19 replies to this topic

[HoosierAlum]

I was just browsing through pokerpages.com, and stumbled across this limit he quiz. Take it and see how you score. There are also a few things about the author's resp0nses/answers that I want to discuss after some people have taken it.I scored a 68.http://www.pokerpage...lotboom06a.php3

[Absolute]

i scored a 70but the two questions i missed (#2 and #3) i have serious issue with.

[Rebecca]

uhm...scored 90.But to be honest, I didn't answer necessarily what I'd do, but what I thought he'd recommend....been reading alot of his articles recently. :wink:***edit*** doah, that score was from the first quiz...scored 68 on the second. Looks like insomnia is catching up to me again. Sleepy time.

[Rocketwadster]

Not surprisingly to me, I scored a 57. :cry: I completely disagree with many of the "answers" that this author has given, but others are reasonable. I would love to get some insight to each "answer" from some of the other forum members, like KDawg and JFarrell...Also, I took the first quiz he did, and got a 75, so I can't be that bad...lol :wink:

[ahosang]

Interesting...Scored 71, got two 'wrong'.7. I called the pro's raise with AQs instead of folding.8. I raised the blind raiser instead of foldingThe thing about pre-flop is that it's easier to learn how to play according to cards, position, and player type. It's flop play in a tight game I struggle with.Absolute, question 3 is not clear-cut to me although I'd raise against an ultra-loose simply to isolate in position. Question 2 I feel Slotboom is bang on here. I feel that raising for value may be a marginal bet and that deception may pay more on a favourable flop.

[Vade]

I really couldn't believe he reccommended folding that hand to a blind raiser. You've got to be kidding me. A9 of hearts is way ahead of a random hand

[Rocketwadster]

Vade said:

I really couldn't believe he reccommended folding that hand to a blind raiser.  You've got to be kidding me.  A9 of hearts is way ahead of a random hand

I agree completely...that guy is off his gourd on a few of his "answers"...

[Trono]

That quiz was stupid.

[dms26]

This guy is a pro? I scored 66, but some of his answers sounded ridiculous. Fold A9s to a blind raiser? Check QQ with 4 limpers giving them a free flop with A or K-rag? Then reraising with AToffsuit in one question but folding AQs in another another? I don't get it.I think Sklansky would have some issues with his quiz too.

[Rocketwadster]

dms26 said:

This guy is a pro? I scored 66, but some of his answers sounded ridiculous. Fold A9s to a blind raiser? Check QQ with 4 limpers giving them a free flop with A or K-rag? Then reraising with AToffsuit in one question but folding AQs in another another? I don't get it.I think Sklansky would have some issues with his quiz too.

Does anyone know what this guy qualifications are, for him to be making a quiz like that with many very questionable "answers"? Some of those plays are so far out of whack it seems like it is a candid camera type of joke... :wink:

[tskillz187]

Rocketwadster said:

dms26 said:

This guy is a pro? I scored 66, but some of his answers sounded ridiculous. Fold A9s to a blind raiser? Check QQ with 4 limpers giving them a free flop with A or K-rag? Then reraising with AToffsuit in one question but folding AQs in another another? I don't get it.I think Sklansky would have some issues with his quiz too.

Does anyone know what this guy qualifications are, for him to be making a quiz like that with many very questionable "answers"? Some of those plays are so far out of whack it seems like it is a candid camera type of joke... :wink:

One of the best European Pot-limit Omaha players as well as a very good limit hold 'em player. A lot of his answers are different than what many other people would advocate but he seems to be doing well and has put a lot of thought into all of his plays. I don't neccesarily agree with all of his answers for the test, but he's most certaintly qualified to give opinion on how to improve someone's limit hold 'em game. He used to be thought of as the biggest rock in his game for sometime and made it through to be one of the most successful players in his game.

[Rocketwadster]

One of the best European Pot-limit Omaha players as well as a very good limit hold 'em player. A lot of his answers are different than what many other people would advocate but he seems to be doing well and has put a lot of thought into all of his plays. I don't neccesarily agree with all of his answers for the test, but he's most certaintly qualified to give opinion on how to improve someone's limit hold 'em game. He used to be thought of as the biggest rock in his game for sometime and made it through to be one of the most successful players in his game.[/quote]So, if a bunch of his "answers" differ from what many people think, how does that make him correct? Daniels poker quizzes give fairly good explanations as to why they are the correct play, adn the majority of the forum members I am sure agree with almost all of them either before seeing Daniel's thoughts, or after seeing Daniel's explanation as to why it is the better play. This quiz doesn't seem as credible to me to help people's games, but maybe that's just me.

[Randy Reed]

Your score: 66I kinda breezed through it while playing a tourney. Funny he would have a quiz and award points the way he does. 7 for one answer, 6 for the other 2?

[Rocketwadster]

Randy Reed said:

Your score: 66I kinda breezed through it while playing a tourney. Funny he would have a quiz and award points the way he does. 7 for one answer, 6 for the other 2?

i got 57 and 75 on his first one...nothing about the way I play has changed (as I did them 10 seconds apart), so why the variance?

[cdddc75]

Trono said:

That quiz was stupid.

[Nutcracker]

I got nearly every single question wrong. Perhaps it is the limits I play at, but I'm not folding AKo, AKs and JJ to a freakin UTG raise. Sure, you are "supposed" to have a very strong hand to raise UTG, but how many people follow that rule.

[tskillz187]

Rocketwadster]One of the best European Pot-limit Omaha players as well as a very good limit hold, on but he, said:

So, if a bunch of his "answers" differ from what many people think, how does that make him correct? Daniels poker quizzes give fairly good explanations as to why they are the correct play, adn the majority of the forum members I am sure agree with almost all of them either before seeing Daniel's thoughts, or after seeing Daniel's explanation as to why it is the better play. This quiz doesn't seem as credible to me to help people's games, but maybe that's just me.

I didn't say it made them correct, just that he is a well respected pro. I agree that his quiz seemed weird with getting different amount of points sometimes and that there is room for debate on his answers, but the question I was answering was that he is a very distinguished professional player in Europe

[tskillz187]

Nutcracker said:

I got nearly every single question wrong. Perhaps it is the limits I play at, but I'm not folding AKo, AKs and JJ to a freakin UTG raise. Sure, you are "supposed" to have a very strong hand to raise UTG, but how many people follow that rule.

He said to picture yourself playing a 10-20 game where only 3-5 were staying to see the flop. also..."The truth is, that a few good or excellent players could indeed eke out some profit in the situations where I said folding was better, simply because their play after the flop is impeccable: they know exactly when they're beat, when it's best to release, when they might be able to bluff their opponent out, etc. However, it is my opinion that the extremely tight approach I recommend will serve the majority of the players best, especially the ones who are still moving up the ranks, as it keeps them from making (compounding) mistakes, and it helps them stay out of difficult situations that require lots of judgment - judgment that they don't have yet, or not enough."That's a preface to taking his test, taken from the same web page as the test

[JaysonWeber]

Scored and 80... I know I have a lot of work to do w/ Poker but I still think a lot of this is situational and based on intricate differences in styles of play. I disagree with some of his thoughts on this subject.