I'm talking about low buy-in MTTs $2-$10 and 6-max micro-stakes up to $0.10/$0.25 (and freerolls of course).

Their VPIP ~70%. They'll limp or call raises as large as 5-10 BB with trash.

They're super-passive postflop unless they hit a monster-hand; then they get super-aggro (a great 'tell' by the way). And they never bluff for fold-equity like a LAG.

I always hear the answer that they'll bust-out by mid-session; but that's not true - they almost always carry their big-stacks late into the game.

My theory:
They see so many flops and therefore make more monster-hands than other players - that's how they pay the costs of seeing every flop.

Last night I lost my 85 BB stack with KK on a board Ts9h5d3d2c - villain had 93o! I open-raised 4 BB from MP and only the big-blind called (he played every hand of the game and amassed by far the biggest stack).

Comments?

Here ya go. Guys who don't play proper poker ALWAYS seem to get ahead...from 2009

you're just remembering the one guy that does and not the other nine guys who go broke

You don't win when u fold

More opportunities to build a stack.

So 9/10 of these guys go broke but the 1/10 ends up being chip leader on occasion

+1
Pessimistic & depressed people (me) remember only bad events in their lives, but rarely remember anything good (unless they try really hard). One of my projects is to write a journal about 'good' things that have happened to me.

It's a bias common to a lot of people. We remember aggression or bluffs more than folds for example.

Your project sounds cool.

If you are interested in thinking about quantifying events a little better I also recommend studying bayes theorem.

http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=13156

You remember pain more than you do pleasure, it's as simple as that. This holds true for me at least, don't know to what degree I can project this onto others. I have no clue why this is so but can just see the scientist dressed in white explaining that from an evolutionary viewpoint avoiding pain is more important to survival than seeking out pleasure or something.


Anyhow, it's definitely true for me and no matter how much I try to remember the times I sucked out on others I simply cannot help remembering times when the same happened to me much more vividly. No idea how to counter this ... Perhaps keep a log of everything that happens to you?

(If it's any consolation, look up the particular player on pokerprolabs or something. The red numbers are usually a bit calming).

That's true. In addition, events that trigger strong emotions (especially due to shock and surprise) form stronger memories. e.g. I can't remember what I had for breakfast a week ago, because a bowl of cereal is boring and predictable, but I remember many specific details about the day of 9/11. Bad beats and crazy bluffs are memorable because of the shock aspect. They are literally noteworthy, because they cause us to reel in horror, or whatever you do when someone sucks out. We don't remember when AA beat 99, because it was expected.
WTF moments are obviously more memorable than meh moments.

You are looking at it from the wrong direction. You look deep into the tournament, and you see the one or two ATC players who are truly bad who have massive chips, and you think 'I don't understand how this style could work'. This is just variance. Millions of people play the lottery, and the one player who wins does not disprove the idea that the lottery is a bad way to invest money.

Playing a solid, math supported style is much more likely to consistently win. Even then, AA vs ATC is going to lose 15% of the time. Variance is part of the game.

Unless you are an exceptional post flop player, playing a very high number of flops is a mistake. The idea that you would hit deceptive hands often enough to stack enough players and pay for your preflop action is attractive, but ultimately false. You are going to wind up, too often, being ground down by players who figured out what you are doing preflop, or going broke with good but not great hands like bottom two pair or the low end of a flush. Just because the halfcourt shot goes in occasionally and everyone remembers it does not mean it is a good shot.

Yes, exactly. Emotions overcome reason, at least for me. I'm supposed to lose AA vs 33 one time out of 5 (which is a lot to be honest) but find it completely normal to win situations like this 20 times in a row (only with an explicit conscious effort that uses up quite some mental energy can I say to myself: Ok, 3 more then we're due to lose one.). Then when the downswing finally comes and when the universe takes its toll, I'm completely flabbergasted to lose several in a row where I am a clear favorite.

It ain't easy being human I tell you!