Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="N.D., post: 827416, member: 30036"] If you feel it's right, then it probably is the right style for you. Still, consider it as your main style and not your only style. Take Gus Hansen for instance. The majority of viewers think he's some sort of maniacal better/calling machine. He has a hyper-aggressive image which he uses to his advantage. But if you watch him play, he's not constantly hyper-aggressive unless it's the right strategy. He's also not crazy-loose all the time. Sometimes he plays tight... Also consider that Gus and others who play with big stacks, have several hundred times their buy-in at any given time. Maybe even more. You don't have that. You need that if you're going to play the way you do. Why? Well let's keep examining Gus Hansen. Only this time let's look at his online game. He took a million dollar downswing in his stride. Why? Because he can afford to + he gets paid to play, win or lose FTP pays him. I'd take losses in my stride if they weren't real losses, but for me, they are real losses... Now, if you look at Chris Ferguson's style which is generally tight aggressive, that worked great for his challenges. His challenges aren't too different from starting with $50. So ask yourself, is it better to play wilder in a style that suits your nature, knowing you haven't enough to cover the swings? Or is it better to play tighter, even though it goes against your nature, just until you have enough to cover the swings. I'll hazard a guess and say that the wilder the player the more money they need in their BR. I'm saying it because the wilder player takes more risks and gambles more. They also pressure the rest of the table, but that only works so much before the table fights back... I guess Kenny Rogers is right. You do gotta know when to walk away and know when to run. If it feels like the rest of the table's gonna turn on you, get the hell outta Dodge and fast! Don't believe me, but I've seen the hyper-aggressors get the crap kicked out of them by 5 - 8 tight/passive players before. They tighten up, they play possum, and then give u a butt-kicking. Still, and this is key. There's no one way to play! Play the table. At one table hyper-aggressive is genius, at another passive works better, at a third it's best to just keep mixing and matching according to the opponent(s) you're in a hand with. I'm sure you've read it before but try to play your opponent(s). Not just your cards, and not just your personal style, but your opponent(s). Also, I gotta ask, why would you call if you know you're beat? If you haven't convinced yourself the opponent's bluffing, why call? You say it's because you could bust them, you could hit your straight. Do you even take your odds of hitting your straight or flush into consideration? Do you even stop to visualize them? I just watched a break time interview with Daniel and he was talking about hands he was in and how he thought about his outs and what to do. He even admitted to some mistakes but he always thought about his outs. His blunders were bet-related and not odds related. Also his blunders worked out for the best. But still, they probably did in part because he had plenty of outs. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us