PDA

View Full Version : Loki - In need of ur Knowledge again (or anybody else that would like to help)



EagleClaw29
02-04-2010, 04:21 AM
Loki - I've got some more questions for you if you have the time. Your reply to my last post hit the nails on the head of my "Hold-em Manager" beginner questions & offered up some good info that I didn't even ask ?'s about.

OK - I'll get right to it.

(1) I thought your take on who you want at the tables with you in the different positions was very good info (especially because we were both talking only about 6-max NLHE. My question about that is that I put myself on waiting lists for many tables when I start - usually looking for high %'s of people involved in the hands. But...when I sit at the tables....most of them I don't have enough info on them yet to know what type of player they are....because I've been playing at P-Stars since starting this & even though I have played 10's of thousands of hands...there are so many players....it takes a long time to get info on them.

Are u playing there too....& do you sit at a table long enough to try & get a handle on everybody & then get out & wait till u can get the right seat? Hmm...I doubt if u do it that way. But - it seemed u were saying u knew right away what players u were up against when u sat at a table? I guess maybe you are playing at a smaller site?

(2) I do take a lot of notes on players & I have always just used the area at PokerStars where u take notes on each player. It looks like "Hold-em Manager" has it's own area to take notes....do u think there is any advantage to where u keep your notes on the individual players? I would think keeping the notes at P-stars would be best?

(3) Another thing I look for when sitting at a table....I don't like sitting with more than 1 (possibly 2) of the players who come in for 1/5th of the buy-in amount & their game is usually just an all-in raise preflop....even though some of them will do it with weakish hands...you can't win that much vs. them in a hand. I like to find tables where there are 1 or 2 players winning & 3 of them having having 65% to 100% of the buy-in.
Does that make any sense to you...& do you have any amounts that u like seeing your opponents have when you sit in a game?

(4) I doubt you can do this...but is there any way to use the program to stop other players from getting stats from you? I guess changing your table name would work....but I'm guessing they don't allow players to do that, or if they do...probably just once or something?

(5) I have done a lot of reading about 6-max NLHE since I started playing the game. When I lived out West & only played live poker....I usually played between $10-$20 to $20-$40 Limit Hold-em Full table (9 or 10 player) ring games. So I've had to make a lot of adjustments since I started with No-Limit. Boy...No-Limit really took off when Chris Moneymaker won the World Series. A lot of the rooms I used to play live in didn't even offer No-Limit in the 90's.
They were afraid that the good NL players would take the bad NL players money too fast & they would lose many of their regulars....& there weren't that many people that wanted to play NL - boy...things have sure changed.

You know...as recent as the late 90's....there wasn't that much info out there on how to play poker well. Libraries still had old books on 5-card draw & maybe 7-stud that weren't very good. I think the only good poker books before 2000 were Sklansky & Malmouth's & I guess Brunsons. Big book stores didn't have any decent poker books as late as the 90's either.
Now the info out there has grown astronomically which allows people to get better much faster than when you had to rely on experience...it is my experience this has made poker much tougher.

(6) One of the authors I read who professed to be an expert 6-max player said he only wanted to get involved in hands where he had both power (which I believe he meant coming in 1st - not neccessarily having a real big starting hand...although that is the best situation if u can get it obviously) & position.
I have also read by most self-professed 6-max experts that if you are going to play...you should never limp...always come in raising if you are 1st in...& I do basically play that way....except for some very rare situations (u know the old poker adage - it depends).

(7) One thing I don't have down yet & am still sort of doing some trial an error with is what hands to call with after someone has already come in raising....say the UTG player comes in with a 3x big blind raise & you are in the cut-off with A-10 suited....would you call with this? How about A-9 suited on the button?

Another 6-max rule I have seen is to always raise 1st in with any pair. I do this too...I believe it is the right thing to do....even though more times than I wish to remember I have R'ed to 3x big blind with 2's or 3's UTG & finally flop a set only to lose my stack to an opponent who either flops or turns a bigger set.

(8) This is getting very long. So just one more. One other situation I know I have been leaving money on the table with is when I don't value bet the river when I have position & my opponent checks to me....& I have had control of the hand from preflop till the river...if the river completes an obvious draw & I get checked to....I don't value bet enough of course because I'm thinking I'm opening myself up to a big check-raise that will put me in a very difficult situation. There are so many players at the site....when this situation comes up...many times you don't have much or any info about your opponent.

I wonder what the % of players there are that try the big check-raise on the river? And what % of players that do this as a total bluff when a scare card comes on the river?

I know that in some/many poker situations....there just isn't a certain way to play...u just have to do the best u can with the info you have.

I KNOW THIS IS JUST TOO LONG & I WON'T DO ANOTHER POST LIKE THIS THAT SORT OF MEANDERED FOR A BIT.

BUT I WOULD SURE WELCOME ANY COMMENTS, SUGGESTIONS, IDEA'S, ETC. THAT READING THIS MAY HAVE BROUGHT TO MIND. I KNOW THAT FOLKS DON'T LIKE READING LONG POSTS ESPECIALLY ON SOME OF THE TOPICS I HAVE BROUGHT UP HERE...because as I'm ending this I realize that some of this is talking poker instead of asking questions regarding "Hold-em Manager" specifically.

OK - THE END!!! - HOPE TO HEAR FROM YOU IF YOU GET A CHANCE Loki

_Loki_
02-04-2010, 11:10 AM
Some of that positional opinion came from article 6 I think. have a look
PM me your email & I'll send you stuff when I get home in a week

But why waste this thread ? I feel an off-topic coming...

DATA GAP DATA GAP DATA GAP
There is an add-on to HEM called table scanner that helps you find juicy tables, but it's useless unless you have data & I don't know how practical it is for me because by the time I've collected the data I will be moving up another level & so on & so on

DATA THEFT DATA THEFT DATA THEFT
Hand Histories (HH). For ethical & practical reasons I will not...
a] buy HH's
b] datamine hands myself
c] get together with others & form a HH sharing group (this is a very common practice)
d] download & subscribe to a HH sharing service (it redistributes hands to other users of the software LIVE while you/they play)
It so happens (I think) that you can't really buy microstakes HH's anyway, but I will stick to my guns on this one even when I reach the level where they are available

MORE VIRTUOUS LESS VIRTUAL VIRTUAL POKER
I believe datamining/datasharing, short stacking & poor multi-tabling is damaging poker & the poker rooms know this. But in the end it might be a GOOD THING that there are douchbags who buy/share/sell HH's. There is a move towards a more 'real' online poker experience for those who want that & this will include measures to curb multi-tablers & short stackers within parts of the online poker world. I don't think the way poker is played now online will change - why should it ? ... but I do expect more specialist rooms to open where the playing field is levelled out a little - the market leaders such as PokerStars will offer more rooms like this (under another skin) for the increasing numbers who would prefer not to play against a 64-stat HUD freak with a South Park avatar

GRINDING MY TEETH AT GRINDERS
I would be happy to drop HM if I knew my opponents didn't have it too. I would rather play one table at a high stake than bonus whore 24 tables & play ABC poker by the numbers. I am getting bored waiting for a (bad) multi-tabler to get back to my table to make his 'inevitable-fold-to-any-reraise-unless-holding-the-nuts' poker - far more annoying than short stackers (I'm almost a short stacker myself :) )

I WATCHED TV TOURNAMENT POKER LAST NIGHT & I'M GONNA SIT HERE & BLOW YOU GUYS AWAY
I'm getting bored by microstakes CASH players who think they are in a tournament with increasing blinds & play poker bingo - don't they know they don't have to fling their last 10bb's into the middle ? Why aren't they rebuying when they're down by 10% ?

I'M NOT GOING TO LOOK DOWN THE WELL - I MIGHT GET DIZZY
There's people who are AFRAID to see any stat that would show how they are running in their current session. They think they are playing poker, but they don't realise yet that we are all really only playing one looong poker game in life...

ZEN ZEN ZEN END
...interrupted by birth, marriage, sex, food & death

SEND

The Minder
02-04-2010, 08:17 PM
+1

_Loki_
02-06-2010, 12:33 AM
EagleClaw29 - I have pm'd you my email address