Conventional vs Unconventional poker

TOM DWAN-unconventional
PHIL IVEY-unconventional
LEX VELDHUIS-unconventional to name a few.
These guys have smthng in common. they play nothing like we talk about here. when we describe EV+ moves etc etc.they reraise with 35 suited and all that good yummy stuff. yet they r pros and most of us are not. So WHY if we want to get good at the game and be considered the best should we follow the rules of conventional poker such as look at stats,follow starting hand charts and all that?
arent those rules like guidelines for noobs? and in order to become the best of the best IMO you must be able to customise those standard rules and be able to play good postflop regardelss of what your holding.?
cause if everyone is doing exactly the same thing,how would it be possible for someone to stand out from the masses?
what im saying is that i dont like following a certain system when playing poker but rather becoming creative in each and every single new hand i come across. thats one of the reasons that i dont like multitabling. you cannot put 100% of yoursef into each table . and at the end of the day following guidelines like a robot is not a good idea. we are humans and creativity is what can make the difference from a good player and a GREAT player.
thats how i see it. just sharing my thought to my fellow CC's.

There is a guideline for becoming better at everything and when you don't have the higher level knowledge/skill capacity/ability(you don't), you can't play in the same way that someone that does.

An example would be in middle school and high school basketball, defense is stressed constantly, get back on defense as fast as you can. College ball worries a little less on defense, and you don't see a fraction of it in the pros. This is because as you become better and better, you are dropping some things that are more medial(I am not saying defense in basketball is medial, I hate that they don't play it) because you have a much better understanding of the game.

Also keep in mind that they are not playing every hand like that. If you're taking this from one of the shows, realize that they are not showing hand for hand, they are showing the hands that stick out. So Dwan may have not played a hand for 5 hands before he got that 35s, and he has position, and the guy in the BB is weak, etc... There is a lot of thinking behind every one of those pro's moves, it isn't just, "OK, I look down at my cards and I don't really care, I'm playing it regardless of what's going on at the table, what history has been, blah blah"

I agree, it's unconventional, but that's just because they are on such a higher level of thinking and reacting that it is appropriate for THEM, not you.

Well first of all, as Hamm said, you're seeing a very selective portion of hands played, and the ones typically picked for television because of the "drama" of the play.

Next, you're talking about the top 1% (or less) of the players. For the other 99% of us, starting with the fundamentals and putting in the hours applying them allows us to gain enough experience to know when unconventional moves can work, but trying before you're to that point is typically disastrous.

It's like any other skill-based endeavor, be it golf or baseball or billiards. A lot of top pro golfers have unconventional techniques that you'd never try to teach someone new to the game. Same goes for billiards, a lot of top pros have unconventional strokes that would totally screw up a beginner trying to imitate them. These guys have put in years and years of practice to overcome the flaws in technique.

Top players also, more often than not, just have a lot of natural talent and can use it to overcome those flaws that the rest of us cannot.

I must admit that I somewhat agree with OP. While ABC poker may work for micros, it probably won't serve you very well amongst high level players. Your moves will be predictable. Playing ultra tight and waiting for premium hands may not lose you too many pots, but you'll have a hard time getting any value out of those monster hands when you do hit them.

I've stated more than once, that the players that I have the most trouble with are the unorthodox ones. You might call them donkeys. Suppose a flop comes rainbow rags. We can easily assume that flop would miss a tight player. But what about that unorthodox player that tends to play hands that are well out of your normal range? Can you be sure that board didn't hit him? I say donkey isn't what you play, it's how you play it.

Of course play varies greatly from the micros to the nosebleeds. And what works at one level, may not work at the other. To me the biggest difference seems to be aggression. For example, at a higher level you're likely to see a lot less limping, a lot more raising and 3-betting. More hands will be played heads up between two players as opposed to half of the table trying to limp in and see the whole board before committing any chips to the pot. We all know that aggression can often win a pot for a player on a board that doesn't hit either player. An aggressive bet may cause a player to fold the best hand, or push a player off of a draw. Of course at lower stakes, a player might be less willing lay down a draw or small pair which may be why a lot of players don't bother using simple aggression to take pots down at this level. When chasing that same draw or holding on to that small pair might cost a player several thousand dollars, they might be more willing to get away from it.

IntenseHeat said:

I must admit that I somewhat agree with OP. While ABC poker may work for micros, it probably won't serve you very well amongst high level players. Your moves will be predictable.

Click to expand...

OP doesn't understand this though.

absoluthamm said:

There is a guideline for becoming better at everything and when you don't have the higher level knowledge/skill capacity/ability(you don't), you can't play in the same way that someone that does.

An example would be in middle school and high school basketball, defense is stressed constantly, get back on defense as fast as you can. College ball worries a little less on defense, and you don't see a fraction of it in the pros. This is because as you become better and better, you are dropping some things that are more medial(I am not saying defense in basketball is medial, I hate that they don't play it) because you have a much better understanding of the game.

Also keep in mind that they are not playing every hand like that. If you're taking this from one of the shows, realize that they are not showing hand for hand, they are showing the hands that stick out. So Dwan may have not played a hand for 5 hands before he got that 35s, and he has position, and the guy in the BB is weak, etc... There is a lot of thinking behind every one of those pro's moves, it isn't just, "OK, I look down at my cards and I don't really care, I'm playing it regardless of what's going on at the table, what history has been, blah blah"

I agree, it's unconventional, but that's just because they are on such a higher level of thinking and reacting that it is appropriate for THEM, not you.

Click to expand...

i think we are kind of saying the same thing. yea sure i agree with what your saying. i just sometimes see alot of people here telling someone their opinion about whether it was a good fold or not(which is totally acceptable and good for them) but i dont think that there is ever a right and wrong play in absolute terms for any hand. i think that any different person can chose to play the hand anyway that they see fit,because dont forget its the dynamics of two people that bring the outcome,not the wholecards themselves.
example being if me and you are dealt the exact same hands and play against each other with 1k each in front of us,im sure the total pot at the end of the hand will not be identical to any other two people playing the same hands under the same circumstances.
to make along story short ,im saying that the rules of poker should be and im sure are being maneuvered by everyone according to their playing style and the more moves you can make the better the outcome may be.

OMGITSOVER9K said:

OP doesn't understand this though.

Click to expand...

i dont understand this? which thread are you reading?

dmorris68 said:

Well first of all, as Hamm said, you're seeing a very selective portion of hands played, and the ones typically picked for television because of the "drama" of the play.

Next, you're talking about the top 1% (or less) of the players. For the other 99% of us, starting with the fundamentals and putting in the hours applying them allows us to gain enough experience to know when unconventional moves can work, but trying before you're to that point is typically disastrous.

It's like any other skill-based endeavor, be it golf or baseball or billiards. A lot of top pro golfers have unconventional techniques that you'd never try to teach someone new to the game. Same goes for billiards, a lot of top pros have unconventional strokes that would totally screw up a beginner trying to imitate them. These guys have put in years and years of practice to overcome the flaws in technique.

Top players also, more often than not, just have a lot of natural talent and can use it to overcome those flaws that the rest of us cannot.

Click to expand...

couldnt agree with you more and love the example with the top pro golfers and billiards.was really good example. and yea i agree with you here.what you have written here is exactly what im trying to say. you pretty much sumed it up. the thing is to be able to make those "extra" moves that only the pros would in any given scenario.whether that be shoving or even folding. its the ability to make those moves that must be mastered and those moves are the ones that make the difference. so ABC poker must be avoided after apoint cause it will get you nowhere.

right.

as explained before, you see people 3/4/5/ betting suited connectors etc on tv because the editor mediated it to be that way.. most of the pots played on High Stakes Poker etc are raise call cbet fold but no-one wants to see that.

Dwan, Ivey, Antonius etc can do this because of their rep and the fact they are the best of their kind. (also they play 300bb+ deep on some shows)

we however, are not.

also when these people are playing each other, poker becomes more about levelling and taking non standard lines with hands in order to get calls or folds instead of playing straight forward.

again, this is only applicable in that situation since when we play most of the time its against droolers/bad regs.

the simple fact is, to be the best player is to adapt to your surrounding (your table) and play whichever way gets you the most money.. so until you're playing 1knl+ ABC poker is the way to play the best.

just because the best can play 35s profitably IP doesn't mean you can, or should attempt to.

and also ,something i may have left out.you guys are right,the tv show does only show the highlights so im sure they dont always play like that but i just used those as examples cause they hit the nail on the head regarding the message im trying to send to the readers of this thread.

OMGITSOVER9K said:

right.

as explained before, you see people 3/4/5/ betting suited connectors etc on tv because the editor mediated it to be that way.. most of the pots played on High Stakes Poker etc are raise call cbet fold but no-one wants to see that.

Dwan, Ivey, Antonius etc can do this because of their rep and the fact they are the best of their kind. (also they play 300bb+ deep on some shows)

we however, are not.

also when these people are playing each other, poker becomes more about levelling and taking non standard lines with hands in order to get calls or folds instead of playing straight forward.

again, this is only applicable in that situation since when we play most of the time its against droolers/bad regs.

the simple fact is, to be the best player is to adapt to your surrounding (your table) and play whichever way gets you the most money.. so until you're playing 1knl+ ABC poker is the way to play the best.

just because the best can play 35s profitably IP doesn't mean you can, or should attempt to.

Click to expand...

makes perfect sense to me man.i agree with everything you said except for only one thing. I am not playing at the 1KNL but im not playing at the 2$NL either.
I M O, abc poker doesnt work at all. but that is personally for me. im sure it might work for others. it might be break even or even alil profitable in the super micros but at 50NL and above you must begin to show signs of creativity.thats all im trying to say. ty for posting by the way.i love hearing opinions about this. really good feedback.

I agree with pretty much everything that was said.... but i would like to add that these pro's can execute that mainly because they have already established that they usually play ABC poker which makes the 34s dangerous when others are expecting that you threw that away.:icon_chee

You know a good poker player contantly changes his game taking it from the abc's to the abnormal ,you must evolve to become a good player .Knowing what to do with the knowlegde only helps if you see situations and put it forth. Changing your game from 1 to the other and doing so in the right situation is what makes you stand apart from the others.

I wouldn't say ABC is break even at the micros. I'm up 25 BI's at 2nl this last week and I play the most basic poker imaginable. I expect this should work up to 10nl with slightly less BB/100 winrates, but all the same it is in no way some dumbed down strategy that will barely show profit. So as much as I enjoy watching creative and innovative plays on TV they just aren't applicable to the context(s) that I play in. Same goes for the majority of the poker population I would think.

It will always be the typo of doing things the same over and over again or choosing to break the streak and do something different.

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Einstein

I can tell you that you have to have a style of yours and to slightly or majorly adjust it to the table. Each hand is different, each tournament is different. Poker is based on %/odds but it's still gambling on the short term, short term which creates the long term.

Any piece of poker advice begins with, "It depends"; if the words aren't actually written it is the responsibility of the reader to mentally insert them. After that, advice can then be, well, it depends.

One thing I can say about trying to play unconventional at the micros, I tried it and went on a 55BI downswing.

Only thing that can get you into more trouble is playing drunk.

I actually combined the two. Amusing, but not profitable.

vinylspiros said:

TOM DWAN-unconventional
PHIL IVEY-unconventional
LEX VELDHUIS-unconventional to name a few.
These guys have smthng in common. they play nothing like we talk about here. when we describe EV+ moves etc etc.they reraise with 35 suited and all that good yummy stuff. yet they r pros and most of us are not. So WHY if we want to get good at the game and be considered the best should we follow the rules of conventional poker such as look at stats,follow starting hand charts and all that?
arent those rules like guidelines for noobs? and in order to become the best of the best IMO you must be able to customise those standard rules and be able to play good postflop regardelss of what your holding.?
cause if everyone is doing exactly the same thing,how would it be possible for someone to stand out from the masses?
what im saying is that i dont like following a certain system when playing poker but rather becoming creative in each and every single new hand i come across. thats one of the reasons that i dont like multitabling. you cannot put 100% of yoursef into each table . and at the end of the day following guidelines like a robot is not a good idea. we are humans and creativity is what can make the difference from a good player and a GREAT player.
thats how i see it. just sharing my thought to my fellow CC's.

Click to expand...

It's a good point but two things to consider...
1) The players you listed (and so many more) have a problem we do not encounter. They can't really play by the book when as many times as not they are playing someone who wrote the book
2) You might be grossly over estimating the drive and initative of the average player to read more than one book on poker. So for the most part Noob/ABC poker is often the most profitable style for us.
3) In order to be the best of the best you have to play the best of the best. I don't think you see Dwan or Ivey playing the same game in a CC freeroll. They will adjust.
And this brings to mind the ongoing problem we have of interpreting the guys who write the books. Is that information for playing the "best of the best" or is it for the Friday night poker game at the pub? A lot of times they do not let us know.
But again, your point is very worthy discussion material. I look forward to more on this line.

vinylspiros said:

but i dont think that there is ever a right and wrong play in absolute terms for any hand. i think that any different person can chose to play the hand anyway that they see fit,.

Click to expand...

Oh dude - huge leak thinking like this. More times than not there is a "right" or corrrect play. That is the beginning of playing good poker. Can you deviate from that? Sure, and those are the plays that will make the final cut for TV.

ABC poker, as learned thru most forums, and a goodly number of books, will get you to the point where you are not losing money. So in general, the mastery of ABC poker should allow you to be profitable.

its the abcDEFGHI part of poker that the pro's have graduated to. :icon_chee

vinylspiros said:

and also ,something i may have left out.you guys are right,the tv show does only show the highlights so im sure they dont always play like that but i just used those as examples cause they hit the nail on the head regarding the message im trying to send to the readers of this thread.

Click to expand...

So your message is ABC poker sucks and we shouldn't be playing it (if we want to get good) - do I have this right?

MediaBLITZ said:

So your message is ABC poker sucks and we shouldn't be playing it (if we want to get good) - do I have this right?

Click to expand...

no and yes. ABC poker is very predictable and highly easy to manipulate. some people will fold AJ on the button if the raiser is from under the gun and not even consider reraising with 35 suited from the button. I cant tell you how many times ive taken pots down from guys i know had aces just cause i floated and used anything the board could give me to my advantage. Floating (with air) is not a part of ABC poker and thats the kind of move that will get u an entire buy in in one hand many times. all im saying is i see alot of people saying that the move is right or the move is wrong. well you cant win them all now can you. you can not stand out and be the best unless you love any hand you see. any hand i get looks like aces to me unless i feel my opponent hit the nuts! the thing is not to lose too much . i always think of 20% of my stack as bluffing money. all im talking about is creativity.my sessions personally are like watching a super donk winning all the time. a nit would think im a totol amature and a lag would think im a maniac but,its all a show.its like waving a gun around but never pulling the trigger unless your sure you wont get caught.

MediaBLITZ said:

So your message is ABC poker sucks and we shouldn't be playing it (if we want to get good) - do I have this right?

Click to expand...

there is no exact message to be honest,its more of a personal opinion . i question ABC poker that's all. i use it and have mastered it of course.i just think its very very predictable and im trying to send out a message to learners that people bluff WAY MORE THAN THEY COULD EVER IMAGINE. so keep your eyes open.

some people get a fix from going to the movies,some from hanging out with their girfriends or friends. i get a fix from stealing pots with total air. thats what kind of a guy i am. thats why i think like this. i know that my opponent knows that when he raises me from under the gun that if i reraise from the BB i gotta have smthng.(which i might not). and when he calls that reraise and i min bet the flop and he just calls,i know 80% of the time that he will fold to a 50% bet on the turn regardless of what he has. ONLY because the reraise preflop has creeped him out.
this is one of endless examples. and an example thats not taught in any book and i DO NOT ADVISE any amature to try. and of course does not work all the time. but works most of the time.

vinylspiros said:

there is no exact message to be honest,its more of a personal opinion . i question ABC poker that's all. i use it and have mastered it of course.i just think its very very predictable and im trying to send out a message to learners that people bluff WAY MORE THAN THEY COULD EVER IMAGINE. so keep your eyes open.

Click to expand...

Yes, bad players bluff way too much. That's largely what makes them bad players. And how do you combat that? With ABC poker. Fancy pants plays against unsophisticated opponents is the quickest road to ruin.

What I question is you suggesting to those that are learning to not put stock in ABC poker. That's a huge disservice to the new player and I would urge them NOT to listen to this advice.

You say you've "mastered" ABC poker, but the stakes I think you're playing and the way you express yourself lead me to question that as well. Care to post some results so we (and these learning players) can better judge that you're actually in a position of mastery to be providing this type of advice that flies in the face of all established training precedent?