Quote:
|
Originally Posted by papokergod Even if you know you'll earn more (on average) if everyone passes, often you should still try to get called.
<snip>
Caro's Great Law of Betting:
You should only bet if the value of betting is greater than the value of checking. Never forget that checking can have value as a poker weapon. It has the value of deception, and more. Checking and then calling may earn more than betting and hoping to be called. There's actually a lot more to this concept, and the reasoning gets fairly complex. But, today, just remember the big premise.
Repeating: In order to justify a bet, the value of betting must be greater than the value of checking. If you begin to thing about wagering that way, you'll earn a lot more money. |
This is my first post, and I would firstly like to say hi, (esp. to Matro57 for mentioning THF!) and thanks to all for being here so I could learn from the wisdom imparted. Secondly, I would recommend brewing a pot of coffee if you are going to read this post.
On to business.
I quoted the above because I have some 'questions'. Some are partly philosophical, and may not have answers, but I am going to ask them anyway.
I will mention tilt further in this dissertation, and I'm sure there are threads that deal with it, but I would love to hear from some of the great minds here at THF on my specific case. My tilt, however, plays a lesser part of the picture I am going to attempt to paint.
First, to make my point, I need to tell you a bit about myself. It is obvious that I can be 'long winded', but I do make a point, eventually, and will do my best to ease the pain of reading this long a post in one sitting. Read on for more excitement! I am going to state some facts that may make me sound arrogant, but it is not my intent to brag. I am merely trying to convey the data necessary so as to allow the reader to come to his/her own conclusion about my situation so that they might offer an opinion from which I could learn. (How's that for a long sentence!?
) By measurable standards, I am 'considered well above average' at math. I have an education as a computer programmer/analyst. I have been building and troubleshooting computers for many years, (started working with them in '82) and I have developed very good problem solving skills. Like an expert mechanic who can listen to an engine and know where to look for the problem, I can do the same with a computer. Also, I have spent plenty of time dealing with people in many different job situations, and I think that has helped my reading of others' reactions, to a point. I am also working on becoming a Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer and I think my people reading skills will be a great asset. As far as poker goes, I have only played online, so far. I was watching TV the other night, saw the Hold Em WPT, and got the bug - which brought me here.
I see Poker as a problem that needs to be worked out, and since the problem is constantly changing, and there is therefore always new information coming in, one of the biggest tools you have in your arsenal is the gathering and correct processing of that information.
I had never played Hold Em before Friday March 4th. Prior to that, I hadn't played poker in 15-20 years, and when I had, back in those days, I wasn't really a poker player, I was just a kid (I'm 37 now) and not really aware of what poker was really all about - I just played for fun. I played with my dad and a few of his friends, for nickels, dimes, maybe even just chips - can't say I even remember learning anything other than the hand ranks.
Perhaps I am just fortunate, or blessed, or lucky, or perhaps I have a natural 'talent' (and I put the word in quotes because I don't like that word, but that's a discussion for another time), but I have done quite well in my first week of playing. I have, so far, only played with play money at pokerstars, but I have managed to last quite a long time in tourneys against some very good players who have been playing for years, and, to me, seem to be very good players (I'm talking about the chip leaders at those tables, and I've often been the chip leader, or near the top). Speaking to these good players, they tell me that I am very good - these guys play in money tournaments and they are telling me I am good. I had one guy giving me advice early on and it was appreciated. I learned a lot from him, and he plays big money live tourneys. I took a good portion of his stack. Yes, it was partly because it was play money, and partly because he was tired (and I told him to go to sleep because he lost 2/3 of his stack to me over a short period in three hands on which he wouldn't have bet otherwise - and just fyi, if it was real money, I wouldn't have told him to go to sleep, but it was play money, and I appreciated the advice he had given me already, and I wanted to pay him back) - but it was also because I played 'correctly'... We had been chatting off and on for an hour - after I beat him several times in a row, he said 'you don't need my help'. That put me on tilt. Imagine - a guy who plays in real cash tournaments, who makes money at it, especially by winning those tournaments, telling me - a guy who hasn't even been playing for a week - that I am good enough that I don't need his advice! Of course, he didn't mean that my game couldn't improve - we all have flaws - all it takes is one mistake, if you are facing a tough opponent, to bring you to your knees, or even essentially knock you out of the game.
But two major points were there. One was that some very good money players have told me that I play better than some pros (which, to me, is amazing, considering I've only been playing for a week, but at the risk of sounding arrogant, I'm not entirely surprised - more overwhelmed than anything). I got into poker because I believe I have a mind that is capable of becoming pro, and perhaps one day winning some decent tournaments. I would never begin to think that I'm the best in the world - that would be ludicrous - but I believe I could, one day, become one of the best, if my learning curve doesn't slow down (and I know money tourneys are different, but the majority of the practice I have been doing is tourneys, against good players, because I am one of the learners, not just the one of the players). I know I have a lot to learn, and it may take years to develop the skills needed to become one of the best. Then again, maybe it won't - maybe I'm ahead of the game for my experience level? The other point was that I find myself tilting a lot because of the success I'm having. Now I know what you might be thinking: "why is this guy complaining because he's successful??" Well, let me say that I'm not asking for pity
just an explanation, if there is one, as to why I can outplay some of the best players for a while, then 'peter out'. Maybe it is tilt, maybe it is lack of experience, maybe it is them adjusting to my game and my lack of adjusting to their adjustment? I would say a combination of all of the above, but what else? Or is there anything else?
After all that, (!Finally!) my first 'official question' is, how long can I expect it to take for tilt to become less of a factor in my game? Now, I realize that is not an easy question to answer, but if you have read this far, you have some idea of where I'm going with this. I'm talking about the fact that I have 1 week of experience and I do very well, until I tilt, and then I don't care anymore, probably because I'm tilting from the overwhelming feeling huge success can bring - I mean, a newbie taking big pots from guys who are tight aggressive, is, to me, an accomplishment of which I have a right to feel proud. I'm not talking about them 'making mistakes' - I'm talking about me leading them into the pot and taking their money with intent (or firing the bullets, if you prefer). I will dominate a huge hand against an opponent who is beating everyone else, and then they tell me I played that hand well, (and at that point, they don't know I've only been playing a week!) and, here I go again: 'Tilt'... That isn't as much a concern as tilting the other way, but it is an issue, although I guess if I were playing with cash it would be more of an issue. Earlier tonight I was playing a 2000+110 NLH sit n go, and out of 45 people, I was in the last 4. Top stack size was 30k, mine was tied near the middle with about 13k, and the lower stack was about 7 I think. Anyway, I found myself basically enthralled watching these guys play, and in the heat of the moment, did an all-in, even though I only had jacks, and was 99% sure the guy wasn't bluffing. I was right - he had queens, but I knew it, and I bet anyway. It was, I think, mostly because I was tilted from the amazement at watching these guys, and seeing that I played just the way they did, and I felt like a pro, sitting there with them, and it was somewhat overwhelming, and I wanted to get out of there before I exploded. It wasn't really that bad, but it was enough to make me want to bet all in and be done with it. Maybe I was just afraid that I'd make a stupid mistake that would shatter my confidence, so it was better to go all in when I was pretty sure I'd lose anyway? Self destructive tendencies...
I don't think I would have done it with real money, or maybe I'm just trying to justify a move that I knew was wrong, but it didn't matter, since the prize was only play money, and not much of it at that: 5k for 1st, 1500 for 4th, and since I can turn 1k into 50k in 2-3 hours, who cares about the chips at that level, right? The problem is, I'm there to learn, and making a stupid move like that on purpose doesn't help me learn. Maybe I had to because I was overloading? Should I have maybe tried sitting out a few hands?
I'm asking this question because I want to know if you think it will hurt me long term - is it maybe a bad habit to get into, to let tilt affect me like that? Should I just walk away for a few minutes? What if I'm still tilted after 15 minutes? I am willing to bet that the top players have learned to handle their tilt, but the question becomes, how? I get the impression that experience and, thereby, more self-confidence, will play a huge role in that department...
Yes, I know, I am sort of answering my own question(s) but any added thoughts or opinions would be appreciated!
The 'second question' is coming (you mean you haven't already asked 187 questions!? - I'm talking about the second one I mentioned in relation to the quote) - the strategies you mention; I had been using them for most of this week, but figured them out on my own. I have only read a few bits and pieces online about how and what and when to bet, call, fold, etc.
Maybe I shouldn't even be asking this - maybe I should just play and prove it, one way or the other, but I think the tilt is coming into play, in large part, affecting my capacity (and I have absorbed, and practiced, huge amounts of information and tactics in a week, and perhaps my brain just needs time to recharge) - and I've been playing 10-14 hours a day, learning all the way, and not really taking breaks, so maybe I'm getting overload and should be stepping back from the table for a while, at least every once in a while (that's one of the reasons I'm here, to take the longest break I've taken from poker this past week, other than going out to the store!)...
Side step: An advantage to betting when you should be checking (and this should only be done if your stack size warrants it, in comparison to your opponent's and his/her skill level) on a weak hand against what is likely a better hand (we're not talking huge bets here, but enough to give your opponent 'hope' (meaning you want them to underestimate you)) is that once your opponent sees your cards, they will now think they are smarter than you, because they made you bet a weak hand against a strong one. They have no idea that you did it to make them think that, and make them feel overly confident, possibly leading them into a future mistake when a similar situation arises but when you are fairly certain you have the best hand. The same can be said for calling when you should have been betting. I had one very good player tell me earlier that I should have bet because I had three tens. There were other possibilities on the board, but I was quite certain I had the winning hand. The pot was small, and that meant it was the right time to make this particular play. My two opponents only had pairs and we all showed our cards, so they knew I had them beat and SHOULD have bet, but didn't. Guess what that does for me? At worst, it confuses them. At best, it makes them underestimate me. He did - he told me I should have bet the tens. What he didn't know was that I didn't bet the tens for two reasons. One, because his stack was over 30k, and mine was 8k. That was not the main reason but it is a linked reason (meaning if our stacks were more equal, I wouldn't have bothered to call, I would have bet fairly big and just taken the pot) The main reason was because, at that point, when he saw my hand, his image of me dropped - he was no longer 'afraid' of me, which means he underestimated me, and stopped playing his best game, because he could loosen up a bit. That kind of move can give one an opportunity to catch some of the best players in a mistake and take a sizeable portion of their stack. That brings me back around to the reason for this post.
Exactly as you stated, the value of betting must be greater than the value of checking. I'm just surprised that I figured it out on my own after just a few days of playing! Call it intuition, or poker sense - I don't know - but it scares me, and sometimes I tilt because I almost feel like I shouldn't know as much as I think I do, this early in 'the game'...
The things you mentioned above, and the things I have just mentioned are things that experienced players have learned. I believe that's a good assessment, but correct me if I'm wrong - I'm just a newbie. I, however, have learned these things in a week of play, without reading a book, without reading tons of online articles (I've read a few, but deduced most on my own). I'm sure there are much more advanced concepts that I have yet to realize, but I'm wondering if I'm abnormal because I've grasped some fairly advanced concepts on my own, with very little experience (one week at 10-14 hours a day isn't that much, is it?), or if a large number of players do come to these types of astounding realizations on their own, this early in their playing experience - or (and here comes what may be the only question worth answering) is it just that I'm still so far down the food chain that I haven't even begun to realize how little I know?
Maybe I should just pick up a book (Doyle's?) to find some of the answers I seek?
