| Author |
Message |
|
Posted: Mon, 06 Dec 2004, 12:23am Post subject: Avoiding suckouts and sharks. |
|
|
Flush
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 504
WPP: 88
Location: Wild Bill's Backyard
|
|
This is almost an oxymoronic concept but there has to be a balance somewhere doesn't there?
Every decent player is a victim of the suckout especially online at lower levels. It is also generally accepted that the higher the level the harder the game is to beat.
Any recommendations on how or where to find games with limited suckouts, but without entering shark infested waters.
I know this topic will have a lot of buts, ifs, and it depends type variables but any input on this topic would be appreciated.
In short, if playing against better players makes your game improve, how can one do this without severly crippling the bankroll? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 06 Dec 2004, 1:04am Post subject: Re: Avoiding suckouts and sharks. |
|
|
Royal Flush
Joined: 12 Dec 2003
Posts: 17020
WPP: 83
Location: Walk the Walk, Flop the Flop.
|
|
| Gatlin Dan wrote: |
Any recommendations on how or where to find games with limited suckouts, but without entering shark infested waters.
|
If such a game existed, it would be a paradox. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 06 Dec 2004, 1:30am Post subject: |
|
|
3-of-a-Kind
Joined: 14 Nov 2004
Posts: 95
WPP: 116
|
|
"Wait, wait, a paradox? You mean one of those things that could destroy the universe?" - Marty, Back to the Future 2
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 06 Dec 2004, 2:15am Post subject: |
|
|
Flush
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 504
WPP: 88
Location: Wild Bill's Backyard
|
|
| yes, it is somewhat of an oxymoronic concept. I'm not looking for the best of both worlds, just a decent balance between the two. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 06 Dec 2004, 7:01am Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 1277
WPP: 105
Location: Drowning in prosperity
|
|
Just look for the game with suckouts and keep playing solid poker.
If you can't get over suckouts and can't understand why they're good for you, you shouldn't be playing poker. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 06 Dec 2004, 7:11am Post subject: |
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 1791
WPP: 58
Location: PEANUT BUTTER JELLY TIME
|
|
| koolmoe wrote: | | If you can't get over suckouts and can't understand why they're good for you, you should learn about why they are good for you with assistance from the helpful members of the FTR forums. |
Fixed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 06 Dec 2004, 7:55am Post subject: |
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 19 Dec 2003
Posts: 1934
WPP: 77
|
|
Go play Tic-Tac-Toe 
Getting sucked out means you played well and your opponent was lucky.
Just make sure you can tell the difference. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 06 Dec 2004, 8:35am Post subject: |
|
|
LAME HUMOR THAT MAKES FISH LAUGH
Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 7456
WPP: 65
Location: This room is a good place to be
|
|
WORST TIC-TAC-TOE BEAT EVER!
I had the fuggin three corners taken care of and a complete lock on the board when this lucky freak blocks one of my columns. Just as I was about to make the winning move, the wind caught the paper and moved it one row over! I marked a meaningless empty square and Chump Change straightens 3 out on his last, free, undeserving move!
I hate this game!
'rilla |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 06 Dec 2004, 9:10am Post subject: |
|
|
Flush
Joined: 06 Jun 2004
Posts: 266
WPP: 130
Location: Ashburn, VA
|
|
| mike4066 wrote: | Go play Tic-Tac-Toe
Getting sucked out means you played well and your opponent was lucky.
Just make sure you can tell the difference. |
Absolutely.
Example hand from the past weekend:
I had 10:club: 7 on the button. Flop comes 10:diamond: 7 4 . Bet to me with a couple callers so I raise and it's called around. Turn is 3, Checked to me so I bet again and get 1 caller. River is J and the caller now bets into me. I call and he shows A K. I consoled myself by knowing that 90% of the time I win that type of hand and that I charged him to get there. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 06 Dec 2004, 10:43pm Post subject: |
|
|
Flush
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 504
WPP: 88
Location: Wild Bill's Backyard
|
|
| I understand that playing against the poor players who don't know when to fold, and suckout are in the long run, good for the bankroll. However, I don't see how it improves the level of my game by playing against poor opponents. I know I play well, but I'm not looking to continue to play well, I'm looking to play better. How can you continue to get better if you don't play against better opponents? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 06 Dec 2004, 11:21pm Post subject: |
|
|
Royal Flush
Joined: 12 Dec 2003
Posts: 17020
WPP: 83
Location: Walk the Walk, Flop the Flop.
|
|
| Gatlin Dan wrote: | | I understand that playing against the poor players who don't know when to fold, and suckout are in the long run, good for the bankroll. However, I don't see how it improves the level of my game by playing against poor opponents. I know I play well, but I'm not looking to continue to play well, I'm looking to play better. How can you continue to get better if you don't play against better opponents? |
Fnord's Theory of Poker:
Find the worst players you can at the highest limit you can beat+afford and the money will come.
Where in there does it talk about playing against good players? 
In poker your profit is your score. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 07 Dec 2004, 12:01am Post subject: |
|
|
Flush
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 504
WPP: 88
Location: Wild Bill's Backyard
|
|
thanx fnord,
Is there a level where there is more player's who generally seem to understand the concepts of pot odds and implied odds than players who don't. This is the level I would like to play at to improve my skills as a poker player. Unfortunately, it seems, tables like these must be as of yet, still above what my bankroll will support because they seem rare. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 07 Dec 2004, 12:27am Post subject: |
|
|
Royal Flush
Joined: 12 Dec 2003
Posts: 17020
WPP: 83
Location: Walk the Walk, Flop the Flop.
|
|
| Gatlin Dan wrote: | thanx fnord,
Is there a level where there is more player's who generally seem to understand the concepts of pot odds and implied odds than players who don't. |
This isn't binary.
There are players that understand but are poor at applying it or simply refuse to. There are also players with a reasonable game but a couple big holes (multi-table rocks.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 07 Dec 2004, 12:53am Post subject: |
|
|
Flush
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 504
WPP: 88
Location: Wild Bill's Backyard
|
|
| I can not comprehend how someone could have knowledge of these concepts and refuse to apply them. Can there be a bigger hole in someone's game? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 07 Dec 2004, 9:29am Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 20 Jun 2004
Posts: 1258
WPP: 112
Location: Bluffalupagus
|
|
If you're facing minimal suckouts, you're playing sharks, generally... or rocks. Neither is a good situation.
A table with a lot of suckouts? Where the hell do I sign up? These are poor players, and I want a seat!
You can't have no suckouts and no sharks. Play with the suckers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 07 Dec 2004, 10:30am Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 813
WPP: 145
Location: Mount Holly, NC
|
|
| Gatlin Dan wrote: | | I understand that playing against the poor players who don't know when to fold, and suckout are in the long run, good for the bankroll. However, I don't see how it improves the level of my game by playing against poor opponents. |
It does not directly improve your game in a conventional way, but it does "force" you to play very solid poker - which in the long run will make you money. It also teaches/encourages patience...waiting and recognizing an opprotunity then having the discipline to take advantage of it....or get away from it.
Everyone has bad days...weeks, I busted out of 2 tourneys last night because of suckouts (last week I was running in the 60% ITM range for MTTs -way high for me) It was not the suckout's fault I lost my stack...one situation I did not see coming and they simply got lucky. The second was all my fault, I stubbornly refused to believe I was beat. He bet at it like he had it, and for some reason I chose not to believe he would play those card out of position and it cost me. I know how to play poker...I know the "rules" and how to calculate odds, but every once in a while I do stupid things for whatever reason...pretty much everyone does. Getting better means that you can step outside the situation and realize that it is a call you should not make.....then having the discipline NOT to make it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 07 Dec 2004, 2:05pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 1277
WPP: 105
Location: Drowning in prosperity
|
|
| Gatlin Dan wrote: | | Is there a level where there is more player's who generally seem to understand the concepts of pot odds and implied odds than players who don't. |
I haven't found a stakes level devoid of bad players yet. I've played several hundred hands of $15/$30, and I saw players that autorated as fish, maniacs, etc. When I am bankrolled for it, I am moving up to exploit them, not the tight-aggressive players who fold KTo. When it seems like everyone at the table knows what they're doing, I find a better game.
Why would you want to play at a table where everyone plays like you and you have no advantage? The cards decide such games, and you end up feeding the rake long term.
| Gatlin Dan wrote: | | This is the level I would like to play at to improve my skills as a poker player. |
Exploiting bad players requires skills worth developing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 11 Dec 2004, 4:52am Post subject: |
|
|
Flush
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 504
WPP: 88
Location: Wild Bill's Backyard
|
|
| That's amazing people will play k10o at a 15/30 table. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 11 Dec 2004, 7:13am Post subject: |
|
|
Straight
Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 113
WPP: 107
|
|
It varies from site to site a little I think but in general:
The 2nd to 3d highest stakes are the toughest ones to beat. The players there have gotten beyond the newbee-state in their game and some are very good but they haven't build the bankroll yet to play in the highest games. This player base is much bigger than the ones moving up to the highest stakes and the more good players/fish the less EV. The rich suckers naturally don't wanna play for pocket change so they choose the highest games available. This implies that the highest games consist of a regular (pretty small) player basis and various rich suckers who gets in there and eventually loses money. I have no proof for this but I think this is the case. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
