Sshe Principals...can They Be Applied To Nl Tourneys?

[Mercury69 3]

OK, might seem like a dumb question, but...Back in late November and early December, i final tabled a hald dozen FCP tourneys within a couple of weeks of each other, as well as winning and ft'ing the 12K $20 rebut tourney on Royal Vegas. Since then, I've been reading books on poker...HOH Vol 1, Super System 2, Theory of Poker, etc, and now I can't even get into the money. Long winded whine? Kind of, but my question is:Can Ed Miller's SSHE principals be ported successfully into a NL HE tourney? Clearly, adjustments must be made, but I'm talking basic principals, such as starting hands, GAP conept, etc.Help me regain my footing, people. I just want to start cashing again...Thanks for the flames(?).

[rog 0]

IMO, there may be some way of applying them, but you're better off reading HOH 1 & 2. I started off using a lot of SSHE principles, but adjusted them pretty much beyond recognition. It would have been quicker for me to have read HOH in the first place.

[Mercury69 3]

Roger that, Roger.

[copernicus 0]

Ive never read SSHE. Is it a limit strategy or NL? If its limit its pretty worthless as a starting point. If its NL then it may not be a bad start.The big differences are the increasing blinds and the inability to take more $ out of your pocket Increasing blinds may loosen your playing hands and making you more aggressive, the latter increases your gap and discourages making small +EV plays.Rather than think through all those considerations yourself, HoH and Tournament Poker for Advanced Players do a lot of that thinking for you, and you can spend the time playing, applying, and adapting those to your game.

[Mercury69 3]

Is there any truth to my thinking that my learning curve took a dip because of all the new information? Could it be that I'm thinking too much and/or applying theory incorrectly? I suspect it is elements of these, as well as some frustration at what seems like a nverending cavalcade of bad beats.Here's one example of a bad beat: On the bubble for US Daily, 61 players left. It's me vs a slightly larger stack. We end up all-in and both of us turn up AKo. Buddy proceeds to nail four clubs on the board to make a flush and I'm out. I mean, COME ON!!!Anyway, thanks so far. More comments are welcome.

[Hobbes 1]

Is there any truth to my thinking that my learning curve took a dip because of all the new information? Could it be that I'm thinking too much and/or applying theory incorrectly? I suspect it is elements of these, as well as some frustration at what seems like a nverending cavalcade of bad beats.Here's one example of a bad beat: On the bubble for US Daily, 61 players left. It's me vs a slightly larger stack. We end up all-in and both of us turn up AKo. Buddy proceeds to nail four clubs on the board to make a flush and I'm out. I mean, COME ON!!!Anyway, thanks so far. More comments are welcome.

That's certainly possible. I found that my play usually suffered right after reading a new book. Now I don't try to remember what I read, I just focus on my reads, concentrate on the game, and make what I think is the correct play at the time. Afterwards I go back and look at the key hands and try to see where I messed up. If some of the strategy/analysis isn't almost second nature to you, it's not effective to try to work it out while in the hand. If you think about what you've read a lot while you aren't playing, you'll find that what you've learned naturally gets integrated into your play. It just takes time. That's my experience anyway.

[Mercury69 3]

Thanks, Hobbes. BTW, I'm in love with your icon.

[copernicus 0]

Is there any truth to my thinking that my learning curve took a dip because of all the new information? Could it be that I'm thinking too much and/or applying theory incorrectly? I suspect it is elements of these, as well as some frustration at what seems like a nverending cavalcade of bad beats.Here's one example of a bad beat: On the bubble for US Daily, 61 players left. It's me vs a slightly larger stack. We end up all-in and both of us turn up AKo. Buddy proceeds to nail four clubs on the board to make a flush and I'm out. I mean, COME ON!!!Anyway, thanks so far. More comments are welcome.

Yes, you may be suffering a bit of information overload, and it takes time to assmilate the info. Its also very likely that your early results were positive variance (a nice way of saying lucky, lol) and your recent results are negative variance and your real level of play is somewhere in between.Since most of the posters here have read HoH and at least incorporate it in their thought process, reading and responding to posts and can help get you into the right thought process.

[mk 11]

Trying to apply the principles of SSHE to NL tournaments would be terrible. It's just variance. It happens.

[Rocketwadster 0]

My fiance used to always reminds me that I know too much when it comes to playing against newbies, as they will rountinely make decisions that won't make any sense to me (ie. low buy-in MTT's, home games with her sister's family, etc), which sometimes end up costing me. I have learned to adapt to my environment somewhat, allowing me to perform well at most levels I play tournaments at. The biggest influence on your results will be the decisions you make. Make enough correct decisions, and the results will take care of themselves.Look at decisions, not results.

[Mercury69 3]

Thx for the further responses...On the plus side, variance decided to smile upon me for a bit this weekend. Finished 7th in a Full Tilt 10$ MTT (300 people) and turned 7$ into a 75$ tourney token, as well as some modest success on low limit ring games, although I definitely overplayed a couple of monster hands and didn't extract enough coin out of the other people in the pot.