| User | Post |
|
12:46 pm
September 15, 2009
|
mullethaiku
| | |
| Member | posts 96 | |
|
|
I've just purchased SSNLHE, and have already noticed improvements in my game after just 40 pages or so. Great stuff so far.
For those of you who have had the E Book for a while, I was curious if any of you wanted to share any success success stories/accomplishments you've had (large or small), after implementing the strategies laid out in the book.
As for me, it's small so far, but after only reading the first 30 pages or so, I played my usual .25/.50 online game last night, and added some of the stealing strategies (which isn't big part of my normal game) Using just the basic steal strategy stated in the first few pages, I managed to add roughly an extra $20 (40BB) to my profits in just 2 hours. Not a big chunk of money, but in relation to the blinds, it was pretty nice, and $$ I would have normally missed out on.
Great book so far, thank you to the authors.
|
|
|
3:24 pm
September 15, 2009
|
abcpoker
| | |
| Guest
| | |
|
|
Way too small of a sample. That will disappear and more than likely turn into losses the more hands you play. The little bit you make in blind stealing will be more than eroded when you get burned on a big loss. These strategies don't work. If you don't believe me, just know that Ed Miller himself is a losing online player.
|
|
|
6:47 pm
September 15, 2009
|
jz1014
| | San Marcos, TX | |
| Member | posts 32 | |
|
|
I see the trolls have taken a liking to this board already. Anyone who suggests that stealing the blinds isn't a critical component of a winning players arsenal is either ignorant, or fooling themselves. A quick glance in hold em manager of any winning players database will show that abcpoker's above statement is simply not true.
|
|
|
7:22 pm
September 15, 2009
|
abcpoker
| | |
| Guest
| | |
|
|
The blinds you pick up when stealing is more than offset by the money you lose in the big pots. I guess Ed Miller wasn't stealing enough here?
http://www.pokertableratings.c…..masaladosa
|
|
|
1:28 am
September 16, 2009
|
Ratboy
| | Belgium | |
| Member | posts 8 | |
|
|
@abcpoker That proves everything, indeed
same site and about same amount of hands: http://www.pokertableratings.c…../phil+ivey
Guess he's a losing player as well…
I don't know if Ed or any of the authors is a winning player but I'm reading the book and it realy helps me in some decisions at the table, my winrates went up so far and I'm feeling like I play the game better and more in control and more conscious of what happens around me,… I only play 10FR or 25FR but I have read a lot of books so far and even though I haven't finished this one yet, I can say that this is one of the 2 books that really changed my game and opened my eyes in a way.
|
|
|
3:41 am
September 16, 2009
|
abcpoker
| | |
| Guest
| | |
|
|
Yes, they are both losing players when it comes to online poker. I mean, if Phil Ivery can't win online, do you really think you can? Lol
|
|
|
5:57 am
September 16, 2009
|
Ratboy
| | Belgium | |
| Member | posts 8 | |
|
|
'Yes, they are both losing players when it comes to online poker.'
Are you really serious? Do you really think Ivey is a losing player online… I think you prouve by this remark how much attention we can give to your other remarks. So if I get it right, if Ivey would like to advise you on your online pokergame you would turn him down because in your opinion he's a losing player.
'I mean, if Phil Ivery can't win online, do you really think you can? Lol'
I'm sure btw that I would be a losing player on the nosebleeds or the high stakes but on the stakes I play now I'm pretty sure I can keep winning for some time, so yes I really think I can.
|
|
|
7:29 am
September 16, 2009
|
mullethaiku
| | |
| Member | posts 96 | |
|
|
abcpoker said:
Way too small of a sample. That will disappear and more than likely turn into losses the more hands you play. The little bit you make in blind stealing will be more than eroded when you get burned on a big loss. These strategies don't work. If you don't believe me, just know that Ed Miller himself is a losing online player.
No need to troll, of course it is a small sample. I was just giving a quick example of how the book helped me. Normally I would have left most of that $$ on the table as blind stealing was not a part of my normal game. Obviously you can't steal the blinds constantly or you will run into big hands against smart, aggressive opponents. But I was playing 2 tables, both of which happen to have tight nits to my left. So in a 2 hours session (.25/.50), I was able to snag an extra 40BB or so just from stealing.
In the right game (tight) it's a nice addition in low stakes. It can make up for not winning as many big pots, when there isn't as many loose players at the table.
|
|
|
3:14 am
September 17, 2009
|
matty
| | |
| Guest
| | |
|
|
I am just halfway through the book and it improved my game tremendously!
I used to play PL micro stakes because I just started playing Poker one month ago. Never played before. I stayed away from NL, guess it scared me. After going through a few chapters in the book I decided it was time to switch to NL and see how it plays out.
After 11.000 hands I am winning constantly. Implementing stealing into my game made my profits way higher than they were before. All I can say is that I consider the book to be a great investment which I almost won back at 0.02. I am sure that when I am done with the book and go through it one more time my game will be even better.
A big thank you to the authors and double thumbs up for the product!
Matty
|
|
|
11:05 am
September 17, 2009
|
jbryan
| | |
| Guest
| | |
|
|
Wow, this garbage does NOT work. Maybe it used to work or maybe it works at the higher limits but all I can say is that over a few hundred thousand hands, applying this stuff at micro limits just plain loses.
At least I was break-even before adopting this junk. Good luck to all that try this at the micro stakes.
|
|
|
12:33 pm
September 17, 2009
|
mullethaiku
| | |
| Member | posts 96 | |
|
|
Unless you are just trolling jbryan, could you be more specific?
What stakes are you playing? Very small micro stakes is a very different game from online $1/$2 6 max. Which is the bulk of what SSNLHE decribes. The kind of aggression they describe in SSNLHE, and all of the examples are geared specifically for online $1/$2 6-max. This is considered a very tough small stakes game, so if you are not aggressive and tricky, you will get eaten alive.
However, you may benefit more in micro with a more straightforward/ABC poker method, while SLOWLY adding and picking your spots to incorporate some of the SSNLHE methods, to increase your profits.
I would not follow SSNLHE verbatim, in very small micro stakes. It was not made for that specifically. I would modify some of the SSNLHE moves that work for you. (the general concepts will work at almost every level) But some of it will not work as well at micro (double and triple barrel bluffs, stealing, etc)
I have learned (sometimes the hard way) that as great as SSNLHE is, you have to always remember is it written from a sophisiticated perspective of beating very tough games, where you have to get very brave and very crafty to make good $$. You may not need to this as much in micro. SLOWLY and GRADUALLY integrate the concepts it into your game. Don't do a complete overhaul or copy the book verbatim for micro. Hope that helps a little.
|
|
|
4:24 am
September 21, 2009
|
Se7en3
| | |
| Guest
| | |
|
|
Bought the book just over 2 weeks ago and here's my stats at $0.01/0.02
VP$IP: 13.47
PFR: 8.4
Hands: 24,201
Amount Won: $154.12
$/100: $0.64
BB/100: 15.92
Days Played: 16
$/Day: $9.63
Averaging 6.49 hrs per day and 4 tabling.
Works for me – time to move up to $0.02/0.05 
For what its worth I read the book through and homed in on the bankroll management part and 7 Steps to NL Success. No point in trying to be tricky at these levels – keep up the aggression and swing for the fences with a big hand.
|
|
|
9:16 am
September 21, 2009
|
reboot
| | |
| Member | posts 13 | |
|
|
Based on those stats, you aren't playing the strategy outlined in the book.
Nothing wrong with that, my experience is that abc poker is better for micros anyway, and you've certainly been successful, but you can't claim it to be a ssnlhe success story.
|
|
|
10:35 am
September 21, 2009
|
Matt Flynn
| | |
| Admin
| posts 114 | |
|
|
In pro poker adaptation is critical. SSNL shows how to adapt to current game conditions in $1-$2 6-max. The bread-and-butter strategies described only apply when those conditions are met. Like stealing from the button only works against relatively tight blinds, so if the blinds are each playing half their hands, then open-raising from the button does not show an immediate profit. The game conditions in micros are vastly different from those in $1-$2, so SSNL is not a book for micros. BUT, it is a fantastic exercise to figure out how micros are different and how to adapt.
|
|
|
11:08 am
September 21, 2009
|
Se7en3
| | |
| Guest
| | |
|
|
Like I said, I am simply applying the outline detailed in the chapter "7 Steps to NL Success" from the book.
Looking at the stats you'd think I was nut peddling – but it's more about adjusting to my opponents. I've folded plenty of "Top 13%" hands preflop OOP against deep stacked crazies. And 3 betted with rags in position against players I felt would throw it preflop or on the flop if they missed.
I've always been pretty liberal with my CBets and still am, but I find myself betting the turn hard a greater percentage of the time. In short while I'm not just randomly being aggressive, I really like to scrap for everything now.
I hear what you are saying in terms of me not adopting the complete ethos of ssnlhe. But I would argue that I'm not simply playing ABC poker. Adjusting to your opponents and exploiting their tendencies in whatever way you can is where it is at on any level.
I plan to work my way through the ranks to $1/2 and will post my stats at the end of each level. In the end thats the only way to know if this will be a success story or not :)
|
|
|
9:50 am
September 22, 2009
|
mullethaiku
| | |
| Member | posts 96 | |
|
|
You definitely have to dial back the aggression in micro, but some of the standard info like REM, SPR's, Commitment and Position from SSNLHE (and PNL 1) work well at all levels.
I'm playing .25/.50 currently and doing pretty well while reading the book and implementing some of the strategies. At that level, there seems to be enough maniac LAG's that I can take take to the cleaners with the nuts, but also plenty of "set miners" you can steal/bluff from all day. I wasn't targeting these profiles, and tweaking my strategy for each as well before the book. It helps alot. I have made some sick calls against the maniacs because I realize many times there range is WIDE. I have also make some sick laydowns against nits/set miners that I probably would have lost big on.
I think the book is most effective in plugging major leaks, not revamping your entire game. I realized I played too much "fit n fold" and did not utilize blind stealing, 3 betting, the button, and turn/river barrelling as much as I should have been.
Fold equity, as simple as it is, was a real revelation to my game. I found that before I was too worried about showdown equity, and hardly concerned about fold equity. MAJOR LEAK.
7 out of 8 of my first sessions while reading the book have been profitable (not sure of the BB/100 off the top of my head) and the 1 losing session was only -$14 total and it included 1 really bad beat on an all in (my AQ lost to A5 on a AA3 5 K board LOL)
|
|
|
3:47 pm
September 23, 2009
|
shtStirrer
| | |
| Guest
| | |
|
|
Post edited 10:49 pm – September 23, 2009 by shtStirrer
I think success stories are meaningless to tell you the truth.
What's more meaningful is the reader's ability to learn and apply the relevant concepts, and be able to discern that he did so correctly.
I think I'm a better player for reading SSNLHE, certainly better than I was when I started playing three or four years ago… yet I've run horribly bad playing live no limit.
You can win and be lucky or lose and play well. Does that mean one case is a failure and the other is a success? No of course not – there's insufficient information to say either way.
|
|
|
8:54 am
September 24, 2009
|
mullethaiku
| | |
| Member | posts 96 | |
|
|
Good point Stirrer. When I started the thread, I did not necessarily mean "success stories" strictly from a monetary sense. I wasn't really looking for just stories of how much $$ players have won. I meant success in the sense of improving your game and plugging leaks. (which will lead to $$ in the long run)
|
|
|
11:15 am
September 25, 2009
|
John
| | |
| Guest
| | |
|
|
Well, this isn't exactly a testament to the strategies outlined in SSNLHE but it is a success story. I have 400,000 hands at $1/$2 no limit with a winrate of 10bb/100. I don't know how this compares to people using the stratgegies in the book, but for me this is a simple tight stratgey that is much easier to use than stratgegies outlined in the book, especially when multitabling.
|
|
|
1:47 am
September 26, 2009
|
Rocketfingers
| | |
| Guest
| | |
|
|
John said:
Well, this isn't exactly a testament to the strategies outlined in SSNLHE but it is a success story. I have 400,000 hands at $1/$2 no limit with a winrate of 10bb/100. I don't know how this compares to people using the stratgegies in the book, but for me this is a simple tight stratgey that is much easier to use than stratgegies outlined in the book, especially when multitabling.
On what site do you play John? I insta deposit there
|
|
Login
Search 
Home
Print this Post 
Add a New Topic
Reply to Post
Quote and Reply 
Topic RSS 
