| Author |
Message |
|
Posted: Wed, 20 Sep 2006, 8:04pm Post subject: Gus Hansen's theory of NL Holdem
|
|
|
Two Pair

Joined: 19 Sep 2006
Posts: 31 WPP: 92
Location: Dublin, Ireland
|
|
| Gus Hansen " Part of my strategy is that my opponents know i will always call " anyone have any views on this theory? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 20 Sep 2006, 8:13pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 04 Mar 2005
Posts: 3614 WPP: 52
|
|
| isn't he supposed to be writing a book? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 20 Sep 2006, 8:49pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Posts: 1591 WPP: 42
Location: Coldbrook, NS
|
|
| His theory in a nutshell, GAMBOOOOOOOOOOOL. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 20 Sep 2006, 10:05pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush

Joined: 02 May 2006
Posts: 4144 WPP: 63
Location: slow motion
|
|
| i thought this was going to be a gotti post |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 20 Sep 2006, 10:10pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 28 Jan 2005
Posts: 3037 WPP: 95
|
|
| martindcx1e wrote: | | isn't he supposed to be writing a book? |
Luckbox for dummies? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 20 Sep 2006, 10:12pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 459 WPP: 144
Location: nutpeddlers anonymous
|
|
| AHiltz wrote: | | His theory in a nutshell, GAMBOOOOOOOOOOOL. |
I think it's more like
1. Pick up a million small pots and build a stack.
2. With said stack, GAMBOOOOOOOOOOOL. (with other people's money). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 20 Sep 2006, 10:52pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 04 Mar 2005
Posts: 3614 WPP: 52
|
|
| he claims his game is extremely mathematical |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 20 Sep 2006, 10:55pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 822 WPP: 73
Location: wisconsin
|
|
| doesnt sound like it would work well in ring. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 21 Sep 2006, 12:01am Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Posts: 918 WPP: 50
Location: Massachusetts
|
|
| Exactly. It is a known fact that in the ring games Gus is the live one. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 21 Sep 2006, 7:44am Post subject:
|
|
|
Two Pair

Joined: 19 Sep 2006
Posts: 31 WPP: 92
Location: Dublin, Ireland
|
|
| I agree it sounds a little daft. I have heard that Gus struggles for consistency in the high stakes ring games but his No - Limit tournament play is second to none. I think his strategy does have some value as his opponents are much less likely to bluff him. Lets face it, if we didnt get bluffed as much, are bankroll would increase. The reason why he is able to implement this strategy so well in tournaments is that he is an outstanding post flop player. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 21 Sep 2006, 8:00am Post subject:
|
|
|
3-of-a-Kind

Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 53 WPP: 146
|
|
| Blinky wrote: | | AHiltz wrote: | | His theory in a nutshell, GAMBOOOOOOOOOOOL. |
I think it's more like
1. Pick up a million small pots and build a stack.
2. With said stack, GAMBOOOOOOOOOOOL. (with other people's money). |
Wouldnt that make him a Brunsonite? Isnt that doyles theory in a nutshell?
And also regarding the original statement ("Other players know I will always call"): that strategy sounds insane. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 21 Sep 2006, 10:01am Post subject:
|
|
|
Two Pair

Joined: 19 Sep 2006
Posts: 31 WPP: 92
Location: Dublin, Ireland
|
|
| Think about it, people are not going to bluff Gus Hansen, he obviously doesnt call all the time but he will call more often then most people, he plays the game way beyond his time and in a way a little bit like Stu Unger, If Unger even thought for a minute he had you beat he would call, im talking mainly about bets on the river |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 21 Sep 2006, 5:38pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 13 Oct 2005
Posts: 2372 WPP: 74
Location: Here and There
|
|
| stu ungar had a reading ability, gus is a calling station. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 21 Sep 2006, 5:41pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 573 WPP: 66
Location: Sweden
|
|
| BankItDrew wrote: | | stu ungar had a reading ability, gus is a RICH calling station. |
fyp |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 21 Sep 2006, 7:32pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush

Joined: 22 Jun 2005
Posts: 7939 WPP: 71
Location: Marry Me Cheryl!!!
|
|
all the wannabe Gus Hansen's i ever played with got wtfpwned.
obviously this book is going to be great for the fish
Please stock it stars fpp shop!
kthx. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 22 Sep 2006, 3:11am Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 3558 WPP: 112
Location: at your tables, calling your bets
|
|
| Gus Hansen's theory of NL Holdem = lose your tourney winnings at high-stakes cash games. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 22 Sep 2006, 4:45am Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 04 Mar 2005
Posts: 3614 WPP: 52
|
|
| mcatdog wrote: | | Gus Hansen's theory of NL Holdem = lose your tourney winnings at high-stakes cash games. |
except when you 1-out Daniel Negreanu and get that calling station to pay you off. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 22 Sep 2006, 7:57am Post subject: Re: Gus Hansen's theory of NL Holdem
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 2186 WPP: 79
Location: donkaments weeeeeeeeeeee
|
|
| dioufy77 wrote: | | Gus Hansen " Part of my strategy is that my opponents know i will always call " anyone have any views on this theory? |
Well, that might make sense. The bluffing frequencies of his opponents go way down vs. him so that makes them easier to read (especially the fish or just the semi-decent players who have trouble adapting to his game).
On the other hand, he does have FE himself if he's bluffing. They're less likely to play back at them without a hand since they know (or think they know) he won't give up. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 22 Sep 2006, 12:38pm Post subject: Re: Gus Hansen's theory of NL Holdem
|
|
|
{NSFW - nipple}

Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 2186 WPP: 108
Location: The Loser's Lounge
|
|
| johnny_fish wrote: | | dioufy77 wrote: | | Gus Hansen " Part of my strategy is that my opponents know i will always call " anyone have any views on this theory? |
Well, that might make sense. The bluffing frequencies of his opponents go way down vs. him so that makes them easier to read (especially the fish or just the semi-decent players who have trouble adapting to his game).
On the other hand, he does have FE himself if he's bluffing. They're less likely to play back at them without a hand since they know (or think they know) he won't give up. |
Yeah that's what I like about his play. He makes it's so his opponents are stuck actually playing their cards against him as he can have any two and will not fold to bluffs very often. This makes him awkward to play against and read. He's not as good at a lot of aspects of the game as other players but he brings them into his house and that gives him a nice edge. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 23 Sep 2006, 6:24am Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 24 Dec 2004
Posts: 392 WPP: 63
Location: Midwest
|
|
Personally Gus' theory makes some sense but it must come with a rather good reading ability as well.
Many times you will see Gus play a hand to the turn or river...He will sense the hand and then play accordingly. Often he does call not because he thinks he's ahead but because he's getting information as well as reinforcing himself as a caller. The Absolute horror for players though is when Gus senses their hand on the turn and then either bluffs them right to that uncomfortable level or plays his strong hand into them because he knows they're strong enough to take the bet.
Basically Gus attacks players on the hardest street to play in HoldEm. More value gets missed and more fold equity gets lost by players who incorrectly play in Gus' hunting ground...The Turn.
PK |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 26 Sep 2006, 10:54am Post subject:
|
|
|
Almost as bad as that idiot redgrape

Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 6600 WPP: 74
|
|
| His theory is correct for SuperLagg play. No one will play back at someone with a bad hand if they know they are going to get called down anyway. Therefore, Gus makes the opponent play straightforwardly against him. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 26 Sep 2006, 12:02pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 28 Jan 2005
Posts: 3037 WPP: 95
|
|
I Play exactly like Gus Hansen in tournaments. Look me up sometime on FullTilt, and you'll see. I'm taggy/laggy at cash game, but it's on a whole different loose aggressive level in tournaments. I'm going big or going home, and then when I get big I'm punishing the table like no tomorrow.
For all of his faults, our old friend Rypptide was aware of something very valuable in the MTT world. Those who build a stack early and use it in the right spots will make a lot of final tables. It's just something that is compatible with escalating blinds. Tournaments are a ladder. Chips are the currency to purchase the next rung up. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 26 Sep 2006, 1:31pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Two Pair

Joined: 19 Sep 2006
Posts: 31 WPP: 92
Location: Dublin, Ireland
|
|
| finally some intelligent responses to my topic. It took about ten posts to start getting some proper critical analysis of Gus's play! really liked the opinion that most value is lost in Holdem on the turn and the river! makes you think! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 29 Sep 2006, 7:54am Post subject:
|
|
|
Two Pair

Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 39 WPP: 161
|
|
| Gus Hansen dont gamble, he knows when to fold. That he is a callingstation can he seem to be, but he isnt, what he is doing is picking reads on opponents to make a stop-n-go a lot on the turn if he sence weakness. He is picking up all the pots where ppl hope just to check down on the river to see who wins, because they feel bad in some way about their hand. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 29 Sep 2006, 12:32pm Post subject:
|
|
|
EAT BUGS

Joined: 07 Dec 2004
Posts: 7837 WPP: 52
Location: trying to live
|
|
| you guys are missing the point. his strategy revolves around people knowing he will call...that doesnt mean he calls alot. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 29 Sep 2006, 2:28pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Two Pair

Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 39 WPP: 161
|
|
| gabe wrote: | | you guys are missing the point. his strategy revolves around people knowing he will call...that doesnt mean he calls alot. |
Nonsence. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 29 Sep 2006, 8:13pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 29 Apr 2006
Posts: 271 WPP: 159
Location: Sweden
|
|
| gabe wrote: | | you guys are missing the point. his strategy revolves around people knowing he will call...that doesnt mean he calls alot. |
This post got me thinking. Does anyone think that Gus, or any other pro for that matter, plays differently when they are on TV in order to build an image? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 30 Sep 2006, 8:43am Post subject:
|
|
|
Two Pair

Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 39 WPP: 161
|
|
| 2_Thumbs_Up wrote: | | gabe wrote: | | you guys are missing the point. his strategy revolves around people knowing he will call...that doesnt mean he calls alot. |
This post got me thinking. Does anyone think that Gus, or any other pro for that matter, plays differently when they are on TV in order to build an image? |
Nope, I dont think so, some may but others dont. I played once at Casino Copenhagen in a tournament where Gus Hansen also played and he seems to play like on Tv, no diffrent, but I think he was more tight, or maybe its just because we only see a sample of hands on Tv  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 30 Sep 2006, 9:28am Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight

Joined: 01 May 2006
Posts: 125 WPP: 134
|
|
the tv editors definately try to edit their shows in a way so the viewers get what they expect from the better known pros:
- you will see some bad beats Phil Helmuth got, and him ticking out
- you will see Gus Hanson making insanely aggressive/loose plays
- you will see Samy Farha gambling with crap |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 01 Oct 2006, 12:21pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Two Pair

Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 39 WPP: 161
|
|
| Wyvver wrote: | the tv editors definately try to edit their shows in a way so the viewers get what they expect from the better known pros:
- you will see some bad beats Phil Helmuth got, and him ticking out
- you will see Gus Hanson making insanely aggressive/loose plays
- you will see Samy Farha gambling with crap |
I dont think they gamble to make ppl out there to get more value for their TV licence, its the real thing, but ofcourse someone at the table might make some crazy plays to make all ppl over the world think they are crazy. One of the most annoying players I ever have seen is the "UMA BOMBER" or whatever his nickname was, over reacting at the table and making a lot of really stupid plays and a show for the public rolling on the floor and really being like a 7 year boy with too much energy.
Ofcourse the TV editors are showing the funny parts, its not funny to watch ppl steal blinds and only the most solid hands that play for themselves. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 01 Oct 2006, 8:48pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Posts: 328 WPP: 315
|
|
| A little question sparked by this quote, this means people won't bluff Gus, but is that a good thing? so we want people bluffing us? if you could choose for people to never bluff you again would you say yes? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 02 Oct 2006, 3:59pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 883 WPP: 85
|
|
| Toadstool wrote: | | if you could choose for people to never bluff you again would you say yes? |
In terms of making money, I think that would be a great thing. I don't think bluffs represent a very big part of my income, because they're not always easy to spot (therefore I'm not calling them), they're making me dump a lot of pots, and I end up paying off good hands at times.
In terms of the game, that would probably make it pretty boring. Unless the thrill of money being slid your way is enough to make up for mindless poker.
In my case? I'd take no more bluffing in a heartbeat. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 02 Oct 2006, 6:06pm Post subject:
|
|
|
midstakes donk

Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Posts: 2979 WPP: 43
Location: flattin ur 4bets, makin u tilt
|
|
| The "theory" presented in the OP is retarded. Basically all it means is that Gus is more than likely to float/peel without odds against flop c-bets. Saying he "will always call" is ridiculous because he plays a lot of rags and calling a river bet with, say, T7 unimproved, has no merit whatsoever 99.9% of the time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 05 Oct 2006, 8:22am Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 782 WPP: 124
|
|
Gus Hansen is a great player. He knows exactly what he's doing and he knows all the maths in poker. He appreciates 1.5to1 odds are quite a lot whereas most poker players will throw there hand away immediately with a lot of hands. But he'll call with a lot more hands.
Gus is a much better player than anyone at this site will ever be. And we all know it |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 05 Oct 2006, 3:58pm Post subject:
|
|
|
EAT BUGS

Joined: 07 Dec 2004
Posts: 7837 WPP: 52
Location: trying to live
|
|
| pokerroomace wrote: | | Gus is a much better player than anyone at this site will ever be. And we all know it |
thats where youre wrong |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 06 Oct 2006, 1:04am Post subject:
|
|
|
midstakes donk

Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Posts: 2979 WPP: 43
Location: flattin ur 4bets, makin u tilt
|
|
| pokerroomace wrote: | Gus Hansen is a great player. He knows exactly what he's doing and he knows all the maths in poker. He appreciates 1.5to1 odds are quite a lot whereas most poker players will throw there hand away immediately with a lot of hands. But he'll call with a lot more hands.
Gus is a much better player than anyone at this site will ever be. And we all know it |
sup ripjohn |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 06 Oct 2006, 1:11am Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 3558 WPP: 112
Location: at your tables, calling your bets
|
|
| pokerroomace wrote: | | Gus is a much better player than anyone at this site will ever be. And we all know it |
Wrong, the majority of name pros are fish when they get online and play high-stakes NL cash games, and Gus Hansen is no exception. I don't think anyone on this particular website plays in those games, but there are at least a dozen 2+2ers who kick Gus Hansen's ass on a regular basis at NLHE.
Just because someone has been on TV doesn't mean he's better than an online player. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 06 Oct 2006, 4:20am Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 03 Oct 2006
Posts: 271 WPP: 100
|
|
| pokerroomace wrote: | | . He appreciates 1.5to1 odds are quite a lot whereas most poker players will throw there hand away immediately with a lot of hands. |
When it comes to pure odds is good ole tight Harrington any different? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 06 Oct 2006, 1:34pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Posts: 464 WPP: 122
Location: Love me for a season
|
|
| martindcx1e wrote: | | he claims his game is extremely mathematical |
CHIPS + SHOVE + FOLD = WINNAGE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 06 Oct 2006, 3:44pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush

Joined: 02 May 2006
Posts: 4144 WPP: 63
Location: slow motion
|
|
| pantherhound wrote: | | martindcx1e wrote: | | he claims his game is extremely mathematical |
CHIPS + SHOVE + FOLD = WINNAGE |
good math |
|
|
|
|
|
|