No One Way to play Poker

[Jay R]

I’ve watched & played lots of famous pros play. And one thing is they all bluff, they all are a bit sick, they look at spots a bit differently than a straight logical proposition.
I thought Phil Helmuth was the most logical player out there until I saw him play a losing hand against Tom Dwan. It wasn’t one on one but the betting came down to these two.
Logic vs crazy bettor. Phil vs Tom. At least you would think so. But this hand Phil wouldn’t let go. He had a pair of 3’s versus 3- 10’s. Any novice could see fold.. but he thought about it for 5 minutes—called & lost $100,000 hand. Did he think Lucky Tom was bluffing-/ must have. But I could not believe Tom keeps raising & Phil keeps calling w) nothing. So I guess it proves when you play a loose cannon like Tom don’t try to guess his cards. Most poker pros are sick, compulsive bettors.. but use that to your advantage to trap them

 

[vittopio]

Poker is a very complex multi-faceted game! It is not necessary to immediately record a player in fish, maybe he has a completely different level of thinking?

 

[hunterws]

I bet he was thinking of calling the possible bluff ... but have at least a pair when you do that, heh.

 

[infonazar]

Fortunately, I don't play poker with professionals, and I don't need to come up with anything. Most of my opponents are mediocre players with basic skills.

 

[AceOfJax]

NOT all pros bluff. Some only play the best starting hands and play on odds alone. They VERY rarely bluff. These pros make a consistent meager living but never are able to become the huge winning players that players who bluff are.

 

[Sivraj]

Always be yourself in the game of poker can nobody be you but you.

 

[Zapahlohotrona]

As long as you trap him, he will take your stack with bluffs and semi-bluffs. They have a different level of thinking. You will not understand this.

 

[NWPatriot]

When I watch these guys play for $50,000 buyins and they are shoving all-in with a mediocre pair, I am always a bit surprised myself. When I think I understand the game, and then I see the pros risking it all for 52% equity, I learn that I don't really understand it at all. A bet or a bluff is one thing, but it is the all-ins that surprise me.

I suppose that is why I am not a pro.

Good luck and God bless.

 

[Kenzie 96]

I’ve watched & played lots of famous pros play. And one thing is they all bluff, they all are a bit sick, they look at spots a bit differently than a straight logical proposition.
I thought Phil Helmuth was the most logical player out there until I saw him play a losing hand against Tom Dwan. It wasn’t one on one but the betting came down to these two.
Logic vs crazy bettor. Phil vs Tom. At least you would think so. But this hand Phil wouldn’t let go. He had a pair of 3’s versus 3- 10’s. Any novice could see fold.. but he thought about it for 5 minutes—called & lost $100,000 hand. Did he think Lucky Tom was bluffing-/ must have. But I could not believe Tom keeps raising & Phil keeps calling w) nothing. So I guess it proves when you play a loose cannon like Tom don’t try to guess his cards. Most poker pros are sick, compulsive bettors.. but use that to your advantage to trap them

I played the little league baseball, albeit poorly, when I was a kid & after high school I played a couple of years of beer league slow pitch softball, again poorly.
The world series is coming up so if you need the play of any of the participants during the series evaluated feel free to give me a holler & I with my vast experience & understanding of the game will splain things to you.

 

[Poker Orifice]

I played the little league baseball, albeit poorly, when I was a kid & after high school I played a couple of years of beer league slow pitch softball, again poorly.
The world series is coming up so if you need the play of any of the participants during the series evaluated feel free to give me a holler & I with my vast experience & understanding of the game will splain things to you.

I'll be takin' you up on this sir!

Is it true that ALL baseball pros are actually beer-drinkin' lazy slobs and only chose baseball because you don't really need to be in very good shape to play it professionally? This one guy told me this once so I figure it's gotta be 100% accurate.

 

[Kenzie 96]

I'll be takin' you up on this sir!

Is it true that ALL baseball pros are actually beer-drinkin' lazy slobs and only chose baseball because you don't really need to be in very good shape to play it professionally? This one guy told me this once so I figure it's gotta be 100% accurate.

Well Babe Ruth did dominate the sport for a couple of decades & from the pictures I have seen & what I have read he does seem to fit your description. I can't prove the above as the Babe was before my time & newspapers & the press in general were about as accurate then as now. You ever get a chance to see him play or watch him on the radio when you were a pup?

 

[Phoenix Wright]

There is no single poker "strategy" or "playstyle" it seems, but ALL the top pros seem to share a few elements in common which contribute to them winning often and being successful.

For example, all pros utilize some element of aggression (tighter players like Hellmuth with raises and re-raises and looser players like Ivey with battling for basically every pot). There is no "absolute" it seems to win at poker, but a few key ingredients can be found is every pro poker game

 

[Phoenix Wright]

I bet he was thinking of calling the possible bluff ... but have at least a pair when you do that, heh.

Most likely yes. Additionally, the Hellmuth vs Dwan game was a Heads-up match, was it not? Any pocket pair (even as low as 33) is a much stronger hand Heads-up when it is tougher to make a strong hand; instead of being beat by one of eight other players (9 in full ring poker), you only have one other player to beat, so even a One Pair hand is often times decent enough to hang in there with.

I suspect the pocket pair was a bluff-catcher hand against Dwan's aggressive playstyle; Dwan is very capable of bluffing with hands like Ace-high or much weaker and even one pair is ahead of this

NOT all pros bluff. Some only play the best starting hands and play on odds alone. They VERY rarely bluff. These pros make a consistent meager living but never are able to become the huge winning players that players who bluff are.

It depends what you mean by "bluff" and who the pro is playing against. In the high-stakes games among the world elite EVERY pro needs to bluff some portion of the time or they become far too exploitable.

One also has to define "bluff" though. Is a flush draw a bluff (semi-bluff example)? What about a made weak pair on a coordinated board (like 99 on a board of Ah Kh Js Jc 3h)?

A scenario when a pro would NOT bluff is against a calling station, or an effective stacks scenario where bluffing isn't as appealing.

However, pros are professional in large part because of their ability to correctly adapt to the situation, but EVERY pro is capable of bluffing and do so fairly often (how often depends on playstyle, situation, table image etc.)

When I watch these guys play for $50,000 buyins and they are shoving all-in with a mediocre pair, I am always a bit surprised myself. When I think I understand the game, and then I see the pros risking it all for 52% equity, I learn that I don't really understand it at all. A bet or a bluff is one thing, but it is the all-ins that surprise me.

I suppose that is why I am not a pro.

Good luck and God bless.

Could you post an example or two which surprises you? I'm pretty sure most are not shoving for 52% equity. Perhaps there is some range details, or meta-game factors which justify it? Similarly, they are likely not shoving with 52% equity by the strength of the exact cards they have - they are probably shoving based on something like pot odds, strength of their range, opponent capped range etc.

If you want to post an example or two, we could try to figure it out together (even though we are probably far from pros ) Who knows? Perhaps a poker pro on cardschat might even stop by and illuminate something we were oblivious to

 

[FoxMS]

I have seen from my own experience that the best strategy is just to be patient and not play with junk. I'm not a professional, and I'll probably never be one, so I just don't play with junk and my bankroll grows.

 

[Shumkoolie]

I have seen from my own experience that the best strategy is just to be patient and not play with junk. I'm not a professional, and I'll probably never be one, so I just don't play with junk and my bankroll grows.

That's a good approach - play the game you're most comfortable with. You're never always going to win, but if you (applies to anyone reading this) are avoiding playing hands that put you in bad spots where you're going to lose money over the long-term (basic example is flopping top pair with a poor kicker and more often than not, losing to a better kicker), then you should be fine.

Being patient is also very critical, as I've seen situations where people lose a pot or two and immediately feel like they have to double-up or win a big pot to get back to where they were before, which will cause you to play outside of what works for you, and while it might yield some results, over time, it's not going to work out for the best.

 

[FoxMS]

That's a good approach - play the game you're most comfortable with. You're never always going to win, but if you (applies to anyone reading this) are avoiding playing hands that put you in bad spots where you're going to lose money over the long-term (basic example is flopping top pair with a poor kicker and more often than not, losing to a better kicker), then you should be fine.

Being patient is also very critical, as I've seen situations where people lose a pot or two and immediately feel like they have to double-up or win a big pot to get back to where they were before, which will cause you to play outside of what works for you, and while it might yield some results, over time, it's not going to work out for the best.

I absolutely agree with you. I also believe that patience is the key to success in poker in the long run. And of course, the main thing is that our right decisions bring us satisfaction.

 

[Sivraj]

There is no single poker "strategy" or "playstyle" it seems, but ALL the top pros seem to share a few elements in common which contribute to them winning often and being successful.

For example, all pros utilize some element of aggression (tighter players like Hellmuth with raises and re-raises and looser players like Ivey with battling for basically every pot). There is no "absolute" it seems to win at poker, but a few key ingredients can be found is every pro poker game

Best post in this thread I agree.

 

[Juan Oro]

the professionals you speak of, such as phil ivey and tom dwan, they have been fighting each other for years, that means they know their game and way of thinking and that they constantly have to change their game strategies just because they already know each other And his levels of thoughts, Tom is an aggressive loose player and perhaps Phil in that hand that you relate he was thinking the whole time that Tom was bluffing since he likes to bluff his rivals a lot.

This does not mean that they are bad professionals for a hand that you see facing each other, there is also a lot of ego and a lot of value between them 2 when they face each other.