smash is a freaking genius.

[JMoney2681 0]

You obviously suck if you cant hit a set on a flop in 34 tries

LMAO! Aint that the damn truth. How about this...QP/SMQuit poker/Save Millions.*patent pending*

[mb5322 0]

Is smash even still around, I stopped posting 4 months ago, and at that time he hadn't posted in about 2 months.

[NOFX_PUNK 0]

i like this stratagey i put in a few minor modifications here and there. But this is how i will teach my girl to play she wants to play but doesnt want to spend the long hours it takes to get good. calling every ax suites is a little nuts in my opinion and pushing with bottom set on retardedly scary boards is pretty dumb aswell. but for the most part this is a great system. Thank you smash. you cocky bastardo sw

You can never be taking far the worst of it considering on the flop, with a set, you are 35% to make a full house or better by the river and at $10 NL who can't afford to gamble those odds?

[MyPlayIsRAB 0]

i just printed this out, im going to try this at 2x25$ NL. im getting 50$ on UB from an instant bankroll type thing on monday. ill post results after 10k hands if i can

[showstopper24 0]

good luck

[Canary3 1]

if you are only going to play 2 tables you will be incredibly bored

[Swift_Psycho 1]

if you are only going to play 2 tables you will be incredibly bored

QFT

[MyPlayIsRAB 0]

QFT

obv as soon as i doule through itll be four tables

[stealfromblind 0]

obv as soon as i doule through itll be four tables

smash is a freaking idiot...and thats being generous

[xtxoxpxd 0]

i used this strategy clearing 900 hands at PP, 10 tabling. ended about even. anyone wanna see stats/graph?

[chgocubs99 0]

i used this strategy clearing 900 hands at PP, 10 tabling. ended about even. anyone wanna see stats/graph?

No.

[Dratj 0]

i used this strategy clearing 900 hands at PP, 10 tabling. ended about even. anyone wanna see stats/graph?

smash strat doesn't work anymore, players are generally better nowadays.

[Zach6668 513]

smash strat doesn't work anymore, players are generally better nowadays.

This may decrease the rate, but I'd argue it still works, perhaps at lower levels now.

[rwood 0]

smash's strat sucks. a sound NL player would have a much higher winrate. laggy or taggy. i dont know how this thread still exists. has anyone actually used this strat at anythign higher than 25 or 50 nl?

[Zach6668 513]

smash's strat sucks. a sound NL player would have a much higher winrate. laggy or taggy. i dont know how this thread still exists. has anyone actually used this strat at anythign higher than 25 or 50 nl?

If you are only rolled for say $50 NL, you could probably make more PER HOUR 20-tabling Smash, than you could playing a normal amount of tables in your normal style.

[rwood 0]

If you are only rolled for say $50 NL, you could probably make more PER HOUR 20-tabling Smash, than you could playing a normal amount of tables in your normal style.

read the CUT TO THE CHASE PART AT THE BOTTOM FOR A SUMMARY OF MY THOUGHTS, BECAUSE I BASICALLY RAMBLED THE FIRST PART OF THIS POST. although it would be a ridiculous waste of time, i wish someone would try this, because i highly disagree. MAIN REASON: the retards with AK that catch air. although i dont see it as much at limits higher, i consistently see oponents bluff off all or most of their entire stacks when checked to after missing flop with AK. like i said this is much more rare at 11 and 1/2 NL and higher, but JS. i used to be amazed by this. anyways, im sure you're right though zach, you are 99% of the time, and most likely have tried the smash strat for a larger sample size than me(about 1yr ago for 1k hands 6 tabling), so i wont argue with you. BUTthis does not make you as good a player and will hurt you almost assuredly when you move past the smaller buy in limits. not saying that 100, 200 and 400 NL is big, JS. CUT TO THE CHASE:20 tabling smash's strat will almost assuredly pay off more than 1-4 tabling w/normal NL strat, BUT smash's strat will not help develop your game as well.

[Zach6668 513]

read the CUT TO THE CHASE PART AT THE BOTTOM FOR A SUMMARY OF MY THOUGHTS, BECAUSE I BASICALLY RAMBLED THE FIRST PART OF THIS POST. although it would be a ridiculous waste of time, i wish someone would try this, because i highly disagree. MAIN REASON: the retards with AK that catch air. although i dont see it as much at limits higher, i consistently see oponents bluff off all or most of their entire stacks when checked to after missing flop with AK. like i said this is much more rare at 11 and 1/2 NL and higher, but JS. i used to be amazed by this. anyways, im sure you're right though zach, you are 99% of the time, and most likely have tried the smash strat for a larger sample size than me(about 1yr ago for 1k hands 6 tabling), so i wont argue with you. BUTthis does not make you as good a player and will hurt you almost assuredly when you move past the smaller buy in limits. not saying that 100, 200 and 400 NL is big, JS. CUT TO THE CHASE:20 tabling smash's strat will almost assuredly pay off more than 1-4 tabling w/normal NL strat, BUT smash's strat will not help develop your game as well.

This is all true.

[dimseven 0]

i just printed this out

Heh.

[MychCumstien 0]

ok, just tried the Smash method for a few hours, played a little over 1000 hands, 6 tabling on party, $1/2 NL. Smash is a moron, plain and simple. A couple fundamental flaws with this system, you're reduced to playing the cards, not the player. Good players aren't calling their entire stacks on the flop, unless they have you beat. Bad players may call once in awhile, but only if they hit top pair or better.So let's see, if I'm 8-1 to flop a set when I get a PP, which is not that often, I then move all in on the flop. Now my opponent is only going to call if he sucks, but has a piece of it, and he's only going to catch a piece of it 1/3rd of the time. That's not very often.After playing this method, I played it to the T, abandoning my regular sound method of play, (I'm an idiot) and only got called once out of 8 times flopping a set. It doubled me up, won $200, but it's one of the only hands I did win the entire session based on this method. By only limping preflop in any position with only Axs, and any PP, I'm not winning enough pots to offset the cost of the blinds and of the limping I'm incurring. I won $200, but ended up spending $400 in blinds/ limping.All in preflop with KK is retarded. Not enough players are calling with hands like AK or AQ. I know I'll get called by AA, and then be a 4-1 dog, this is trash.Not raising QQ ever is retarded as well, it's litterally throwing away EV. I can understand limping with it sometimes/ mix it up a bit, but that's about it.Summary, this strategy is overly simple, and may help beginners of the game not get busted as often, and the all in method may bust the occasional donk once in awhile, but you won't bust people often enough to offset the costs of the blinds and the limping while multi-tabling. At best you may break even. Now this was at 1/2 NL, I can't speak for the lower limits than that.Anyway, it didn't work for me, I ended up down 2 hundy overall, and I honestly feel stupider for having tried.

[rwood 0]

ok, just tried the Smash method for a few hours, played a little over 1000 hands, 6 tabling on party, $1/2 NL. Smash is a moron, plain and simple. A couple fundamental flaws with this system, you're reduced to playing the cards, not the player. Good players aren't calling their entire stacks on the flop, unless they have you beat. Bad players may call once in awhile, but only if they hit top pair or better.So let's see, if I'm 8-1 to flop a set when I get a PP, which is not that often, I then move all in on the flop. Now my opponent is only going to call if he sucks, but has a piece of it, and he's only going to catch a piece of it 1/3rd of the time. That's not very often.After playing this method, I played it to the T, abandoning my regular sound method of play, (I'm an idiot) and only got called once out of 8 times flopping a set. It doubled me up, won $200, but it's one of the only hands I did win the entire session based on this method. By only limping preflop in any position with only Axs, and any PP, I'm not winning enough pots to offset the cost of the blinds and of the limping I'm incurring. I won $200, but ended up spending $400 in blinds/ limping.All in preflop with KK is retarded. Not enough players are calling with hands like AK or AQ. I know I'll get called by AA, and then be a 4-1 dog, this is trash.Not raising QQ ever is retarded as well, it's litterally throwing away EV. I can understand limping with it sometimes/ mix it up a bit, but that's about it.Summary, this strategy is overly simple, and may help beginners of the game not get busted as often, and the all in method may bust the occasional donk once in awhile, but you won't bust people often enough to offset the costs of the blinds and the limping while multi-tabling. At best you may break even. Now this was at 1/2 NL, I can't speak for the lower limits than that.Anyway, it didn't work for me, I ended up down 2 hundy overall, and I honestly feel stupider for having tried.

can i get a QFMFT???!?!?!?!?

[Canary3 1]

obv as soon as i doule through itll be four tables

you will need to play much more than four tables to not feel very very boredI know smash said his strat would work all the way up to 400 nl but i dont think it works over 50nl. I have had success 8 tabling stars 10 nl

ok, just tried the Smash method for a few hours, played a little over 1000 hands, 6 tabling on party, $1/2 NL. Smash is a moron, plain and simple. A couple fundamental flaws with this system, you're reduced to playing the cards, not the player. Good players aren't calling their entire stacks on the flop, unless they have you beat. Bad players may call once in awhile, but only if they hit top pair or better.So let's see, if I'm 8-1 to flop a set when I get a PP, which is not that often, I then move all in on the flop. Now my opponent is only going to call if he sucks, but has a piece of it, and he's only going to catch a piece of it 1/3rd of the time. That's not very often.After playing this method, I played it to the T, abandoning my regular sound method of play, (I'm an idiot) and only got called once out of 8 times flopping a set. It doubled me up, won $200, but it's one of the only hands I did win the entire session based on this method. By only limping preflop in any position with only Axs, and any PP, I'm not winning enough pots to offset the cost of the blinds and of the limping I'm incurring. I won $200, but ended up spending $400 in blinds/ limping.All in preflop with KK is retarded. Not enough players are calling with hands like AK or AQ. I know I'll get called by AA, and then be a 4-1 dog, this is trash.Not raising QQ ever is retarded as well, it's litterally throwing away EV. I can understand limping with it sometimes/ mix it up a bit, but that's about it.Summary, this strategy is overly simple, and may help beginners of the game not get busted as often, and the all in method may bust the occasional donk once in awhile, but you won't bust people often enough to offset the costs of the blinds and the limping while multi-tabling. At best you may break even. Now this was at 1/2 NL, I can't speak for the lower limits than that.Anyway, it didn't work for me, I ended up down 2 hundy overall, and I honestly feel stupider for having tried.

I also find it funny that you've played 1000 hands and think it doesnt work. drop down a few levels and play 20,000 hands and see if you like it any better

[Zach6668 513]

Igonrance...

Hi,THE POINT OF THE STRATEGY IS NOT TO PLAY GOOD POKER AND PLAY THE PLAYER.THE POINT IS TO MAKE THE MOST MONEY WITH THE LEAST RISK BY PLAYING A MILLION TABLES OF SMALL STAKES NO LIMIT OVER TENS OF THOUSANDS OF HANDS.WHY IS IT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?- Zach

[Canary3 1]

Hi,THE POINT OF THE STRATEGY IS NOT TO PLAY GOOD POKER AND PLAY THE PLAYER.THE POINT IS TO MAKE THE MOST MONEY WITH THE LEAST RISK BY PLAYING A MILLION TABLES OF SMALL STAKES NO LIMIT OVER TENS OF THOUSANDS OF HANDS.WHY IS IT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?- Zach

i love how you always say hi first.

[rwood 0]

Hi,THE POINT OF THE STRATEGY IS NOT TO PLAY GOOD POKER AND PLAY THE PLAYER.THE POINT IS TO MAKE THE MOST MONEY WITH THE LEAST RISK BY PLAYING A MILLION TABLES OF SMALL STAKES NO LIMIT OVER TENS OF THOUSANDS OF HANDS.WHY IS IT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?- Zach

zach are you saying that playing 20 tables of 10nl will yield a higher profit than 1-4 tables of 200 or 400 nl? what i totally agree with you on is that this works better for smaller limits than playing a sound strategy on just a few tables.

[Canary3 1]

I think hes saying that its much less risky to play 20 tables of smash