Q
quads
Rock Star
Silver Level
After reading an article Aliengenius directed us to read written by Jenifear, a writer for PokerFives.com on another thread, which discusses the ICM, (independent chip modeling) theory. I felt a need to discuss my feelings about the author’s recommendation.
First of all who is Jenifear? The site says “Jennifear is a proud Contributing Writer for Pocketfives.com and a Presto Award Winner”. I also see she wrote like 15 articles for the site and is a poker instructor. So, who is she? Why don’t these authors of articles teaching us how to win, using their recommended systems based on rules and theories, also post some proven facts from their own experiences using the same?
She stresses the importance of learning to respect your chip value when bubble play is on; of course this is always sound and obvious advice.
She mentions the chip leader has been pushing all-in nearly every hand since the action became four-handed fifteen hands ago. I can’t recall every running into that scenario. Which by the way if I did I would be thinking the Kill Phil theory, and would quickly adjust my play.
Regardless, allot of what she says of course makes sense, but all these articles with systems that are based on rules, and theories, always state something like Jenifear’s quote, (“Please note that these are general rules that work a majority of the time, but circumstances may exist that alter your optimal strategy”): So now you play by her rules and lose. You post what took place and then of course when the completed hand or hands are face up for everyone to see, 10 Monday night quarterbacks will tell you 10 different ways you should have played to win. This new and additional information only protects her rule and theory system by placing the hands into the “alternate circumstances” umbrella usually stated in every one of these articles.
Now there’s no doubt everyone including me, want to learn how to win a majority of the time. I personally read over 15 poker books, which in fact helped and improved my game. Yet, actual experiences were, and still are my ultimate learning aid. Online and live experiences are very much helpful for each other, but in many cases are isolated when comparing the two, with very different experiences that must be separated.
Understanding pot and hand odds, along with all the different styles of opponents, just too slightly touch on the challenge of a poker game is a mission in its self. Now let’s throw in another 100 or more different systems we read about based on rules and long term theories into this already complicated mix. Damn, I am going to have to start playing online with a computer that has a hard drive bigger then the CIA, in Washington. And I might as well just quit playing live, cause there’s no way my brain is going to be able to store not only the basic fundamentals of poker, but all these different theories along with the famous “alternate circumstances” clause.
Poker isn’t a game where anyone could guarantee a win. Even in the long run based on a blueprint of rules, theories, and of course alternate circumstances, (which will always exist with every hand that is played) that equal a system.
Just like handicapping a horse race, there are some many variables, like track surface, slow, fast, muddy, early-speed, closer’s, controlling the pace, luck, who’s peaking, and who’s not feeling to well, etc… Other then the complete stand-out (very rare) it is pretty hard to predict the outcome on a steady basis. Well the same goes for poker to be able to win on a consistent basis. And with the way online poker is heading, the goal of winning more then you lose online is getting even harder.
Anything we can pick up, even if it’s only one thing that will help our poker game become more experienced is always a good thing.
Bur since the poker boom and especially over the last four years, with all these poker magazines, websites, forums, books, etc… it seems like new systems and theories, are popping up every week.
Poker became a big business, and I think too many chefs are stirring the stew, for personal gain.
I wonder what the old time true proven poker champions like Doyle, and Harrington, read as they were climbing the ladder. The only system they followed was their own which developed from nothing more then cold personal experiences over a long period of time. I know online is speeding up that process today, but unless you are playing the same group of people day in and day out, (not) experience coupled with some brains, will prove to be the ultimate winning system.
Many players are making tons of money online. But many more are losing. Remember when someone wins $8,000,000.00 dollars in one tournament, $8,000,000.00 dollars plus was lost by other players.
First of all who is Jenifear? The site says “Jennifear is a proud Contributing Writer for Pocketfives.com and a Presto Award Winner”. I also see she wrote like 15 articles for the site and is a poker instructor. So, who is she? Why don’t these authors of articles teaching us how to win, using their recommended systems based on rules and theories, also post some proven facts from their own experiences using the same?
She stresses the importance of learning to respect your chip value when bubble play is on; of course this is always sound and obvious advice.
She mentions the chip leader has been pushing all-in nearly every hand since the action became four-handed fifteen hands ago. I can’t recall every running into that scenario. Which by the way if I did I would be thinking the Kill Phil theory, and would quickly adjust my play.
Regardless, allot of what she says of course makes sense, but all these articles with systems that are based on rules, and theories, always state something like Jenifear’s quote, (“Please note that these are general rules that work a majority of the time, but circumstances may exist that alter your optimal strategy”): So now you play by her rules and lose. You post what took place and then of course when the completed hand or hands are face up for everyone to see, 10 Monday night quarterbacks will tell you 10 different ways you should have played to win. This new and additional information only protects her rule and theory system by placing the hands into the “alternate circumstances” umbrella usually stated in every one of these articles.
Now there’s no doubt everyone including me, want to learn how to win a majority of the time. I personally read over 15 poker books, which in fact helped and improved my game. Yet, actual experiences were, and still are my ultimate learning aid. Online and live experiences are very much helpful for each other, but in many cases are isolated when comparing the two, with very different experiences that must be separated.
Understanding pot and hand odds, along with all the different styles of opponents, just too slightly touch on the challenge of a poker game is a mission in its self. Now let’s throw in another 100 or more different systems we read about based on rules and long term theories into this already complicated mix. Damn, I am going to have to start playing online with a computer that has a hard drive bigger then the CIA, in Washington. And I might as well just quit playing live, cause there’s no way my brain is going to be able to store not only the basic fundamentals of poker, but all these different theories along with the famous “alternate circumstances” clause.
Poker isn’t a game where anyone could guarantee a win. Even in the long run based on a blueprint of rules, theories, and of course alternate circumstances, (which will always exist with every hand that is played) that equal a system.
Just like handicapping a horse race, there are some many variables, like track surface, slow, fast, muddy, early-speed, closer’s, controlling the pace, luck, who’s peaking, and who’s not feeling to well, etc… Other then the complete stand-out (very rare) it is pretty hard to predict the outcome on a steady basis. Well the same goes for poker to be able to win on a consistent basis. And with the way online poker is heading, the goal of winning more then you lose online is getting even harder.
Anything we can pick up, even if it’s only one thing that will help our poker game become more experienced is always a good thing.
Bur since the poker boom and especially over the last four years, with all these poker magazines, websites, forums, books, etc… it seems like new systems and theories, are popping up every week.
Poker became a big business, and I think too many chefs are stirring the stew, for personal gain.
I wonder what the old time true proven poker champions like Doyle, and Harrington, read as they were climbing the ladder. The only system they followed was their own which developed from nothing more then cold personal experiences over a long period of time. I know online is speeding up that process today, but unless you are playing the same group of people day in and day out, (not) experience coupled with some brains, will prove to be the ultimate winning system.
Many players are making tons of money online. But many more are losing. Remember when someone wins $8,000,000.00 dollars in one tournament, $8,000,000.00 dollars plus was lost by other players.
