After each meaningful pot I do a quick review in my head of what I could of done better if anything, and looked at how they played the hand from their point of view. That way any 'history' with that player is fresh in my mind and I can remember why I did certain things.
After a session though I do zero reviewing. I have more important things to do, like sleeping.
In Response to Re: Extra curricular activities : not entirely true... if you know the correct move in a prticular spot, you can apply that knowledge to different but similar spots this kind of in depth anaysis is exaclty why "internet kids" took over the poker world - they started to crush live games too and resulted in even big stars like Daniel Negreanu admitting that he was no longer competitive and recieving coaching from some of them! Posted by chicknMelt
This is only relevant on nosebleed stakes IMO. I strongly believe for a site like Sky and the standard £11 bounty hunter, playing is the best form of learning. It doesn't matter how many hours you study, how many triple range oobery dooberies you do when Mr gamble is just randomly betting with no thought just to have some fun.
Studying is to get that edge, when you're at a level that 'an edge' can mean the difference between winning and losing thousands of pounds. On here ABC will make you a decent profit.
By no means do I think I'm one of the best players on here, but I put hardly any studying in, I have learnt pretty much all my knowledge from simply playing over the last 6 or 7 years and I've made a few quid that way.
Saying that though, everyone learns differently, I suppose that's the key. What works for one may not work for another.
I just use the search engine in hand history and review hands in which I won more than 10xbb and lost 10xbb or more. Most are pretty standard but there are always one or two where you could have done better.
In Response to Re: Extra curricular activities : This is only relevant on nosebleed stakes IMO. I strongly believe for a site like Sky and the standard £11 bounty hunter, playing is the best form of learning. It doesn't matter how many hours you study, how many triple range oobery dooberies you do when Mr gamble is just randomly betting with no thought just to have some fun. Studying is to get that edge, when you're at a level that 'an edge' can mean the difference between winning and losing thousands of pounds. On here ABC will make you a decent profit. By no means do I think I'm one of the best players on here, but I put hardly any studying in, I have learnt pretty much all my knowledge from simply playing over the last 6 or 7 years and I've made a few quid that way. Saying that though, everyone learns differently, I suppose that's the key. What works for one may not work for another. Posted by FlashFlush
its not all about complex lines etc - you can do analysis vs mr gamble too - for example, if villain is calling with 80%, what is a profitable shoving range.
yep, people learn in different ways. some learn better just by playing... I dont think Viktor Blom does any analysis, he just plays the best and picks up stuff that way. expensive way of learning imo lol.
i wouldn't ignore the effect of small mistakes that you get to make over and over. ed millar wrote a great article on it.
you might agonise whether you should c/raise or c/call with AA on a montone, straightening board v a reckless opponent - maybe that was the biggest pot you won / lost all week. but it's a situation that you will face only once a month maybe.
opening JTo from early position or defending your blind by calling with 89o might only cost you a few BB's each time you do it, but you get to do it hundred of times a month. if you only look at your big pots you might miss these loose peels you make dozens of times a session, bleeding chips without realising.
Comments