some help with smash's theory please!

[adidas freak 0]

I've tried searching for Smash's theory but can't seem to find it. Can anyone point me in the right direction or tell me the theory? Also, was there ever a consensus on whether it worked or not?Thanks in advance!

[93transam 0]

no

[jlgosse 0]

Go all-in with every hand, and always sit with the maximum at every table you play at.And no, it doesn't work. Or at least I don't think it works better than playing well.

[adidas freak 0]

Go all-in with every hand, and always sit with the maximum at every table you play at.And no, it doesn't work. Or at least I don't think it works better than playing well.

So, according to you, the theory is to buy in for the max and just move all in every hand?I know Smash is a little ecentric but not retarted.Can I please get a reply from someone who isn't a complete idiot!By the way Jlgosse, please dont ever respond to one of my posts again...ever!Thanks a bunch!

[93transam 0]

go all in on every hand and never fold.you'll increase your earnings by at least 150%

[SuM827 0]

This is ridiculous. Smash's theory isn't a theory at all, it's a proven strategy. It works at any ring game up to NL $600, not because he is a genius, but because NL games online are bad, very bad, and if you need to follow his strategy to beat online no limit poker, you're probably one of the fish that make a strategy like this work.

[RDigger 0]

Go all in EVERY SINGLE HAND!!Thats EVERY hand.Don't fold, EVER.Go ALL IN.EVERY HAND.good luck

[adidas freak 0]

I really dont care how basic it is or if he really invented it. I have no plans on using it. All I want to know is what the strategy is. All I am asking is for someone to tell me where I can find it or, better yet, just tell me the theory.Please dont reply with "just search". I just tried searching and can't find it.

[RDigger 0]

Just go all in every hand.Eventually you will get lucky and win a huge pot!

[TucsonMonster 0]

all it is is only play any A-x suited, and small pocket pairs. Go all in with KK and AA preflop in any position no matter what. fold everything else, including AK off suit, and see flops with the small pocket pair and ace-x suited, and try to hit you flush for cheap, if you flop a set go all in no matter what in any postition. thats itFOrd

[hank213 1,823]

This is a valid strategy....If:You never want to move up in limits(see PS)You are extremely patientYou want to make a little bit of moneyPSBy constantly playing these admittedly weak tables you will never hone your skills to the level necessary to play for "real" money. If that is your objective there is nothing wrong with it. However, if your desire is to move up "the ladder" then playing this will will gain nothing more than a bankroll you will lose when you move to where some money is.In essence, you are negating any +EV from that particular hand at any higher limit because you negate the fish calls by making such an over bet. So, if you play this strategy and become comfortable with it, you will have extreme difficulties in the future. Unless of course your idol is Knish and you play safe always no matter the payout and keep playing small time. No flaming necessary. Just let me speak my two cents.

[Smasharoo 0]

In essence, you are negating any +EV from that particular hand at any higher limit because you negate the fish calls by making such an over bet. So, if you play this strategy and become comfortable with it, you will have extreme difficulties in the future.Nah.It teaches new NL players a lot of fundementially important things. Mostly discipline, which is 90% of that game anyway.You'd be much, much, much, netter off starting with a core strategy and then trial and erroring a style out of it than you would be playing your way up in limits, winning at low limits because retarded chimpanses can win at low limit NL and then losing your whole bankroll because you have absolutely no idea how to play when you move up.That's much *more* likely to happen if you read SS and go off and play low limit NL.good luck.

[Smasharoo 0]

I really dont care how basic it is or if he really invented it.I really did.In about 20 seconds when someone asked about low limt NL a year or whatever ago.good luck

[Chiggleslap 0]

I really dont care how basic it is or if he really invented it.I really did.In about 20 seconds when someone asked about low limt NL a year or whatever ago.good luck

I remember that. An epic moment in poker history.He isn't lying. He really did invent it. Pay him.Although I'm surprised it took even 20 seconds, smash.

[Smasharoo 0]

Although I'm surprised it took even 20 seconds, smash.Well, I had to type it.The next 30 hours of my time that I spent explaining the simplest strategy in the world to people was, I'm sure, some sort of punishment for me having been Hitler in a past life.

[TraptSteve 0]

Why do you exclude medium pairs from the "no set, no bet (all-in)", which apparently was a concept you came up with and all the poker authors jocked?Why not K-x suited?? Plenty of NL players will call with the lower flushs anyway. If you are going to push with a small set , which will often NOT be the nuts, why not do it with a K-high flush as well?(ps - just some friendly knit-picking )

[Chiggleslap 0]

Although I'm surprised it took even 20 seconds, smash.Well, I had to type it.The next 30 hours of my time that I spent explaining the simplest strategy in the world to people was, I'm sure, some sort of punishment for me having been Hitler in a past life.

Don't worry, you weren't Hitler. My 6th grade humanities teacher was Hitler in her past life.So unless my principles of reincarnation need to be brushed up on, I think you're just experiencing the height of human stupidity, which doesn't discriminate.You were probably a butterfly in your past life.

[hank213 1,823]

In essence, you are negating any +EV from that particular hand at any higher limit because you negate the fish calls by making such an over bet. So, if you play this strategy and become comfortable with it, you will have extreme difficulties in the future.Nah.It teaches new NL players a lot of fundementially important things. Mostly discipline, which is 90% of that game anyway.You'd be much, much, much, netter off starting with a core strategy and then trial and erroring a style out of it than you would be playing your way up in limits, winning at low limits because retarded chimpanses can win at low limit NL and then losing your whole bankroll because you have absolutely no idea how to play when you move up.That's much *more* likely to happen if you read SS and go off and play low limit NL.good luck.

I can't argue with the idea of having a core strategy against the chimps, it is 100% valid. My point is that should someone adopt this strategy and make it their own without truly learning the finer points of NLHE, they will pay other peoples mortgages. All in all though smash, you should get some author credit in an "online hold 'em" book.

[Smasharoo 0]

Why do you exclude medium pairs from the "no set, no bet (all-in)", which apparently was a concept you came up with and all the poker authors jocked?They're talking about *limit*. See, when you play Holdem, there can be diffrent betting structures. SOMETIMES you can bet all of your chips *at any time*!!I'm actually not sure what you mean by "exclude medium pairs" I think you're confused by a 30 word strategy. Which, frankly, isn't really shocking.Why not K-x suited??Visibility.Plenty of NL players will call with the lower flushs anyway. If you are going to push with a small set , which will often NOT be the nuts, why not do it with a K-high flush as well?Visability.good luck.

[hank213 1,823]

Ok it appears smash is online so I am eagerly anticipating his response to my last post :shock:

[Smasharoo 0]

I can't argue with the idea of having a core strategy against the chimps, it is 100% valid. My point is that should someone adopt this strategy and make it their own without truly learning the finer points of NLHE, they will pay other peoples mortgages.Nah.They're much better off not "learning" by making horrible plays that win them money because the games are so stunningly bad.It's important to learn to play well post flop, but you really get a feel for that more by playing lots of hands than anything else. It doesn't really matter much how you play them if you pay attention to how other people play them.A good postflop player could play every single hand preflop in low limit NL for a 5BB raise and still do fine. That's not the point. Beating low limit NL doesn't make you a better player at higher limit NL, the gameplay's so diffrent postflop it's really two diffrent skill sets. good luck.

[hank213 1,823]

I can't argue with the idea of having a core strategy against the chimps, it is 100% valid. My point is that should someone adopt this strategy and make it their own without truly learning the finer points of NLHE, they will pay other peoples mortgages.Nah.They're much better off not "learning" by making horrible plays that win them money because the games are so stunningly bad.It's important to learn to play well post flop, but you really get a feel for that more by playing lots of hands than anything else. It doesn't really matter much how you play them if you pay attention to how other people play them.A good postflop player could play every single hand preflop in low limit NL for a 5BB raise and still do fine. That's not the point. Beating low limit NL doesn't make you a better player at higher limit NL, the gameplay's so diffrent postflop it's really two diffrent skill sets. good luck.

As one who started is playing smaller blind NL I have to disagree. If you play smart, learn from the smallest loss and/or victory, why wouldn't you stand a better chance at higher limits? It seems the fundamental disagreement we have is about how much effort one is willing to put into truly learning the game. Again smash, you do deserve some credit, I actually played your strategy for 3000 hands online and did quite well. But, I gave it up to learn instead of make a few bucks at a time.PSI appreciate that ya didn't just flame me...you prove that a civilized discussion is still possible on the net. Best of luck and put me in the dedication when you write your book hehe.

[checkymcfold 0]

Visibility.Visability.

good at poker, bad at spelling. or even consistency.seriously, everyone, stop trying to argue against this strategy. if you were ever good at low limit NLHE, you did something similar to it, anyway. if you tried something more nuanced or "advanced," you didn't win as much money as you could have. and if you worked on your game and tried to adjust it to the circumstances at low limit NLHE, you found more and more that your game looked EXACTLY like this strategy.if you're arguing otherwise, it's all ego, and most of it unjustified. get over it.

[steve7stud 0]

I can't argue with the idea of having a core strategy against the chimps, it is 100% valid. My point is that should someone adopt this strategy and make it their own without truly learning the finer points of NLHE, they will pay other peoples mortgages.Nah.They're much better off not "learning" by making horrible plays that win them money because the games are so stunningly bad.It's important to learn to play well post flop, but you really get a feel for that more by playing lots of hands than anything else. It doesn't really matter much how you play them if you pay attention to how other people play them.A good postflop player could play every single hand preflop in low limit NL for a 5BB raise and still do fine. That's not the point. Beating low limit NL doesn't make you a better player at higher limit NL, the gameplay's so diffrent postflop it's really two diffrent skill sets. good luck.

This is an interesting post. I don't want to elaborate too much. But it's worth reading a couple of times.

[hank213 1,823]

Visibility.Visability.

good at poker, bad at spelling. or even consistency.seriously, everyone, stop trying to argue against this strategy. if you were ever good at low limit NLHE, you did something similar to it, anyway. if you tried something more nuanced or "advanced," you didn't win as much money as you could have. and if you worked on your game and tried to adjust it to the circumstances at low limit NLHE, you found more and more that your game looked EXACTLY like this strategy.if you're arguing otherwise, it's all ego, and most of it unjustified. get over it.

I for one am not arguing against this strategy, as just that a strategy. However, my argument comes into play for those that wish to move up to higher limits. Other than that, IT WORKS...so if your desire is to make some money here and there by all means GO FOR IT! But, if your desire is to start playing higher limits...then study the game, your opponents and your own play. As confuscious say: to know what another man desires , first know what you desire.I'll respond to all replies tomorrow...time to go pay the rent. lol