too much analysis........

[steve7stud 0]

I often feel like I should spend more time in the strategy section discussing hands, or trying to offer advice.One of the problems that I have encountered when attempting to give advice is that I'm not terribly familiar with the thought process of low limit play. As a result, if I were to comment on something, it could actually be counter productive.It's funny, I had a poker friend staying with me for a few weeks. He played much lower limits than I did. During his stay he was playing online quite often, so naturally I began to play online as well. Sometimes he would watch me play, and he couldn't understand some of the bets or folds that I would make. Mathematically, it would seem like I should make a call, but I wouldn't. Eventually, everyone must learn to think outside of the box. David Sklansky is a good example of someone that is a VERY anayltical player. In fact, he's written dozens of books on various poker games and statistics. But if you put him up against a guy like John Hennigan. John would crush him in the long run. It's my belief that not only is John far more talented, but he has learned to think outside of the box. In the beginning, I think that poker has a lot to do with trial and error. But eventually, as you play more and more. Every situation is so unique, that you must learn from your mistakes and move on, letting your game evolve. There will always be a lack of information, so in most cases, the response will be "it depends". I've never been a big fan of that phrase. But now that I've been faced with the task of trying to answer questions with a lack of information, those are the words I find myself thinking quite often. Good Luck.

[checkymcfold 0]

excellent post, as always, steve. :-) i agree with you about the trial and error part. i never read a poker book until the spring of this year, and i was crushing 5/10 at that point. i then read sklansky's "necessary" works and learned surprisingly little.if you have a good understanding of basic algebra and are willing to work out the math in the game, you could write everything sklansky ever wrote. the vast majority of the mid-/high-limit game is, as you said, feel, and you can't learn that from a book, even the FCP god, mr. sklansky.

[CobaltBlue 662]

Blasphemy! J/k.steve, brad has been posting some higher limit stuff lately, if you feel like your comments would be more relevant. That said, I don't mind knowing how hands would play differently at a higher level.

[loxo 0]

Steve, I think everyone would be very interested in hearing any thoughts or comments you felt like contributing. I use this strategy section often to hear how different people would approach different situations and find it most rewarding when people offer different yet convincing arguements to each situation. The thought processes behind each decision has really helped me in thinking through a hand and the more experienced posters putting forward there opinions the better IMHO.So to conclude....Please post away.

[BeanGW 0]

Steve: Meh, I'd say you contribute plenty to Strat during your nutbar Strat table sessions.