I write notes for these articles often while I’m playing and here’s one I wrote the opposite day: “Instead of specializing in interesting results, take care of interesting decisions.” This came up after everyone was talking a couple of hand from a couple of months ago where two people got all in preflop and decided to run it 3 times. One had K-K and the opposite Q-Q. At the first board, the Q-Q made quads. Then, at the second and third run, the boards ran out 8-9-10-J to provide the Q-Q a straight both times. They discussed the probability of the hand for several minutes and passed an image of the board from side to side repeatedly. I’ll admit, it's a captivating result. I found out the probability of it popping out that way with Q-Q winning all 3 times and factoring within the card removal on each run. It turned out to be 25,684-to-1 to expire that way exactly. It’s obviously considerably not up to that for Q-Q to overcome K-K on every occasion when running it three times, about 1500-to-1 in that case.
Barring this incredibly interesting result, among the time, people discuss hands on the table that experience less interesting endings. But that’s the problem, discussing the effects. I were seeking to determine why these people who I'VE played with for years, who've been playing much longer than I'VE BEEN fidgeting with them, can be stagnant of their poker playing and that i suddenly realized it. They don’t consider the selections within the hand, they give thught to how the hand played out.
I thought back to how I developed as a poker player. I remember my first strategy group. We played at an individual game within the Fort Worth area. The sport would usually start around 5pm however the guys who became my strategy group would all manifest early. I'D appear early because I USED TO BE the dealer and they'd manifest early because they didn’t have anywhere else to be I SUPPOSE. Before the regular game would start (usually $1-$2 no-limit hold’em or $4-$8 limit) we'd play a sit-n-go for $20 or so. We'd play different games, sometimes pot-limit Omaha (PLO), sometimes no-limit, sometimes limit hold’em or Omaha-eight-or-better. After interesting hands, we might talk our way during the decisions and discuss the merits of various lines and strategies, not the effects or possible results. Then, after people showed as much as play the regular cash game, we'd put away the tournament chips and play the money game. I’d deal and they might play until the sport broke. Then the others would depart and the tactic group would stay to speak about hands that happened within the cash game. Sometimes we’d play another sit-n-go. That was probably the hardest $3-$6/$4-$8 limit hold’em game ever and we learned from one another by talking about interesting situations in preference to interesting results.
My next strategy group was a virtual one. A tournament strategy forum started on a widely known poker community site. I USED TO BE some of the original members of the gang and we again enthusiastic about interesting decisions in interesting hands, going as far as not to include ends up in original posts so as to avoid influencing everyone’s advice on how you can play the hand. You see, in the event you take the effects out, the one thing that matters is the verdict. We developed tournament poker strategies that were very effective for a lot of people within the poker industry. Like my first strategy group, lots of them now not play poker however the ones that stopped finished as lifetime winners and those still playing are getting cash doing it, many to boot known tournament pros.
My most up-to-date strategy group is one who I often lead. After I teach at poker schools or with my students, we don’t discuss results, we discuss decisions. In fact, on the WSOP Academy, we do something called hand labs. The professional is the dealer and there are nine students at each table. We play a hand all of the way out in a selected tournament situation and when the choices are over within the hand, everybody turns their cards up and we discuss how the hand was played. If there's an all-in before the river, I stop the action, discuss the hand after which split up the pot according to how I THINK is suitable. If there are cards remaining to be dealt, they don’t pop out. I’ve taken the effects out of the discussion completely so as to ingrain in these students that the effects truly don’t matter.
We’ve all done it. I’ve done it myself, I let the result of a hand effect how I FEEL about how a hand played out. Only after I remove the effects from my mind do I'VE an efficient thought process about whether I played that hand correctly. Then and only then is it possible to be told from a captivating hand. ♠
Gavin Griffin was the primary poker player to capture an international Series of Poker, European Poker Tour, and World Poker Tour title and has amassed nearly $5 million in lifetime tournament winnings. Griffin is sponsored by HeroPoker.com. You'll follow him on Twitter @NHGG
Read More... [Source: CardPlayer Poker News]
No comments:
Post a Comment