re: Poker & Why im not posting as much as usual.
Originally Posted by dakota-xx
So I guess advising a player like me on the correct play - AND getting me to understand it becomes increasingly difficult. Or getting me to understand that there is more than one answer and how to decide which to apply. And realizing that the answer for me and the answer for you are completely different.
A tiny bit this and thanks for the credit, but it's more to do with situations that arise in a really specific context with lots of information available that goes beyond the hand itself or preflop %ages and PT stats.
It's the difference between saying "you should adjust your game to suit the table, your stack and the point in the tourney" and interpreting this to mean play looser when it's tight and tight when it's loose and then taking it a step further and being able to refine that to exploit the tiny edges that all add up by folding 99 unopened one hand late in a tourney and playing it the next because something has changed in the interim that makes it right to do so.
In both cases it could easily be correct to call, but something about context makes a subtle but important difference (change in size of stacks, loose/tightness of the blinds, suckout on the previous hand and a dozen other things).
It's the thing that helps you let go of KK on a fairly benign low flop due to the action and then call an all in with AJ on a J high flop.
For me it's been about playing a lot more aggressively and being able to do this because I've been able to structure hands and pots in such a way as I avoid overcommitment when I'm behind. This means betting a lot more on hands which previously I would have let go and making more definitive decisions on the strength of someones hand based on their betting in order to make strong plays (or laydowns) in mid-late tourneys.
What underpins this though is a really strong understanding of the fundementals of the game which in the case of hand histories and analysis is usually going to provide a single "best" answer. This is because the HH is largely devoid is context so the default "standard" play is going to be the recommendation.
Long post already, but just to finish, Mrs Irexes often watches me play tournies and while she's doesn't comment on a hand while it's in play I often narrate my thoughts.
Quite often I'll watch someone for hours at my table and have described to her what they are doing, what their weakness is and that I am waiting for a particular situation to arise so I can bust them or double up. This might be something like picking up a strong hand in the blinds where I can push with KK and generate a call from an early position raise with A6s. In pure terms this would be a poor play and a different strategy might bring better EV, however the context dictates a different play.
Often my big moves in tournies are things like this, or the rarer big bluff or draw chased because of the implied odds despite it not being the "best" move if the hand were taken in isolation. I also pick up a lot of smaller pots by picking on people in spite of rather than because of the cards. Mrs Irexes and I will high five and agree it was the right hand and play at the right time.
Anyway I'm rambling, but the jist is that the fundementals remain pretty much unchanged and the bits that seem to keep evolving become harder to explain in the context of a forum which can make a HH answer seem shallow and lacking the depth of a "real" situation.