kiddo
106 posts
Joined 10/2008
yep, i had only slept 2 hours when i wrote my post (my kid wakes me up at 7 and I had played poker until 5 in the morning) so im sorry if I was focusing on the bad parts of the video... it is still of course a very interesting video and i didnt fall asleep watching it (something I did 1 hour later reading Stoxs book and his handexampels which are really strange because he almost never use a read on the players... maybe he is so focused on playing balanced that he doesnt need a read, he is just focusing on playing unexploitable poker... but i dont understand how playing "unexploitable" can be done without a read unless u are the next generation of computers and can have all the math in ur head)
anyway, the reason I prefer Oinks videos before this one is that he is really playing poker for real when he is recording, he is having the attitude I would like myself to have while I play. And its not like Oink never is funny (his way of saying "spank you" after winning a decent pot against a bad player)...
that said, im sorry if i got out of line in my earlier post
Posted over 4 years ago
Reply to Topic
Reply w/Quote
Soepgroente
493 posts
Joined 07/2008
DeathDonkey
5387 posts
Joined 11/2006
Hey kiddo,
fwiw I completely agree with your general point that when playing, we shouldn't underestimate our opponents or think of them as clueless fish, we should do our best to see what they are doing well and how we can better play against them when we see them make mistakes. I think Entity and Danzasmack agree with that too, and I think Entity's point that playing good poker and having fun aren't mutually exclusive.
-DeathDonkey
Posted over 4 years ago
Reply to Topic
Reply w/Quote
danzasmack
2084 posts
Joined 02/2007
Like Rob said, that comment had nothing to do with the session you saw in this vid - I was half making fun of myself and the way I played in a DIFFERENT session (the one GiantBuddha referred to) and 1/2 poking fun at the fact that there are now so many "well you can't" or "well you have to" rules in LHE despite what the math might in fact say. I made a couple of 1/100 plays in that vid that are never ever a bluff (except that 1/100) and saw people still calling down. The more I see things like this the more I nod my head in agreement even more when I see DeathDonkey post some sort of super exploitable play that nobody will ever exploit because they "have to check back there - he folds nothing!"
Fwiw having a laughing, casual attitude is what has helped me play good poker and be pretty good at anything I've ever actually been good at it. It is 110% a personal thing and don't expect everyone to relate at all.
TBH though there are a bunch of people that attitude really could help.
Think of the "John Candy" drive - the most famous drive in the history of the San Francisco 49ers. With the ball deep in their own territory, the team was huddled up during a tv time out. And what did Joe Montana do? Point down the field at the other end zone and say "hey, isn't that John Candy?"
92 yards later - touchdown.
Also, clearly not out of line in your post. Referencing multiple sessions in 1 vid is confusing. This session we got lucky with some good games in general.
Also, Rob, change your avatar.
Posted over 4 years ago
Reply to Topic
Reply w/Quote
danzasmack
2084 posts
Joined 02/2007
Entity
8233 posts
Joined 11/2006
GiantBuddha
30 posts
Joined 05/2008
I'm such a trouble maker...
I actually agree that the attitude of "ZOMG DonkeyFish!" is rather a turn off and non-constructive. However, I didn't feel like that was the tone of this video series at all. It was more of a "This guy plays well, so we're going to have to do blah blah blah [insert useful advice here] to take advantage of some of the spots where he may be weak. Except for GoldenHawk. But there's always going to be players like that somewhere.
Also, laughing's good for you.
Posted over 4 years ago
Reply to Topic
Reply w/Quote
HLS2k6
686 posts
Joined 11/2007
Once he capped the river with J-high vs a fish with trip 7's it was all over for us.
PS - You played goot that video.
Rob
I posted this hand the night it was played in the Low Content thread in SS. WTF was going on there!?
Posted over 4 years ago
Reply to Topic
Reply w/Quote
HLS2k6
686 posts
Joined 11/2007
danzasmack
2084 posts
Joined 02/2007
HLS2k6
686 posts
Joined 11/2007
Ok, who is good at the poker math?
Is there an equation for this proof?
"How much better does the video hafta be when it has Rob & Chuck in it at the same time if you get half as many videos as there'd be if they were making them separate?" I think it's 2.5 times, but I'm not sure how to show my work.
Posted over 4 years ago
Reply to Topic
Reply w/Quote
Entity
8233 posts
Joined 11/2006
Ok, who is good at the poker math?
Is there an equation for this proof?
"How much better does the video hafta be when it has Rob & Chuck in it at the same time if you get half as many videos as there'd be if they were making them separate?" I think it's 2.5 times, but I'm not sure how to show my work.
A) The question is moot. I'd easily do 2x as many vids with Chuck as I would solo, it's just too much more fun and easier to record.
2) It needs to be 2.3x as good.
C) Is that John Candy?
Posted over 4 years ago
Reply to Topic
Reply w/Quote
danzasmack
2084 posts
Joined 02/2007
Entity
8233 posts
Joined 11/2006
Boomer
1550 posts
Joined 06/2007
FWIW guys it's the fact that you guys seem to have such fun playing the game and obviously enjoy talking about the game that makes the videos great to watch for me and actually makes the learning experience easier due to the fact that any "lesson" is madee easier when it's entertaining.
Posted over 4 years ago
Reply to Topic
Reply w/Quote