Q&a With Steve7stud

[steve7stud 0]

I've tried to display a false image in live games taht i play many times. But it turns out that the people i play with are still too donkish to realize that if i put out a bet of x amount and then show a bluff, that the next time i put out that x amount as a bet i'm supposed to be bluffing. In other words, i put out an image, they ignore me. What do i do then? Back to ABC?

If the people you play with don't change based on your play, then I would stick with abc poker.

[steve7stud 0]

Add my thanks to the list for doing this Steve, it really is an amazing new "feature" in this great community.I believe that at small stakes, regarding starting hand requirements, it is always best to be tight unless:a- the table is tight, orb- your tightness is losing you action on your big hands.Seeing as neither of these conditions ever seem to be met at the tables I'm at, I find myself playing a very tight game all the time.Can you think of any reasons to adjust this thinking? Is this causing bad habits? Or should I play the way I believe is most profitable now, and learn other gears only when I've found myself in games that require the adjustment?

I believe that people should play a style that works best for the limit they are playing. As you move up in limits, make sure that you adjust to differences in play. But for the tme being, if it aint broke, don't fix it.

[steve7stud 0]

steve,Question for you on your opinion on playing at a certain limit that one would say is there middle ground of comfort. You sit down and start off the first 4 hours of the nite just getting on the loosing side of the stick. You think its because of the quality of players at the table, if you run in to this situation would you move up a level and try to find a better quaility of a table?

It depends on why you are losing. You should always try and play at your maximum comfort level. If you see a higher limit game with worse players AND you are properly br'd for it, I don't see any reason not to play.

[silkyjonson 1]

Steve,When I play live I usually play in a 2-5NL 200 max game (which is the biggest game that runs) and have shown solid results, on the weekends a 10-20NL uncapped game comes together and has a mix of a couple good players a couple avg/weak players and a couple rich maniacs. Although I do think I have an edge in this game it does play fairly big and even the soft players are really aggressive. I played in it once about a year ago and booked a 2.5k loss which was the biggest loss of my career and pretty much my whole bankroll at the time. Now I have about 20 buy ins for this game and played it last week and booked a solid win.Although I do find myself playing more cautious and tight then usual and many of the players know that I am not a regular in the game. This game plays extremely loose and aggressive and I think the best strategy is defintely Tight, but I find myself playing passively on purpose to allow the players to bluff off to me and control pot sizes when out of position with hands such as top pair etc. and it worked in the last session but am I courting danger in playing this style in a game that the stakes are fairly higher than I'm used to. Should I not even play in this game yet?

[mikeysong 0]

Steve,When I play live I usually play in a 2-5NL 200 max game (which is the biggest game that runs) and have shown solid results, on the weekends a 10-20NL uncapped game comes together and has a mix of a couple good players a couple avg/weak players and a couple rich maniacs. Although I do think I have an edge in this game it does play fairly big and even the soft players are really aggressive. I played in it once about a year ago and booked a 2.5k loss which was the biggest loss of my career and pretty much my whole bankroll at the time. Now I have about 20 buy ins for this game and played it last week and booked a solid win.Although I do find myself playing more cautious and tight then usual and many of the players know that I am not a regular in the game. This game plays extremely loose and aggressive and I think the best strategy is defintely Tight, but I find myself playing passively on purpose to allow the players to bluff off to me and control pot sizes when out of position with hands such as top pair etc. and it worked in the last session but am I courting danger in playing this style in a game that the stakes are fairly higher than I'm used to. Should I not even play in this game yet?

let me take this oneI would not step up to the plate if you're not completely comfortable. Any good regular might start 3barreling you in position and basically just putting you in lots of tough spots. You really shouldn't play the game on a regular basis until you've shown that you're comfortable enough to go with your read and stack off without a set or make sick call downs because you know he's bluffing.If the money bothers you, you're at a disadvantage.Now if a super yum yum stepped up, I would definitely play. Taking a shot at a higher game and playing the set-mining game in NL is fine. It's just over the long run I really wouldn't do it, you'll get beaten up, and most importantly, you won't improve as a player.

[silkyjonson 1]

let me take this oneI would not step up to the plate if you're not completely comfortable. Any good regular might start 3barreling you in position and basically just putting you in lots of tough spots. You really shouldn't play the game on a regular basis until you've shown that you're comfortable enough to go with your read and stack off without a set or make sick call downs because you know he's bluffing.If the money bothers you, you're at a disadvantage.Now if a super yum yum stepped up, I would definitely play. Taking a shot at a higher game and playing the set-mining game in NL is fine. It's just over the long run I really wouldn't do it, you'll get beaten up, and most importantly, you won't improve as a player.

Honestly I dont have a problem stacking off without a set and If I feel a guy is trying to bully me I will make a stand and call a guy down with as little as 4th pair etc, but I think that is part of the problem I am not taking the lead or being aggressive enough, I know that I will get guys bluffing into me and I can get value there but when the game is so deap I don't know if that style is going to cost me in the long run. I guess part of the problem I see is that inflating pots against these guys they make it extemely difficult to play out of position so I find myself check/calling unless in position.The money does make me a little uncomfortable because every pot is 1k or more and the game is hyperaggressive, but at times it is super yum yum with the right guys on tilt or just certain guys that will go bezerk. I felt comfortable playing the last time I played in it although I played pretty tight preflop and on the flop not getting involved with marginal hands at all, although I made money I dont feel I played really great or anything like that I think I caught some hands at the right time, I guess I wished I had pulled off some moves or something but now that I think of it playing really tight was the right way to play as I was getting payed off and if I were to run bluffs it would have to be a big commitment with a high risk in order to pull it off. Although I do feel that even from that one session it has made me a better player by playing against some pretty good players and at higher stakes.Do you think that I should continue to pursue this game because it does have soft spots and it will make me a better player playing against some better competition or does me being out of my comfort zone overide that?

[uncooper 1]

Honestly I dont have a problem stacking off without a set and If I feel a guy is trying to bully me I will make a stand and call a guy down with as little as 4th pair etc, but I think that is part of the problem I am not taking the lead or being aggressive enough, I know that I will get guys bluffing into me and I can get value there but when the game is so deap I don't know if that style is going to cost me in the long run. I guess part of the problem I see is that inflating pots against these guys they make it extemely difficult to play out of position so I find myself check/calling unless in position.The money does make me a little uncomfortable because every pot is 1k or more and the game is hyperaggressive, but at times it is super yum yum with the right guys on tilt or just certain guys that will go bezerk. I felt comfortable playing the last time I played in it although I played pretty tight preflop and on the flop not getting involved with marginal hands at all, although I made money I dont feel I played really great or anything like that I think I caught some hands at the right time, I guess I wished I had pulled off some moves or something but now that I think of it playing really tight was the right way to play as I was getting payed off and if I were to run bluffs it would have to be a big commitment with a high risk in order to pull it off. Although I do feel that even from that one session it has made me a better player by playing against some pretty good players and at higher stakes.Do you think that I should continue to pursue this game because it does have soft spots and it will make me a better player playing against some better competition or does me being out of my comfort zone overide that?

The correct way to adjust to very aggressive players is to bluff less often, raise less often, and call more often. It seems like you know this and made the correct adjustments.

[ThreeBet 0]

Just found this thread today after seeing Steve mention it in his thread in General ...This is awesome! Thanks to Steve and the other "qualified" posters answering .... this adds soooo much to an already great forum. I had an opportunity to "join" Steve's group about a year ago and the timing just wasn't right. It's something that I've regretted ever since, as it is obvious that he truly is genuine and loves to help others. Now, I feel that I can get a lttle of what I missed out on. Who knows, maybe even our host will make a guest appearance or two?After reading the whole thread I don't even have a question .... yet! I do however, have a couple of comments:Someone asked about taking notes at the table and Steve's response was it's bad for the game, which I completely agree with. I was having problems remembering everything I wanted to remember (either about myself or others) after sessions, even more so if I couldn't get motivated until well after the session to write things down. I bought a little tape recorder that I take with me now and every time I take a break I make my "notes" away from the table. This has really helped me remember obviously, but even more importantly, my session notes are now done on a regular basis. In the past I'd put them off and sometimes have to do up to 3 sessions at one time. Now I can leave it as long as I want with dates, buy-ins, wins, losses, specific hands etc all on tape waiting for me.The tape recorder has also hepled me in the second thing I wanted to comment on which was the "Image" and "Action" questions more recently in this thread. People remember the negative much easier than the positive. If you suck out on someone, make a big bluff, or just a donkastic play the people at the table will remember it forever. Obviously if you play against them again, this will be front-and-center in their "image" of you. If I have an opportunity to alter my image and the circumstances are right I will take it. I'll immediately make "note" of who is at my table (and even who was railing if relevant) and take a break pretty quick afterwards recording everyone's names that saw it. This also works when I make a bad read/call. I'll again make "note" of who saw it as they'll think I'm stupid. These big or unusal hands/plays definitely skew peoples "image" of you which you can use to your advantage for a long long time, imo.

[Actuary 3]

I'll bite my tongue.

[BudBundy 0]

I'll bite my tongue.

lol please don't. I want to hear this one.

[bdc30 0]

I'll try a diplomatic response. In SSHE, there's a good passage about mindset and table image - I can't quote it right now, since I'm at work, but I'll do the best I can from memory. Maybe someone else can find the exact quote. It says something to the effect of to view playing live poker in the same sense as a company softball game. This is not the world series. It's not the time for war paint. If you get brushed back or hit by a pitch, don't charge the mound - just take your base with a smile. Keep it friendly and light.In essence, don't ever whip out a notepad at a table. If you feel the need to carry a tape recorder, don't let the other players see it (I have no clue WHY you find it helpful, but to each their own). Rely on your memory. If you don't have a mechanical mind and sharp memory, play online only where you can buy/download programs to track your opponents.Case in point -- a fellow fcp'er made a post yesterday that he used to play at the Windsor casino. I've been there maybe 3 or 4 times in the past year. I recalled a specific guy, who just had happened to be wearing an fcp hat one time I'd seen him playing at ANOTHER table (not even the one I was at). It just so happened that it was this same guy that posted yesterday. (i didn't bother him as he was in a 2/5 game and it was busy that night -- just sorta took note of it) I not only remembered what he looked like, I remember the sweater he was wearing and guessed his age to within 2 years - and this one night was probably 6 months ago.This is the kind of thing you need to develop.

[Balloon guy 158]

Case in point -- a fellow fcp'er made a post yesterday that he used to play at the Windsor casino. I've been there maybe 3 or 4 times in the past year. I recalled a specific guy, who just had happened to be wearing an fcp hat one time I'd seen him playing at ANOTHER table (not even the one I was at). It just so happened that it was this same guy that posted yesterday. (i didn't bother him as he was in a 2/5 game and it was busy that night -- just sorta took note of it) I not only remembered what he looked like, I remember the sweater he was wearing and guessed his age to within 2 years - and this one night was probably 6 months ago.This is the kind of thing you need to develop.

The ablility to scope out and remember what guys were wearing 6 months ago?Just kidding, I like what you are saying, don't use aids for your memory, because you can't develope a good memory unless you work at it ie lifting weights, you can lift light weights and have a tone, or you can lift heavier weights and have real muscle.No crutches.

[silkyjonson 1]

r

I'll try a diplomatic response. In SSHE, there's a good passage about mindset and table image - I can't quote it right now, since I'm at work, but I'll do the best I can from memory. Maybe someone else can find the exact quote. It says something to the effect of to view playing live poker in the same sense as a company softball game. This is not the world series. It's not the time for war paint. If you get brushed back or hit by a pitch, don't charge the mound - just take your base with a smile. Keep it friendly and light.In essence, don't ever whip out a notepad at a table. If you feel the need to carry a tape recorder, don't let the other players see it (I have no clue WHY you find it helpful, but to each their own). Rely on your memory. If you don't have a mechanical mind and sharp memory, play online only where you can buy/download programs to track your opponents.Case in point -- a fellow fcp'er made a post yesterday that he used to play at the Windsor casino. I've been there maybe 3 or 4 times in the past year. I recalled a specific guy, who just had happened to be wearing an fcp hat one time I'd seen him playing at ANOTHER table (not even the one I was at). It just so happened that it was this same guy that posted yesterday. (i didn't bother him as he was in a 2/5 game and it was busy that night -- just sorta took note of it) I not only remembered what he looked like, I remember the sweater he was wearing and guessed his age to within 2 years - and this one night was probably 6 months ago.This is the kind of thing you need to develop.

He also recalled that he could smell my distinct fermenting cheese odour from the next table over but left that out to not embarass me.

[ThreeBet 0]

I'll bite my tongue.

I appreciate that ... I think.Everyone is different .... in real life and in poker .... whatever works best for one person may not for others. I find that I'm concentrating on so many things at once that if I'm able to "lock something pertinent away" I'm able to start fresh again .... kinda like freeing up some brain cells, if that makes any sense. As of yet, no one has seen the tape recorder (I go outside and smoke when using it) but even if they did I'll have no problem with it and will be able to explain it off to "too many drugs" or something like that. Bottom line is I do what's best for me based on my understanding of myself. Understanding yourself is one of the most important things in Poker, imo.The tape recorder is especially usefull when noting "who saw what when" ... there's no way I can remember all the specific players at a table during a specific hand, days, weeks or months later but I want to for reasons mentioned. We all know Poker is one long session for the rest of our lives and my individual sessions tend to blend in together making it difficult to differentiate between them.'Nuf said ... this thread is not designed for individuals (like me) to support their personal techniques or beliefs and I will leave it at that.

[bdc30 0]

Here's a question about game selection.How often and for what reasons do you switch up your "main" game that you're playing?I like to be able to go between plo, nlhe, tourneys, stud hi, and triple draw, and I think that playing ALL of these games decently makes you a much more well rounded player. I'm running decent at plo right now and for the first time in a long time putting in a good amount of volume (as much as I can with still holding a full time job, anyway). I just don't want to get stale. Do you switch after every couple of months - when running badly at one particular game - just because?Do you switch for one or two or five sessions at a time, or commit to playing one or two games at most for a specific period of time?

[Actuary 3]

I appreciate that ... I think.

sure

lol please don't. I want to hear this one.

oh well, the audience demands it....Call me bitter.. but many of us have been trying to help for...gee... 10,000 posts.Some in NL, Some Tourrnies, some Omaha, Razz, General, LHEYour post seemed as if we had no Strategy Forum, pre Steve.Obv, Steve blows most of us away in experience and expertise; howevever, much of the nutthugging that occurrs is based on and from people who could learn a lot from about 25 regular strategy posters. That is to say: These are not high level questions.In fact, most of them, if posted in a separate thread would get a "It depends" or the responses would simply be Royal Tour style anecdotes (because they are not questions with definitive answers that serve themselves well for a forum format.) I can defintely appreciate any help Steve gives. Nothing against his efforts.Sorry to dissapoint you, my thoughts had nothing to do with your specific strategy of note taking devices, I'm too narcisstic to be bothered.Should I just bite my tongue next time?

[David_Nicoson 1]

This is awesome! Thanks to Steve and the other "qualified" posters answering .... this adds soooo much to an already great forum.

It'd be really easy for some to misconstrue your use of quotation marks here as sarcasm. Noting your liberal use of quotes throughout the rest of the post, I'm fairly confident that's not what you intended.

[checkymcfold 0]

Here's a question about game selection.How often and for what reasons do you switch up your "main" game that you're playing?I like to be able to go between plo, nlhe, tourneys, stud hi, and triple draw, and I think that playing ALL of these games decently makes you a much more well rounded player. I'm running decent at plo right now and for the first time in a long time putting in a good amount of volume (as much as I can with still holding a full time job, anyway). I just don't want to get stale. Do you switch after every couple of months - when running badly at one particular game - just because?Do you switch for one or two or five sessions at a time, or commit to playing one or two games at most for a specific period of time?

in a lot of ways, i think that the best indicator of when you should switch games is when your winrate starts to stagnate for whatever reason. this might be because you're playing too many hands of just one game and going on autopilot, it might be because you're not mixing it up enough and the regulars are adapting to you, or it might simply be a case of getting bored and not playing your best all of the time. sometimes it's tough to tell what's causing a downturn, but switching games is sometimes a wonderdrug of sorts. it's always possible that something's going wrong that you just can't see no matter how hard you look, and taking a few weeks off a certain game can sometimes fix that right up. not always, of course, but sometimes, indeed. and of course, it's dangerous to resort to even a wonderdrug if it comes at the expense of you analyzing what you might be doing wrong, even if that might mean you're losing the balls to bluff when you have in the past, etc.in any case, at least for me, i've started to switch games when i start to see any sort of sustained downturn in my winrate at a specific game i'm concentrating on, even if i think i'm playing great. for instance, in the last 3-4 months, i've gone from SHLO8 to HULO8 to HULHE to SHPLO8 to FR NLO8 to 2-7 and am now playing HU razz. of course i change that up if i see a known fish at a game i'm comfortable in otherwise, but jumping around is a good way to both keep myself feeling like i'm learning and adapting and at the same time keeping my villains from getting too good a feel for how i play--a lot of possible problems all being solved at once. but at the same time, it's easy to take this too far. it's not like if i lose a buyin at plo8, that i'll go over and play razz or triple draw or whatever. obviously some things need to be taken in stride, but if it starts creeping into my head that something wicked this way is coming, then i usually take that as an indication to change directions with respect to poker. imho, that's one of the greatest boons to being well-rounded in one's play. again using myself as an example, although my best games are definitely o8 variants, sometimes my edge might actually be bigger playing something like 2-7 or stud8 where really bad opponents are more exploitable, so my cash flow isn't really hurt by switching it up as much as i do, even if i may be switching away from the game i have the most talent at.

[steve7stud 0]

sureoh well, the audience demands it....Call me bitter.. but many of us have been trying to help for...gee... 10,000 posts.Some in NL, Some Tourrnies, some Omaha, Razz, General, LHEYour post seemed as if we had no Strategy Forum, pre Steve.Obv, Steve blows most of us away in experience and expertise; howevever, much of the nutthugging that occurrs is based on and from people who could learn a lot from about 25 regular strategy posters. That is to say: These are not high level questions.In fact, most of them, if posted in a separate thread would get a "It depends" or the responses would simply be Royal Tour style anecdotes (because they are not questions with definitive answers that serve themselves well for a forum format.) I can defintely appreciate any help Steve gives. Nothing against his efforts.Sorry to dissapoint you, my thoughts had nothing to do with your specific strategy of note taking devices, I'm too narcisstic to be bothered.Should I just bite my tongue next time?

I don't think you should bite your tongue. But lets look at the bigger picture. I had a training program that I offered to members of FCP. As opposed to taking on a new group, I started this thread. I felt that I could help more people this way. And it was completely free for all. I'm a high stakes poker player, and have been successful for ten years now. During that time I've made plenty of mistakes. Luckily I've learned from most of them, and am willing to give advice as needed.I don't create the questions, I simply answer them. And if I feel that someone is more qualified than I am to talk about a subject, I will ask someone else to intervene. I am also more than willing to have others answer questions if they choose to.Because I'm not a "tourney" player, I'm not looking for a fan base. In fact it's just the opposite. I'm a cash game player who would rather stay fairly anonymous. I essentially get absolutely nothing for doing this. Nor do my students who come on here and answer questions. If you're bitter about not getting advice for various poker games in the past, don't be. Nobody owes you anything. You've spent time arguing one point or another in various threads. It seems like it would be more productive to simply ask questions that can make you a better player. For someone who has been waiting for so long to get specific advice, now that you've got it, you're not utlizing it.In the interst of keeping things going in a positive way regarding this thread, I would rather just answser questions. This happened to be something that stuck out.

[David_Nicoson 1]

in any case, at least for me, i've started to switch games when i start to see any sort of sustained downturn in my winrate at a specific game i'm concentrating on, even if i think i'm playing great. for instance, in the last 3-4 months, i've gone from SHLO8 to HULO8 to HULHE to SHPLO8 to FR NLO8 to 2-7 and am now playing HU razz.

How does the economy work for a game like heads-up razz? Are there big fish stumbling into razz who are losers at the more standard games, or are successful hold'em players spewing in razz?I realize you may be playing against winning players, but they're probably beating up on somebody else, too.

[CobaltBlue 662]

I don't think you should bite your tongue. But lets look at the bigger picture.

Steve, I do think Actuary appreciates what you're doing here. My feeling was that he was being a little critical of potentially pedantic questions and an overall uplifting of this thread over the rest of the strat forums. I view it (and I think most agree) as additive though. Having this thread around definitely isn't detracting.

[ThreeBet 0]

It'd be really easy for some to misconstrue your use of quotation marks here as sarcasm. Noting your liberal use of quotes throughout the rest of the post, I'm fairly confident that's not what you intended.

You are correct ... in fact, the complete opposite of sarcasm. I didn't want to go on and on in the post (keeping this thread to questions and answers is best for all). I was genuinely surprised that others answering were all some of the most respected posters here (many of them Steve's former students) and that everyone else has not jumped in with opinions. It was a Veiled compliment, if you will.Obviously an exception is Mr Actuary. Not sure what the problem is, but obviously there is one! I have learned a lot from your posts in Strategy in my time here sir, and have said just that before (although not naming you specifically). As I said in a post before, the simple things (to which you, apparently, seem to detest) are often the most difficult to fully comprehend as we take them for granted.It was obvious to me that this was Steve's way of giving back to this community ... call me a nuthugger if you will, but I appreciate it!

[checkymcfold 0]

How does the economy work for a game like heads-up razz? Are there big fish stumbling into razz who are losers at the more standard games, or are successful hold'em players spewing in razz?I realize you may be playing against winning players, but they're probably beating up on somebody else, too.

honestly, i don't know, since i haven't had a losing session of HU razz yet, nor have i seen too many repeat players (i've only been on this most recent kick for a week or so). everyone so far has been extremely predictable, and i feel like i know where i stand on every street of every hand. the vast majority of players have really been easy to convince that they're behind in a hand, whether they are or not, and i'm basically just running everyone over without having to adapt. obviously, that might change, but the simple mantra of bet until they fight back, then fold if you ain't got it, is working just fine.as for the economy of the game, like i said, i'm not sure--i guess some of these guys could conceivably be winning players if they found the right villains, but it seems more like they're trying to go from playing full ring to HU without changing their tactics at all and would never have a chance against anyone who had a clue about HU razz. they obviously have some sort of clue about razz in general, but show little to no ability to adapt to someone who is probably more aggressive than 99% of the players they've played before. i suppose that they could remedy this eventually, but they haven't yet. this is part of why i change games so often--i have a really, really aggressive style of poker, and when people start to adapt to me properly, my swings shoot through the roof and it's often a better idea to go run over people who haven't played me in a while and make a lot more consistent money rather than re-adapt and work a small-ish edge at the same game.

[simo_8ball 0]

This is something I've been thinking about for a while, and I havent come to any specific conclusions:Is making the right move for the wrong reasons better than making the wrong move for the right reasons?This is incredibly vague, but I think the concept is important. I suppose the correct answer is probably "individual decisions yes, long term no", but I'd appreciate any insight you (or anyone else) could give.

Edited September 13, 2007 by simo_8ball

[silkyjonson 1]

This is something I've been thinking about for a while, and I havent come to any specific conclusions:Is making the right move for the wrong reasons better than making the wrong move for the right reasons?This is incredibly vague, but I think the concept is important. I suppose the correct answer is probably "individual decisions no, long term yes", but I'd appreciate any insight you (or anyone else) could give.

Well making the wrong move for the right reasons will hypothetically show dividends in the long run but in the short run may seem incorrect. I'll use a tournament example say you pick up AQ in the blinds and an aggressive player raises from the button and you shove and he wakes up with AA. Was it the wrong move? Yes when the hands are turned face up, but in the long run you have his range crushed so this move will show a profit. I hope this maybe helped a little, not sure if this is the concept you meant, but it helps invision poker as one long session.