High Stakes Poker very loose

I know alot of you guys watch that show and I wanted to talk about how loose they play. My style is mainly tight aggressive and I always thought that was the safest way of making money ,although loose aggressive does work if you are very good. However , I see these pros raising with trash and 'cold calling' raises , which I believed to be one of the worst things to do in poker. Lets say that I am at a table and somebody from early position raised , I would fold KJ because I would be 'cold calling' when my hand is not that strong. Yes I know these are all pros and they are really good at reading people but they throwing big stacks like its pennies. I just thought these players would be a bit tighter and not play like Gus Hansen , all of them. It makes me think maybe I should loosen up a bit because I used to make more money when I first started playing and when I learned poker I became more tight and now I am not winning as much. I think I am better then alot of online players at reading situations so I just have to becareful and not play too many hands. This goes against what I have read in the few poker books I own but I also see alot of bad play online that maybe calling a raise with 98s is profitable when you hit your draw and get paid for it. What do you guys think about HSP and what I just said?

It shows that a lot of the time they are looking for good situations with high implied odds. Since the bet is still very small in relation to the stack sizes, these calls often make sense.

So then its ok to cold call just so you can very lucky and get paid of when you make a monster . In order for that to happen you first have to make your hand and your opponent has to have a real hand himself and also call you down if he doesnt read you correctly. But most times your opponent will miss with his two high cards and fold medium pairs so its very hard to pull that off . I hear what you are saying and maybe pros can play like this but do you guys think this strategy is good at our online games?

I was watching last night and Sammy Farha dominated the table by calling with any two cards. Everyone knew what he was doing, but, nobody bet big enough preflop to do anything about it.

If you are at a table that limps preflop allot, limping with any two cards is probably a +EV play. That is why preflop aggression with premium cards is so important. Adjusting to the table is a must.

Can someone with Pokerstove run a scenario with 27o and 3 limpers.

I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that they know each other. Player x knows that player y will respect his reraise under most circumstnces, so player x doesn't generally run the risk that we, general populace poker players do.

We have to deal with totally unknown players for the most part.

You might also notice that when they start raising with trash, the field thins greatly. How seldom that happens for us. You can probably remember a dozen times where you have gotten that respect and were able to do anything you wanted for a few hands at least. Also remember that the table where that happened was probably stable for several if not many orbits.

New term, Stable Table. definition. in tournement play a table that neither looses, exchanges or gains players for more than several orbits.

i love watching highstakes... and yeah i notice that they do play REALLY loose....i think they play to loose.... they throw around thousands like its pocket change...but yea.... comcast moved GSN to digital cable and we have basic cable... which sucks.... o well

You have to factor in the fact that most of those people have so much experience and have played each other many times. There is a whole lot more to winning poker than just cards. Taking into consideration implied odds, experience against certain opponents, experience, pot odds, position, tilt factor, tells, a decision to move on a certain hand after presenting a tight image for an hour or so (knowing you are sitting with observant players not all in anytime you can hope to be online spares) by design no matter what two cards you are dealt, etc etc etc.

The latest season was flushed with a lot of new moneyed aggressive players wanting to make a bigger name for themselves as well. The Chans,Negreanus,Greensteins,Brunsons,Elezras and so on have been raking huge money for decades. The Booths,Antonius,Williams, and so on are products of the latest boom. They are outstanding players and some every bit as good if not better than the old veterans. They are still the new face and are taking advantage of their opportunities in the spotlight so the play will seem a little loose to most viewers.

John D'agostino for example was clearly there to prove his worth. He didn't want to be shown up or outplayed and wanted to show he wasn't just a tournament phenom. He found himself in a couple bad situations and tossed a few chips he clearly had no intention of losing. Jamie Gold on the other hand was very casual about the game and was motivated more by playing at that table than worried about whether or not he lost. Victor Ramdin is just loose.

dj11 said:

I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that they know each other. Player x knows that player y will respect his reraise under most circumstnces, so player x doesn't generally run the risk that we, general populace poker players do.

We have to deal with totally unknown players for the most part.

You might also notice that when they start raising with trash, the field thins greatly. How seldom that happens for us. You can probably remember a dozen times where you have gotten that respect and were able to do anything you wanted for a few hands at least. Also remember that the table where that happened was probably stable for several if not many orbits.

New term, Stable Table. definition. in tournement play a table that neither looses, exchanges or gains players for more than several orbits.

Click to expand...

you bring up some good points and it makes a bit more sense only wish I could read people like that

MrFeebles said:

That is how it gos for everyone. You will continue on your downward slide for as long as you play for real money online. You'll see. Everyone does. No one wins long term online. If you must, play for pennies online. Never play for serious money online.

Click to expand...

So what happens to the money you lose. Somebody has to win it. And if they lose somebody has to win that.

I better stop here, but, that is a ridiculous statement.

It is possible that you are not winning as much right now. I guarantee the swings are a whole lot less now though. Poker is not about doubling your bankroll over night. Build our bankroll safely (slowly) and when the time is right up your stakes. If you haven't read them yet, there are some great articles on bankroll management in the articles section of this sight.

Of course no one wins in online poker that is why i have cashed out 2k this yr and only deposited 50 for my current roll ihavent won no i am a loser

In a way I agree.

MrFeebles said:

It sounds like you have been studying about LIMIT holdem. Sometimes you make plays in No Limit that you would never even think of making in fixed limit. That explains part of it. Also,remember that what you see on TV is heavily edited. You're not seeing everything in a context that you would have if you were there seeing it all. As far as your results online(doing less well than you were at first even though you are a better player now). That is how it gos for everyone. You will continue on your downward slide for as long as you play for real money online. You'll see. Everyone does. No one wins long term online. If you must, play for pennies online. Never play for serious money online.

Click to expand...

I struggle to explain this one, but I`ll try again. If you play properly u play by the odds, etc. However, this is based on other peoples play. So, if u have some clown pushing all in with a flush draw - probably 100 times the bb in a MTT, and u r sitting with a set, what do u do???
This is made worse by the fact the guy to act after u is a maniac that will call the slightest draw and he has more chips than u.

So your odds. playing `properly`, would be about 5:1 fav. However, this reduces massivley with the fact that your set is middle set and there is an ace on the deck, meaning u know the nutter could be sitting with 2 pair, or even worse, top set.

It could be that I simply don`t understand the game - could it be that all u need to do is raise raise raise and u will get lucky when u catch a monster hand or the odd time u have a hand no one believes u???

I`m playing in a $2/4 limit game now. I play tight. I get pocket K`s, raise the max. I lose on the river to a guy catching a flop of 10JQ4 - he hit straight with AK - I had him dominated. Next hand I play in the big blind QJspades. Flop 89J. I raise, am called. 7 next. I raise, called (I`m worried about straight) last card 2. I check, he checks and shows down J9=2 pair. Preflop had him dominated.
I then am on button with 22. The pot is raised 2 bets by UTG but 6 callers so I call. Catch trips and win pot.

Then QQ, raise to max, no overcards, catch trips on river. Win pot.

So my point??? I think u need to concentrate on every hand. U can`t miss out on an implied odds opportunity. Also, from time to time, u need to take a calculated risk/ gamble. That is what these guys do and what Gus Hansen does. What they have over me, however, is they play position so much better, have lots more experience and have a much better read on players than I do

High Stakes Poker isn't nearly as edited as much as wsop. I love HSP. I haven't gotten to watch all the episodes, but they 3 on the other night and I watched them.

Some guys play loose - but if you watch, they fire at a pot and are called...now there is enough in the pot to risk firing again if they just can't put their opp on a hand. Then when they are called, you'll see them just check on the river and a showdown. Watched that several times the other night. The other guy who has the hand, doesn't have a great hand thus the check on the river (avoiding a trap).

Also, when you have Daniel (who bought in for a mil) and the blinds are low (relative), he'll call blind w/ any 2 and will call a 2X - 3X raise w/ almost any 2. But the Lakers Owner only bought in for a 100K so he was a little tighter. Lost it all and had to borrow 50K more from Daniel. Point - for the stakes (blinds) they can play looser.

If I buy into a .05/.10 table, I'll limp with almost any 2 (24o, 72s/o, and some other crap hands I'll let go). Once I limp, if somene raises to say .30 and everyone calls, that's a lot of money (relative) in the pot and I'm getting odds to draw to anything. So I'll chip in my other .20 with almost any 2...and let it go after flop if I don't hit. If it's a bad flop and I don' think anyone hit and I think I can steal it, I'll fire. If I think I was called with a drawing hand, I may fire again on turn. So it looks like a loose play, and maybe it is...but if he calls the turn, he has something and I'll just check the river and see what happens.

I also like when they run it twice (whole board or turn and river). Makes it interesting. That's how you know for these rich guys, it's not all about money. 2 pair vs top pair - and they agreed to run it twice. If you have the best hand, why would you agree to this? Cuz it's not all about money. Someone had a pair and someone had 2 pair. They agreed to run the turn & river twice...first hand the 2 pair held up. The second run, the pair hit a set on turn - but the 2 pair hit a FH on river. So the pair lost both hands and lost pot. Def a change of pace.