BigStack.com

[thejim]

Bonomo and Negreanu hosted by Scott Huff. There have now been two episodes. It becomes clear that Daniel is a great player and Justin is a great theorist AND player. If anyone else has listened, I'd be interested in your thoughts.

[Zero]

thejim wrote: Bonomo and Negreanu hosted by Scott Huff. There have now been two episodes. It becomes clear that Daniel is a great player and Justin is a great theorist AND player. If anyone else has listened, I'd be interested in your thoughts.

I am way behind on my Cash plays...I will listen tomorrow at work and get back to you.

[Zero]

Listening now.

One thing came to mind while listening to this (and any poker show that talks strategy and what not) is what does Daniel and any top pro have to gain by talking about their game and their own ideas on how to play?

I was talking with Tom Schnieder last year about random poker stuff, and I asked him why he never talked much strategy or did hand analysis on his radio show? He basically said, he didn't really see any benefit from giving people more information on the way he plays poker.

Is this kinda like all those sports bookies advertising a "guaranteed lock of the weekend" for College football or whatever? If those guys were so good, they wouldn't need to advertise, they could just bet and win, right?

....ANyway, will comment more about the show when its over.

[chopz33]

Zero wrote: Listening now.

.

Is this kinda like all those sports bookies advertising a "guaranteed lock of the weekend" for College football or whatever? If those guys were so good, they wouldn't need to advertise, they could just bet and win, right?

.

alot of these guys do this and then once they get alot of people betting on that side and then line moves..they take the other side

and they win both ways..
i have and will never pay for picks...although i might need to after this year

[Zero]

Okay. Daniel said something that I totally agree with, and it goes against all the math fags out there.

Talking tournament play.
Early in the tournament, he said if he was at table with Ivey, Hanson, or whomever...aka a "tough" table, he would push all in with his flush draws and take a coin flip all day long.

However, if he was at a table full of bad players, he would throw the same hand away everytime, even if he KNEW he was a 55%-60% favorite he would still throw it away knowing he could outplay the other players later on.

[Zero]

Finished the first one. I liked it. Has potential. Listening to the 2nd one now.

[Zero]

Daniel just said something I like.

Against weaker players, with deep stacks he likes to call and never re-raise preflop, even with AA or KK a lot of times. He perfers to widen the gap between the amount of chips he puts into the pot and the amount of chips he has left. Giving you more play post flop, if you build a big pot early there is less room to play post flop.


This is also lets him raise preflop with shitty hands later on because he has never raised previously.

I guess this is just more small ball discussion points now that I think about it.

[Zero]

Daniel pointed something out, that made me go ummmmm.

Knowing that every book out there says "play more pots from position", and other straight forward things, he likes to use that against those kind of players more often than not.

This got me to thinking, Daniels small ball strategy works really well in deep stack tournaments....not so much in short stack events. However, as a rule, people are dumb. I betcha a lot of people will try his strategy in short stack events and you can use that against them as well to some degree.

[thejim]

-Why talk strategy as a great player? Because, it doesn't matter. Many players will use what you're saying to strengthen what they already believe, even if the two are in total conflict. Other players will understand exactly what you're saying, but not be able to execute the ideas, at least not correctly or at the right times. I like Schneider quite a bit. He was a speaker at BARGE a couple months ago and talked about some things that really resonated with me. He's not, however, a strategy guy. I get the feeling that most of his skill comes from playing. He is, though, smart enough to know that any strategy he would espouse would be sound rudimentary, which is more than I can say for MANY pros.

-Pushing edges and gambling more against better players and less against worse players is a widely accepted cliche, even among "math fags". The "math fags" do, however, understand that it can be taken too far. Hellmuth put in half his stack and then folded to an all-in a couple years ago on TV. NOBODY's edge is that big.

-Daniel N.'s "small ball" strategy works great - for him. Not reraising with AA, limping in a large percentage of pots, etc. in deep stack events works because he is a great reader and postflop player AND because people WANT to play with him. Because it works so well for him, he has incorrectly extrapolated that it is THE BEST way to play tournaments. This is what I'm talking about when I say that Bonomo is a great poker theorist and player, while Daniel is just a great player.

-Yes, any time you can use the generally accepted practices of the "sheep" against them, it's a good thing. That just makes sense.

[Zero]

thejim wrote: -Why talk strategy as a great player? Because, it doesn't matter. Many players will use what you're saying to strengthen what they already believe, even if the two are in total conflict. Other players will understand exactly what you're saying, but not be able to execute the ideas, at least not correctly or at the right times. I like Schneider quite a bit. He was a speaker at BARGE a couple months ago and talked about some things that really resonated with me. He's not, however, a strategy guy. I get the feeling that most of his skill comes from playing. He is, though, smart enough to know that any strategy he would espouse would be sound rudimentary, which is more than I can say for MANY pros.

-Pushing edges and gambling more against better players and less against worse players is a widely accepted cliche, even among "math fags". The "math fags" do, however, understand that it can be taken too far. Hellmuth put in half his stack and then folded to an all-in a couple years ago on TV. NOBODY's edge is that big.

-Daniel N.'s "small ball" strategy works great - for him. Not reraising with AA, limping in a large percentage of pots, etc. in deep stack events works because he is a great reader and postflop player AND because people WANT to play with him. Because it works so well for him, he has incorrectly extrapolated that it is THE BEST way to play tournaments. This is what I'm talking about when I say that Bonomo is a great poker theorist and player, while Daniel is just a great player.

-Yes, any time you can use the generally accepted practices of the "sheep" against them, it's a good thing. That just makes sense.

I dont disagree with much of what you said.

I think its very obvious that Justin is an internet player and Daniel is a live player by how they discuss the hands and the decisions they make in certain situations.

I think small ball is the current best deep stack tournament strategy for live play, whether you are Daniel or not....unless you have decided that you are way outmatched by your opponents, then the KillPhil strategy is probably better for you.

I do think as the game evolves there will be 2 very distinct games (might already be that way) Online Poker and Live Poker. And IMO, not differentiating the two is a mistake when discussing hand strategy and playing types. They seem to do a decent job at that. Daniel mentions a few times that he doesn't have all the hand ranges memorized like Justin does, he goes by more feel. Daniel commented on how he was in awe how some of the internet guys can say playing A6 there is a HUGE mistake while playing A7 there is the right thing to do. That being that insync with hand values was impressive, and I think that is strictly an online thing when physical tells are not a factor and time is more critical.

Future shows should be good. Seems like a new one should be coming along anytime now.

[thejim]

Interesting points. I agree that internet poker and live poker play very differently. I will say that, in general, talking about internet poker is more interesting, because the play is better. I think that's why Bonomo is so much more interesting to me than Negreanu. Negreanu continually talks about how to play when clearly you're better than your opponents - play a lot of pots and get them to stack off when you have a better hand than them. That's not interesting.

[Zero]

thejim wrote: Interesting points. I agree that internet poker and live poker play very differently. I will say that, in general, talking about internet poker is more interesting, because the play is better. I think that's why Bonomo is so much more interesting to me than Negreanu. Negreanu continually talks about how to play when clearly you're better than your opponents - play a lot of pots and get them to stack off when you have a better hand than them. That's not interesting.

While I agree the tendencies of Daniel is to harp on getting bad players to stack off. I kinda glass over that and listen for very specific dicussion topics.

Such as, why he is playing K3o from a certain position...catching his MAN and then checking it down almost no matter what. Then Justin says he would do basically the same thing, but he offers that he would bet it in certain circumstances.

Internet players rely very heavily on math for obvious reasons, and tend to discuss hands in a robotic manner sometimes. "thats an automatic push situation" mostly because they are used to playing so many tables at one time that its impossible for them to watch and follow the action at any given table and that is the only decision they have to make is totally based on a math move.

Daniel did discuss the hand from HSP with Lakk and Matusow where Laak flopped the flush or something similar and he check called Matusow all the way through the river knowing Matusow was a "3 barrell" player. I found that interesting.

I wonder why its just you and I that listen to and comment on these shows?

[thejim]

3rd episode is up.

[Zero]

3rd Ep wasn't as good as the first two.

Listening to the 4th one now. And the first 10 minutes has a dallas guy call in and talk about you.

http://www.pokerroad.com/all_strategy/10-8-08/container.html

[Action Greggo]

I sure wish poker wasn't dead. This stuff makes me want to play.