Genius28 is sitting right now at a 1k HU PLO reg speed.

Knowing now about what sort of talent you have and the strongness of it, how lucky have you gotten to accomplish what you have in poker? Like with the knowledge that you have it in you to become one of the best and make over a million, how big would you say the chances of this happening were right after you started really getting into poker?

Do you think we perhaps overrate the quality of people who are the best in other fields than poker? we both agree that the level of play for the best hungs players is still pretty low compared to the amount of money that's able to be made and other branches of competitive sports/mindgames, but before we got here we obviously also never expected it so maybe our perception of how good the best at something are is simply off. What do you think the percentages split is re: husngs are at the top far less evolved than the amount of money that's to be made and the lifetime it has had should dictate OR we overrate the capabilities of the top players in non-poker fields

He plays a lot of 8 game cash

This is interesting, makes me realise how my comments look good and smart but are actually pretty damn short sighted. Like for all my comparisments to other thinking sports I really just compared it to chess, since that game is played by my family. It takes like a decade with an insane amount of time spent studying the game to get really good at that and even then you'll never make any worldlist. My dad told me not to get into it when I was in highschool because I was too old to become world class at it - can you imagine. And then there's poker, where anyone with a decent amount of talent can play for 2 years and not even study the game and be good at it - compared to the field.

I'm not sure how poker actually relates to other thinking games in that way. I actually don't know anything about other thinking games, what is your opinion on all those questions yourself?

Also a pretty interesting quote from a chessbook I opened once which I think relates very much to poker, it was something like 'Becoming good at chess is not fun, it takes a ton of study and hard work. Its much easier to just play and think carefully when playing, and expect that to make you better at it, and this is what most players do.'

If you're interested in this I recommend the book "Talent Is Overrated" by Geoff Calvin. He's a journalist summarizing a lot of the current scientific knowledge on expertise and how to acquire it. Googling the term "Deliberate Practice" will also lead you to a lot of interesting and/or useful information.

Also Malcom Gladwell in the book Outliers said you become an expert at something after 10k hours of practice.
Since a HU sng lasts an average of 10 mins, you need to play 60k games to become an expert. Multiply it by roughly 3 (average length 3 mins) ~180k games for Hyper turbos :-P

Gladwell was on to something but he missed a very important point. Just putting in the hours won't be enough, especially not in Poker. Also, you don't need as many as 10k hours to reach to top of the world in many activities, and poker is probably one of them.

He is stating, that if at least, you invest 10k hours practicing something, you will be an expert in that area, which is indeed imo correct unless ur just a ****ing ******

: )

There's a ton of professionals who've put way more than 10k hours into their daily 9-5 job yet could hardly be described as an expert at whatever they do.

10k hours of deliberate practice is enough to make you a world class performer in one of the most competitive fields like football, chess or music. But 10k hours of mindless grinding will leave you hardly any better than when you started. Of course, in the real world nothing is truly 'mindless', but there still remain a huge difference in the quality of the hours you put in.

10k hours include studying not only playing the game so my 60k/180k games are unrealistic. I think those 10k hours apply to many branches of expertise because it is around 10 years for many human activities (surgery, music, sports, etc.). If you don't become an expert after such a long time you basically suck :-)

got a question for you!

assuming you have dissected opponent's range to perfection and you are 100% sure hes only open jamming pocket pairs 22 to 88

would you start calling with J9s T9s Q9s K9s etc to 15-20bb open jams? This would give you a 5% edge vs that range so is that enough to beat the rake (in superturbos where the rake is low) ?

How can i know this?

I'm pretty sure you should not take the rake into account when doing these calculations.

Would be orsm if someone could confirm this or prove me wrong.

100% dont count the rake and yes it is a call for sure if you can see those hands

nobody open jams 77-88 and most dont do 55-66

rake doesn't matter. what does matter is your expected winrate assuming you keep folding those hands

so vs standard oponent who is never ever gonna open jam lets say 370t at 10/20 with anything else than a low pocket pair its allways +EV to call hands that are 55% vs pocket pairs?

I dont really understand how rake doesnt really matter? i mean if you take a series of 50.1% vs 49.9% bets endlessly you would end up losing money in the long run... right? (due to rake being higher than that 0.1% edge)

Let's say you have 370 chips and villain has 630 chips. You post BB of 20 chips and villain openjams. Now, if you call, the EV of calling with equity x is p(740)*x+p(0)*x, and the EV of folding is p(370), where p(n) is the probability of winning the match when having n chips (and villain has 1000-n chips). Let's say we're playing a $500 ST and your pre-rake edge at 370 chips is 4%, meaning p(370)~$385. Now, let's say your edge at 740 chips is 2.5% (lower eff. stack), meaning p(740)~$760. That means that assuming EV(call)>EV(fold) and p(740)*x+p(0)*x>p(370), then 760x+0x>385 and x>385/760=0.5066. Ofc that doesn't mean *you* need 50.66% equity, your own winrate may be different and stack sizes will obv differ as well

The reason rake doesn't matter is coz I'm assuming it's a sunk cost and playing to get the highest ROI. ofc rake is not really a sunk cost and sacrificing ROI can lead to higher hourly rate, but calculating for the highest hourly rate is very complicated and depends on many factors, and will not yield the same results for a $5 player and a $500 player in this same situation, but what I can def tell you is that our 50.66% is the highest the border can go, playing for the hourly can only make it lower. Nichlemn made a good post about playing for the hourly rate but it's 3am over here and I can't really bother digging for it right now so I hope some1 else can find the link

i bought outliers but stopped reading pretty quickly, after reading this statement i'm very happy i did, it's definitely one of the dumber/more worthless things i've heard.

Yeah i don't really have a strong opinion, but my guess is that the skill level at the top of poker is fairly low. In other fields you are more accurately rewarded based on how good you actually are, in poker this is obviously not the case and things that might make you better, such as playing tough regs might even have a negative effect on your overall outcome, so perhaps it's simply logical.Also being really good at something that has actual rankings makes for much more respect in the field itself but more importantly from the outside world. So it's really to be expected that poker has less skill at the top still there is a lot of money to be made and a lot of competitiveness so how big the difference would be i do not know

I feel the skill level at the top of the poker is extremely high. As in anything where there is so much money to be made, people from other fields will cross over to try it out.

I find it interesting that HUSNGs don't reward the best players enough to improve their edge over the other good regs. I would think that in deep stack NLHU any tiny edge gained is worth thousands. I know in limit that the difference between the better 10/20 players and 100/200 players isn't much but edges are so small per hand and some many hands are played after the flop that this small gain becomes huge.

This is it I think:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/58...-tl-dr-461260/

Cheers!

thanks everyone for the responses.

sorry for theory invasion in your well h2olga lol

hi H2, i would like to know which HUD did you use in your HUSNG vids. I think its terrific with transparent frame, etc...

thanks