Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos
I feel the need to remind you that this conversation between us began long ago...with your assertion that "NL holdem is primarily a pre-flop game". This is a declaration that I am sure would be refuted by 95% of the "professional-grade" NL players out there...and it has been refuted in print by practically every poker author who has ever written a "responsible" NL poker book. And yet...you have never retracted it, but you have instead chosen to provide only anecdotal evidence to support your side of the argument. To a man...every poker author that I've ever read emphasizes the overriding importance of post-flop play. Hardly anyone who has actually played NL seriously would consider post-flop play to be of lesser importance than pre-flop play, as you have done here...especially in the deeper-stacked games.
Those "difficult post-flop situations" that you mention above plague the "boring" pre-flop players too...and God help them if they lack the post-flop skills to effectively deal with them. The nature of deep-stacked NL is such that a "boring" pre-flop game won't offer you much "protection" if your post-flop game isn't up to par.
|
Limon deals with this point. The people he plays against in high and mid stakes games who actually make money "play boring" pre-flop, while a lot of people who have written poker books aren't actually winning players in cash games (and certainly don't have the winrates of the people he mentions in his post).
There's also plenty of evidence from online that the biggest winners play pretty tight. And not only is that more accurate data, but it's a much larger sample size. Live players believe a lot of old wives' tales, including many who think they are "good", because their sample sizes are so small.
As for difficult situations- in any poker game, the player with the stronger range will have the second best made hand less often. That's basically the mathematical principle behind tight play.
