Great Redline Ideas Missed By Most Of You

  • NL BSS
  • NL BSS
  • $200 - $1000
  • Shorthanded
(4 Votes) 10588

JOIN NOW TO VIEW THE FULL VIDEO

Free membership

Join now
 

Description

Our coach and redline specialist comes with another video about ideas most of you might have missed.

Tags

analysis high stake ideas mid stakes non showdown winnings Ranges redline redline ninja review stealing

Comments (24)

newest first
  • Krolik94

    #1

    Interesting
  • akkaripk

    #2

    Nice
  • GingerKid

    #3

    Regarding looking at DB and seeing around 250 hands for A6o, A7o, don't you think that it could be pure variance? you could actually be unlucky with few hands and loose big pot, then you make decision to fold such hand preflop because on super low sample you lost money? Regarding looking at statistics for deciding to fold A7o, i think that you also often observe very low samples. Like river stats, it is surely not enough. That guy could be also playing differently vs you than vs others because you steal less often the blinds or because you defend well vs 3bet. So i think making so big adjustments in strategy by relying purely on statistics is not good, especially with low sample.
  • danilor123

    #5

    nice
  • Robmaf

    #6

    Ginger - you are 100% right. Making decisions on low samples are inaccurate. What I forgot to say I am doing that kind of analysis for years and ofc looking deeper asking what exactly happened. When in doubt (and it is always good to doubt) I ask some of my closest poker friends. If they have different outcomes I don't bother too much, if similar to mine I follow it. Also I don't treat A6, A7 separately. The whole group is important. If I win on A5, lose on A6, A7 and win on A8 it is hard to say anything.
    So ofc I do take into consideration what you ve said. Good point!
  • GingerKid

    #7

    Hi Robmaf, thanks for you answer. I agree that you can conclude many useful things from DB. It is however not simple task because statistics can be very misleading.
  • hjkawaguchi

    #9

    nice
  • Milvoski

    #10

    rofl
  • Kruppe

    #11

    analysing whether to OR A7o OTB is truly bizarre, i don#T even know whether i should invest the few minutes to find out what the producer says...
  • Kruppe

    #12

    i mean really, it's weird to hear this stuff coming from someone who alledgedly is qualified to produce this video and is commenting on nl200 hands.

    couple of points:
    1) if you have 17k hand sample, then either a) you are a dataminer or b) you have played so many hands against villain that villain might anticipate certain (megaexploitative) adjustments you may make

    2) vs a theoretical player with those exact stats, A7o isn't a fold. if you really want to exploit, you can limp. or you could just try to play the hand correctly.
  • Kruppe

    #13

    this video feels like circa 2009
  • Kruppe

    #14

    also, just to bring my aggressive criticisms to a point: if you really are losing money with A7o on the button, you probably shouldn't be making videos
  • lolohebic1

    #15

    totally agree with GingerKid and Kruppe
  • Robmaf

    #16

    Kruppe in your opinion. I ve been playing up to nl5000. Not anymore. I am not a theoretical player and yes I buy HH from years.
    Exploiting correctly is a huge advantage. If you don't find anything valueble that's ok. I ve coached 100 players. With some I couldn't find any real common ground and it is normal.
    The beauty of poker is that many different ways of playing and thinking works. I ve shown you mine and it is pretty uncommon. I seriously don't care what other players think as long as my strategies bring me money.

    Have you made any review like this in your DB?
  • Kruppe

    #17

    so a) you're a data-miner
    and b) you teach a theoretically unsound exploitative strategy, meaning its success is dependent on current and future opponent strategies and meta-game, but your credentials for this are not expertise in current games but in games years ago...
    ok, got it.
  • Robmaf

    #18

    I think this discussion is not about the video but the philosophy of playing poker. Not years ago, but until this year - yes.
    What's wrong in dataminig if I am not playing on Stars?
    I seriously don't care what is 'theoretically sound or not'. If some idea works I use it if not I don't. Isn't it opponents who proves you wrong at the end?

    If you want to discuss it in further detail just contact me on skype it is no point to waste time here, but I will be happy to answer to all questions about the video.
  • Kruppe

    #19

    if something is theoretically sound, then you know it will work, as in you know it will have positive EV unless your opponent plays perfectly, in which case it will have breakeven EV.

    and you say you use an idea if it works. well, i would make a correction: you use an idea if it has worked. and in your case if it has worked years ago, in radically different games.

    and indeed if a coach's results aren't extremely strong in current games, then it actually only makes sense for him to coach if what he teaches is theory-based.
  • Kruppe

    #20

    furthermore, if you really want to teach stats-based adaptive strategy, then what you could do is teach the correct application of statistics theory to poker data. this would be very useful, as statistics is a whole branch of science/maths and is largely both counter-intuitive and outside a poker-players realm of expertise. but you don't do this eiuther, you just use primitive intuitive methods like 'my database shows negative winnings here, therefore this is bad'
  • Robmaf

    #21

    Not really and in not every situation. Some things work from theoretical point of view (it is different in HU) and are being a mistake at the same time. Stacking off AK on every occasion is a mistake - it depends on the situation and our opponent.
    I am not a theoretical player, even though I ve learned a lot. Playing exploitive style is much more adaptive.
    Example in the video is an invitation to look into your DB. Not only yours but everyone. There will be hands you are losing but you should earn money and this is once again an invitation to follow and find the real reason why.
    Each pokerroom has different poker dynamics. It determines different playing styles. Doing that kind of analysis isn't perfect -it is obvious. It will help and will shorten your time and improve results.
    What is the real reason to play a break-even theoreticly correct hand if we are people not robots?
    Sometimes you should open it, sometimes - much more often - you should consider folding. Why? Poker players try to play as many tables as possible, having rakeback, bonuses and to earn as much money as possible and also to have biggest winrates.
    I don't know anyone (except HU players) who wants to play beautiful and 100% theoreticaly correct.
    Show one of your videos to explain to other players what you think and why. Playing with me with cat and mouse claiming for some reason 'it has worked years ago' or using '..of statistics theory to poker data'. OMG we are playing poker here not 'statistics theory' using such slogans are just disturbing in playing normal poker for most players.

    Once again my skype is: robmaf we can make 'theory based' dissucusions there. or we can open a thread 'exploitive vs theory poker'. I just have a feeling you have too much time to waste and you are witch-hunting seeing your post in my coaching thread - https://www.pokerstrategy.com/forum/thread.php?postid=2706716#post2706716

    I ve also recorded 'non-theory based' poker course - Redline Ninja if you want to check - http://robmafpoker.com/product/redline-ninja-course/.
    I invite you to make yourself familiar to practical exploitive poker.
  • Kruppe

    #22

    I write critical comments and you suggest that i ahve too much time and am witch-hunting.

    Well firstly, critical comments should be allowed imo, and writing these comments only takes a few minutes.

    Secondly, this is how the comments came about: I commented on 1) a private coaching thread listing the infamous scam-marketer coach YourDoom as the coach's most important influence and then some months or years later on 2) a coaching video of questionable quality.
    The fact that you, Robmaf, link these two situations can be interpreted to say a) I'm witch-hunting you. this interpretation is pretty bizarre given i have zero connection to you and don't care much about this stuff. i'm a long-time midstakes grinder from pokerstrategy who sometimes takes a few minutes to see whether there are any worthwhile new videos or coaches.
    or it can be interpreted b): Robmaf being involved in both 1) and 2) reflects badly on Robmaf.

    the rest of the stuff you wrote just shows how bad your understanding of poker and exploitative vs optimal play is. the AK example is bizarre: firstly, there's no reason to believe GTO says AKo is a PFAI in all situations, and secondly, your statement that ''Some things work from theoretical point of view [...] and are being a mistake at the same time'' is so obviously fallacious that there's just no point in discussion.
  • Robmaf

    #23

    Sure, critical comments are welcome, but comments that will lead to an answer or that will give any real practical information that can benefit to those who read it. I don' t have a feeling your comments are in this manner. Still more like being bored and looking to waste some other peoples time.
    Your A or B are silly.
    Many people say they always stack off AK for many reasons. It is of course incorrect.
    Playing GTO kills winrate. Expecially when you have a read on someone and still follow GTO you make a mistake or you don't have enough knowledge change gear and adapt. This is exactly what I meant.
    I am long time high-stakes winner (not a grinder), during my whole carrier I played 3-4-5 tables max. And 250-350k hands per year having high winrates. And I am not a new coach on Strategy. My first video was made http://scr.hu/491r/46bod - 6 years ago.

    So thanks for your input. I hope your next comments on next videos of mine will help others to improve. This is one of my main goals doing these videos.
  • Kruppe

    #24

    well, i disagree on basically all points.

    my comments are of practical usefulness to readers: some pokerstrategy members may find my comments useful in helping them decide whether to watch a video and how to interpret or value the content of a video.

    furthermore, it's somewhat insulting and pathetic that you accuse me of being a bored time-waster and witch-hunter.
  • Robmaf

    #25

    You may have your opinions. Please don't waste my time anymore.
  • Kruppe

    #26

    wow