playing and raising every hand

[scooterdice]

the pokerowned freeroll yesterday had a player who played and raised preflop EVERY hand....this must be the best strategy ive seen so far , because it seemed to work.
i know he cashed but didnt stick around to see if he won.

but seriously isnt this strategy what you do in bingo?

tough to build a decent stack and then have your pocket kings and your entire chip stack donked by this player

sometimes it seems the poker software rewards this kind of play

[leexg23]

It doesn't necessarily matter about how many pots you play, in a tournament a GIANT factor is pot control. I play a ridiculous amount of hands and always go deep. Probably 75% of the hands in the first hour. You just have to master pot control and avoiding flips when possible.

[lorenz0wns]

It doesn't necessarily matter about how many pots you play, in a tournament a GIANT factor is pot control. I play a ridiculous amount of hands and always go deep. Probably 75% of the hands in the first hour. You just have to master pot control and avoiding flips when possible.

It is absolutely ESSENTIAL that you put yourself in scenarios where you flip for your tourney life because u needa take a risk to build a huge stack.

[abwil2]

It is absolutely ESSENTIAL that you put yourself in scenarios where you flip for your tourney life because u needa take a risk to build a huge stack.

voted most ludicrous statement in this thread LOL and here we have a bingo player that believes that kind of bullshit!!

[TheHaversham]

I take it you've never heard of smallball poker? I'm guessing, if he was successful, he knew how to fold a big hand if needed, unlike some players, who simply can never walk away from one pair if it's higher than the board.

How'd your KK play out?

[rghy2]

I was lucky enough that the poker gods decided to grace me with a player like this that sat down directly to my right a couple weeks ago when I was playing 3/6 live. Once he sat down I refused to leave the game until him and his friend left, sorry hubby. Anyways, he was telling me about some of the big WSOP satellite events he's played in. It sounded like he's even won at least once, but his play was redonkulus. It just tells me aggression will get people farther than passive play. Hopefully most of the time they just give away their chips, but judging by this guy's story and the stats of some of the po players I've labeled donks, being an aggressive donk gets you deep in the occasional tourney. I seriously doubt it's a winning strategy in the long run, but maybe they're on to something.

[cubsfan2589]

There a lot of morons that play this way. They usually get knocked out though after awhile.

[2sweet247]

There a lot of morons that play this way. They usually get knocked out though after awhile.

While this can be true..sighs my problem is that have already knocked me out with their 8 3 os flopping 2 pairs

[TheHaversham]

It is absolutely ESSENTIAL that you put yourself in scenarios where you flip for your tourney life because u needa take a risk to build a huge stack.

This is absolutely not true. Playing optimally for hours hoping to get it in on a coinflip is not a path to consistent success. In certain situations, you might settle for a flip against the top end of someone's range, but that is generally not the ideal, as, if you are correctly ranging opponents, you will only get it in ahead. You can't always be correct, but most solid players look to AVOID flips for their tourney life.

I played opposite waited for a good 60% starting hand that didnt come until my relative stack size was to small to see a flop .The big were
raising were had to go all in or fold,Tounament poker you have know how fast blinds go up in order to know how loose or tight to play.

While this can be true..sighs my problem is that have already knocked me out with their 8 3 os flopping 2 pairs

You guys are missing something fundamental to today's poker. In the early days, nobody was playing much no-limit holdem, so when Doyle's masterpiece came out, he pointed out that playing the top 20% of hands with aggression was a winning strategy against players who played too many hands too passively. Then, the poker boom hit, and everyone did that. Dan Harrington's tournament strat masterpiece Harrington on Holdem then defined a new version of tight aggression, and yet more got on board. But the reality is that winning poker - and Doyle had already pointed this out - is generally more efficient when you play against the grain of the table. So if everyone is tight and aggressive, loose and trappy become the winning strat. But then Negreanu turned the poker world on it's head again, demonstrating a loose aggressive strategy that still generally holds sway over the old-timers and Harringbots, who continue waiting to try to win the occasional big pot vs taking constant stabs at the smaller pots.

Many top players know both styles inside and out, can recognize them, and can attack or defend appropriately. Factor in the ideas that simple math and multitabling have brought to the concept of reducing variance, and you end up with what you are experiencing: players you think that are playing bad that are absolutely crushing tournaments, while you fold and fold and fold waiting for AK or AA to get all your chips in with. By that point, your stack is all but irrelevant to them, if they've built their stacks well. And if they KO early, on the next without a second thought.

I mentioned this once in another thread, how after some instruction from some nosebleed friends I slashed my ITM% almost in half (meaning I cashed much, much less), while blowing my profit through the roof by almost 700% (meaning that when I DID cash, it was very rarely for the minimum, and often in the top 3).

Just some food for thought.

[lorenz0wns]

This is absolutely not true. Playing optimally for hours hoping to get it in on a coinflip is not a path to consistent success. In certain situations, you might settle for a flip against the top end of someone's range, but that is generally not the ideal, as, if you are correctly ranging opponents, you will only get it in ahead. You can't always be correct, but most solid players look to AVOID flips for their tourney life.





You guys are missing something fundamental to today's poker. In the early days, nobody was playing much no-limit holdem, so when Doyle's masterpiece came out, he pointed out that playing the top 20% of hands with aggression was a winning strategy against players who played too many hands too passively. Then, the poker boom hit, and everyone did that. Dan Harrington's tournament strat masterpiece Harrington on Holdem then defined a new version of tight aggression, and yet more got on board. But the reality is that winning poker - and Doyle had already pointed this out - is generally more efficient when you play against the grain of the table. So if everyone is tight and aggressive, loose and trappy become the winning strat. But then Negreanu turned the poker world on it's head again, demonstrating a loose aggressive strategy that still generally holds sway over the old-timers and Harringbots, who continue waiting to try to win the occasional big pot vs taking constant stabs at the smaller pots.

Many top players know both styles inside and out, can recognize them, and can attack or defend appropriately. Factor in the ideas that simple math and multitabling have brought to the concept of reducing variance, and you end up with what you are experiencing: players you think that are playing bad that are absolutely crushing tournaments, while you fold and fold and fold waiting for AK or AA to get all your chips in with. By that point, your stack is all but irrelevant to them, if they've built their stacks well. And if they KO early, on the next without a second thought.

I mentioned this once in another thread, how after some instruction from some nosebleed friends I slashed my ITM% almost in half (meaning I cashed much, much less), while blowing my profit through the roof by almost 700% (meaning that when I DID cash, it was very rarely for the minimum, and often in the top 3).

Just some food for thought.

idk, if you wanna have sick scores like shaun deeb you're going to want to take flips for your tourney life to accumulate a big stack although you have to take 'em in the right time like in the middle of a tourney, obv not in the beginning because if u win a flip in the beginning you're still nowhere near the FT.

http://officialpokerrankings.com/ful...2501E.html?t=3

^that's shaun deebs acc on FTP. as u can see all his major bustouts happen 65% of the time during the middle of a tourney. the reason being he takes those flips in which if he wins it sets up his deep runs to the FT, a crushing 18% which is almost double the average player