Ya Joe it's quite funny listening to her talk... All her advice is geared towards high buy in tournies/SNGs... Most of the players I see on PNL are complete garbage with the expection of G-didi and a couple other randoms who stop by once in a while. With that in mind I think it's ok to limp alot more (not in early position) with nice drawing hands because they don't seem to raise that often, and I feel at least in the early stages it's worth risking 20 or 40 (bb) to try to see a flop with say J10o or 89Suited etc.
Two things I disagree with after watching last night's repeat. Both you(Johnny) and Audrey said laying down the 25o in SB for 50% of the players stack was the correct lay down... The game was 5 handed I believe, so this player needed to make the comeback of a life time, like negmike did after folding the 610(that was some bs luck that player got). The 25o was getting exactly 3:1 pot odds, and was going to go up against the BB. Who you can pretty much guarantee is holding to random over cards, which is 3:1. The player folded. picked up AQ suited next hand and went up against 2 players and lost the hand. The BB turned out to be a 23suited. 40 to 27%.
Second thing I disagree with was the answer you and Audrey gave to the email where the player asked "seems alot of player open raise or reraise all in in the early stages of the SNG should I cal with hands like AQ and AK."
You and Audrey said be patient and wait for better hands like 10s or better... But this is a low buy in SNG we're talking about. The last three 5.50$ SNG's i played in, i called an all in with AK to go up against A7 suited, and reraise all in with AQ and AK to go up against another A7 suited and an A3 suited. These are the loose aggressive players who over value to their hands, and are an easy way to double up early in the SNG. Your thoughts?
Well.
There is certainly a lot to respond to. I'm not going to say that I have all the answers but I will try to respond.
In all truth, I don't remember the 2/5 situation all that well. I remember questioning whether or not that player should move, but that is all I think I did and as a host, and all I should do. I have to limit how much "expert" is in the "host". I really don't remember the situation, but 2/5 offsuit, regardless of the odds is still a difficult play to make. Some tables will give the odds to play any two cards that you are dealt, especially in a low limit game, but that doesn't mean one should play every hand. It is still important to be selective and to choose your situations. I would much rather have even a 4/5 suited than a 2/5off in an elimination tournament.
As for the Ak or AQ all in situation, I think that Audrey handled most of the email and I added that calling all-ins in the early going with an AQ is not always a good idea but that I would be more inclined to call with AK (and not all the time). To CALL an all in one needs a MUCH stronger hand than to PUSH all in. AQ off or even suited just doesn't cut it for me (Unless we are short handed of course). I might push with it, but not call with it. Even AK might be going up against 10's through AA's in which it is a coin toss or I am a big underdog. Unless one knows the players very well (And you can never be 100% sure), I don't think early risks are wise...wait for the later stages to take these kinds of risks. I probaby would not call a preflop all in with less than QQ. Why would an opposing player push all in so early? For a measly 20 chip blind? Let him have it! He might be hoping for a call. I don't like coin tosses in the early stages of a tournament, I don't think it is a good play to make. Limit however is a very different story.
I do have a very good tournament record both live and online and avoiding high risk situations is a big reason for that.
I don't know if I responded to all of the comments but I do appreciate the debate.
Johnny T
so, on any given night, you can access the PNL TV sng's from any of hte prima network sites? and there I was creating accounts on different ones, wondering how many bloody people play on all these sites to get on PNL :P
this makes things easier, if I can just pick one good site and play there. not too happy with crazy poker, or poker metro, i must say.
For the 25o the player had half his stack in the SB, and there were still 5 players left... He was getting 3:1 for his money, and against two random cards that's probably what the odds were gonna be. If you fold in that situation you're leaving yourself with so few chips that you need such a huge string of lucky to make a comeback... I think the player was definitly pot commited.
I do agree that always calling on pot odds isn't worth it (in tournaments) because ya say you're getting 4:1 and you think it's a 3:1 shot, if you make the call based on those pot odds, you will be getting more chips, but that call might not make you finish in the money, ermm does anyone get what i'm trying to say lol.
Johnny I completely agree that calling an all in during the early stages with hands like AJ AQ isn't a smart move, and if i were in a MTT or higher buy in SNG i wouldn't do it. But after playing many low buy in SNGs I've seen such horrible play, and time after time players push with suited ace rags or KQ, in which case my AQ, AJ, AK is in a great position to double up early. I can be safe knowing they don't have AA, KK,QQ, or JJ because beginers LOVE to slow play face card pocket pairs. They seem to think they can't be beat. Say in the unlucky situation they pushed with a midle or low PP, well alot of the time people make the call with AK or AQ when they put their opponent on a pp... So for the most part i'm either in a great position to double up, or coinflip.
Remember people, i'm only saying i'd do this in a Low buy in SNG where the players are mostly beginers.
Yep, I was on last night and I DO have a new hairstylist! I was on Wed. to allow me to go to my daughter's play tonight -- she's the lead!
Hopefully, I'm getting a better with each new show. And the good news is that they've decided to keep me on for the next two months and possibly more! I'm having a ton of fun doing the show, and I'm hoping I can provide an interesting perspective into the poker life.
Just wanted to say you're doing a bang up job Lou. It's always great to get advice from different proffesionals and perspectives. I espeicially like your way of playing micro tables after a real bad beat to ensure you dont tilt all your money down the toilet.
Thanks to everyone for your support. It does make it easier, even though it's real hard to say good stuff live with the pressure on. I must say that Tina, Devo and Johnny are amazing at this job -- able to think on their feet, say good things and keep the show entertaining. They do make it every easy for me and I can honestly say they are top notch professionals!
That entire segment actually made me laugh out loud.
G-Didi, I feel so bad for you, to lose to runner runner straight that top set is just so brutal, then the queen on the river to knock you out... Just horrible.
I've been thinking about small tournies and SNGs and i've come to the conclusion that i'd rather play with half decent to ok players than really bad players that i seem to play with often, or that play in online SNGs for buy ins of 10 or less. I know this sounds very bizzare, becayse you'd think hey the worse the player the easier the money, but that is only strictly true for cash games.
I find when i play in home game tournies with 2 tables, or low limit SNGS online, i'm forced far too often into an all in situation with the best, but find myself consistently getting knocked out by bad beats. Now don't get me wrong, i'm not saying i'm unlucky, i DO win alot of those all ins, but when i'm playing with such bad players it oftens unfolds like this (online to)
Bad loose player makes a brutal call of all in or raise of all in with mid pair, limper with q5o or some garbage calls with top pair not even considering kicker, and doubles up early on. Couple hands later someone gets a 4 card flush jack high and loses to king high. Another player doubles up. So I find that unless i catch good cards early on, i'm often faced with people at half my stack, and some palyers with double or more than what i've got. I'll win say one or two all ins, but the third 6.5:3.5 shot i lose to one of the large stacks who for the most part always make looser calls with their chip advantage, generally ace rag to my ace higher kicker.
Anyone's thoughts? (specifically devo/johnny/lou seeing as you watch these crap shoots all the time for your job on PNL)
Thanks for watching, and for your continued support of the show! This thing is getting bigger, I can feel it. The show, I mean.
As for your question, this subject has been brought up a few times before, so I'll address it before BBC or GTA or one of those... ummm... more straightforward types has a chance to.  When you play against "bad" players--players who make calls with sub-optimal cards, or when they are not getting the correct odds, they may be new, they may be bad, they may be both--you are going to experience a high-variance game. Your stack can grow to epic proportions, or it can shrink to nothing, depending upon how the cards are coming for you on that particular day. But here's the thing, and you've probably heard me say it before:
If you are constantly getting your chips in with the best hand, you will win money. Your short-term fluctuations will be huge, because you'll always be getting action, but in the long run, things will even out, and then go your way. It has to be this way. There is no other way for it to be. However, the downside of it is that you may never play against these "bad" players again. They may take your chips one night (and once they're gone, they're gone) and you may never see them again. Rest assured, if they continue to play that way, they will give your chips back in spades eventually, but unfortunately they may not give them back to you. All you can do is try to find the softest games possible on a regular basis, and keep getting your chips in with the best of it.
As for the Q5o hand, why was this player allowed to see the flop in the first place? Didn't the player with the middle pair raise preflop? Q5o made the right call on the flop... I'm just amazed that he/she was able to see it. Please tell these people to play for their life savings, and please invite me to the game.
As for the later stages, if you're getting your chips in with AQ vs. A3, you're in amazing shape. If the big stacks want to give their chips away, let them. If they hit a 3, challenge them to a rematch.
I've been thinking about small tournies and SNGs and i've come to the conclusion that i'd rather play with half decent to ok players than really bad players that i seem to play with often, or that play in online SNGs for buy ins of 10 or less.
I've found that in the early stages of a low buy in sng ($1-5)
a Kill Phil type strategy is pretty effective. The weakest players
at the table will very often call a massive over bet or all in raise.
You'd be surprised how often your pocket AA-JJ will get called
by A/rag, K/rag, or a baby pair.
Once i've built my stack off the weak players, I continue
to punish all limpers and weak raises. The better players
that are left in the tournament have the skills and experience
to lay down their hands to a big raise.
But Devo, here's why I think "getting all your chips in the middle with the best of it will make you win in the long run" isn't always true, for say low buy in SNGs and some home games I use to play at.
The classic philosphy comes to mind : I'll start with 10 000 chips, you start with 1. I'll give you KK and myself K2o and we'll go all in every hand. Odds dictate that the 1 chips will double up many many times, but eventually the 4% chance for the K2o will hit and will win and take all the other players money.
I used to play at a home game SNG, 2 tables 8-10 people 20$ buy in with penalising rebuy system. Horrible players, which at first was great, i made a lot of chips, then get card dead for a while. What do i see happen, Guy calls all in with inside straight draw, loses, rebuys. Same game 3 hands later calls all in with midle pair, loses to top pair. These bad players would love to go all in, which meant that there were some monster chip stacks at the table (serious monsters). It got down to one table, and the blinds were like a SNG, doubling every 20 minutes. I went all in twice and won both times, but eventually lost with AQ suited to K8 same suit. (also it was top 2 paid of 18). I never went back.
It just seems to me that in these SNGs i see on PNL and have played in on various sites (stars, absolute, time) stuff like that always happens. I've won a couple by catching some cards early on, but for the most part i lost with the better hand to a huge stack who was making loose calls.
I'd really much rather play with players who have a general basis of when to call all ins, call pre flop etc, rather than maniacs who are just starting to play.
Nm i wont bother trying to explain my thoughts anymore, they're coming off all muddled and awkward.
I don't think they're coming off akward....I totally get what you're saying, but I think your perspective on long-term might be a bit skewed. Luck plays a huge factor into tournaments, and the "long-term" for them is, in my opinion, much longer than "long-term" as it relates to cash games. But as Devon said....if you are consistently making good decisions and getting your money in the pot with the best hand, you will come out on top in the long term.
I'm not sure I have a good grasp of how long "long term" is for tourneys....but my best advice is to track all your results. That way you'll see the impact of variance and get a better perspective on your play. You could even take notes on the games where the players were donks vs. more skilled players and see how that might impact your results.
Dave Scharf put me in touch with the producers of PNL. They had asked him to do the gig, but since he lives in Saskatoon, he couldn't do it. So, he passed my name along to them as someone who might be good for the job. I told them about my instructional DVD, my work with the media for Labatt, my credentials as a player, etc. Then I went in, did some screen tests, read from a prompter, and that was that.
I should mention that we don't use teleprompters, ever, for PNL. It's all off the tops of our heads. I guess they wanted me to read from prompter in the audition to see if I would crumble into a tiny little ball of anxiety when faced with a camera, which happens to some people sometimes.
As an aside, I'm going to be putting in a brief cameo appearance on MTV Live tonight. They're going to be talking about lying, and someone thought it would be a good idea to find out what the cameraman/poker poker (me) thinks of it all. I believe Darren is going to be holding some cards, and I'm going to read him like a book and tell the audience whether or not he has a hand.
Of course, there are all sorts of things wrong with that scenario. Most importantly, Darren would have to CARE about his hand being good or bad in order for me to have a chance to read him. He won't. There is no money on the line. Also, it would be helpful if I could have been playing with him for an hour or so before attempting to read him, but that ain't gonna happen.
In the interests of being thorough, I will probably mention all of this stuff, and then speculate (blindly) that he doesn't have much of a hand, because more often than not, he won't.
Live on MTV from 6 to 7 tonight, and then it repeats a number of times I think, also called "Hacked", etc.
Actually, I think we do "get" what you're saying, but we're just saying it's "wrong".
I think this summed it up nicely...
but I think your perspective on long-term might be a bit skewed. Luck plays a huge factor into tournaments, and the "long-term" for them is, in my opinion, much longer than "long-term" as it relates to cash games.
I think somewhere along the way, any poker player will eventually realize how much they suck (and I mean this in the nicest possible way). Luck is a major factor, and to think that "skill" outweighs "luck" in the short-term is foolish. Once you begin to grasp how immense a factor variance is (and are at peace with it) you begin to realize that your edge is probably a lot smaller than you would have previously thought... Every poker player has an ego, it's just the more experience you get, the more you're able to (somewhat) keep it in check.
At least that's how I see it. And FWIW, I'm pretty sure at some point in my poker edumacation I thought the same way...
See you're just repeating what's already been said, and if i replied with "i'm not getting my thoughts off cause you still don't understand" repeating what you already said is just pointless...
I'm not thinking in short terms or in terms of luck. I'm thinking in terms of statistics. I.E if you go all in 10 times with PP vs underPP and he always has you covered, you're gonna lose based on odds... now that's not exactly what happens all the time, but in a format i played with some people back here that seemed to happen alot, especially since there were rebuys. For SNGs in the long run you will pull out ahead, but i'm saying i'd rather play with players who respect bets and can be bluffed out, or who don't play and two suited cards than those who do. I dislike the random noob factor and it's bitten me in the ass many many times.
Devo, not to pry or anything, do you get paid on a show by show basis, per year?
See you're just repeating what's already been said, and if i replied with "i'm not getting my thoughts off cause you still don't understand" repeating what you already said is just pointless...
I'm not thinking in short terms or in terms of luck. I'm thinking in terms of statistics. I.E if you go all in 10 times with PP vs underPP and he always has you covered, you're gonna lose based on odds... now that's not exactly what happens all the time, but in a format i played with some people back here that seemed to happen alot, especially since there were rebuys. For SNGs in the long run you will pull out ahead, but i'm saying i'd rather play with players who respect bets and can be bluffed out, or who don't play and two suited cards than those who do. I dislike the random noob factor and it's bitten me in the ass many many times.
Devo, not to pry or anything, do you get paid on a show by show basis, per year?
First, I have no clue what you are saying about overpair vs underpair, it simply make zero sense.
If you can only beat a certain type of player then you have to work on your own game. Poker is a dynamic game where you need to make constant adjustments.
.E if you go all in 10 times with PP vs underPP and he always has you covered, you're gonna lose based on odds...
OK, yes, but given your "hypothetical situation", how did hero get in a position to be outchipped 1000:1 or something ridiculous to an inferior player? I'm missing something obviously...
For SNGs in the long run you will pull out ahead
Agreed.
but i'm saying i'd rather play with players who respect bets and can be bluffed out, or who don't play and two suited cards than those who do
Are you saying then that, "I expect to win more against semi-good players than ridiculously bad players?" Why would this EVER be true? Is it possible that whatever "moves" allow you to beat good players might not translate to bad players...? Hmm...
I dislike the random noob factor and it's bitten me in the ass many many times.
Of course it will. They're bad. They get their money in frequently with the worst hand. However a significant portion of the time you're probably overestimating how often your hand "should" hold up. It's a lot easier getting the bad money than the good.
Comments
and a 25% rakeback (http://www.stanjames.com/poker/promotion_rakeback.asp).
I like their colours and the customer service is 2nd to None !
Ya Joe it's quite funny listening to her talk... All her advice is geared towards high buy in tournies/SNGs... Most of the players I see on PNL are complete garbage with the expection of G-didi and a couple other randoms who stop by once in a while. With that in mind I think it's ok to limp alot more (not in early position) with nice drawing hands because they don't seem to raise that often, and I feel at least in the early stages it's worth risking 20 or 40 (bb) to try to see a flop with say J10o or 89Suited etc.
Two things I disagree with after watching last night's repeat. Both you(Johnny) and Audrey said laying down the 25o in SB for 50% of the players stack was the correct lay down... The game was 5 handed I believe, so this player needed to make the comeback of a life time, like negmike did after folding the 610(that was some bs luck that player got). The 25o was getting exactly 3:1 pot odds, and was going to go up against the BB. Who you can pretty much guarantee is holding to random over cards, which is 3:1. The player folded. picked up AQ suited next hand and went up against 2 players and lost the hand. The BB turned out to be a 23suited. 40 to 27%.
Second thing I disagree with was the answer you and Audrey gave to the email where the player asked "seems alot of player open raise or reraise all in in the early stages of the SNG should I cal with hands like AQ and AK."
You and Audrey said be patient and wait for better hands like 10s or better... But this is a low buy in SNG we're talking about. The last three 5.50$ SNG's i played in, i called an all in with AK to go up against A7 suited, and reraise all in with AQ and AK to go up against another A7 suited and an A3 suited. These are the loose aggressive players who over value to their hands, and are an easy way to double up early in the SNG. Your thoughts?
There is certainly a lot to respond to. I'm not going to say that I have all the answers but I will try to respond.
In all truth, I don't remember the 2/5 situation all that well. I remember questioning whether or not that player should move, but that is all I think I did and as a host, and all I should do. I have to limit how much "expert" is in the "host". I really don't remember the situation, but 2/5 offsuit, regardless of the odds is still a difficult play to make. Some tables will give the odds to play any two cards that you are dealt, especially in a low limit game, but that doesn't mean one should play every hand. It is still important to be selective and to choose your situations. I would much rather have even a 4/5 suited than a 2/5off in an elimination tournament.
As for the Ak or AQ all in situation, I think that Audrey handled most of the email and I added that calling all-ins in the early going with an AQ is not always a good idea but that I would be more inclined to call with AK (and not all the time). To CALL an all in one needs a MUCH stronger hand than to PUSH all in. AQ off or even suited just doesn't cut it for me (Unless we are short handed of course). I might push with it, but not call with it. Even AK might be going up against 10's through AA's in which it is a coin toss or I am a big underdog. Unless one knows the players very well (And you can never be 100% sure), I don't think early risks are wise...wait for the later stages to take these kinds of risks. I probaby would not call a preflop all in with less than QQ. Why would an opposing player push all in so early? For a measly 20 chip blind? Let him have it! He might be hoping for a call. I don't like coin tosses in the early stages of a tournament, I don't think it is a good play to make. Limit however is a very different story.
I do have a very good tournament record both live and online and avoiding high risk situations is a big reason for that.
I don't know if I responded to all of the comments but I do appreciate the debate.
Johnny T
this makes things easier, if I can just pick one good site and play there. not too happy with crazy poker, or poker metro, i must say.
exactly
good to know, thanks
I do agree that always calling on pot odds isn't worth it (in tournaments) because ya say you're getting 4:1 and you think it's a 3:1 shot, if you make the call based on those pot odds, you will be getting more chips, but that call might not make you finish in the money, ermm does anyone get what i'm trying to say lol.
Johnny I completely agree that calling an all in during the early stages with hands like AJ AQ isn't a smart move, and if i were in a MTT or higher buy in SNG i wouldn't do it. But after playing many low buy in SNGs I've seen such horrible play, and time after time players push with suited ace rags or KQ, in which case my AQ, AJ, AK is in a great position to double up early. I can be safe knowing they don't have AA, KK,QQ, or JJ because beginers LOVE to slow play face card pocket pairs. They seem to think they can't be beat. Say in the unlucky situation they pushed with a midle or low PP, well alot of the time people make the call with AK or AQ when they put their opponent on a pp... So for the most part i'm either in a great position to double up, or coinflip.
Remember people, i'm only saying i'd do this in a Low buy in SNG where the players are mostly beginers.
Lookin good on PNL tonight.. snazzy haircut there bigguy!!
Just watching it now.. (Thursday Aug 8 at 11:15 for those interested)
Mark
/g2
Hopefully, I'm getting a better with each new show. And the good news is that they've decided to keep me on for the next two months and possibly more! I'm having a ton of fun doing the show, and I'm hoping I can provide an interesting perspective into the poker life.
Cheers
Lou
Thats awesome news !!!
You're doing a great job keeping Johnny T in line. LOL
Cheers
Magi
Devo" Oh snap!"
That entire segment actually made me laugh out loud.
G-Didi, I feel so bad for you, to lose to runner runner straight that top set is just so brutal, then the queen on the river to knock you out... Just horrible.
I've been thinking about small tournies and SNGs and i've come to the conclusion that i'd rather play with half decent to ok players than really bad players that i seem to play with often, or that play in online SNGs for buy ins of 10 or less. I know this sounds very bizzare, becayse you'd think hey the worse the player the easier the money, but that is only strictly true for cash games.
I find when i play in home game tournies with 2 tables, or low limit SNGS online, i'm forced far too often into an all in situation with the best, but find myself consistently getting knocked out by bad beats. Now don't get me wrong, i'm not saying i'm unlucky, i DO win alot of those all ins, but when i'm playing with such bad players it oftens unfolds like this (online to)
Bad loose player makes a brutal call of all in or raise of all in with mid pair, limper with q5o or some garbage calls with top pair not even considering kicker, and doubles up early on. Couple hands later someone gets a 4 card flush jack high and loses to king high. Another player doubles up. So I find that unless i catch good cards early on, i'm often faced with people at half my stack, and some palyers with double or more than what i've got. I'll win say one or two all ins, but the third 6.5:3.5 shot i lose to one of the large stacks who for the most part always make looser calls with their chip advantage, generally ace rag to my ace higher kicker.
Anyone's thoughts? (specifically devo/johnny/lou seeing as you watch these crap shoots all the time for your job on PNL)
Thanks for watching, and for your continued support of the show! This thing is getting bigger, I can feel it. The show, I mean.
As for your question, this subject has been brought up a few times before, so I'll address it before BBC or GTA or one of those... ummm... more straightforward types has a chance to.Â
If you are constantly getting your chips in with the best hand, you will win money. Your short-term fluctuations will be huge, because you'll always be getting action, but in the long run, things will even out, and then go your way. It has to be this way. There is no other way for it to be. However, the downside of it is that you may never play against these "bad" players again. They may take your chips one night (and once they're gone, they're gone) and you may never see them again. Rest assured, if they continue to play that way, they will give your chips back in spades eventually, but unfortunately they may not give them back to you. All you can do is try to find the softest games possible on a regular basis, and keep getting your chips in with the best of it.
As for the Q5o hand, why was this player allowed to see the flop in the first place? Didn't the player with the middle pair raise preflop? Q5o made the right call on the flop... I'm just amazed that he/she was able to see it. Please tell these people to play for their life savings, and please invite me to the game.
As for the later stages, if you're getting your chips in with AQ vs. A3, you're in amazing shape. If the big stacks want to give their chips away, let them. If they hit a 3, challenge them to a rematch.
I've found that in the early stages of a low buy in sng ($1-5)
a Kill Phil type strategy is pretty effective. The weakest players
at the table will very often call a massive over bet or all in raise.
You'd be surprised how often your pocket AA-JJ will get called
by A/rag, K/rag, or a baby pair.
Once i've built my stack off the weak players, I continue
to punish all limpers and weak raises. The better players
that are left in the tournament have the skills and experience
to lay down their hands to a big raise.
The classic philosphy comes to mind : I'll start with 10 000 chips, you start with 1. I'll give you KK and myself K2o and we'll go all in every hand. Odds dictate that the 1 chips will double up many many times, but eventually the 4% chance for the K2o will hit and will win and take all the other players money.
I used to play at a home game SNG, 2 tables 8-10 people 20$ buy in with penalising rebuy system. Horrible players, which at first was great, i made a lot of chips, then get card dead for a while. What do i see happen, Guy calls all in with inside straight draw, loses, rebuys. Same game 3 hands later calls all in with midle pair, loses to top pair. These bad players would love to go all in, which meant that there were some monster chip stacks at the table (serious monsters). It got down to one table, and the blinds were like a SNG, doubling every 20 minutes. I went all in twice and won both times, but eventually lost with AQ suited to K8 same suit. (also it was top 2 paid of 18). I never went back.
It just seems to me that in these SNGs i see on PNL and have played in on various sites (stars, absolute, time) stuff like that always happens. I've won a couple by catching some cards early on, but for the most part i lost with the better hand to a huge stack who was making loose calls.
I'd really much rather play with players who have a general basis of when to call all ins, call pre flop etc, rather than maniacs who are just starting to play.
P.S Q5o was raised pre flop but made the call.
If that is the only way you are winning then you need to really improve. You are missing a ton of components in your game.
Pay attention to what they are saying. They speak the truth.
Devo, I think they cut out Tina bowing to you at the end of last nights show.
P.S what is this "game with johnny" I heard you talking about?
I don't think they're coming off akward....I totally get what you're saying, but I think your perspective on long-term might be a bit skewed. Luck plays a huge factor into tournaments, and the "long-term" for them is, in my opinion, much longer than "long-term" as it relates to cash games. But as Devon said....if you are consistently making good decisions and getting your money in the pot with the best hand, you will come out on top in the long term.
I'm not sure I have a good grasp of how long "long term" is for tourneys....but my best advice is to track all your results. That way you'll see the impact of variance and get a better perspective on your play. You could even take notes on the games where the players were donks vs. more skilled players and see how that might impact your results.
Sorry for the hijack Devo & Johnny!
Man I hope to god my T.V at residence has Digital Cable. I hope to be able to keep watching PNL at university.
I should mention that we don't use teleprompters, ever, for PNL. It's all off the tops of our heads. I guess they wanted me to read from prompter in the audition to see if I would crumble into a tiny little ball of anxiety when faced with a camera, which happens to some people sometimes.
As an aside, I'm going to be putting in a brief cameo appearance on MTV Live tonight. They're going to be talking about lying, and someone thought it would be a good idea to find out what the cameraman/poker poker (me) thinks of it all. I believe Darren is going to be holding some cards, and I'm going to read him like a book and tell the audience whether or not he has a hand.
Of course, there are all sorts of things wrong with that scenario. Most importantly, Darren would have to CARE about his hand being good or bad in order for me to have a chance to read him. He won't. There is no money on the line. Also, it would be helpful if I could have been playing with him for an hour or so before attempting to read him, but that ain't gonna happen.
In the interests of being thorough, I will probably mention all of this stuff, and then speculate (blindly) that he doesn't have much of a hand, because more often than not, he won't.
Live on MTV from 6 to 7 tonight, and then it repeats a number of times I think, also called "Hacked", etc.
Actually, I think we do "get" what you're saying, but we're just saying it's "wrong".
I think this summed it up nicely...
I think somewhere along the way, any poker player will eventually realize how much they suck (and I mean this in the nicest possible way). Luck is a major factor, and to think that "skill" outweighs "luck" in the short-term is foolish. Once you begin to grasp how immense a factor variance is (and are at peace with it) you begin to realize that your edge is probably a lot smaller than you would have previously thought... Every poker player has an ego, it's just the more experience you get, the more you're able to (somewhat) keep it in check.
At least that's how I see it. And FWIW, I'm pretty sure at some point in my poker edumacation I thought the same way...
I'm not thinking in short terms or in terms of luck. I'm thinking in terms of statistics. I.E if you go all in 10 times with PP vs underPP and he always has you covered, you're gonna lose based on odds... now that's not exactly what happens all the time, but in a format i played with some people back here that seemed to happen alot, especially since there were rebuys. For SNGs in the long run you will pull out ahead, but i'm saying i'd rather play with players who respect bets and can be bluffed out, or who don't play and two suited cards than those who do. I dislike the random noob factor and it's bitten me in the ass many many times.
Devo, not to pry or anything, do you get paid on a show by show basis, per year?
First, I have no clue what you are saying about overpair vs underpair, it simply make zero sense.
If you can only beat a certain type of player then you have to work on your own game. Poker is a dynamic game where you need to make constant adjustments.
Hmmm....sounds like prying to me....lol
OK, yes, but given your "hypothetical situation", how did hero get in a position to be outchipped 1000:1 or something ridiculous to an inferior player? I'm missing something obviously...
Agreed.
Are you saying then that, "I expect to win more against semi-good players than ridiculously bad players?" Why would this EVER be true? Is it possible that whatever "moves" allow you to beat good players might not translate to bad players...? Hmm...
Of course it will. They're bad. They get their money in frequently with the worst hand. However a significant portion of the time you're probably overestimating how often your hand "should" hold up. It's a lot easier getting the bad money than the good.
For PNL, have you guys every considered designating say a limit night? or a pot limit night?
P.S So how did that tourny go with you (Devo) and Johnny. What was the format?