GLAVI65
Rock Star
Bronze Level
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2020
- Total posts
- 106
- Awards
- 1
- Poker Chips
- 146
- Casino Coins
- 0
- #1
Hello everyone.
More and more poker content is available: courses, problem solving programs, videos, books, databases, GTO analysis, etc. Nowadays, a player can spend more hours studying than playing.
However, when we sit at a real table, especially at low and medium limits, we often encounter situations that don't appear in any problem solving program: recreational players who place strange bets, rivals who show unconventional patterns, or tables where the dynamics are constantly changing.
That's why I have a question that I want to discuss:
What influences long-term success the most: technical study or the ability to improvise and adapt?
Personally, I believe that the study provides the fundamentals and avoids making serious mistakes. But I also think that experience develops a kind of “instinct” that allows us to make quick decisions when information is incomplete.
In addition, in poker there is the subject of aspiration. We all start with different objectives: some are looking to have fun, others to generate extra income and others dream of reaching a professional level. Do you think that the aspiration level of each player influences the amount of study they should dedicate?
Some questions to discuss:
How many hours of study do you dedicate for each hour of play?
Do you think that a very studious player can be limited if they don't develop the ability to adapt?
Is improvisation a skill that can be learned or is it something innate?
In what situation has it been the case that moving away from theory has brought them more money?
For someone who aspires to excel, what do you consider more important: studying more or playing more?
I'm interested in learning about the experiences of both casual and regular players.
What do you think is the ideal combination of study, improvisation and ambition to progress in poker?
More and more poker content is available: courses, problem solving programs, videos, books, databases, GTO analysis, etc. Nowadays, a player can spend more hours studying than playing.
However, when we sit at a real table, especially at low and medium limits, we often encounter situations that don't appear in any problem solving program: recreational players who place strange bets, rivals who show unconventional patterns, or tables where the dynamics are constantly changing.
That's why I have a question that I want to discuss:
What influences long-term success the most: technical study or the ability to improvise and adapt?
Personally, I believe that the study provides the fundamentals and avoids making serious mistakes. But I also think that experience develops a kind of “instinct” that allows us to make quick decisions when information is incomplete.
In addition, in poker there is the subject of aspiration. We all start with different objectives: some are looking to have fun, others to generate extra income and others dream of reaching a professional level. Do you think that the aspiration level of each player influences the amount of study they should dedicate?
Some questions to discuss:
How many hours of study do you dedicate for each hour of play?
Do you think that a very studious player can be limited if they don't develop the ability to adapt?
Is improvisation a skill that can be learned or is it something innate?
In what situation has it been the case that moving away from theory has brought them more money?
For someone who aspires to excel, what do you consider more important: studying more or playing more?
I'm interested in learning about the experiences of both casual and regular players.
What do you think is the ideal combination of study, improvisation and ambition to progress in poker?
