***HU SNG REGS THREAD***

[bamboo]

jus wondering, what is skates screen name?

[r1tony]

Originally Posted by ChicagoRy

I'm just going to end there, I think I'm going to quit debating this, I really just don't like telling people not to share poker strategy without a very very good reason, regardless of my own benefit or lack of benefit.

+1 and make it free. Do something good, we all had to start somewhere. Getting help from any winning decent stakes players is like finding the end of the rainbow or costing 500+/hour... it's just sad. Some Reg's even go out of their way to tell you they would be glad to help then block/hide from aim or make some BS excuse what they cant take a few minutes to go over a hand.

It's pretty sad as a community. I am not the greatest HU SNG player far from it, but am always glad to share, point out mistakes or even just discuss anything with anyone free of charge. I also thought it made me a better player/person and good karma in the process.

[huntypro]

Implementing information is the most importany factor. I have studied the game more in the last month than ever and I really don't think I am doing what I should to win games. If Skates gives advice then some will use the info but alot of players will forget or implement the info incorrectly. There will always be alot more losing players than winners.

The better players absorb information and use it far more efficiently than the rest.

Conclusion - let Skates post and stop being paranoid.

[skates]

lol what have I started...

A lot of negative feedback, so it's not happening. I side with the "will reduce edges" crowd more than the "will increase edges" crowd, and I don't think anyone refuted my assertion that good, public information reduces the money flow to the higher games.

I think it's crazy how much weight you guys are assigning to something I write, but I'm pretty sure we're just talking about a bigger-scope problem.

I can't really write a partial or smaller article either... it just doesn't work like that. I was thinking "well, what if I wrote something about preflop, then sent it to a few people, asked them if it was chill to post, and went from there", but the underlying problem is that I can't just write something about preflop. It all connects, and to really express what I want to express it requires something more expansive.

I also don't think this interacts poorly with the function of the message board. The message board operates under the premise of learning through the exchange of ideas. Once someone is not able to get useful information out of the exchange of ideas, the usefulness of the board deteriorates. That's why you don't see high stakes guys posting hands. When they do, it's "player is x, what's your line", and there's good reason for that: The question isn't about "what's the best line vs. avg player #6" because everyone knows that... it's about "what do you think the best line is with my image against this specific player"... and the information received isn't of the same form (what's the conclusion given the premises), it's of the form "in what ways are your assumptions about this player different than mine", which manifests itself in the form of a line suggestion. If I ask what you do vs. kbp00 in a spot, it's because I want to know if your notes on kbp00 differ from mine, not how you use my notes. I didn't explain that very well, but I hope it's clear.

Side comments:
I'm 20 and can't play in casinos yet .
I'm not ignoring the question about poker having a negative impact on my life. I'm thinking if I want to respond or not, and in what way.
I really wanted to define the "Skates Point" .

[sejje]

I skipped for a little while, and I haven't really taken sides (and still I'm not), but ChRy is almost certainly underestimating the impact of a good article.

Skates said himself he didn't write the article because it would almost certainly decrease his bottom-line. Enough said imo.

Edit: Didn't write it earlier in his career.

[ac on]

Originally Posted by ChicagoRy

words

You seem to have done, by far, the most thinking about whether this should posted or not, more so than spamz, who is seemingly the only one against the publication of skates thoughts who has said more than "dont do it, it'll be bad for our edges."

That said, in the game spamz plays, players are at 15-30bb for a large percentage of the game, and it IS really hard to find good information out there on 15-30bb play.

So, if spamz is correct, that he makes the most profit at 15-30bb, it would make sense for him to be harmed by more people becoming competent at this level, wouldn't it?

[sejje]

Yeah but the side ChRy is taking is this:

Where would spamz/(insert many of our forum buddies) be without 2p2 and all the knowledge they gleaned here?

And if the fact remains that they wouldn't be where they are (and truthfully even if they would be), then why are they so reluctant for information to be published that might lead others down that same path? I mean, it's very clear--selfishness. And selfishness is not a bad term in my vocabulary, so don't take offense anyone. Spamz is looking out for himself here, and nobody can blame him.

[spamz]

1) Ugh, nobody said we know everything about this matter. We all have our thoughts. Pretty sure we could learn one or two things from the manual skates wants to write (you keep talking about an article, skates used the word manual, i'm kind of curious how long this would be tbh). Thing is, bad regs, will learn like 20 things from this, even if they only catch up one big leak in their game, roi-wise this is gonna be way bigger than the other way around. Let's say something about winrate (obv fictional numbers, just pointing out):
now: 55%
i read the article: 55.2%
fishreg reads the article: 54%
we both read the article: 54.2%
you get my point? Everyone will learn something from it obv, one player just way more than the other and it's not the better ones learning more obv...

2) People on the $10s-$50s don't "need" this article and probably couldnt use it a lot anyway. They are focusing on playing fish, and as said before, that's not that hard at all, easy to master pretty much because 90%+ of the time fish work in extremes.

3) You keep talking about an article and skates about a manual. An article for me is like 1 page or something, 2 at best. I really think skates is going to put more effort into it than that. Do you really think people on 100s are THAT much worse than 500s? Think again! Edges are small as said before, make them even smaller or what? Your sentence "If we're only one good mid blind article away from killing the high stakes games, won't they be dead very soon anyways?" is partially true, yes. It doesn't take much imo, and it's pretty much this aspect we're talking about here. Will you have a higher than > 50% winrate against 500+ players then with just this info? Meh, unlikely. However, the better players wouldn't be beating rake anymore now so it would be just everyone lining up for fish up till 2ks or smth once they got the roll for it.


I was gonna post some more but heard skates replied.

[skates]

**I still have to read the other posts but I'm responding to a piece of this**

Originally Posted by ChicagoRy

It just feels like so much is being assumed here:

- Majority of edge is in the effective stacks area Skates would be writing about.

- There's not much good information out there about it.

- If this material is made public the edges regulars have in HS will disappear.

I think the first one holds. I really, firmly, do. Especially on FTP if I had to guess. I think this is because number of chips (so amount of $) at risk is high relative to deeper blind levels, and because the edges possible are ten-fold the edges possible at shorter stacks. (erm, there's clearly a function here... with 1500 chips at 0-chip blinds there's no edge, and at 1500-chip blinds there's no edge, so the edge function increases then decreases somewhere... I think the max appreciated over all stack depths is somewhere around 50-chip blinds, which is between 15-30BB deep usually.)

There is no good information about it anywhere. Agreed.

I think edges between regulars will still exist on close to the same level, though slightly decrease in some cases. I think the undercut problem is more critical (players at lower stakes playing better on average, allowing less money to float up).

[spamz]

Originally Posted by ac on

You seem to have done, by far, the most thinking about whether this should posted or not, more so than spamz, who is seemingly the only one against the publication of skates thoughts who has said more than "dont do it, it'll be bad for our edges."

That said, in the game spamz plays, players are at 15-30bb for a large percentage of the game, and it IS really hard to find good information out there on 15-30bb play.

So, if spamz is correct, that he makes the most profit at 15-30bb, it would make sense for him to be harmed by more people becoming competent at this level, wouldn't it?

yeah this, i'm at these stacksizes around 50% or more of my game i'd say, i doubt you have this even 30% of the time

[ac on]

Originally Posted by sejje

Where would spamz/(insert many of our forum buddies) be without 2p2 and all the knowledge they gleaned here?

I'm under the impression they didn't get to where they by having someone write them manuals, though, so if that's where Ry is coming from, I tend to lean away from his side. I didn't get that impression, though I'm kind of tired so my reading comprehension is probably a bit shot.

[skates]

Originally Posted by ChicagoRy

4) If you believe Skates article will be potentially devastating to the HS community, should you all not be concerned that Skates has mentioned he believes super turbos are pretty much unbeatable at the rake they are being offered? If you believe him, I would imagine that an unbeatable husng game that is siphoning off the funds of every husng player that plays them would be more likely to be devastating to your bottom lines than one article posted on 2p2 or a training site could be. I happen to believe super turbos are potentially a very bad thing and should be offered at a lower rake or discontinued. I've posted my thoughts in the FTP feedback thread. If others agree, maybe we can do more about this. If not, why do you disagree with Skates? If you disagree with him on a topic that seems a little more basic than 10-30bb play, then are you even going to agree with the article that he plans on writing?

I think that the existence of hyper turbo HUSNGs is close to the worst thing that could happen to the HUSNG community in terms of maintaining the profitability of the games (obv, not necessarily a bad thing for the site at all). I've voiced this opinion before. This is a much much much much much bigger issue than anything I could write.

[sejje]

Originally Posted by ac on

I'm under the impression they didn't get to where they by having someone write them manuals, though, so if that's where Ry is coming from, I tend to lean away from his side. I didn't get that impression, though I'm kind of tired so my reading comprehension is probably a bit shot.

Fair enough, but Ry is a bleeding-heart liberal and he believes in the promotion of the lower class to as high of a class as possible.

Therefore, he is for the sharing of all knowledge that can be shared. He would not withhold something from his HUSNG brethren.

As far as Ry is concerned, if someone knows something that can help others, he should share it.

Sorry to sum you up like that Ry.

[cwar]

If everyone is so concerned about one article like this the life span of HS HU sngs must be nearing an end soon no?

[skates]

Originally Posted by ac on

There was a thread a short while back in which skates asked me how I would adjust to someone check/minraising my cbets 100%. I gained more from thinking about that than any article I've ever read.

I appreciate hearing this actually. I spent a lot of time that weekend trying to communicate thought processes. Thinking about things like that (the bigger picture, if you will) is the way to get better in a meaningful way rather than just a "how do I beat this next batch of slightly better idiots".