smash system, q's and comments for people using it.

[Loismustdie 0]

And I will give the guy the benefit of the doubt and assume he meant postflop, and my analysis still stands.

No one ever gets the benefit of the doubt here at FCP. Fall in line already.

That's the truth.

[MLMarkland 0]

Aren't the odds of being against an overset 1/167?

[Pupsta 0]

there's no doubt in my mind that this system makes more, consistently, at the .5/1 and lower limits, than anything that the common poster on here is doing.anyone that says that they can make reads on someone at .10/.25 or .25/.50 is a fool, and is just blindly guessing, and only remembering the times he's right.and lois, we know that this system won't work for you, because you fold the nuts if you're worried about draws. that's okay though, we need the fish in our games.i guarantee smash is laughing at everyone disputing this theory, because every person that doubts him means that it's another person that will pay him off when he decides to play brainless NL.

[MasterLJ 0]

Jesus, I can put together coherent sentences, you should at least give me credit for a slip of the typing there and should have figured out the obvious, I meant on the flop, or post-flop.I guess it's good that people actually read my posts, half the time I think they fall on deaf ears/eyes...whatever.

[MLMarkland 0]

there's no doubt in my mind that this system makes more, consistently, at the .5/1 and lower limits, than anything that the common poster on here is doing.anyone that says that they can make reads on someone at .10/.25 or .25/.50 is a fool, and is just blindly guessing, and only remembering the times he's right.and lois, we know that this system won't work for you, because you fold the nuts if you're worried about draws. that's okay though, we need the fish in our games.i guarantee smash is laughing at everyone disputing this theory, because every person that doubts him means that it's another person that will pay him off when he decides to play brainless NL.

Pupsta, your posts are the most useless posts on this forum, as far as I can tell. Congratulations.

[Pupsta 0]

there's no doubt in my mind that this system makes more, consistently, at the .5/1 and lower limits, than anything that the common poster on here is doing.anyone that says that they can make reads on someone at .10/.25 or .25/.50 is a fool, and is just blindly guessing, and only remembering the times he's right.and lois, we know that this system won't work for you, because you fold the nuts if you're worried about draws. that's okay though, we need the fish in our games.i guarantee smash is laughing at everyone disputing this theory, because every person that doubts him means that it's another person that will pay him off when he decides to play brainless NL.

Pupsta, your posts are the most useless posts on this forum, as far as I can tell. Congratulations.

you're going to call my posts useless, and quote a post that actually had a purpose? the people debating the theory are delusional. it IS the best moneymaking way to play NL at the lower limits. search my posts and i'm sure you can find a more useless post than this, so go ahead and quote that and call me useless please.

[MLMarkland 0]

there's no doubt in my mind that this system makes more, consistently, at the .5/1 and lower limits, than anything that the common poster on here is doing.

Conjecture, assumption and hyperbole does not rise to the level of usefulness. Whether there is any doubt in your mind "that the system makes more consistently, at the .5/1 and lower limits," is not a useful statement of fact. Negative Usefulness Value for this sentence.

anyone that says that they can make reads on someone at .10/.25 or .25/.50 is a fool, and is just blindly guessing, and only remembering the times he's right.

Making reads is certainly a losing proposition at the lowest limits, but it is not an impossibility at certain times. Additionally, calling people fools has -UV.

and lois, we know that this system won't work for you, because you fold the nuts if you're worried about draws. that's okay though, we need the fish in our games.

Hyperbole degrades usefulness. -UV.

i guarantee smash is laughing at everyone disputing this theory, because every person that doubts him means that it's another person that will pay him off when he decides to play brainless NL.

I'm not sure what part of this statement is useful. -UV.

[Pupsta 0]

so, by definition, is your post debating the usefulness of my posts less useful, because it's playing off of an already useless part, or more useful, because it's educating the masses on the level of uselessness of my posts?[/useless]

[MLMarkland 0]

so, by definition, is your post debating the usefulness of my posts less useful, because it's playing off of an already useless part, or more useful, because it's educating the masses on the level of uselessness of my posts?[/useless]

My post is marginally useful since it empirically examines the UV of your post.

[Binbs 0]

Its not the best way to make money at the lower limits.The system is ok and it works, however you can make a lot more by making reads and having a sense of what kind of ppl you are playing against.

[Pupsta 0]

Its not the best way to make money at the lower limits.The system is ok and it works, however you can make a lot more by making reads and having a sense of what kind of ppl you are playing against.

no, you can't.you have a sense of what kind of people you're playing against. you're, for the most part, playing against retarded donkeys. if you're not playing against retarded donkeys, you're playing the wrong low limit tables.against retarded donkeys, smash's system cleans up. what part of this is so hard to understand?

[Dubey 1,035]

when using the system, are you supossed to buy-in for the max at whatever limit your are playing?

[Pupsta 0]

when using the system, are you supossed to buy-in for the max at whatever limit your are playing?

absolutely. you want to extract the max out of your hands.

[Binbs 0]

PupstaI dont care how you put it. I have to disagree. Not everyone is a donkey at that limit. Yes most dont know that much, but there are plenty of ppl like people who frequent these forums who do know some bit.And they are not gonna call your ALL IN preflop with AA every time. That system will work but the money you get from that will not be as good as actually using your brain and analyzing the table.I cant believe anyone would argue against this. Its common sense.

[MLMarkland 0]

PupstaI dont care how you put it. I have to disagree. Not everyone is a donkey at that limit. Yes most dont know that much, but there are plenty of ppl like people who frequent these forums who do know some bit.And they are not gonna call your ALL IN preflop with AA every time. That system will work but the money you get from that will not be as good as actually using your brain and analyzing the table.I cant believe anyone would argue against this. Its common sense.

[Pupsta 0]

PupstaI dont care how you put it. I have to disagree. Not everyone is a donkey at that limit. Yes most dont know that much, but there are plenty of ppl like people who frequent these forums who do know some bit.And they are not gonna call your ALL IN preflop with AA every time. That system will work but the money you get from that will not be as good as actually using your brain and analyzing the table.I cant believe anyone would argue against this. Its common sense.

that's the thing. if you're playing at a table with good players, YOU'RE PLAYING AT THE WRONG TABLE. it's almost like you're choosing to go to an ATM that has a service charge instead of going to the one affiliated with your bank that's sitting right next to it. there are these tables with these donkeys. know what i got called by with my aces last time i tried it? Q4d. yes, it was sooted. yes, i laughed out loud. if you're too damned lazy to find the donks, you are the donk. just keep getting your immaculate reads and laying down your kings because you know their 50 cent raise signifies aces.

[Pupsta 0]

PupstaI dont care how you put it. I have to disagree. Not everyone is a donkey at that limit. Yes most dont know that much, but there are plenty of ppl like people who frequent these forums who do know some bit.And they are not gonna call your ALL IN preflop with AA every time. That system will work but the money you get from that will not be as good as actually using your brain and analyzing the table.I cant believe anyone would argue against this. Its common sense.

as i said in my previous post, that's fine...keep getting your reads and keep making moves on people at these games and keep making the minimum on your good hands. it doesn't matter to me.there is no reason to play any other strategy at the low limit NL games. if you do, you really just dislike money. you're not gaining the experience you need, because you cannot put these people on hands no matter how hard you try. you're just giving up money.

[Binbs 0]

This strategy still will not give you more money than if you use your brain while playing.And please stop implying stuff about me. You dont have any idea what kind of player I am.

[Pupsta 0]

This strategy still will not give you more money than if you use your brain while playing.And please stop implying stuff about me. You dont have any idea what kind of player I am.

you said that you make reads and play "thoughtful" poker at the lower limits...that tells me all i need to know about you...that you're overthinking yourself at these limits, and are thus making less money than you would if you used this system.that's fine...if you choose to make less money, it doesn't matter one bit to me.using your brain at low limit NL will pretty much only make you less money.

[Binbs 0]

What games and limits do you exactly play since you know all this?I never said I use all kinds of fancy moves. I knwo what Im doing.I play in a way where I can extract the most amount of money from the people im playing against.Doesnt matter. You dont seem to get it. I sure hope other people do.I never said smashs system doesnt work. It just not is the most efficient way to make money. No clearcut system will ever be. When you are dealing with human beings you must analyze how to play them, at that instant, in that hand, at that table on that particular day.Again, its common sense.

[Pupsta 0]

What games and limits do you exactly play since you know all this?I never said I use all kinds of fancy moves. I knwo what Im doing.I play in a way where I can extract the most amount of money from the people im playing against.Doesnt matter. You dont seem to get it. I sure hope other people do.I never said smashs system doesnt work. It just not is the most efficient way to make money. No clearcut system will ever be. When you are dealing with human beings you must analyze how to play them, at that instant, in that hand, at that table on that particular day.Again, its common sense.

you just absolutely fail to understand how terrible the people can be at these limits. i was a doubter at first, too, so i went and tried it. patiently waited for my hands, and presto, i hit a set and am called by toppair no kicker. hit my flush and called by lower flushes, 2 pair, etc etc. push aces and called by q4 sooooted.you have all the analysis you need for bad players...they will pay you off on your hands, so don't get cute with the betting...they will call your push if they're going to call a dollar. you're the one that doesn't seem to get it, my friend.

[Binbs 0]

You know something just struck me.I play shorthanded nearly exclusively. I can see how this would be more realistic playing 10 handed. especially at the really lower limits.

[Pupsta 0]

You know something just struck me.I play shorthanded nearly exclusively. I can see how this would be more realistic playing 10 handed. especially at the really lower limits.

oh, absolutely. this system fails shorthanded, because it costs you more per hand on average, since you'll be seeing the blinds much more often.

[Binbs 0]

Yea. I can definately see this working most of the time at the micro limits.lol. Funny we are argueing back and forth.

[Pupsta 0]

Yea. I can definately see this working most of the time at the micro limits.lol. Funny we are argueing back and forth.

if you would have said that you play shorthanded, then it wouldn't have been argued whatsoever. i still don't see why you'd want to play low limit shorthanded though, when there's a lot more $ to be made with the strategy in full ring games, but if that's what you prefer, that's fine. just don't use this strategy in shorthanded games