|
|~|ypermegachi
|
11-25-2004, 01:04 AM
Post subject: CardPlayer review of Ed Miller's SSH
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: emo-kid
Posts: 3,580
|
|
http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_maga...f90176c136f349
i saw this on 2+2, and thought maybe us FTR's take on the criticism in the article.
he does make a valid point that most people will bet with a good hand. but i also know that many people do bet with nothing on the button on a raggy flop. i do it all the time, and i'm sure a lot of others do too. it's probably around 50/50 whether they have a legitimate hand or not.
but i think the general idea is that the book is teaching tight aggressive, not weak tight. for the 2 examples in the article you have the pot odds to call. but since calling is "weak", you raise for a miniscule +EV
thoughts?
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
Fnord
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: I'll Do You Like A Truck
Posts: 19,333
|
|
Winning the max means not passing up any +EV.
Will be interesting to see the debate on 2+2. This is certainly one of the more interesting conclusions of the text. It's probably one of those cases where the best answer is "it depends" and for simplicity the author endorces the more aggressive play. Ed refered to the "idiot-proffing" of his text in a previous 2+2 post...
|
|
|
|
koolmoe
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Drowning in prosperity
Posts: 1,279
|
|
The review is flawed for a couple of reasons.
First, SSH is not aimed at beginners. It is aimed at players who have solid knowledge of the game and want to play expertly. "Expert play" is in the title for Pete's sake.
Second, there are lots of reasons to raise, even if you *know* you are behind. The reviewer's focus on the fact that you may be behind suggests that he missed this point upon his reading of the book.
SSH is not without flaws, but it will certainly add a few wrinkles to an already solid player's game.
|
|
|
|
koolmoe
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Drowning in prosperity
Posts: 1,279
|
|
*double post*
|
|
|
|
|~|ypermegachi
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: emo-kid
Posts: 3,580
|
|
the author in the article says you are benefiting the bettor by raising which drives out all the weaker players. you are investing money, to help protect the bettor's best hand...
now the question is...will you have the original bettor beat, and/or get the weak players to fold who woulda hit gutshots/runners/etc to make the play more profitable in the long run? i don't know, but i believe in Ed :P
|
|
|
|
ChezJ
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 1,456
|
|
i think the writer of the article is not truly experienced with low limit HE. people ram and jam their unimproved AK/AQ/KQ/KJ/QJ/AJ every minute of every day, even at tight venues like UB.
people will also (correctly) bet their straight and flush draws on the flop, or bluff into weakness from LP with baby PP's. so raising is clearly the right move if you are next to act holding 2nd pair or higher.
ChezJ
|
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska
05-26-2012, 03:08 PM Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
Linear Mode
