What exactly is the stats of a nit? Is it like a rock 10/3/3(tight/passive/aggressive)? Or 11/18/1.5 (tight/aggressive/passive symbolized as a warning sign on PT3) Or 10/2/1(tight/passive/passive shows as a mouse on PT3 icons)???

OR maybe its just a name of anyone below 12VP$IP?

It's all relative to whatever game you're playing, but a nit is anyone who's significantly tighter than average (or tighter than the average winning player). There's no hard and fast definition for any of these sppelations. Poker is a fluid game, and what's TAG today was LAG five years ago and a maniac 10 years ago.

I red somewhere that the most common hand taking it down is twopair in micro FR. True or untrue?

How do I get my screen name removed from PokerTableRatings?

Where is some information on getting rakeback?

How many buy-ins would ya'll recommend for $7/$14 45/9 super turbo SnGs?

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/70/rakebacknetwork/

Hi I'm new to the forums and I'm pretty excited to learn as much as I can.
This sounds pretty stupid and I'm sure the answer will be really basic but..
Why do players such as Phil Ivey cover their cards with chips? I understand that you put a single chip on the cards to stop the dealer from raking it into the card pile. I was watching $1,000,000 Cash game and he uses about 10 chips to cover his cards. Any Ideas?

Thanks

How do you guys play on stars?

I have to click the buttons like sit at table, and the bet/raise/fold ones like 5 times before it does it (ok only 2 or 3 times but its annoying)

I don't think he has any particular reason for doing it, just a personal preference. I might sometimes have one chip, sometimes multiple myself.

makes it more unlikely that dealers will fold ur hand for you.

A single click has always worked fine for me. Perhaps you need new batteries in your wireless mouse or something else is going on that's hardware related?

Options > advanced multi-table options > single click table activation

Im a looking to pick up a poker software to help me with my game. I am a micro limit full-ring game (<10NL) and <$5 sng/mtt player. It seems that HEM and PT are the two most acclaimed software being used by the 2+2 community.

Which one do you think would be more suited for a low limit player looking to slowly climb the ranks while improving on his game?

Thanks ;p

Lol, if I got a penny for every time I heard that question...

This question has be debated since the dawn of poker.

Just download and try both free trials before you decide to buy.
Or search the forums for the millions of threads about this debate.

Is 3betting % based on amount of total hands? or amount of times you raise when someone else 2bets first?

Hi,

I know this will sound like a really stupid question, but can anyone be a winning poker player? I know technically anyone can be a winning player, but there do seem to be players who, for whatever reason, will never be winning players, despite their best efforts. There seems to be a natural intuitive/ cognitive element to poker that some players have, and others do not. I guess I speak as someone who has spent a insane amount of time trying to learn this game by reading books, watching poker videos, reading posts etc. And still I can not get a steady win rate over a large sample at 10nl and lower, losing to players who are probably just more naturally gifted than I am.

Also, if some are unlikely to ever suceed, how many hands must they play before they can conclude that they will probably never be successful. 100K? 200K? At which point, would poker even be profitable anymore?

sorry, thiis is just something I was thinking about.

^^^^^^^^

In my opinion, most people cannot be winning poker players. I also think it's a terrible trap for many people to believe that poker is a test of intelligence. Intelligence is not enough to ensure success, and many very bright players who are well qualified for other pursuits will never be very successful at poker.

It's hard to explain exactly why, but there are psychological issues that go beyond questions of intelligence, and perhaps it's also fair to say that poker takes a *particular kind* of intelligence which is very specific to the game. Also, acquired experience and the knowledge it brings are very important, but many people will not profit from it, either because they don't last long enough, or because their minds are full of unshakable preconceptions and bad ideas, or they've become too emotionally battered to pick up the necessary lessons that experience brings.

[QUOTE=zadignose;16719342]^^^^^^^^

In my opinion, most people cannot be winning poker players. I also think it's a terrible trap for many people to believe that poker is a test of intelligence. Intelligence is not enough to ensure success, and many very bright players who are well qualified for other pursuits will never be very successful at poker.
QUOTE]

Wouldn't that mean that a lot of us trying to learn this game are just wasting our time. It's kind of disheartening, but it might be true.

[QUOTE=ophelia157;16719845] A lot of low stake players (myself included) play poker as means to unwind and have a good afternoon or evening. Sure, turning a profit is a very important aspect of the game, but for many of us it is not the only reason why we play (if it is the only reason why you play, your in for a mighty rough road ahead). This is not to say that money cannot be made on a consistent basis by playing poker, many have proven that it indeed can be done. However, for every person that is successful working up through the ranks and making it 100NL or higher, there are 100's of others that fall well short.

This is because of multiple reasons IMO. First, many players unlike yourself don't put in the time, research, and thoughtfulness the game requires for a player to be successful over the longhaul. Secondly, those that do study and put in the time don't always practice what they are learning (it is one thing to read about ideas and strategy, it is entirely another to be able to use that strategy at a table and make adjustments where necessary). Lastly, many players don't follow bankroll management and as a result cripple themselves when they experience a significant downswing.

I think many online players have an understanding of poker fundementals and have spent quite a little time studying and thinking about their game. I honestly believe however, that when it comes time for them to actively put to use what they have been learning, they fall short and leaks/ bad habits remain.

But to answer your real question, can anyone be a winning player at poker? I guess I have to ask you, what is a winning player? Is it someone who makes thier living at poker? Is it someone who is able to break even or a little above at the lowest stakes? While I am pretty much a break even player for the past 5 years I have been playing poker, I consider myself a winning player because I enjoy the game. I don't risk more than I can afford, and I have never busted because I play within what my roll allows.

Ask yourself what you want to achieve from poker, I think then you will know your answer.

Well... sorry to say, I think a lot of people *are* wasting their time, but it's impossible to objectively say in advance *who* are the ones who are wasting their time, and who has the potential to thrive. Still, the principle reason why there's money to be made in poker is because so many people drop several hundred or several thousand dollars into the poker economy before making their exit.

If you want to thrive, then you have to struggle to be one of the exceptions whose time is well rewarded. Tackling a very difficult challenge, *without* any promise that your effort will be rewarded, is one of the psychological hurdles that tests the would be poker winner.

Now @About2NuT: I appreciate that success is a relative term and not everyone even has to desire big money success in order to get enjoyment or a few extra bucks out of the game. That's a perfectly reasonable personal goal, if that's what you're after. But I replied mainly on the assumption that ophelia57 was considering success in terms of beating the game hard... crusing it, destroying it, and extracting maximum cash. Or, at the very least, entering and surviving the middle ranks of poker regulars, and looking at a long term record of winning "success."

I agree with your previous statement whole-heartidly. I think we just read his question differently. I thought I would pose my response as a combination of my personal reasons/ goals for playing poker, as well as, offer some insight into why many fail to rise above the clutter of losing players.

If ophelia57's definition of "waste of time" is not being able to crush the game consitently, then yeah, after playing 100K-200K hands at 10NL and barely breaking even serves as a fairly strong indicator that you are indeed wasting your time with poker. With that being said it is time to get yourself a coach (if books, forums, software, and videos aren't helping enough to improve your game) to fix your leaks. Otherwise, just enjoy playing poker for what it is, and if playing cards is not time well spent, I suggest finiding a new way to spend your time.

**Please don't take this post as a put down or me trying to come off as being negative, that is not at all my intention. I am just trying to address the issue you have presented as logically as possible.

Hope this helps.

I know quite a bit of the shorthand jargon used in poker like AK, AKo BB etc. But I see new things on your site I don't understand like MO M+1. Do you have a page listing all the terms used on the forum?

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/32...ncement95.html

#37

Hero has AA
Villain has AK

Board is QQQQ3

Does the Hero or Villain win? Both have four of a kind with Ace kicker, but villains second kicker is King. Does hero have second kicker (also Ace)?