You really think that the handful or so of successful authors on NL cash poker probably have played in fewer card rooms than MikeStarr?

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

This thread is really racing to the bottom.

Roy Cooke summed it up in the Sept card player

when one is able to read a player and situation and deviate from GTO to achieve a higher EV advantage , now you are learning
to simply play GTO with no thought is to stagnate and be left behind

I'll take the best soldier over the best officer any day.

This may not come out well, but … this kind of hand is a superb one to post because it isn't a cooler (and no it isnt a potential cooler UTG UTG1 to have KK v QQ) or some short stack thoughtless gii nonsense spot. Playing this type of smallish/standard spot well over and over and over is how you win at poker. (at least as far as on-table is concerned). It's just incomplete to say winning = correct because it's more about 'correct for your range', which means that there is no such thing as an ABC spot unless everyone in here is playing the same ranges at the same frequencies beyond just preflop (which we're obviously not).

Now, I'm all for keeping 'balanced' in the traditional sense, and having an understanding for what that looks like certainly helps you play better, but it doesn't account wholly for winning.

I asked Mike 'why deviate' because once a so-far-tightish player goes raise-call UTG, QQ is going to be more of a 1-2 street thin value hand on this runout at best. Checking flop is a real thing against aggro/better types, and it also might be a good line if Mike does not have much JJ as a 3b pre here, but for the most part I just say 'don't deviate' because betting flop wins so often against this player. The way the hand played out, the UTG takes such a clown line that Mike wanted to post it up here and see what TF is going on... scratching his head, he said. It's a fold I guess as played, but I'd much rather have bet bet and gotten shown KK or bet ck bet and seen it than check flop, bet and then fold river because why tf did I lighten up my own range with this line only to fold an OP on the river to a player that may did get induced/have some bluffs/worse for value now? Seems bad, but his lol sizing/range makes it a muck nonetheless.

Anyways, once you have a handle on your own ranges, it really is about exploiting player archetypes even with limited info. This hand against some guy in a collared shirt and a gold watch is 80 pre and 3 streets 100% of the time. Against this guy, 3b pre (I guess), bet (nice), bet (meh, best option probably), check.

LOL. This assumes that Mike or most players know how to play GTO in the first place.

Hint: they don't.

So we agree after all. Although I'm too slow to get the soldier-officer comment.

I’d prefer to spend five minutes talking to Garrett before 5 days reading Janda. Stick w the guys in the trenches.

I know about as much about GTO as I do about Russian Literature.

Don't you think you would win more by just calling the turn and then calling the river rather than this minraise line (I doubt he is going to bet only $75 on the river). How do you balance your min-raise OTT, will you ever show up with a bluff? What is your check/calling range going to look like when this is the line you take with this hand?

Seems like a suboptimal play IMO and I doubt you will be able to pull it off twice vs the same villain.

Is everyone still talking about live 2/5? Jfc

poker is dead.

I dont mind your suggestion of calling the turn and calling the river either. He may or may not bet the river as a bluff though. Ive never played with the guy before so I have no idea. He might fire more than $75 on the river and I make more or he might give up and check/fold and I make less. There's no way of knowing.

I could make more or less than $150 your way, but I have to call the river every time, so I will lose more for sure your way when Im beat.

The one thing I like about my line better is that I make $150 for sure when I win and if he fires the river after getting raised on the turn, I know I'm beat so I wont lose more than $150.

Perhaps. But if so I suggest you have a problem expressing yourself in a clear and logical manner. You also keep ignoring any argument that dispels yours. I'm done on that front because although I respect you as a poker player you are just impossible to convince of anything you don't already know.

TAGs DO play tighter than average in comparison to the entire player pool (not in comparison to other regs or solid players). Most people play too many hands. They may not raise too many hands but they play too many. That's where the money comes from. They play too many hands and either fold too much or call too much or raise too much post flop.

Whether active 2p2ers tend to fold QJs is irrelevant because you are looking at a biased sample of presumably much stronger than average players. And I do think most active 2p2ers tend towards the nitty side.

I mean no offense but I truly doubt that. To be clear we may mean different things by "standard ABC poker" and as such I'm not sure those terms are that useful. What I am advocating is a more theoretically sound and math-based approach. It is perfectly fine to deviate if you have good reasons (such as live reads) but you should have that baseline.

And I doubt any of us have mastered such an approach. I haven't even come close. Just because you know a basic straightforward TAG game doesn't mean you can't improve your winrate through better understanding of TAG play, even moreso than you currently make. I just get the impression from you that you think you have mastered everything you need to know. Your disdain for poker books and training sites speaks to this. I'll admit many poker books are terrible but I've learned much more from the good ones than talking to other grinders.

You seem to think there is this binary choice between playing a basic, unevolved TAG game and taking "unorthodox" lines. There are other approaches such as expert TAG play.

And there you go again misinterpreting what I say.

Mike Starr: Id love to pick the brain of a 40/30 crusher.
Shai: I get the impression you think you have already mastered everything you need to know? .

MikeStarr: I play mostly ABC poker but I mix in some of these unorthodox lines too. It probably looks like I only play strange lines because I dont post standard hands here. They are boring.
Shai: You seem to think there's a binary choice between basic TAG play and taking unorthodox lines

Do you even try to understand anything I say or do you just want to argue?

Wow. All I can say at this point is your self awareness is close to zero. That or you are deliberately cherrypicking just to show you are right. I like to think you wouldn't do that.

When I read your post I literally thought "did this guy even read or try to understand my response?" I can assure you I have tried to do so with you but it's just endless circles.

I officially give up. Unorthodox play FTW.

We finally found something we agree on.

What possesses someone to troll their own thread. I shoulda paid attention in psych class.

Yikes. We're not on the same page after all.

TTHRIC?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Definitley

V played this hand extremely poorly. He missed out on a huge amount of value. The EV of having KK vs QQ on a no Flush no ace run out should be extremely high.

Mike’s read was spot on so congrats on good fold. I’m not sure what I would have done, probably called because the line is so weird. For what if it worth, I think is much wider than the assumed ranges. A solid ABC player is going to open UTG wider than AK and TT+ unless ABC is now code for bad.

If you think 4 betting KK is a mistake because it turns your hand face up should be 4betting way more.

Yup.