Ok, so I'm still up, but I've had two really really bad sessions. I'm going to spend some time taking a break. Relaxing a bit, and coming back to poker in a couple days. right now I'm sitting at $1032.68. I was up to $1120ish, but as a result of my two really bad sessions am down.
It's going to be REALLY hard to not play for the next three days. Really hard. But I think it would be good to step back as I have been playing very consistently, and a lot over the past week.
I will hopefully be able to take some time, analyse, and look at my play for holes. I know I chase way too much, but hopefully I can look and see 'how much am I chasing too much?' or 'is there times when I'm losing big pots by chasing, but getting the right odds to call?'
I want to look at these questions and see if I can figure some of these out. I also want to be able to discuss the best kind of table that I play on. Whether I want a loose table, with really high average pots, or tighter tables with low average pots. I was playing at a really high average pot table, the other players were betting REALLY big, and always taking stabs, etc. Perhaps the answer is, when I'm on these tables, be more patient. If I know I'm over aggressive sometimes, these might be good spots to be more patient for big hands, because I know very well that I will probably get paid off.
I might try to read Dave Sklansky's Theory of Poker on this little three day break. I will hopefully be able to learn something, and I will let you all know. Anyways, that's all for now. See you guys later.
Showing posts with label stack. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stack. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Small Stackers
So I've developed a pretty good method, which I'm well aware is not a new strategy. I didn't come up with it myself, but I've done a pretty good job implementing it.
As always, at every table, you have your "short stackers." People who will buy in for the least possible amount of money. Sometimes it isn't always the lowest possible, but it's often pretty low.
On the tables I play on, $0.10/$0.25, the standard (and the max) is $25. However often we'll have 2 or 3 (sometimes 4) players who will buy-in for $10. I like playing and picking on these people. They tend to play really conservative, always hoping to flop the nutz.
I understand where they're coming from with their strategy, but it just makes it way to easy. Maybe I tend to be over aggressive, but I just feel like you can't put enough pressure on if you have less than 50% of everyone else at the table.
If I go all in against you, I'll still have more than half my stack, even if I lose.
The other reason I like them, as I said before, is they tend to play ultra-conservative. They make small raises, or limp, hoping to flop big. This makes them wide open to bluffs since they don't have as much protection and cushion against loses. Some of my biggest bluffs are against these players.
All in all, while I'm sure they are thinking about protecting their money by buying in for such a small amount, in reality they are opening themselves up to pressure that they have made it impossible to for them to respond too. I think it would just be smarter to play conservatively, but buy-in for the full $25.00.
As always, at every table, you have your "short stackers." People who will buy in for the least possible amount of money. Sometimes it isn't always the lowest possible, but it's often pretty low.
On the tables I play on, $0.10/$0.25, the standard (and the max) is $25. However often we'll have 2 or 3 (sometimes 4) players who will buy-in for $10. I like playing and picking on these people. They tend to play really conservative, always hoping to flop the nutz.
I understand where they're coming from with their strategy, but it just makes it way to easy. Maybe I tend to be over aggressive, but I just feel like you can't put enough pressure on if you have less than 50% of everyone else at the table.
If I go all in against you, I'll still have more than half my stack, even if I lose.
The other reason I like them, as I said before, is they tend to play ultra-conservative. They make small raises, or limp, hoping to flop big. This makes them wide open to bluffs since they don't have as much protection and cushion against loses. Some of my biggest bluffs are against these players.
All in all, while I'm sure they are thinking about protecting their money by buying in for such a small amount, in reality they are opening themselves up to pressure that they have made it impossible to for them to respond too. I think it would just be smarter to play conservatively, but buy-in for the full $25.00.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)