limit poker player.

I took his quote to imply that player reads are more important in NL than in Limit, which I'd agree with, in general. In Limit, there's a limit to the size of mistake that can be made if your read is off (pun intended). But obviously it's not "all about your holding and pot odds".

Essentially, that is the same as saying limit poker is all first level thinking. While it may be possible to beat the weakest games without regard to the other player's range and reactions, you would do better even at that level to be aware of what he has and what he thinks you have. I don't have a problem with the idea that knowing the other player and reading him is more important in NL, but I reject the notion that it is unimportant in limit. When I am sufficiently inspired, I might be willing to argue that hand ranges and player reading is actually more important in limit, but for now I'll just hold that it is also important.

[jeffnc]

I think playing the cards is so much more important than player reading in LH. It's all about your holding and the pot odds presented.

I do not mean this in an insulting way, but I strongly suspect based on this post that you are not a limit poker player.

I took his quote to imply that player reads are more important in NL than in Limit, which I'd agree with, in general. In Limit, there's a limit to the size of mistake that can be made if your read is off (pun intended). But obviously it's not "all about your holding and pot odds".

Essentially, that is the same as saying limit poker is all first level thinking.

You weren't referring to my response, were you? We seem to totally agree.

[AlamedaMike]

Current issue of cardplayer - Roy Cooke said in part

It's often said that our game is a game of people, not of cards. Instead of asking yourself how you should play hands differently, focus on how you should play people differently...

Of course, he was talking a $30/$60 game at the Bellagio but it is limit. For lower limit games as in my case people are important but not as important as higher limits.

My point is, and I am sure that you agree, use the appropriate level of people skills for the game that you are in.

Just because it is low limit limit hold'em (LLHE) does not mean that you ignore the people in the game.

[AlamedaMike]

Here is an example:

On hand one I limped with KQ EP 1st in. Sometime I raise and sometimes I fold and sometimes I call. The flop was an A-4 something. There were 3 players , me and the blinds. The blinds checked and I bet. They called. The turn was a 7 - they checked and I checked. The river was a 4 they checked, I bet and the SB check/raised me and I folded.

I put a note on the SB that he either slowplays or bluffs.

A few hands later I am on the button with and the aforementioned player is MP2 on this hand.

Full Tilt 1/2 Hold'em (9 handed) Full Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: ITH Forums)

Preflop: Mike is Button with , .
2 folds, MP1 calls, MP2 calls, 1 fold, CO calls, Mike calls, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (6 SB) , , (6 players)
SB checks, BB checks, MP1 checks, MP2 checks, CO checks, Mike bets, SB folds, BB folds, MP1 folds, MP2 calls, CO folds.

Checked to me and I bet.

Turn: (4 BB) (2 players)
MP2 checks, Mike bets, MP2 raises, Mike calls.

Okay, here I can check my notes on him. Does he slowplay or bluff. I bet and as expected he raised me.

River: (8 BB) (2 players)
MP2 checks, Mike bets, MP2 calls.

River I got lucky.

Final Pot: 10 BB

Results:
MP2 doesn't show. He had As-Qs
Mike has 9h Jh (full house, jacks full of twos).
Outcome: Mike wins 10 BB.

He slowplays. Well, the first hand was not played well but that is what I did. I learned something about MP2 that might save me some money down the line. It also stretches my mind a little on developing reads.

I like to read anything that Barry T writes. His last article in card player was a critique of a hand that was posted in 'ask an expert'. It was a 30/60 hand here.

He reviewed the hand and he recommended not to post hands until you know something about the player because you need to know something about the player in order to determine how to play the hand.

I'm starting to catch a drift here from Roy and Barry? Oh, yeah, Dr. Al beats that drum as well.

-------------

I'm a computer geek in a manner of speaking - a specialist in the large IBM mainframe systems that is. I am not a people person. I do better interacting with a computer porgam than a person (except my wife).

My weakest area is reads. I have good logic skills since I use to program for a living, but a little rusty since my bypass a few years ago.

This I need to improve.

[AlamedaMike]

...but if you haven't figured out how to beat bad limit players then there are real gaps in your understanding of the game.

Good point and a lot of what I mean. You need to be able to identify the player's playing ability and then adjust to that players, shall we call it, style?

e.g. don't try to bluff a calling station, don't tug on superman's cape and don't piss into the wind.

[nsidestrate]

I think playing the cards is so much more important than player reading in LH. It's all about your holding and the pot odds presented.

I do not mean this in an insulting way, but I strongly suspect based on this post that you are not a limit poker player.

I took his quote to imply that player reads are more important in NL than in Limit, which I'd agree with, in general. In Limit, there's a limit to the size of mistake that can be made if your read is off (pun intended). But obviously it's not "all about your holding and pot odds".

Essentially, that is the same as saying limit poker is all first level thinking.

You weren't referring to my response, were you? We seem to totally agree.

You can't get to 21,000 posts without replying to those who agree with you as well as those who disagree.