[Josherzz1]

The GTO vs. FEEL playing style conversation is one of most interesting discussions in poker. Sometimes it gets misconstrued that GTO players don’t understand FEEL or that FEEL players don’t understand GTO. Or that team GTO and team FEEL are akin to political rivals that should always be at odds with one another. Whatever the case may be, both styles are fascinating. There are elite winning players in both camps as well as hybrid players who utilize both strategies and elements into their game.

Poker is almost like another branch of philosophy. There is seemingly no right or wrong answer as any play can seemingly be justified depending on your opponent, what that player was thinking about during a particular hand, and how they saw the hand possibly playing out through their own lens and unique perspective. On the other hand, when you run these decisions through a solver, you can study in a GTO way where you can figure out whether or not the math was really on your side when you made certain moves on different streets. Which is obviously extremely crucial. GTO is also an ever-evolving concept and strategy that will continue to advance, especially as programs continue to evolve and get better. Like in the advancement of correct decision making in complex multi-way spots for example. However, team FEEL can also make an argument that focusing too heavily on GTO can be negative in a way because an access to so much information can be quite overwhelming to the point where it becomes an echo chamber with no dissenting opinions and GTO is king no matter what. When maybe it is quite possible that having more open-mindedness to different strategies is the key to being a more well-rounded, successful player. The back and forth conversations that can be had are endless.

GTO vs. FEEL is talked about in a way as if to say that the GTO player is the more sophisticated and mathematically sound player that is taking calculated risks backed up by concrete data from solvers and is making optimal decisions. While the FEEL player is just a reckless gambler who is just guessing and is not fundamentally or technically sound. There is this sense that FEEL players seem to get by because they have good pattern recognition and run hot in high variance spots but are not theoretically sound. However, while this may be true, this can also sometimes lead to an unhealthy level of arrogance that can potentially hurt players and cause them to fall on their own sword so to speak. Any elite abstract qualities that FEEL players may possess such as reading ability for example are seen as a complete farce by the GTO community since those things cannot be accurately measured or calculated. On the other side of the coin, there are players who think they are playing GTO when they are not and are receiving incorrect advice and tutelage. Or they themselves are not studying GTO correctly. Now if I had to give my unbiased and objective opinion, even knowing that GTO is not this 100% full proof strategy where one knows all the answers, I would still say that in general, the GTO player who studies hard and puts in the work would be a favorite over the FEEL player if we had to put a betting line to it given what we know today and the tools and programs that are available to us. It would seem obvious that you would most likely bet on the player that has a strong theoretical foundation and studies very hard in order to keep improving their game and evolving their strategy. As studying is better than not studying. However, this is where I think the discussion gets interesting. As it appears that the truly elite FEEL players can at times take advantage of being massively underrated and underestimated.

[Josherzz1]

“There is a level of live seasoning at the highest stakes that unless you’ve felt it or been there, you don’t quite know. There are some very gifted and savvy live players that make it to these sorts of stakes and if you ever wonder if you’re a little nervous in a pot, maybe I’m giving something away, those are the players that you are right to have those nerves and fears because they just know what’s going on, on an almost spiritual level of live poker that comes with years and years of experience.”
- Nick Schulman (Joe Ingram Podcast, 2017)


When analyzing the FEEL poker playing style, it is important to bring it back to ground level and understand things at their very core. What exactly is the true advantage of having an innate feel for playing a game like poker? Or any game for that matter. Let’s take the decision making in sports for example. Basketball commentator and former NBA player Greg Anthony often uses the example of playing basketball with great feel and instincts. That when you have elite level feel and instincts when you play basketball, the game sort of just comes to you and you don’t necessarily need to do a lot of thinking. You just naturally know what the correct move is and act accordingly. Makes sense right? Basketball is a game of motion and the ball is constantly moving. There is no time to be stagnant and overthink things. You need to be constantly passing the ball and finding the open teammate for a high percentage shot. Of course, they are completely different games, but imagine thinking about a pick and roll play in basketball like the way we analyze a poker decision. Like alright, when my teammate sets a screen for me and rolls to the basket, I can drive to the basket and should shoot a floater 35% of the time, while 35% of the time I should pass the ball to my teammate who just set the screen for me and is also moving towards the hoop, and 30% of the time I should kick it out to my teammate in the corner who is a 3-point shooting specialist. That would be ridiculous right? There is no time for that. By the time you have finished thinking about all of the probabilities, the opposing team has already stolen the ball and they’re running down the court for an easy fast break layup. And quite frankly, as more live tournaments start implementing 30-second shot clocks for each decision, the ability to make poker decisions quickly will become even more important. What gets lost sometimes is that it’s good if you have a natural feel for things and you’re naturally talented at poker. There is a lot of value in that. If you are gifted at something and things seem to come naturally to you, you can develop and build on that talent.

[Josherzz1]

Arrogance vs. Humility

There is an idea some players have that maybe they should be a little bit cocky before they play in a cash game or a tournament. Not too pompous of course, but in a way where you have this silent swagger about you and an inner confidence in yourself before you play. Hey, I feel like I can hang at these stakes and I believe I can win. It’s possible that the failure to think like this before you play can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy of a downward spiral that you already have this losing mentality and are already approaching the game as if you believe that you are a huge underdog. Okay, this is a big spot for me and I’m shot taking, the competition is a lot tougher, and I wouldn’t be surprised if I lost sort of thing. And so if you do lose, you can always use that as a crutch to make yourself feel better. It’s an interesting concept and I also tend to lean slightly in the direction of thinking that this is a good way to approach things. Having this inner confidence in yourself can be an eminent quality. Where things might backfire though is when one is overly prideful to the point of arrogance. Which is obviously not a good thing. Especially when one is letting their guard down and underestimating their opponents. Ego can be a double-edged sword that can help you slash your opponents or you can fall on that sword and it can hurt you. It is also important to know when to withhold from using your sword and keep it in its scabbard.

Any preconceived notions, stereotypes, or biases that you might have versus other opponents before you have even played a hand against them is probably a leak, most likely -EV, and can be taken advantage of by other players. You have the freedom to do that and it’s your right to think like that. However, it may be best to play as if your opponent is good until shown otherwise. The reason for that is because the problems that can arise when people make assumptions in poker is that it is lazy thinking. They’re not using the full capacity of their intellect because they are just assuming something that might not be based on tangible facts. Instead of trying to find out the truth or what might be close to the truth, they just jump to conclusions. We are almost like scientists at the poker table and in a way our opponents are our test subjects. There is no need to make any absolute assumptions because we are running experiments and seeing how our opponents play in front of our very eyes. We could just find out whether they are good or not by watching them actually play and seeing how their game is. One example of this is when it is assumed that a guy who is an older poker player drinking coffee at the table is labeled “old man coffee.” And sure, while there may be older players that fall into this category, it’s 2023. There is a lot of free and open source material on the internet and also programs that can make all players better and improve their skills. Is it that inconceivable to think that an older player could have stumbled across a forum post that highlighted the fact that older players who drink coffee play super tight? And that after reading that, they decided to change their strategy and mix it up a little bit? In fact, there may have been some instances where players might have folded the winner to “old man coffee” because they just think he only plays AQ+ or TT+. Surely he has me beat right? When in reality, the older player might be playing a wider range than people realize and can be making sophisticated moves and pulling off esoteric bluffs. Even if they are not playing like that, it is still important to at least keep in the mind that it’s a possibility.

I feel as if the vast majority of players do not have a well-rounded game both on the felt and off the felt. It is easy for players to become arrogant just because they have had good results recently. Some even feel entitled to win as if they are this top 10 in the world chess grandmaster that is supposed to beat 99% of the opponents they face. Which is comical and could not be further from the truth. No matter how good we might think we are, no one is immune to a drunk tourist coming in and getting dealt AA and KK and crushing us. If we run bad and they run hot, we lose. No amount of hours studying solvers will be able to help them overcome that situation. It is important for players to have the humility to understand that. There are still some pros who act like a petulant child when they lose and complain all the time. Even though they could read Epictetus or Marcus Aurelius and learn about stoicism and improve. But they never do that and they stay the same. Having self-awareness and a strong mindset, as well as thinking deeply about poker in a philosophical kind of way is extremely underrated. Players can underestimate their opponents and think they are smarter than they really are. If the game really involved MIT level, nobel peace prize winning math, only Bill Chen and Chris Ferguson, who both have Ph.D. degrees in STEM, would be able to play and be successful. The truth though is that any high school dropout could beat those guys and be successful poker players. But it doesn’t mean that they are smarter than Bill Chen or Chris Ferguson. Bill Chen and Chris Ferguson should also not underestimate the high school dropout either.

[Josherzz1]

The way we classify players seems archaic: Fish, Rec, Pro

A modern 2023 updated version feels like it should be:

Base Level Fish, Fish+1, Fish+2
Base Level Rec, Rec+1, Rec+2
Base Level Pro, Pro+1, Pro+2

Fish+2, Rec+2, and Pro+2 are the best versions of their category.

An example of the Pro category from my view:

Base Level Pro: i.e. Allen Kessler. Players like this are technically pros but hendon mob results come from putting in a lot of volume. Majority of these cashes are min-cashes. They play very tight and have to run hotter than the sun to win a tournament. No capability of making fearless, esoteric bluffs or making GTO plays like utilizing blockers to make an all-in bluff river shove to put pressure on opponents if they have blockers to a potential made straight or flush on the board. Complain when they lose to inferior hands even though obviously bad beats also happen to everyone else as well.

Pro+1: i.e. Matt Berkey. Very good players. Beating most lineups but not quite elite though. Have leaks in their game that can be exploited by Pro+2’s. Not as theoretically sound as they should be for the modern era. Would be at a disadvantage going up against Pro+2’s like Dominik Nitsche and Stephen Chidwick in high roller tournaments.

Pro+2: i.e. Isaac Haxton, Phil Ivey, etc. Elite. Best of the best. Fundamentally sound with a strong theoretical base, combined with great instincts and aggressiveness. Little to no leaks in their game. Can adjust from playing optimal to exploitative poker theory depending on the situation and opponent.

[Josherzz1]

Rec+2 are the best players from the Rec category. They masquerade as a weak player that is perceived to be a rich whale/problem gambler that doesn’t care and just wants to have fun. When in actuality, they are very cunning and savvy and are excellent players. Probably the most dangerous type of player as they don’t have that many results since they only play when they are on vacation so you don’t see them coming or know who they are most of the time. It’s also easy to assume that they are base level fish which can be a massive mistake.

Fish+2 are the best players from the Fish category. They do make -EV mistakes which is why they are fish to begin with, but what makes them good for example is that in a tournament, they will fearlessly 5-bet shove all-in with JT or Q9 suited. Hands that can crack AA and KK. They will not run an underpair into an overpair and will just set mine. Being willing to engage in these types of skirmishes, along with their aggressive style makes Fish+2 a very dangerous player in cash games and tournaments. But most players will write them off and say they are just fish and that they suck. When in reality, they are actually really good players in their own way and can be very profitable at poker playing that specific style. They truly understand variance and embrace it which gives them an edge over scared money, tight, passive players.

Poker in the modern era is pretty interesting. We have come a long way since the moneymaker boom in 2003 when ESPN showed the main event on tv. Something like the WSOP is so fascinating to me because there is no financial instrument on earth where you could turn 1K into 1M in a couple days. Not even the best penny stock that went from rags to riches. But you can do that if you win the $1500 WSOP millionaire maker tournament. It’s pretty amazing when you think about it that you could win a 401k plan in only a couple days playing cards.


Anyway, just wanted to philosophize a little bit and give my take on things.

Whether you are playing online or live, good luck at the tables out there.

[Optional]

Wow, you've written a thesis Josh!

[ChuckyTheGoat]

Wow, you've written a thesis Josh!

Yes, good stuff. I'll be re-reading it.

A few basic things about Hold-em. I'm using comments from Poker Pro Brian Rast as a basis:
1) Limit Hold-em has been solved (in Rast's opinion). There aren't enough permutations to confuse the Solution. Call/Raise/Fold have been solved to the n-th degree.
2) Following item 1, Rast thought (a few years ago) that NLHE was approach the same level of SOLUTION.
3) The BEST NLHE players surely profile their opponent. The best can take some generalized solution and apply it DIRECTLY to the player they're facing. Think about it:
a) Don't pay off when they're beat.
b) Maximize value when they don't think the opponent can fold.
c) Bluff them off marginal holdings when the best doesn't think opponent is capable of calling.

Only thing I'd really question in your writeup is use of the term FEEL. The BEST gamblers in the world don't operate off feel, they operate off probabilities. When assessing the opponent, recognition of tight/loose play impacts their decisions.

[Josherzz1]

Chucky, thanks for reading. I appreciate it. A lot of it I'm just philosophizing and it's just my opinion. You can be right and I can be wrong of course.

When it comes to your "feel" player inquiry, the game has changed dramatically in the modern era where Pro+1's and 2's consider anyone who does not actively study no limit holdem using pio solver or any kind of solver in general to be a feel player. It's not enough to just understand the equities and probablities. That is already a given. You have to understand what range of hands you should be playing and how to be balanced so you can get paid off when you make strong hands with marginal holdings like suited connectors which also means you must be given the credit for being capable of actually bluffing so you can get some folds and also get paid off when you make your hand. You cannot just wait for strong hands and play tight because you will never get any action.

An example of a GTO concept regarding hand selection. A2 suited is a fun hand that you can raise with on the button and possibly even 3-bet. Not because of the strength of the hand at face value, but because of what you can represent and what you block. So A2 is a powerful hand in theory because you have an ace which decreases the chances of your opponents having an ace themselves. So you can represent AK and AQ even though that's not actually what you have. That also means you can 4-bet shove all-in pre-flop after it has been opened and 3-bet deep into a tournament when the blinds are high and you have already made the money. And you might be able to pick up a nice pot uncontested because an opponent who opened with 33 and another opponent who 3-bet with AJ suited, those hands don't look that good if they have to call for their tournament life because we are the ones repping AK and AQ even though they are beating our A2 with AJ and 33, they don't know that and it's a very tough call for them to make because they know that they can easily be dominated or that it is just a coin flip (33 will fear higher pairs and not wanting to flip against AK and AJ will fear being dominated by AK and AQ) and not want to make that call. And even if someone calls with 22-KK, you can still catch an ace and you have straight and flush potential, but the more important concept is that you're the one applying pressure and you're the one who has fold equity, and you're the one who can pick up chips uncontested utilizing the ace blocker.

An example of a GTO concept regarding bet sizing is that you will see strong players in tournaments bet 25%-33% on the flop. This is because it's the perfect size to see where your opponent is. If you bet 33% on the flop and your opponent calls then you can just evaluate things again on the turn. You build up the pot without giving up too many chips just in case your opponent re-raises you and you have to fold, and just in case you hit a backdoor straight or flush draw on the turn which can allow you to semi-bluff and bet maybe 75% on the turn to get your opponent to fold right then and there with potential to hit your outs on the river if your opponent calls, setting up a potential over bet of 125% pot on the river whether you hit your outs or not. If the pot was 3600 and you were bluffing with air and bet full pot 3600 on the flop instead of 1200 and your opponent raises you, you will just have to fold and you'll be priced out of seeing the turn card and will also regret the extra chips you could have saved if you had bet smaller. And if you bet full pot on the flop only when you have strong hands, your opponents will just fold every time. If you are given credit for being a strong player capable of bluffing with a wide range of hands, the small bet on the flop will also sometimes induce a 3x or 4x raise from your opponent who is either bluffing also or has a decent hand as well but one that you are beating. And when you actually have the goods, you can re-raise them and either stack them later if they call or you can pick up more chips from them bluffing and having to fold.

That's why it's important to mix it up because a very tight player will never have situations like this come up because everyone will also play very tight against them and will never bluff them. The only way a tight player can win chips is by having a cooler situation where they flopped top set and their opponent flopped middle set or have AA over KK. That of course doesn't happen that often and you cannot consistently rely on situations like that to occur.

Maybe not on this forum but casual fans of poker might not know that Phil Hellmuth is not highly regarded in Pro+2 circles. I like Phil Hellmuth actually and you have to respect the 16 bracelets but he does make funky plays and not in a good way and on average he does not play that well in high roller tournament fields if you take a step back and look at hand to hand analysis. He relies more on his innate feel for the game and his reading ability rather than optimal theory. An example of this is in the 50k players championship at the WSOP which just happened recently.

6:11:34 mark
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxv-YclcIGk

They are playing PLO. Hellmuth has deuces full of kings and his opponent has deuces full of fours. Hellmuth bets 50k on the river. Opponent pots it and Hellmuth has to make a decision for all his chips. He has a king in his hand which blocks kings full of deuces. He also has a deuce so it's impossible for his opponent to have quads. There are two full houses lower than his, deuces full of fours and deuces full of jacks, and his opponent could also have the queen high flush. Or just be making a stone cold bluff since he has more chips and wants to apply pressure. The only hands that beat him are jacks full and fours full. He absolutely has to make that call in that situation. Instead he folds because of his read that his opponent has jacks full. He could have had over 1M in chips but instead folds and leaves himself only 320k. An unthinkable fold. Yes he is on the Mount Rushmore of poker and yes you can make an argument that he is the GOAT because of the 16 bracelets but you can see why Pro+2's talk shit about him. It's because of plays like that. He plays more of a FEEL style than a GTO style. Again, it works for him and he does have 16 bracelets but one can objectively see that he does have leaks in his game. More leaks than you would think for someone who has 16 bracelets.

This is an older video but a good one because it features Dominik Nitsche. One of the brightest poker minds in my opinion. When you hear him talk you will understand the massive difference there is between people who study solvers and people who don't.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_1JMsgH_bM
he describes FEEL players not cutting it at the 14:39 mark
he describes GTO concepts at the 22:22 mark
he describes playing a hand with Hellmuth where Hellmuth 3-bet him with 64 offsuit at the 42:00 mark

Anyway, hope this answered your inquiry. I am by no means an expert. I just love playing poker and thinking about the game.

[ChuckyTheGoat]

Josh, I just question your use of the term "FEEL". Trust me, any of these pros have a REASON for their decisions across streets during a hand.

I've watched a lot of hands over time. One of the hand matchups that show up FREQUENTLY is:
*low-straight draw that BRICKS vs a modest holding (like one-pair or Ace-hi).

IMHO, one of the all-time best hand-readers in tournament poker history is Davidi Kitai. The flops that produce a low straight-draw can produce draws that often leave the aggressor with an All or Nothing hand. If the straight-draw bricks, they're left with a hand that lacks showdown value.

I've seen these hands show up often in critical times. The BEST players can sniff this out, when there are few value hands at showdown. Kitai is the best I've seen, as I've seen him call down with QUEEN-HI and be right!

[ChuckyTheGoat]

Josh, check out this Fold. Way the hand played out, she thought she had to be beat:

[Optional]

The only two cards that could beat her, and she folds. And shows it.

Guy must have been freaked out she could read him

[ChuckyTheGoat]

The only two cards that could beat her, and she folds. And shows it.

Guy must have been freaked out she could read him

Opti, my observation is that the BEST pros hate to pay out on the river in big-$$ pots. Some of the Andy/Garrett hands on Live at the Bike are awesome.

*I've seen Garrett lay down 3rd Full House when it appears standard to pay off.
*I've also seen Andy bluff Garrett off Nut Flush (on a paired board). Can only do that if you think your opponent is CAPABLE of making a huge laydown.

[Josherzz1]

Josh, I just question your use of the term "FEEL". Trust me, any of these pros have a REASON for their decisions across streets during a hand.

I've watched a lot of hands over time. One of the hand matchups that show up FREQUENTLY is:
*low-straight draw that BRICKS vs a modest holding (like one-pair or Ace-hi).

IMHO, one of the all-time best hand-readers in tournament poker history is Davidi Kitai. The flops that produce a low straight-draw can produce draws that often leave the aggressor with an All or Nothing hand. If the straight-draw bricks, they're left with a hand that lacks showdown value.

I've seen these hands show up often in critical times. The BEST players can sniff this out, when there are few value hands at showdown. Kitai is the best I've seen, as I've seen him call down with QUEEN-HI and be right!

Davidi Kitai is a great player. Tough to play against him live. Yeah, I've seen some of those hands where he made great hero calls. He has this presence to him that makes it tough for opponents since he stares them down and takes his time and thinks a lot every street, haha.

Yeah, I think that maybe it's tough to get it down to an exact science because of how inexact poker can be at times. Ike Haxton is heavily weighted towards the GTO side with a tad bit of FEEL. He studies solvers for hours every single day and even has what is rumored to be custom "dream machines" that he paid big money to programmers to design for him where you can have the program tell you what the mathematically correct decision is on every street and how much to bet, pre-flop to river, in real time. He doesn't use it online as that would be cheating but he does study his ass off which is why he nails every single decision playing live or online and is just a nightmare to play against. Phil Ivey is probably more on the FEEL side of things with a touch of GTO. You could make an argument that he is still the best all-around player in the world and was just chip leading the WSOP 50k players championship and made the final table yet again. The elite instincts, the stare downs, the presence about him, the fear he instills in opponents, he's just a fascinating player. Always has that intimidating aura about him. Both Ike Haxton and Phil Ivey are Pro+2's to me but they play different styles of poker and have a different way of approaching things. So I don't necessarily think that you need to be heavily weighted towards playing GTO approved poker in terms of fundamental hand ranges, technical play on various streets, and knowing what the exact % bet sizes to make to be successful at poker. Which is why I made this thread to begin with. One interesting experiment that I would do if I could would be to have a team vs. team poker battle. Computer science and mathematics majors from MIT/Cal Tech vs. political science and philosophy majors from Stanford/Harvard. One would think that the STEM majors from MIT/Cal Tech would have an edge right? But the social science and humanities majors from Stanford/Harvard are also intellectually elite in their own way so it would be a very interesting matchup. The math is also not super insane in poker which is why any average joe schmo can be great at poker and win a lot of money which is something I mentioned in one of my posts above. That's why the game is so fascinating to me.

From my perspective, it's important for people to know who they are as a player and what category they are in. And not be delusional about what they are and what their level of ability is. I'm not actively studying solvers every single day. I know that I am a rec player, so therefore my goal is to be a Rec+2 and do my best in that role.

[Josherzz1]

Josh, check out this Fold. Way the hand played out, she thought she had to be beat:

I remember when this video made the rounds. What an amazing fold.

[Josherzz1]

The only two cards that could beat her, and she folds. And shows it.

Guy must have been freaked out she could read him

Incredible instincts to the point where it is just spooky. That was cool that the guy showed. That dude is a sick pro too. Yeah, he was definitely freaked out, haha. It's funny because 99% of people would say to never fold that and that it was a bad decision and that you can't be results oriented just because she was right. Which is true and they have a point. But in her case, when you know, you know...

[ChuckyTheGoat]

Incredible instincts to the point where it is just spooky. That was cool that the guy showed. That dude is a sick pro too. Yeah, he was definitely freaked out, haha. It's funny because 99% of people would say to never fold that and that it was a bad decision and that you can't be results oriented just because she was right. Which is true and they have a point. But in her case, when you know, you know...

One of my biggest pet peeves on the poker videos is hearing someone say "Good fold."

Totally results-oriented. It might not have been a good decision on a probability basis. Has to do with the range you think your opponent COULD have.

On the hand from post 10, there are some other value hands this guy could have. She just thinks the Check-Raise is super-strong. AA (one combo) or KK (6 combos) are the only hands that beat her, and I'd argue that KK plays across streets differently.

She simply puts him on AA and figures she's beat. Her husband said in an interview that she's known to have very good hand-reading abilities. I guess so.

[stevenash]

*off topic*

Does anybody play at BoL?
I was reading in Card Player Magazine about that micro tournament series they're running is why I ask.

[Josherzz1]

One of my biggest pet peeves on the poker videos is hearing someone say "Good fold."

Totally results-oriented. It might not have been a good decision on a probability basis. Has to do with the range you think your opponent COULD have.

On the hand from post 10, there are some other value hands this guy could have. She just thinks the Check-Raise is super-strong. AA (one combo) or KK (6 combos) are the only hands that beat her, and I'd argue that KK plays across streets differently.

She simply puts him on AA and figures she's beat. Her husband said in an interview that she's known to have very good hand-reading abilities. I guess so.

Yeah, there is no way on earth I could make that fold, lol. If they have me, they have me. Especially in a massive $25k tournament like that where life changing money is on the line. It would be like Mike Mcd in Rounders where I would feel like this is our time and all we're thinking about is "Vegas and the fuckin' Mirage", lol. That was also relatively deep into the tournament (220 players left, 181 got paid) and her opponent is a multiple bracelet winner, had her covered, and could have easily been given credit for being able to bluff and apply max pressure in that spot. But kudos to her, she survived and was able to cash.

[Josherzz1]

*off topic*

Does anybody play at BoL?
I was reading in Card Player Magazine about that micro tournament series they're running is why I ask.

I've never played on there before. Good luck if you decide to check that out. Those are always fun. Pokerstars (outside the states), runs this "micro millions" tournament series that was pretty fun to play. I played in that a few times when I was on vacation. They had a big guaranteed prize pool $22 main event where 1st place got $100,000+. The field was of course an absurd 50,000+ player minefield, lol. But that was an incredible 1st place prize for just a dub buy-in. Hopefully that BoL tournament series has a similar main event like that for you to play.

[WalkingLuckCharm]

Word of friendly advice, networking is far more important than poker skill.

[stevenash]

My word of advice, and I welcome all words of advice is knowledge is king.
Read, read, read.
And when you're done reading, read some more.

[Optional]

Word of friendly advice, networking is far more important than poker skill.

What do you mean?

Are you saying top players collude to cheat?

[ChuckyTheGoat]

Josh:

*If you're that gung-ho on Poker, you should be out in Vegas at the WSOP.

Go out there for a week, play some of the tournaments. I've been out there at that time, no shortage of action.

[stevenash]

Josh:

*If you're that gung-ho on Poker, you should be out in Vegas at the WSOP.

Go out there for a week, play some of the tournaments. I've been out there at that time, no shortage of action.

Going next year for two events.

[Josherzz1]

What do you mean?

Are you saying top players collude to cheat?

He's referring to the fact that if the object of poker is to make money, networking and being a likable person that is willing to drink a little bit, smoke some cigars, and play loose in a fun environment, you will make a ton of money being one of the chosen few that can get invited in those juicy private games with players who have deep pockets. Private games that only you will be invited to and the GTO nerds will be blacklisted from, lol. Which is a fine strategy. Whatever floats your boat. I am just an average joe schmo that will never be invited to those types of games. Like most poker players and fans of poker, it's also my bucket list dream to win a WSOP bracelet one day. So I just focus on trying to be the best player I can be given the fact that I'm married and too busy to be able to get coached, study solvers, and all that jazz. Because the only way I can win that is by entering the tournament and winning straight up, so I have to still be somewhat of a competent player since I don't get to play extremely soft, lucrative, private cash games.

[Josherzz1]

Josh:

*If you're that gung-ho on Poker, you should be out in Vegas at the WSOP.

Go out there for a week, play some of the tournaments. I've been out there at that time, no shortage of action.

Yes, I've been there. It's quite the thrill. I have a couple WSOP cashes in No Limit Hold'em and Pot Limit Omaha. I have one career title in PLO in a non-WSOP, international tournament circuit which was pretty sweet since it's listed on hendon mob, card player, etc as one of my results and counts as an official title. I actually got a trophy for that one which was so cool, haha. Best natural high I've ever had. Can't even describe the feeling. Pure jubilation. I had AA76 and he had QQKT and we got it all-in pre-flop and my aces held.

[Josherzz1]

Going next year for two events.

That's awesome! Have fun and enjoy the experience. It's a lot better to play now than it was in the past because the structures are better. When I cashed in a $1000 WSOP NL Hold'em event in 2012, you were only given 3000 chips to start. Now they give you 15,000, 25,000, 40,000 chips, etc. It's much deeper stacked now and there is so much more room for playability. Fun story about that cash in 2012, I was very blessed that my parents are so incredibly cool and they saw how much I loved poker so they backed me in that event and paid for the $1000 buy-in. I was in my early 20's. It was a lot of pressure of course since I didn't want to let my parents down and I wanted to reward them for believing in me. I showed up on time when the tournament started. I remember vividly there was a guy who sat down and he was getting smashed taking shots because he had just won $35,000 on a nascar bet where he picked the winning driver, lol. We were like oh wow, congrats man, lol. The big hand for me came when I coolered a guy when I had QQ and he had AQ. Flop was Q-x-x. We got it all-in. Turn was an A! I was shaking even though obviously I was in a great position equity wise. He didn't catch the miracle A and that was my first substantial double up where I had chips and could maneuver around. I was moved to another table later in the day and I had A2 suited of clubs. Flop was 3-4-5 ALL CLUBS! I flopped a straight flush! My opponent had a queen high flush so I stacked him. After that hand, the dealer looked up at me (I was sitting in the 5 seat), and he said "son, I've been dealing poker for 30 years, I've never seen anyone flop a straight flush in my entire life." Haha! It was an incredible moment. I ran so hot that day. I got AA four times and stacked a couple people who had KK and QQ. At one point I was the chip leader. The run ended on day 2 when I lost having AK suited of diamonds vs. AJ offsuit and he outdrew me. My parents were so proud of me though so that took away the sting of the bad beat. They were following on the computer checking the WSOP updates and refreshing all the time, lol. They picked me up at the Rio and we split the profit between my mom, dad, and me. Then they treated me and we ate at a buffet to celebrate. It's a memory I'll never forget.

[stevenash]

^
Nice

I've seen A2 suited cripple many a stack,

*Hypothetical*

48 players left in your tourney and pays the top 36.
You're on the bubble in 40th place.
Chances are if you blind out you probably make the cut, but by no means guaranteed.

You're UTG and wake up with KK.
You're first to act being UTG, only thing that dominates you pre is AA.

What's your play?
Lay them down, or shove all in?
You're short stacked, you can't get cute, it's either shove and pray your monster holds up if called, or fold?

I was in the same spot in a qualifier last year.
I was dealt AA, moved all in UTG, big stack bully who has me easily covered snap calls with 44.

You can guess the rest.

[Josherzz1]

^
Nice

I've seen A2 suited cripple many a stack,

*Hypothetical*

48 players left in your tourney and pays the top 36.
You're on the bubble in 40th place.
Chances are if you blind out you probably make the cut, but by no means guaranteed.

You're UTG and wake up with KK.
You're first to act being UTG, only thing that dominates you pre is AA.

What's your play?
Lay them down, or shove all in?
You're short stacked, you can't get cute, it's either shove and pray your monster holds up if called, or fold?

I was in the same spot in a qualifier last year.
I was dealt AA, moved all in UTG, big stack bully who has me easily covered snap calls with 44.

You can guess the rest.

Oh no... big stack bully caught a sailboat? Dang.

Yeah, you made the right move. The only thing I would add that I have seen in online tournaments, as I've played some WSOP online events recently on GG poker, is that players will go almost all-in, but leave a little bit of chips behind, just in case there is some freaky scenario where 3 people go all-in after you (two small stacks and one big stack calling) and the next person to bust will burst the money bubble. Then you can safely just fold when the action comes back to you knowing that you are guaranteed to make the money even though it sacrifices your chances of having a stack to be able to go farther in the tournament, but at least you cash. Just something to keep in mind if you are ever in that position and it's a bigger buy-in tournament. Some people make crazy ICM mistakes in the heat of the moment. In your scenario, you were still a long ways from the cash point, so you made the right play. Not that good of a move by that player calling an UTG shove with 44 even with a big stack. 44 for me would either be an open fold, a 2.25x the big blind open raise looking to set mine and play post-flop, an aggressive 3-bet to get players who you think open light to fold (although this play is probably -EV), or is the one shoving and applying pressure (like small blind vs. big blind, with SB shoving on BB) trying to win the antes and blinds uncontested. Definitely not calling an all-in shove where flipping is the best case scenario, lol.

[Optional]

Going next year for two events.

Almost 20 people turned up for an unofficial SBR "poker mixer" at WSOP 2017.

We had an awesome time.

Was speaking to Mpaschal just last week about trying to do it again for 2024 WSOP. Probably during the Seniors Event week.


Here is how it worked out last time.

https://www.sportsbookreview.com/for...-24-check.html

[Optional]

^
Nice

I've seen A2 suited cripple many a stack,

*Hypothetical*

48 players left in your tourney and pays the top 36.
You're on the bubble in 40th place.
Chances are if you blind out you probably make the cut, but by no means guaranteed.

You're UTG and wake up with KK.
You're first to act being UTG, only thing that dominates you pre is AA.

What's your play?
Lay them down, or shove all in?
You're short stacked, you can't get cute, it's either shove and pray your monster holds up if called, or fold?

I was in the same spot in a qualifier last year.
I was dealt AA, moved all in UTG, big stack bully who has me easily covered snap calls with 44.

You can guess the rest.

I "prefer" to get aggressive around the bubble as others get nittty worrying about a min cash.

Would be no hesitation from me shipping with those cowboys.

[Josherzz1]

Almost 20 people turned up for an unofficial SBR "poker mixer" at WSOP 2017.

We had an awesome time.

Was speaking to Mpaschal just last week about trying to do it again for 2024 WSOP. Probably during the Seniors Event week.


Here is how it worked out last time.

https://www.sportsbookreview.com/for...-24-check.html

Great thread. I checked it out. Yeah, that would be sweet if you guys did that again for 2024. I would show up to one of those eventually as well if the timing is right. Would be fun to go bracelet hunting at the WSOP and gamble/party.

[Josherzz1]

I "prefer" to get aggressive around the bubble as others get nittty worrying about a min cash.

Would be no hesitation from me shipping with those cowboys.

Yeah, fortune favors the bold.

[Josherzz1]

^
Nice

I've seen A2 suited cripple many a stack,

*Hypothetical*

48 players left in your tourney and pays the top 36.
You're on the bubble in 40th place.
Chances are if you blind out you probably make the cut, but by no means guaranteed.

You're UTG and wake up with KK.
You're first to act being UTG, only thing that dominates you pre is AA.

What's your play?
Lay them down, or shove all in?
You're short stacked, you can't get cute, it's either shove and pray your monster holds up if called, or fold?

I was in the same spot in a qualifier last year.
I was dealt AA, moved all in UTG, big stack bully who has me easily covered snap calls with 44.

You can guess the rest.

Speaking of A2 and AA. I just saw this. Happened in the millionaire maker. Wow, what a hand.
https://twitter.com/PokerGO/status/1674190732473819136

[magpie878]

Another example why you don't celebrate too early.... see ya