Not cut out for Hold'em?

Where do I begin? Okay, Hold'Em is possibly my weakest game. Past few days, I've been looking at Omaha books online, and figured to get that free shipping, let me pick out a Hold'Em (Harrington Tourney or perhaps Mitchell Cogert 101 Winning Moves or Slotbooms's Winning Stratgies of Pro Players), since I play a lot, not by choice, and with very limited success.

Upon reading a few excepts as well as the many reviews, I am skeptical that I can even play this way. I know I hate the (winning I guess) table-mates who play this aggressively with garbage, and I don't wanna be that person. I feel bad for fooling people to fold. This is 1 essential element to the very nature of the game. Do I need to toughen up, and take it less personal? Should I resign myself to the fact that my basic personality is not suited to it?

No brag intended, but I am good at games of mathematical/logical strategy. Omaha HL, all stud games (includes razz), where you can only semi-bluff. And I don;t feel bad for making someone with a (POSSIBLY) inferior hand fold (so what's the damn difference right?). But in hold'em, from everything from the 'terrorizing the blinds' to the 'c-bet' (when you miss) to even the 'value bet', etc, I have a hard time.

Bottom line, should I face facts, maybe I like poker, but I'll never enjoy Hold'em (or maybe I can learn to???), so don;t waste time trying to improve? Focus my efforts on Omaha? I dunno, I love HORSE, but get bored with a razz or stud tourney all by itself. Perhaps learning more naunces of each (as JD has taught me about razz) would help my success as well as enjoyment.

Sorry for the long-windedness. Any thoughts appreciated.

There's nothing wrong about not liking hold'em. It use to be that 7 stud was the game of choice and now no one plays it. Play the games that you like.

If you enjoy Omaha, work on that. There are plenty of Omaha games available online and the standard of play is often lower than it is at NLHE.

Thanks, just not sure how that's possible. You can't legislate chemistry, relationshipship or otherwise. But maybe taking positive steps to improve (no matter how it goes against my grain) would make me like it better.

Thanks Donkey. Was just reading how Omaha is catching up so fast in popularity to holdem... we might see the face of online offerrings changing. We'll see I guess. But I remember going to Atlantic City maybe 12 yrs ago, had just legalized poker. All we had was stud, and we were grateful for it.

Thanks! And as I mentioned above, Omaha seems to be catching up fast. Maybe I can capitalize before the next onslaught of 'newly studied theorists' prey on the 'average'.

Besides echoing what's already been said, maybe limit hold'em is a better match for you that no limit.

Possibly, I can see that. Although, I don;t really have as much a problem with PL or NL in Omaha. But yeah, I can definitely see that. Your BS WILL get called. lol

dive, everybody has their strengths, and due to the internet a new breed of "master's of hold-em" have emerged...its all good to think the poker world revolves around it, but that's only because tv and the internet have glamorized it to that point. The money, I mean the real money, at least live, is decided over the other games, at least here in vegas. Sure lots of holdem tables obviously but if you want real skill and not just weekend warriors you're movin down the right track

and just because you don't think you're great at holdem online that doesn't mean nuttin hunny, you just keep side-steppin the landmines and you'll do fine

Thanks much for the support and encouragement. Hate to use anything from Pop Psyche 101, but I almost feel 'validated'. Exactly - it does seem like Hold' Em is considered the 'grand master' or such - and if you're no good at that, you might as well be invisible, ya know, pack your toys and go home. But I'll give learning a shot, or else I won't be able to play any CC games except for the occasional Friday night.

Surprised to hear the 'real money' is made elsewhere. Are we talking Stud, Omaha?

I was going to give you some advice but after reading your replies It seems like you allready know the answer's ,, Interesting .. Darn it I wanted to help ??? lol

Help and anyone's precious time is always appreciated. 'Answers' are never absolute. But if you can't add much, I sure appreciate the thought. Thanks!

actually most of the money is either in limit holdem or pl omaha. There's really good players that sit at the stud tables but its easier to make money at the omaha tables, so many calling pot hoping to take it on the flop

An interesting post coming from one who I have played many CC games with and sure seems to know the game better than the average player. I do applaude your self honesty and desire to improve/change to preffered games. Maybe I should consider some changes too.

TV was mentioned and my thoughts on that are simple. So many "wannabee's" watch the bizare hands played (chozen by the editors to make the show more interesting) that people actualy think they are playing well by calling trash. Why wouldn't they? Their see their TV Hero's play similar cards. Sad part is they don't see the whole story thanks to creative editing where those junk hands miss far more often than they hit. Maybe if they knew that it takes 8+ hours of filming live play to cut down to less than 1 hour of footage just to make 1 dramatic show they'd rethink their play.

fwiw...I used to film hunting and fishing shows. I know all to well the tricks of the trade to make a long boring day of footage into a half hour of excitement...

Actually, I didn't embarass myself too bad at the Bodog freeroll (17th?), but very kind of you to say so. It's still demoralizing, and I'd post a screenshot, but don't want to implicate anyone here. I saved the screenshot, but he taunted me that he reraised me with nothing (I folded) and kept 'lol'ing. And the 'beauty' of Hold'Em is that you have no idea. I said to him it was cuz of people like him that I hate the game.

Oh yeah, it's gotta be crazy the people that see the 'brunson' (2-10) and think they can pull this off. lol Agreed, there's gotta be a ton more you don't see than you do. Thanks for the reply!

even though this thread is getting way off topic I gotta say dive you did good up against someone like that. I know what's he's like, back and forth and no staying power, just luck the whole way. He does good on bdog, and great for him that he propers somewhere, buy you do good on all, specially ft so keep it up and you know in the long run you'll have all his money...

probably mine too but what the hell, if somebody needs to take it may as well be you

Make sure you stay around and keep playing the CC Freerolls. For some strange reason I really like saying "nh bitch" and not having people think I'm being an ass .

Seriously, I agree with some of the other posters, when I've played at the same table as you, it seems that you've been a very solid NLHE player.

Dive,
I feel your pain/concern. For a long while there I stopped playing NOLIMIT and only played limit games where the swings are less volatile. But then I realized I was being volatile too! THe hardest thing for me is to NOT PLAY EMOTIONAL! This is what the avg maniac thrives off of and I try not to give it to him/her. I've seen your play. You're solid! THose taunting players are just showing their lack of culture. DEY GOT NO COUTHS!!!!! LOL
OT......where do you go down!!! I dive also!!
Peace,
FLOW

Yes it is, and you have PM. And that's the spirit. Perhaps someday I will be afforded the pleasure of returning your bubble buy-in.

Who else but me would probably answer 'TYVM '? And mean it? So at least they wouldn't think you're an ass for that reason. Just messing with ya! Thanks much for the kind words. Perhaps the same things that really get me going, and instilling self-doubt and trepidation happen to all of us on a regular basis - just probably to a lesser degree than me.


Thank you so much for the kind words. Getting beat by a better hand, well-played (even trickily or well-disguised) by an opponent does not set me off at all. It's the river luckbox donk who disrespects all raises (bad poker). It's also the idiot raising with nothing or bottom pair to push me off a winning hand (good poker or so I've read). It becomes a game of 'catch me if you can'. And mine turns into 'I'm gonna git you sucka'. It's just not fun.

So maybe limit games ARE better suited for me, even hold'em. Perhaps it all boils down to (assuming basic skills & principles) frame of mind. I dunno, just dunno anymore. Get the feeling sometimes that the answer is out there, somewhere in between a lot of things, and overanalyzing it won't lead you to it.

I dive anywhere the water is warm and blue. Not as often as I'd like to - make that NEED to. And you??

While you can become a specialist and just focus on one or two games, I think you will end up a better poker player by learning more games.

For example, the things you learn in a no limit tournament game can be applied to a limit tournament game. In fact, today given what you mentioned, it may be that limit tournaments specialists may have a bigger edge against their opponents than those who focus on no limit events.

The reason I wrote Tournament Poker: 101 Winning Moves was to help players understand that this game is about being aggressive. That while luck plays a part, you need to embrace the risk in the game. It is more important to play to win a tournament than to survive. One win lets you free roll for a lot more events...and maybe one day take down a monster payout.

Play what you feel is most comfortable for you from both a mindset and experience standpoint. Track your results, and see what happens over time.

Good luck!

I can't tell you how flattered I am (and frankly shocked ) that a pro such as yourself would even read my little post, much less reply. Especially one who has written a book with a 5 star rating on Amazon. I couldn't agree with you more, especially on those first 2 highlighted. Even in Omaha, I tend to do better at the limit games, perhaps my personality is better suited to it. So maybe I should try limit hold'em and see if that's more productive (and/or less frustrating).

Anyway, I read ALL the reviews, and a few excerpts from your book. I aliken your book to Rolf Slotboom's on PLO. Advanced strategies for a very experienced player with an already firm grasp of every concept and aspect of the game. Some of his reviews smacked of 'do not try this at home kids'. And although I have more success at Omaha than Holdem, I went with Hwang's book, covers the basics, and solid intermediate stratgey. I went with Harrington's 1 & 2 for the same reasons. Someday (hopefully), when I get more experienced and comfortable with aggressive play strategies, I will buy your widely (and wildly) acclaimed book as well. But one must be honest with one's self. I know I'm am not ready for that kind of play - yet. hehe

You last comment I highlighted sounds like very sage advice. Thanks again for responding. And good luck on the felts! Even a pro needs just a little, right?

I guess I can't offer too much insight into your problem, if only because of my relative lack of experience.

I have to say, though, that patient, tight play when you finally get your hands on the people "who play this aggressively with garbage", is what has helped me to turn the corner and see moderate success.

Nothing better than a guy trying to bluff you off a hand by going AI when you have the nuts.

Good luck.

who play this aggressively with garbage

This is soooo true. And also where I earn and fully enjoy most of my (relatively few? ) successes. So much so, however, that sometimes it gets to the point where my table image, after a couple of showdowns, is viewed as so tight, even my smooth-calling will strike terror in the hearts of the most hardened donks, and they stop raising, and fold to any bet. So I probably need to change it up a little.

As far as 'garbage' is concerned, there seems to be a new school of ultra-aggressive strategy that address position, stack size, and betting amounts, almost irrespective of your cards. But I'm not sure using some of these strategies will help build a tight table image if you over-use them. I'm sure a lot of it works, and is profitable in the longrun if you can stand the variance. I guess the key is moderation. Or maybe not (?).

By the way, my book is written for beginning and intermediate players. Experts already know these plays.

The key point of the book is not to play like most everyone else, because it makes it easier for your opponents to read you. It is about realizing that there are aggressive plays you should be making based on position, card strength, table image, opponents checks/bets, chip stack, flop, etc.

It is not about making super aggressive moves with garbage. That's just asking for trouble.

The other books on no limit I highly recommend are Gus Hansen and Erick Lindgren--they are honestly revealing how they play and why. Yes, their style is aggressive but it's not stupid aggressive. That's why they win.

Good luck!

Didn't know it was geared towards beg/intermed. Btw, I was not referring to you at all when I mentioned "'do not try this at home", that was a review on Slotboom's Omaha. NOR "the new school of ultra-aggressive strategy that address position, stack size, and betting amounts, almost irrespective of your cards". (Although you once pulled 2 people off solid hands with a 46os, in late position of course ).

I've only been playing poker frequently and online the past year & a half. Maybe I'm a slow learner or have never read a poker book - but only recently noticing and even anticipating bold moves from certain players from certain positions. And have always said to myself "when I finally get some cards, I'm gonna burn that sucker". And while I often do, I fully appreciate your assertions in the first few pages that "playing it safe in a tournament is a sure way to lose". You can't wait around for 'finally'. But the way I've always figured it, especially post-flop, is that if I didn't hit, someone else probably did. I suppose there's a fine line between going to the well too often (raising) and maintaining a believable, raise-respected table image.

I will pick up your book as well, or at least buy the online download. The little I read was very sensible and well-written too. Some risks seemed large, but they were well-calculated, thus not maniacal. Thanks again for the thoughtful reply. Have a safe & happy holiday!

You need to remember, poker is a GAME, it is meant to be won! There is no reason you can't put on your "poker face" and become a lieing, coniveing gold digging bitch, and still be sweet and loving when you step away from the table.

definitely just play the games u like, if u dotnt prefer hold em, dont play it. i too, get sick of hold em or poker in general, thats when i play spades or cribbage.

Ive said Holdem was my weakest game in a blog on here before but after watching more and more poker on tv and reading more and more strategy on the game I would have to say its now in my top two.

Fine, if I can still be a sweet & loving bitch. What you see is what you get, I am what I am, and all that jazz. Welcome back!!! Jane's been filling us in a little, and you've been missed around here. Hope you have a great Christmas, and a fresh new start with only good things to come in the New Year!

Thank you!!
I still have my kids and this isnt my 1st rodeo. Ill be good to go soon.

Somehow I've missed reading this thread until today. (dang!!)

I've read every word and reply. Interesting. Wide variation of opinions. Had the urge to quote many replies, but chose only Cowboy's (to try to keep this short and readable).

"poker is a GAME" .. is it really just 'one game'?? Each style of game has it's own distinct variances, nuances and strategies. Stud is 'one' game, while nlhe is also 'one' game, but quite different. Game variants were MEANT to satisfy the particular interests of THAT GROUP of players.

Online, players who do not want to play limit stud will often do so, kicking and screaming all the way to the rail. I started playing 5card draw and 5 & 7 stud live in '69 when casino nlhe tables were sitting empty. I STILL prefer stud, and so do those of us who choose to sit at any of the 'limit' tables.

In the reverse, you do not see stud/limit players kicking and screaming at the nlhe tables about how 'bad' no limit games are. At casinos, players choose the ONE table they prefer to play at, the games that interest THEM. Online, many players are multi-tabling 12 tables, playing anything they can get into, P.U.I. (playing under the influence), and often using chat to pound their hairless chests. This is just the nature of online nlhe players in all too many cases. Products of TV poker and anonymous, over-inflated egos.

Exclude, please, those few players who DO take their online and live games seriously. The existence of forums shows the difference. There are TENS of MILIONS of online players, while only a few hundred THOUSAND forum members, and a vast number of those are only there for FR passwords.

"meant to be won"<<- even this is deceiving imo. 'What' is 'won'? Each hand? Each session? Each MTT? All, of course, but that is not possible. Winning has to be whatever it means to the player. I 'win' if I leave a ring session with a profit. I 'win' if I make it anywhere ITM in an MTT. I have an overall 'win' rate at ring sessions, while I have never taken 'first' in an MTT, but I'm thrilled with having made second a few times. Does that make me a 'loser'? My 4 site's BR's from -0- lead me to say - 'not'.

"poker face" .. we cannot be happy or satisfied players if we do not like what we 'look like' in the mirror. Why force yourself to change your personality to play nlhe 'correctly'? I find more satisfaction playing at the limit games and that keeps ME happy. On Stars, I make most all of my Round 2 tickets playing the limit FR's and always have several in the 'ticket bank'. I also use those tickets ONLY in the limit Round 2's.

Just my .02c, but don't try to be what you are not. We should all know our limitations. Play nlhe if you must, and play as well as you can, but concentrate on playing what makes YOU happy and gives you personal satisfaction, whatever that means to YOU.

Nick, where you drunk when you wrote all that?

you missed the mark on everything you said as it relates to this thread.

This thread is about Holdem, not any other game. so your 40 years of playing stud doesnt come into play here.

Poker is a GAME!!, and Yes it is meant to be won, there is nothing deceiving about that.

DB wanted to know if she should give up Holdem because she isnt aggressive enough. That it wasnt in her nature to be dishonest.

I told her she CAN be aggressive at the tables and still be herself away from the tables.

Everyone should try to be what they are not, its called growing. As a person or a poker player. As the old saying goes "Even a fool knows you cant touch the stars, but that wont keep the wise man from trying"

^^^So glad to have Cowboy back in the threads!!!

Anyhoo, dive, I'm the same way. I think I'm a decent NLHE player, but I'm just not aggressive enough to really do well in it. But Omaha 8/b is my game. I almost always double my money when I toss a few bucks into the pot on those tables. And, I realized that my play at higher stakes was better too in Omaha. Now, I just need to get my br up there enough to play them to win.

Just do what you need to do to make yourself happy. And it would be nice if we held a couple of freerolls on here in the PLO or PLO8.

Not drunk at all (I don't drink OR smoke). DB said: "I don't wanna be that person. I feel bad for fooling people to fold." I used (and clearely stated it was in regards to me) that playing limit can be most 'unlike' no limit games. Why play something that makes you something you "don't wanna be"?

DB asked is essence 'what she should do'? Am I not entitled to an opinion? ANY game other than nlhe is for someone who does not like what it takes to play. What about "Be what and who you are, not what someone else thinks you should be"?

My example using stud was justification for MY opinion about NOT having to change. Not having to be someone I am not, just as she should pursue whatever game wiggles her crank.

You 'reach for the stars'. They don't interest me. I'll dig for gold, may never find any, but it won't keep me from digging.

DB goes on to say: "I love HORSE". All 5 are limit games, which led me to my comparison of limit vs. no limit games. Maybe you weren't reading everything she wrote.

All poker games are great games, if YOU enjoy playing them and can do well. Keep doing what works for you. Any variation from nlhe MTT's would be welcomed by me also.

The only problem with PLO or any of the PL games is that especially in FR's, they are even more like nlhe, only going to all-ins even quicker. As a general rule, nlhe FR's (a few forum FR's excluded) bust close to 2/3 of the field in the first hour. In PL games it is not uncommon for 3/4 of the field to be gone the first hour.

At least speaking for our own live Omaha MTT's here in town, the play is soooo much better, it makes it a pleasurable, and profitable game.

My reasons exactly!

Shortened your post a bit, hope you don't mind. Good point about poker being many games. I think though, what Cowboy was trying to say is that I can play any game to win any way I can - and still walk away and be who I am (or was?). It was very well intentioned, although I don't think he realizes how hard an adjustment it might be. While I feel like 'crouching tiger' with certain tablemates' play, and can't wait for any opportunity to blow them away, I feel awful making some BS move that makes someone (who I think is tight, earned his chips, doesn't raise with junk, or even try to steal in every HU checking match) fold.

So, I fully agree with the notion of playing something you like and are suited to (since there's plenty of alternatives to NLHE to choose from), as opposed to forcing yourself to make adjustments that go against the very grain of your personality or temperament. Also agree with you that if you are going to play (as I enjoy CC freerolls and would like to do the buy-ins too), might as well try to improve my game.

Funny, most of my Round 2 tix at PS have been limit as well, but well over half in Omaha (even 2 in NL H/L ). Can't wait to use the 11 I've stock-piled since Sept.. All the games I like are Sunday at 2, which = football time. Guess they'll come in handy in the dog days of winter. Thanks much for the thoughtful reply & encouragement.

Interesting. I'm not so sure this is possible for everyone. Perhaps a better way to say it is 'be the best person (or in this case, NLHE player) you can or wanna be, whatever shape that takes. And I can be quite aggressive and assertive in many situations. It's just that I have to work on it a lot harder than some at it when the larger degree (than limit) of elements inherent in NLHE (i.e. bluffing, bullying, not to mention risk if you are called, raised) are present. But good points. The Harrington books are 'on the truck', and hopefully will provide some means to that end.

My game too, and hope to improve even more when Hwang's book gets here, every little bit helps. Wouldn't the occasional Omaha freeroll be fantastic? I honestly don't think there's anyone here that would turn down playing just because they prefer NLHE. I mean we play our NLHEs when we'd prefer Omaha, right? Thanks for the reply!

I missed your last post this morning. Started replying yesterday, before you wrote it, and didn't refrsh the screen. Was afraid of losing what I wrote. Anway...

Even in HORSE, my least fave game is holdem. Maybe it's the constant exposure to NLHE that gnaws on my subconscious, maybe a little Pavlovian (just making up words now).

Interesting observation on the PLO field thinning faster than NLHE. Trying to figure out what might account for that. Possibly more people are willing to call a pre-flop raise when they see more possibilities (than holdem) in their hand. Also, more people (some very misguided) will also see more drawing possibilities post-flop, and before long they are pot committed. Then when their nut flush gets busted by a paired board on the river, they tilt. What do you think?