tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11828468.post7983253211108030679..comments2023-10-12T07:52:41.914-04:00Comments on Poker Wannabe: Harrington Revisitedcolumbo (at eifco dot org)http://www.blogger.com/profile/16116768669414563102noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11828468.post-34324216969065958112010-03-15T08:26:08.543-04:002010-03-15T08:26:08.543-04:00surely you can attack passive players with an M wa...surely you can attack passive players with an M way under 44... that seems extreme tbh Travis? will definitely check out your site for the maths though.Erik "Towels" Savagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00053277499942929386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11828468.post-77564682923820883952010-03-11T23:24:28.406-05:002010-03-11T23:24:28.406-05:00To even just attack passive players and value bet ...To even just attack passive players and value bet your good hands you need M = 44.5<br /><br />To shut down another other aggressive player once in awhile so you do not get ran over you need at least M = 61.5<br /><br />To be that aggressive player that hammers everyone else at the table and builds chip stack you need at least M = 100+<br /><br />Did all the math on this in:<br />http://www.darkenedpoker.com/blog/?p=157Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17652803036284484844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11828468.post-50983167729937452342010-03-09T13:46:43.253-05:002010-03-09T13:46:43.253-05:00I completely agree. I liked his books because they...I completely agree. I liked his books because they opened my eyes a bit wider, and helped me get past Harrington (don't get me wrong - Harrington is an EXCELLENT starting point). At the time Snyder wrote his books, his plays were probably pretty reasonable, but now with a lot of hyper aggressive folks out there it becomes less effective. I also hate the way he writes... reminds me of the tom cruise character in magnolia :)BLAARGH!https://www.blogger.com/profile/07396268011386676476noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11828468.post-86036879403553268332010-03-09T09:21:15.779-05:002010-03-09T09:21:15.779-05:00Yes, I have read the Arnold Snyder books and his c...Yes, I have read the Arnold Snyder books and his chip utility, but his obsession with getting there over playing correctly does not work for me. But, his understanding of the options you have when you reach utility and the watermarks are more accurate.columbo (at eifco dot org)https://www.blogger.com/profile/16116768669414563102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11828468.post-44368681284770221082010-03-08T17:03:34.756-05:002010-03-08T17:03:34.756-05:00Don't know if you read the Arnold Snyder books...Don't know if you read the Arnold Snyder books, but he describes it as chip utility and goes by bb rather than the whole M calculation. His big thing is taking the entire tournament structure as well as your chip stack (and of course the other stacks around you) into account to figure out what you need to do at what point in the tournament. He's definitely worth a read, and might help you clarify your thoughts. book one is for small buy in tournies, and book 2 is for bigger buy ins - 2 pretty different strategies are employed based on fast (turbo) structure, and slow structures.BLAARGH!https://www.blogger.com/profile/07396268011386676476noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11828468.post-80668230655368798972010-03-08T16:35:04.548-05:002010-03-08T16:35:04.548-05:0088? sometimes, yes. Depending on if I think I wou...88? sometimes, yes. Depending on if I think I would be forced to get more than 1 caller. I dont want to raise to 3xBB and thus have 10% of my stack in with 88, only to face an average of TWO overcards on the flop. Especially if its in EP where I might get two callers. I would rather shove or fold. With an M of 8 I might play it, but I might not.columbo (at eifco dot org)https://www.blogger.com/profile/16116768669414563102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11828468.post-51086008677598715552010-03-08T16:18:41.576-05:002010-03-08T16:18:41.576-05:00You would fold 88 with an M of 8?You would fold 88 with an M of 8?Schaubshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18022476308776632194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11828468.post-67537418287102379282010-03-08T15:40:15.213-05:002010-03-08T15:40:15.213-05:00Getting the M up there is what keeps the pressure ...Getting the M up there is what keeps the pressure on the small M's.<br /><br />And yes, when you have that less than 10 M, you are in the Push or Fold phase.<br /><br />Haven't read Harrington, it was on my list. I use relative stack size to blinds (which also corresponds to M). So the strategy is not that much different.<br /><br />Good Luck on the Felt.ImperfectFuturehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05824843960158622427noreply@blogger.com