Inside the mind of a donk poker player

[RAFC24]

Hahahha that was really funny it realy made me laugh. I once did this all in all in all in in a 12000 player freeroll and i became chip leader deep by a mile!! Just by shoving repeatedly and losing a few, winning a big one even when I was behind.

Really ul never lose more than 4/5 even with the worst of it like 72 against ace ace so imagine you do this with marginal hodings but better than 72? i.e A4, Q5, 96 and u can take like 10-12 losses before you have to play smart. Add to that a lot of players wont call u especially the average stacks because they are putting their hard fought tournament life on the line in a marginal situation where they dont know where theyr at. Plus, deep, your picking up lots of blinds and antes like that.

But a really fun video

 

[toned14]

Is Obrestad a donk for playing and winning an mtt on PS without ever looking at her cards?

She is not, just shows you how much position matters, tho she did look once on one pivotal decision, tho remember its a claim tho i don't doubt she could pull this off, has anyone else tried this??

 

[atlantafalcons0]

LMAO - nobody can win a MTT on PS without looking at their cards.

That's just stupid. I'm sure she looked at the bet slider which is right next to the cards.

 

[salim271]

It's funny you gotta admit. But when it happens to you it sucks. That guy was such a luck-box. Considering the way he was playing, I would only call him with monster or premium hands.. such as KK, AA, QQ. S*** happens though.

You dont need them, I'm calling him down with 99+ hes playing everything. The hands hes hitting arent pairs, he was catching straights and trips, it doesnt matter if you have AA or 99 in that situation.

 

[poker d player]

Why would anyone want to get into the mind of a Donk ?? I try to watch and get into the mind(s) of the best players ... doyle, ellie, phil (yeah the one everyone hates) and even sammy and durr .. for agressive play ... you get the idea ... these are the minds I want to tap into... It's great that we can watch poker after dark, high stakes poker and other shows that show their hole cards and lets is learn the strategies and styles of these very talented players Gota love technology advancement

 

[toned14]

LMAO - nobody can win a MTT on PS without looking at their cards.

That's just stupid. I'm sure she looked at the bet slider which is right next to the cards.

It was actually a 180 person SnG, I'd say thats a lot more feasible...

 

[Zorba]

LMAO - nobody can win a MTT on PS without looking at their cards.

That's just stupid. I'm sure she looked at the bet slider which is right next to the cards.

LMAO.

 

[Pothole]

LMAO - nobody can win a MTT on PS without looking at their cards.

That's just stupid. I'm sure she looked at the bet slider which is right next to the cards.

I see you don't have to play cards to be a donk.

 

[Neoblast]

Bah, incredibly lucky...
Seriously...

I have never ever been that lucky even with great hands, not shit like that.

 

[cobbie1966]

no wonder i dont win in this game with people like that playin that way...here we go i got so much money,we will just go allin every hand,,just plain idiotic! in my oppion,if thats the way people play here,i wont be here long...cobbie

 

[sportserh]

wow, he must be the luckiest donk ever. He seems to bust every good hand at the table. I mean 6,5 vs. a,k vs. 7's and he wins? Why does full tilt always seem to reward the donks...

 

[dmorris68]

LMAO - nobody can win a MTT on PS without looking at their cards.

That's just stupid. I'm sure she looked at the bet slider which is right next to the cards.

It did happen, and was written up on several sites on the net. It was an experiment to demonstrate the power of position, and she's not the only one who has done or suggested such things.

Arnold Snyder, author of the tournament books I'm reading now (Poker Tournament Formula, vols I & II) takes a unique rock-paper-scissors approach to fast MTT strategy. Without getting into too much detail, scissors equate to position, and cards equate to paper, and scissors beats paper. In that section of the book he demonstrates how much more important position can be than cards, by suggesting a basic position strategy. To drive the point home, he directs you to buy-in to a small MTT, stick a post-it or piece of paper over your hole cards, and play completely blind to your cards -- using only your position and the betting action in front of you to determine your decisions based on a simple chart. He claims that if you strictly adhere to the strategy, you will cash or at least go deep a surprising percent of the time. I haven't tried it yet, but I have played around with using his position strategy (while also paying attention to my cards), and it was actually quite effective against micro players. Better players would likely figure out what you're doing pretty quickly and exploit you, but regardless it's an interesting experiment that really does emphasize just how important position is. I would certainly consider it a valuable lesson for beginning players, anyway, and I think that's the point Annette was making.

 

[Bovinity]

I'm not entirely sure how that'd work at all...yeah, you can play based just on position and betting action, but then what? Post-flop play would be wonky as hell, and if you have any aggressive or stubborn players at the table, you're pretty much in trouble every time someone bets.

Also, whenever someone says, "It was effective against micro players." I'm pretty skeptical...that usually means, "If you're lucky enough." or something similar. In fact, I'd think a blind strategy would be even worse against micro players because they're the ones that will ignore your position, ignore your raises and just shove over you and force you go to showdowns blind.

Did Oberstad win an MTT that way? I guess. This guy here won a SNG by shoving all-in every hand, too. That doesn't make it a smart strategy, either.

 

[dmorris68]

Nobody's claiming it's a smart strategy, not even the author I mentioned. He's not saying "play all of your MTTs like this," he's saying that if you have any doubts or underestimations of the importance of position, this strategy can cure you of that oversight.

Post-flop play is played by a chart of pre-determined actions, just like pre-flop play. You will sometimes get called down by a better hand, but you'll often fold out the villain(s) or get called down by worse. As a rule you're never going all-in (well, not until you're on life support), so your risk is relatively small when the blinds are small and stacks are deep. It works well enough that you'll generally have amassed a pretty large stack by the time you do get called down to the river and lose.

The reason I said it's best against micro or low-limit players is because the majority of them will play consistently enough that you can read them. Whether that's consistently bad or consistently mediocre or whatever, they tend to not change gears. Better players not only change gears and are harder to read, but they're more likely to pick up on what you're doing and exploit you back, hence the distinction. That's not to say there aren't very good micro/low stakes players, they're just a very small minority.

I don't want to fully reproduce Snyder's basic position strategy here as it might not be appropriate, but the books are inexpensive and well-reviewed. I've enjoyed the first one, and look forward to the advanced strategies in Vol II. It's definitely a different take on MTTs than HoH, and in fact while he credits HoH with a lot of good strategy, he disagrees on a point or two. Bottom line is it's a fresh approach to the usual boilerplate tourney strategies I'm used to reading. I can highly recommend them if for nothing else than a different way of looking at MTTs.

 

[Bovinity]

I said that wrong, I guess. I wasn't trying to say that someone said it was a "smart strategy". I just didn't like the idea that the Obestrad thing "proved" anything anymore than this video "proved" anything about that strategy.