make a good point about the hot o meter and i have been wondering if this makes a difference to players choices. I dont use it myself and its obviously for newbs but do they use it in decision making which affect seasoned players when they raise and get called with what we consider bad hands. As ive noticed a couple that say on fire when i wouldnt agree. I for one would like it taken off completely you dont get it on other sites and newbs playing for money shouldnt use it either they should know what are good hands with out being shown by sky. GL elsadog hope you have better luck else where and come back
seing as this has turned into a bad/unlucky beat section now ive got to post the last 2 hands i played! ok first hand was maybe my fault for slow playing it but second was just sick. yes i was tilting and yes i called a big raise in hunt for flush but the river was so sick twice in a row!
Hi everyone, I wasn't looking to start a revolution or a bad beat section when I posted, I was just so frustrated.
It isn't the fact that I'm not winning, that's expected in tournament play. My game, more than most, tends to be feast and famine because I only play the bigger field tournaments. I either make an early exit or get to the final stages, and my win rate when I progress to the end is very high. What I have found most annoying is the way I'm constantly losing all my chips. Getting out-drawn is all part of the game, meeting a better hand in a showdown is all part of the game, and playing badly or making bad decisions is also part of my game occasionally.
The frustration comes from the sheer number of calls/shoves with second rate cards that are seeming to be paid off far too often. I have always had a 'feel' for the game and making considered calls against opponents was a strength. I still judge those calls pretty well, but of late, even when I get the call right and have my opponent dominated, I lose out. When I make a move with strength I lose out. I can't remember the last time I won any race on here. Maybe it's just a phase but it's a long lasting phase, and a bad one. Having encountered this for the past month or so I honestly can't imagine how I could ever win another tournament on Sky because there are just too many mines in the minefield.
The Hot-O-Meter is I'm sure a part of it. Telling a novice who is struggling to learn the game, that hands which should be junked most of the time, are ''top cards'' or ''on fire'' is a sure way to get them overplaying the cards. In any tournament there are many occasions when the cards you didn't play win the hand and you accept that. By persuading players to risk their tournament on those (poor) hands means a percentage of success and a lot of upsets are the result. It's not at all unusual to see a number of players (even in the deepies) with 4 or 5 times the starting stacks within the first 10 minutes of the tournament start. I don't want to play that type of poker. I like the main events on here, and some of the deepstacks too, but I will be giving them a wide berth for a while because I don't enjoy the game on Sky anymore.
My post wasn't intended as a whinge (it probably comes across like that) and it's not about going bust or losing money on here. I just don't see the point in spending my money on a gamble, being frustrated, and not enjoying it. In the past I've been asked about my poker and the 'gambling' and my reply has always been that I don't gamble; that poker is a game of 'considered wager' and I believe that.
Sadly, I can't say that anymore about my poker on Sky. Now it's just a gamble. The points made about playing cash for profit and tournaments for enjoyment make sense. With me it's not about the money (I have a good job and earn far more than I would win at poker) for me it is about enjoyment and so I play tournaments because I love to win them occasionally. But I won't waste my money where I can't see a way of winning........................
Maybe I should take to the play-money tables .......... move over Porkerman make room for one more )
Nice post 'Al' ... Ok mate I'll let you and only you into a secret, I've found the way to beat this game here on SkyPoker .....ssssshh look and learn )
Elsa, u r more than entitled to whinge,some of us have been doing it for a while,..and what you say about making the right decision only to be mugged off on the river,time and time again,or going in well ahead and coming out well behind,rings very true.I dont think i'll ever be a Hellmuth,but im not an idiot (some may say HE is),and like to think i have a small grasp of the game.,but it seems unbelievably in favour of the lesser hand here,..and does take away from the enjoyment..whatever u do,gl.
Nice post 'Al' ... Ok mate I'll let you and only you into a secret, I've found the way to beat this game here on SkyPoker .....ssssshh look and learn ) 1 Minute Roulette Loading... Tournament Complete Finished at 23:16 - 04 May 0 1 : 2 3 : 4 5 : 6 7 This is a TV-only game Starts At Started At Buy-In Running For Prize Pool Registered Players Left Chips Blind Limits Blinds Current Next In Stacks Largest Average Smallest 1 bennydip2 - £7 + 10 League Points 2 UGLYN - £4.20 + 8 League Points 3 ZINOM - £2.80 + 6 League Points 4 magpie49 - 4 League Points 5 CHILLI884 - 2 League Points Rebuys/Addons available ) Posted by bennydip2
I see what you're saying Benny .......... I'd have settled for the 2 league points (
Good Post Alan, & as you & I have shared virtual poker tables for over a decade, back to the Tribeca days, & still share a Forum elsewhere, I wish you well wherever you play your poker, & I hope that at some stage, you will return here.
As you rightly say at the top of the Post, the thread went all skew-wiff, & I could hardly bear to read it, let alone Post on it, to wish you well. It just became a series of bad-beat Posts. And I'm not entirely sure what they achieve......
I'm afraid all this "I had a worse Bad Beat than you" - "No, MINE was worse, look" completely goes over my head. Everybody ONLY loses, everyone ONLY gets bad-beated according to this thread. Frankly, I think one needs a glass half-full mentality to play poker. To play it with a glass half-full mindset must be a living ****, & I genuinely feel for them, because where is the pleasure in poker if you can only see the downside? Every session must be ****. Or do they have good sessions, too, & keep schtum about them?
And how are regulation poker suck-outs suddenly the fault of Sky Poker? To the best of my knowledge, poker was not invented by Sky Poker, they never made the Rules, nor were they ingenious enough to design that incredible thing called a deck of cards which produces such a bewildering array & variety every single hand, so much so that worldwide, millions of us stare at them night after night. And yet so many of the Posts blame SKY POKER. Eh?
If we went to, say, the old Laddies Forum, what did we see? Everyone blamed Laddies for rigging the game. Ditto Tribeca. Ditto blonde. Ditto every Site that has a Forum. We have the Laddies River, the Stars River, the Sky Poker River. Surely players can see through this, & work it out? - it's just a luck-based game with vicious variance, in which the more-skilled players have a tinsy-winsy edge. I suppose it's all about the blame culture - "it's not my fault, so it must be someome elses".
And it was asked "is the Sky RNG really random?" I mean, how exactly would that work, making it "non-random"?, lol! Does it somehow sort out the bad players & reward them with suck-outs? How would that work? Can someone actually explain how that works, how the software knows who the bad player who needs help is?
Then, to cap it all, the "bad play" on here was laid at the door of Ed & myself, for giving bad advice!
I'm old school. I prefer to play people who call wide & high, it's the good players who call when they are winning that I shy away from. Now, all of a sudden, everyone is complaining about playing bad players. What? WHAT? The world has turned upside down when we start thinking that!
But the thread highlight was being described as "Mr Zimmerman". It was the only smile I got from the whole thread!
Good Post Alan, & as you & I have shared virtual poker tables for over a decade, back to the Tribeca days, & still share a Forum elsewhere, I wish you well wherever you play your poker, & I hope that at some stage, you will return here. As you rightly say at the top of the Post, the thread went all skew-wiff, & I could hardly bear to read it, let alone Post on it, to wish you well. It just became a series of bad-beat Posts. And I'm not entirely sure what they achieve...... I'm afraid all this "I had a worse Bad Beat than you" - "No, MINE was worse, look" completely goes over my head. Everybody ONLY loses, everyone ONLY gets bad-beated according to this thread. Frankly, I think one needs a glass half-full mentality to play poker. To play it with a glass half-full mindset must be a living ****, & I genuinely feel for them, because where is the pleasure in poker if you can only see the downside? Every session must be ****. Or do they have good sessions, too, & keep schtum about them? And how are regulation poker suck-outs suddenly the fault of Sky Poker? To the best of my knowledge, poker was not invented by Sky Poker, they never made the Rules, nor were they ingenious enough to design that incredible thing called a deck of cards which produces such a bewildering array & variety every single hand, so much so that worldwide, millions of us stare at them night after night. And yet so many of the Posts blame SKY POKER. Eh? If we went to, say, the old Laddies Forum, what did we see? Everyone blamed Laddies for rigging the game. Ditto Tribeca. Ditto blonde. Ditto every Site that has a Forum. We have the Laddies River, the Stars River, the Sky Poker River. Surely players can see through this, & work it out? - it's just a luck-based game with vicious variance, in which the more-skilled players have a tinsy-winsy edge. I suppose it's all about the blame culture - "it's not my fault, so it must be someome elses". And it was asked "is the Sky RNG really random?" I mean, how exactly would that work, making it "non-random"?, lol! Does it somehow sort out the bad players & reward them with suck-outs? How would that work? Can someone actually explain how that works, how the software knows who the bad player who needs help is? Then, to cap it all, the "bad play" on here was laid at the door of Ed & myself, for giving bad advice! I'm old school. I prefer to play people who call wide & high, it's the good players who call when they are winning that I shy away from. Now, all of a sudden, everyone is complaining about playing bad players. What? WHAT? The world has turned upside down when we start thinking that! But the thread highlight was being described as "Mr Zimmerman". It was the only smile I got from the whole thread! Anyways, take care fella, & love to Mrs Woof. Posted by Tikay10
I was musing on this overnight, & in fact, I found a parallel with Alan's problem.
In Live Poker, I have cashed in at least one Tourney in every Venue I have ever played in. That includes Russia, Spain, Italy, France, Holland, Denmark, Austria, the USA, RoI, & of course all of those in the UK in which I have played, which is almost all of them, certainly all the "major" rooms.
Except.....
The Vic. I was 0 from 34 before giving best - I just could not cash there, no matter what. Outlandish bad beats, (including quads over quads in a £1k Tourney) eventually led to a phobia in my mind, & I think I started playing less well than I can, sub-optimally for sure, as my confidence was shot to pieces.
Eventually I decided to quit playing there. That was in 2005 I think, & I've never played a single Tourney there since.
Like Alan (but unlike many on this thread) I did not blame the poker provider, as it's "just one of those things". The Poker Gods of Variance move in mysterious ways, their wonders to perform.
Thanks for the kind words Tikay ........ as always you are the voice of reason and wisdom.
The Hot-O-Meter concept is real. In any tournament you can expect to meet a variety of different players. The aggressive, the passive, the canny, the novice and the expert all behave differently but predictably and therefore can be successfully negotiated. On Sky there is a high percentage of inexperienced players and that can be a good thing or a bad thing. In a one on one situation it's definitely a good thing in the long run. However, my observations regarding the mtts on Sky reveal something I think most of us are very aware of. Isolating a player from the field is nigh on impossible now. 4x p.f. raises mean nothing, 10x p.f. raises will still result in 2 or more callers most times. So the problem arises as to how you isolate and the answer seems to be to shove all-in. This is by no means a certainty and in my experience you will still get callers with any paint in their hands. Building a stack an occasionally coming across someone feeling lucky with K7 or the like should be a bonus even allowing for the occasional suckout. But when the percentage of players feeling confident (as opposed to feeling lucky) with K7 or similar increases as it has on Sky, your chances diminish rapidly. You simply can't dodge K7 too many times.......... eventually it will get you.
When the H-O-M is telling inexperienced players that K7s (and a variety of other low ranking hands) is 'red hot' there is bound to be major action on almost every hand. Very quickly there will be some of these players with very big comparative stacks after having knocked out similar 'chancers' and a big stack without any fear is dangerous. A big stack who thinks that K7, and the like, are top hands will call you down every time. You may get past some but you simply can't beat them all. Of course the odds will eventually catch up with this type of play and the cream will eventually rise to the top in any large field tournament. Unfortunately, lasting long enough for that to happen is akin to a lottery. Hopefully the skill level will increase on Sky and the realisation the K7 is not the bee's knees will eventually dawn on the majority of players, and they will realise that outrageous successes on a few hands don't lead to either overall success or profitability. The early stages of tournaments on Sky are similar to the low entry rebuys on other sites. Elsewhere players will go allin on multi-way pots with any two cards in order to build a stack. The result is mayhem for the first hour but at least you can rebuy if you choose to when your monster hand gets crushed. The H-O-M isn't a help to any player but in my opinion it's playing a big part in spoiling this site as far as tournaments are concerned.
I love it when we can debate it properly, instead of "it's Sky Poker's fault, the RNG is wrong" stuff, (which you have & never would say or even think of course) so pardon me if I respond further.
Let's look at this Hot-O-Meter theory, because I'm quite intrigued by what you say. In fact, if you were correct, I could actually go & get something done "upstairs".
You play - or played! - on Sky Poker a wide range of MTT's, but from my knowledge of what & where you play, you mainly play the £10, £20, & £30 MTT's here.
Are you suggesting - no sarcasm or irony here, it's an innocent question - that the players who you - or let's say "we" - encounter in these Tourneys, the "regular" £10, £20 & £30 Tourneys, actually follow advice from the Hot-O-Meter? Because, personlly, if that were true, it'd be truly jaw-dropping, to be honest.
I have no idea of it's purpose really, but I imagine it was designed - badly if you wish, it matters not at this juncture - as an aid to absolute newbies, peeps who have never played poker before, a market niche that Sky Poker have certainly targeted successfully.
But, hand on heart, if a player who has played for more than a few Tourneys - say a dozen - & who is able to frequent the bigger Tourneys on Sky Poker - the £10, £20 & £30 ones where I believe you play most of the time - actually is influenced by the H-o-M, well, I'd be truly staggered. So are we saying that these guys actually follow the H-o-M?
In summary, if the H-o-M (which IS an aid to complete newbies) were absent, are we saying that the standard of play on this site would change & improve dramatically?
If they do, I'd be truly amazed - & I'd happily accept I misjudged it. But I'm struggling to buy that one!
As a reasonably new newbie (7 months and counting) I admit to initially using the Hot O Meter when starting out as an aid. But a couple of re-loads later (and a bit of experience) made me realise that that aspect of it was not good. I still use it as a guide for the odds once the flop has come,etc. Hopefully people will learn as I have and instead of using it they look at their cards and the history/knowledge of the players on their table. Admittedly on the 2p/4p tables I play on there are always people who want to shove regardless. I have had to learn the hard way to accept the losses with the occassional win. If I could only learn to take the wins and run instead of continuing to play and slowly losing it all! But then I like playing!
Good Post Alan, & as you & I have shared virtual poker tables for over a decade, back to the Tribeca days, & still share a Forum elsewhere, I wish you well wherever you play your poker, & I hope that at some stage, you will return here. As you rightly say at the top of the Post, the thread went all skew-wiff, & I could hardly bear to read it, let alone Post on it, to wish you well. It just became a series of bad-beat Posts. And I'm not entirely sure what they achieve...... I'm afraid all this "I had a worse Bad Beat than you" - "No, MINE was worse, look" completely goes over my head. Everybody ONLY loses, everyone ONLY gets bad-beated according to this thread. Frankly, I think one needs a glass half-full mentality to play poker. To play it with a glass half-full mindset must be a living ****, & I genuinely feel for them, because where is the pleasure in poker if you can only see the downside? Every session must be ****. Or do they have good sessions, too, & keep schtum about them? And how are regulation poker suck-outs suddenly the fault of Sky Poker? To the best of my knowledge, poker was not invented by Sky Poker, they never made the Rules, nor were they ingenious enough to design that incredible thing called a deck of cards which produces such a bewildering array & variety every single hand, so much so that worldwide, millions of us stare at them night after night. And yet so many of the Posts blame SKY POKER. Eh? If we went to, say, the old Laddies Forum, what did we see? Everyone blamed Laddies for rigging the game. Ditto Tribeca. Ditto blonde. Ditto every Site that has a Forum. We have the Laddies River, the Stars River, the Sky Poker River. Surely players can see through this, & work it out? - it's just a luck-based game with vicious variance, in which the more-skilled players have a tinsy-winsy edge. I suppose it's all about the blame culture - "it's not my fault, so it must be someome elses". And it was asked "is the Sky RNG really random?" I mean, how exactly would that work, making it "non-random"?, lol! Does it somehow sort out the bad players & reward them with suck-outs? How would that work? Can someone actually explain how that works, how the software knows who the bad player who needs help is? Then, to cap it all, the "bad play" on here was laid at the door of Ed & myself, for giving bad advice! I'm old school. I prefer to play people who call wide & high, it's the good players who call when they are winning that I shy away from. Now, all of a sudden, everyone is complaining about playing bad players. What? WHAT? The world has turned upside down when we start thinking that! But the thread highlight was being described as "Mr Zimmerman". It was the only smile I got from the whole thread! Anyways, take care fella, & love to Mrs Woof. Posted by Tikay10
Should you deide to , I for one would be very sorry to see you go, but see your reasons for having enough, Good luck in wherever you play, be it in here, or elesewhere, take care of yourself.
I've been trying to fathom for some time now why players are putting so much blind faith in poor hands and the H-O-M is the only reason I can come up with. Maybe the game changed whilst I was sleeping and the modern game is multi-way pots with AA K7 Q6 and 89. Maybe a cavalry charge is the modern way.
Would it help if I started drinking when I play ........... I wonder sometimes.
Some very good posts on here (mainly from Alan & Tikay) now. I echo everything Elsa has said and it is nice to see a constructive debate on here for a change.
The H-O-M, IMO, does have a influence on here so it maybe time for the boffins to re-think the usage of it and possibly replace it with just an odds calculator or a 'outs' card.
I think the only time I use the H-O-M is when I am playing RR and it helps me to decide on my action
I've been trying to fathom for some time now why players are putting so much blind faith in poor hands and the H-O-M is the only reason I can come up with. Maybe the game changed whilst I was sleeping and the modern game is multi-way pots with AA K7 Q6 and 89. Maybe a cavalry charge is the modern way. Would it help if I started drinking when I play ........... I wonder sometimes. Posted by elsadog
I find it helps, you dont really remember the beats in the morning....
Thanks for the kind words Tikay ........ as always you are the voice of reason and wisdom. The Hot-O-Meter concept is real. In any tournament you can expect to meet a variety of different players. The aggressive, the passive, the canny, the novice and the expert all behave differently but predictably and therefore can be successfully negotiated. On Sky there is a high percentage of inexperienced players and that can be a good thing or a bad thing. In a one on one situation it's definitely a good thing in the long run. However, my observations regarding the mtts on Sky reveal something I think most of us are very aware of. Isolating a player from the field is nigh on impossible now. 4x p.f. raises mean nothing, 10x p.f. raises will still result in 2 or more callers most times. So the problem arises as to how you isolate and the answer seems to be to shove all-in. This is by no means a certainty and in my experience you will still get callers with any paint in their hands. Building a stack an occasionally coming across someone feeling lucky with K7 or the like should be a bonus even allowing for the occasional suckout. But when the percentage of players feeling confident (as opposed to feeling lucky) with K7 or similar increases as it has on Sky, your chances diminish rapidly. You simply can't dodge K7 too many times.......... eventually it will get you. When the H-O-M is telling inexperienced players that K7s (and a variety of other low ranking hands) is 'red hot' there is bound to be major action on almost every hand. Very quickly there will be some of these players with very big comparative stacks after having knocked out similar 'chancers' and a big stack without any fear is dangerous. A big stack who thinks that K7, and the like, are top hands will call you down every time. You may get past some but you simply can't beat them all. Of course the odds will eventually catch up with this type of play and the cream will eventually rise to the top in any large field tournament. Unfortunately, lasting long enough for that to happen is akin to a lottery. Hopefully the skill level will increase on Sky and the realisation the K7 is not the bee's knees will eventually dawn on the majority of players, and they will realise that outrageous successes on a few hands don't lead to either overall success or profitability. The early stages of tournaments on Sky are similar to the low entry rebuys on other sites. Elsewhere players will go allin on multi-way pots with any two cards in order to build a stack. The result is mayhem for the first hour but at least you can rebuy if you choose to when your monster hand gets crushed. The H-O-M isn't a help to any player but in my opinion it's playing a big part in spoiling this site as far as tournaments are concerned. Posted by elsadog
So, if we had Rebuys, or even Rebuys AND Add-Ons, it would be OK - or at least, "better" here?
Hmm, maybe that's part of the answer. Well that's do-able. VERY do-able.;)
Comments
THIS ISNT FUNNY ANYMORE.
It isn't the fact that I'm not winning, that's expected in tournament play. My game, more than most, tends to be feast and famine because I only play the bigger field tournaments. I either make an early exit or get to the final stages, and my win rate when I progress to the end is very high. What I have found most annoying is the way I'm constantly losing all my chips. Getting out-drawn is all part of the game, meeting a better hand in a showdown is all part of the game, and playing badly or making bad decisions is also part of my game occasionally.
The frustration comes from the sheer number of calls/shoves with second rate cards that are seeming to be paid off far too often. I have always had a 'feel' for the game and making considered calls against opponents was a strength. I still judge those calls pretty well, but of late, even when I get the call right and have my opponent dominated, I lose out. When I make a move with strength I lose out. I can't remember the last time I won any race on here. Maybe it's just a phase but it's a long lasting phase, and a bad one. Having encountered this for the past month or so I honestly can't imagine how I could ever win another tournament on Sky because there are just too many mines in the minefield.
The Hot-O-Meter is I'm sure a part of it. Telling a novice who is struggling to learn the game, that hands which should be junked most of the time, are ''top cards'' or ''on fire'' is a sure way to get them overplaying the cards. In any tournament there are many occasions when the cards you didn't play win the hand and you accept that. By persuading players to risk their tournament on those (poor) hands means a percentage of success and a lot of upsets are the result. It's not at all unusual to see a number of players (even in the deepies) with 4 or 5 times the starting stacks within the first 10 minutes of the tournament start. I don't want to play that type of poker. I like the main events on here, and some of the deepstacks too, but I will be giving them a wide berth for a while because I don't enjoy the game on Sky anymore.
My post wasn't intended as a whinge (it probably comes across like that) and it's not about going bust or losing money on here. I just don't see the point in spending my money on a gamble, being frustrated, and not enjoying it. In the past I've been asked about my poker and the 'gambling' and my reply has always been that I don't gamble; that poker is a game of 'considered wager' and I believe that.
Sadly, I can't say that anymore about my poker on Sky. Now it's just a gamble. The points made about playing cash for profit and tournaments for enjoyment make sense. With me it's not about the money (I have a good job and earn far more than I would win at poker) for me it is about enjoyment and so I play tournaments because I love to win them occasionally. But I won't waste my money where I can't see a way of winning........................
Maybe I should take to the play-money tables .......... move over Porkerman make room for one more
Nice post 'Al' ... Ok mate I'll let you and only you into a secret, I've found the way to beat this game here on SkyPoker .....ssssshh look and learn
)
1 Minute Roulette
Tournament Complete
Finished at 23:16 - 04 May
This is a TV-only game
Rebuys/Addons available
Good Post Alan, & as you & I have shared virtual poker tables for over a decade, back to the Tribeca days, & still share a Forum elsewhere, I wish you well wherever you play your poker, & I hope that at some stage, you will return here.
As you rightly say at the top of the Post, the thread went all skew-wiff, & I could hardly bear to read it, let alone Post on it, to wish you well. It just became a series of bad-beat Posts. And I'm not entirely sure what they achieve......
I'm afraid all this "I had a worse Bad Beat than you" - "No, MINE was worse, look" completely goes over my head. Everybody ONLY loses, everyone ONLY gets bad-beated according to this thread. Frankly, I think one needs a glass half-full mentality to play poker. To play it with a glass half-full mindset must be a living ****, & I genuinely feel for them, because where is the pleasure in poker if you can only see the downside? Every session must be ****. Or do they have good sessions, too, & keep schtum about them?
And how are regulation poker suck-outs suddenly the fault of Sky Poker? To the best of my knowledge, poker was not invented by Sky Poker, they never made the Rules, nor were they ingenious enough to design that incredible thing called a deck of cards which produces such a bewildering array & variety every single hand, so much so that worldwide, millions of us stare at them night after night. And yet so many of the Posts blame SKY POKER. Eh?
If we went to, say, the old Laddies Forum, what did we see? Everyone blamed Laddies for rigging the game. Ditto Tribeca. Ditto blonde. Ditto every Site that has a Forum. We have the Laddies River, the Stars River, the Sky Poker River. Surely players can see through this, & work it out? - it's just a luck-based game with vicious variance, in which the more-skilled players have a tinsy-winsy edge. I suppose it's all about the blame culture - "it's not my fault, so it must be someome elses".
And it was asked "is the Sky RNG really random?" I mean, how exactly would that work, making it "non-random"?, lol! Does it somehow sort out the bad players & reward them with suck-outs? How would that work? Can someone actually explain how that works, how the software knows who the bad player who needs help is?
Then, to cap it all, the "bad play" on here was laid at the door of Ed & myself, for giving bad advice!
I'm old school. I prefer to play people who call wide & high, it's the good players who call when they are winning that I shy away from. Now, all of a sudden, everyone is complaining about playing bad players. What? WHAT? The world has turned upside down when we start thinking that!
But the thread highlight was being described as "Mr Zimmerman". It was the only smile I got from the whole thread!
Anyways, take care fella, & love to Mrs Woof.
I was musing on this overnight, & in fact, I found a parallel with Alan's problem.
In Live Poker, I have cashed in at least one Tourney in every Venue I have ever played in. That includes Russia, Spain, Italy, France, Holland, Denmark, Austria, the USA, RoI, & of course all of those in the UK in which I have played, which is almost all of them, certainly all the "major" rooms.
Except.....
The Vic. I was 0 from 34 before giving best - I just could not cash there, no matter what. Outlandish bad beats, (including quads over quads in a £1k Tourney) eventually led to a phobia in my mind, & I think I started playing less well than I can, sub-optimally for sure, as my confidence was shot to pieces.
Eventually I decided to quit playing there. That was in 2005 I think, & I've never played a single Tourney there since.
Like Alan (but unlike many on this thread) I did not blame the poker provider, as it's "just one of those things". The Poker Gods of Variance move in mysterious ways, their wonders to perform.
The Hot-O-Meter concept is real. In any tournament you can expect to meet a variety of different players. The aggressive, the passive, the canny, the novice and the expert all behave differently but predictably and therefore can be successfully negotiated. On Sky there is a high percentage of inexperienced players and that can be a good thing or a bad thing. In a one on one situation it's definitely a good thing in the long run. However, my observations regarding the mtts on Sky reveal something I think most of us are very aware of. Isolating a player from the field is nigh on impossible now. 4x p.f. raises mean nothing, 10x p.f. raises will still result in 2 or more callers most times. So the problem arises as to how you isolate and the answer seems to be to shove all-in. This is by no means a certainty and in my experience you will still get callers with any paint in their hands. Building a stack an occasionally coming across someone feeling lucky with K7 or the like should be a bonus even allowing for the occasional suckout. But when the percentage of players feeling confident (as opposed to feeling lucky) with K7 or similar increases as it has on Sky, your chances diminish rapidly. You simply can't dodge K7 too many times.......... eventually it will get you.
When the H-O-M is telling inexperienced players that K7s (and a variety of other low ranking hands) is 'red hot' there is bound to be major action on almost every hand. Very quickly there will be some of these players with very big comparative stacks after having knocked out similar 'chancers' and a big stack without any fear is dangerous. A big stack who thinks that K7, and the like, are top hands will call you down every time. You may get past some but you simply can't beat them all. Of course the odds will eventually catch up with this type of play and the cream will eventually rise to the top in any large field tournament. Unfortunately, lasting long enough for that to happen is akin to a lottery. Hopefully the skill level will increase on Sky and the realisation the K7 is not the bee's knees will eventually dawn on the majority of players, and they will realise that outrageous successes on a few hands don't lead to either overall success or profitability. The early stages of tournaments on Sky are similar to the low entry rebuys on other sites. Elsewhere players will go allin on multi-way pots with any two cards in order to build a stack. The result is mayhem for the first hour but at least you can rebuy if you choose to when your monster hand gets crushed. The H-O-M isn't a help to any player but in my opinion it's playing a big part in spoiling this site as far as tournaments are concerned.
Thanks Alan.
I love it when we can debate it properly, instead of "it's Sky Poker's fault, the RNG is wrong" stuff, (which you have & never would say or even think of course) so pardon me if I respond further.
Let's look at this Hot-O-Meter theory, because I'm quite intrigued by what you say. In fact, if you were correct, I could actually go & get something done "upstairs".
You play - or played! - on Sky Poker a wide range of MTT's, but from my knowledge of what & where you play, you mainly play the £10, £20, & £30 MTT's here.
Are you suggesting - no sarcasm or irony here, it's an innocent question - that the players who you - or let's say "we" - encounter in these Tourneys, the "regular" £10, £20 & £30 Tourneys, actually follow advice from the Hot-O-Meter? Because, personlly, if that were true, it'd be truly jaw-dropping, to be honest.
I have no idea of it's purpose really, but I imagine it was designed - badly if you wish, it matters not at this juncture - as an aid to absolute newbies, peeps who have never played poker before, a market niche that Sky Poker have certainly targeted successfully.
But, hand on heart, if a player who has played for more than a few Tourneys - say a dozen - & who is able to frequent the bigger Tourneys on Sky Poker - the £10, £20 & £30 ones where I believe you play most of the time - actually is influenced by the H-o-M, well, I'd be truly staggered. So are we saying that these guys actually follow the H-o-M?
In summary, if the H-o-M (which IS an aid to complete newbies) were absent, are we saying that the standard of play on this site would change & improve dramatically?
If they do, I'd be truly amazed - & I'd happily accept I misjudged it. But I'm struggling to buy that one!
I do love this post
Should you deide to , I for one would be very sorry to see you go, but see your reasons for having enough, Good luck in wherever you play, be it in here, or elesewhere, take care of yourself.
Would it help if I started drinking when I play ........... I wonder sometimes.
I find it helps, you dont really remember the beats in the morning....
Hmm, maybe that's part of the answer. Well that's do-able. VERY do-able.;)