Q&A #79: But Doyle Brunson Says…

I watched a dvd of a poker conference and at the end it had Doyle, Harman, and one other guy answering questions from the audience.

They were being asked the dumbest questions imagineable but each time the pros were saying ‘it depends’ and telling the fish what to think about rather than offering soundbites.

So I think it’s the TV’s fault, not the pros. Having said that I can think of one player (he’s won 11 bracelets) who’s made quite a nice living from giving soundbite poker advice.

Context is something I’ve been thinking a lot about lately. Whether it’s books, videos, or posts on poker forums, sufficient context is never provided. Even with the very best advice, it’s up to the audience to supply the last bit of context. Without that, the advice may be worse than worthless.

Forum posts are the worst in terms of context. Replies to questions are frequently given by players playing different stakes, on different sites, with different styles, and without regard to whether they are playing online or live, or in short-handed or full games.

I’m realizing that making adjustments to whatever advice I get is critical. Figuring out what adjustments need to be made and how big they should be is painful, but I’m finding I can’t be successful otherwise.

Hope this doesn’t sound too much like a continuation-name-dropping, but I thought this quote from the Stoxtrader/Zobags book sounded relevant to the original question:

Three-betting also allows me to further narrow my opponents’ ranges because I get to see whether or not they four-bet. Since neither of them does, AA, KK, QQ, and AK are ruled out virtually 100 percent of the time, as well as probably JJ, and maybe TT. While a player sometimes may not four-bet those hands against only one opponent for deception purposes, it is extremely rare (and a big mistake) not to four-bet pref-flop with these hands when three or more players are in.

I always love the interviews with pros that ask “What’s your favorite starting hand in hold’em”. You always get answers like 76s or T8s or something like that. I believe it was Chip Reese that gave the most honest answer when he said #1 = AA, #2 = KK, #3 = QQ ….

Yes, and even if it’s completely honest and selfless, still beware grabbing snippets here and there.

I was associated with a well-known, highly successful wrestling coach for a number of years. He would have camps that were attended by wrestlers from all around, several that would be competing agaist his own atheletes.(camp was practically mandatory for his wretlers)

He showed a lot. All honest and good stuff that made his guys not only successful in H.S. but helped several of them attain educations and successes years later.

I asked him ” What are you doing ? That is going to come back to haunt you.” He replied no it wouldn’t. The athelete won’t know how to use it properly without practice and practice. And if he does show it to his coach and they practice it everyday, if it doens’t fit into the coach’s overall philosohy about wrestling, what’s important, how important, how to incorporate it with the other umpteen moves and series of set-ups and moves, it’s not going to make a difference. And of course, if it did, he felt confident enough to go beyond that next time and still be ahead of the competition.

That’s the way I feel about Big-name advice and myself. Even if something will eventually work for me in my games, it’s not now and I’m not good enough yet to know how to take an isolated idea and incorporate it into what I’m trying to accomplish as a player.

The only big-name books I own are Dan Harrington , and thanks to QE, Ed. =)