|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 8, 2009 0:02:57 GMT -5
I've reposted this..please login to download. I know we have several excellent comments, but I am asking everyone to re-review this paper and really provide us with some excellent feedback so we can grow this properly. We'll see THIRTY additional replies as each member is expected to put down their comments here: wordpress.com/post/thepokersyndicate.wordpress.com/283 |
|
eemil
Junior Member
Posts: 51
|
Post by eemil on Dec 8, 2009 2:05:46 GMT -5
I made few comments on the week one- thread which I will copy below. If you want me to add these comments to the discussion paper should I select an arrow and place my comments with my nick or do we just make separate posts and one person will group it together.
Please let me know how to proceed. Find my original post about the paper below.
Hi Mark and peers
Mark, I have read and reread you paper. I think it is excellent tool to move forward. There are areas which I didn't fully understand but overall structure is good. Of course, as we go forward we might find that some structural changes are in order but I do think that are not able to get sidetracked if we use this format.
I would like to add a topic, which I feel is pretty important. Before the start of the tournament and before every hand dealt you should have a plan. I find myself too many times just playing a hand without really thinking about the circumstances or impact of outcomes.I want to point out that plan is the important but not carved to the stone. It is kind list of what if's and very adjustable but still there. This topic might also help us or at least me to weight the different factors meaning in this type of situation I need to master 3bet or re steal tools to play good.
I think that overall challenge is the size and number of areas to cover. As we are gonna use collective force to search/combine/ summarize different topics we truly need some facilitating knowhow. It might be good that all pods would have similarities when presenting the outcomes that it would be easy to grasp the core of the topic.
My two cents,
Eemil
|
|
|
|
Post by bishamonten on Dec 8, 2009 15:39:54 GMT -5
This is excelllent stuff Mclucky i am impressed with the thought you have put into this project . I am particularly interested in the mental well being section.
anyway thank you for giving this a great framework from which we can start
|
|
|
|
Post by abscat7 on Dec 8, 2009 18:18:54 GMT -5
Wow! I was excited by Steve's email about the upcoming discussion group Monday, as it seemed as if alot of thought had gone into where we should head as a group. Then I read MX's post. Amazing piece. Although I realize that this has to be fleshed out - it is apparent that he took alot of time and effort to put this together. Thanks. I know for me - I need alot of help with the advanced math concepts. I also tried to do something like this for myself before the group began. So I downloaded Fox's Poker College articles to use as a framework for some of the items. In particular he talks about certain books we should read in various areas, i.e. Poker Mindset, Theory of Poker, etc. I think we should incorporate that into our content to work from. Also, there are some great articles from Full tilt like Pearljammer's cbetting info we should look at. I also read Swayne's book, it has some interesting info, including card strength, perhaps this could be included as well. I'm sure some of us are calling raises and/or playing cards that don't play well against 1 raiser or need multiple opponents to have +EV. Anyway, just some beginning thoughts. Look forward to Monday. Amy
|
|
huge
Full Member
Posts: 109
|
Post by huge on Dec 9, 2009 5:20:36 GMT -5
Here's where I'm coming from ...
I don't really care about whether or not it's possible to define a championship model for becoming a great poker player, or whether we can define 50 factors that a great poker player has to be good at (or whether there are 62, or 41, or maybe there are 79 of them but you can be pretty great as long as you've got at least 67 of them under your belt).
Having said that ... I'm very interested in the material we might come up with in pursuing those goals. If we fail miserably at coming up with 50 factors, but we end up with 12 important categories and a bunch of links to resources and discussions under each of those categories, and a good framework and network of people to discuss those issues with, I'll be super-happy.
I really like how MX5's document is laid out, and I'm grateful for the work he put into it. I'm a little unclear on how we're going to go about populating it, but I think it's a great place to start. Some thoughts/suggestions:
- there should be a clear way to link one factor to another ... for example, MX5 has the yellow arrow saying that my links to satellite strategy should be placed under "bankroll building", and indeed that's how they came up in the first podcast, but I would say that they should really just go under "satellites" and then there should be a link from "bankroll building" to satellites.
- as you might guess from what I've said above, I don't care too much about assigning weights to each factor. I don't object to it, I just don't want to spend a lot of time thinking about it. I think there will be disagreements about weighting, and I think that the most important factor to one player's game might be nearly negligible to another.
- I don't quite understand what the novice/strong/world-class profile columns will contain.
- Maybe we need two forums - one where people can throw a link or a video or a resource and say "hey I found this great thread/video/book about blah blah blah, and I think you guys will like it" and then another forum where we can move that post to when we've added it to the document. The first forum will be sort of a to-do list of resources that need to be categorized. I'd like us to get rigorous about whenever we refer to an article or whatever, putting a link to it or a description of it in the forum. For example everything Amy mentions in the last post in this thread should get linked/listed/sorted.
- Wait ... Amy? OMG we have a woman in the group? Excellent.
- I would make "hand reading" a numbered category, which would then have links to and from many other categories/factors.
Great work creating this document, Mark.
|
|
|
|
Post by mclucky on Dec 9, 2009 5:40:49 GMT -5
- I don't quite understand what the novice/strong/world-class profile columns will contain. Good feedback & ideas Laurence. Just to clarify - the columns for novice/strong/world class are a way for people to understand where they are on their journey for that particluar factor. In the actual column would be a description of what a novice/strong/world class MTT player demonstrates in this factor. The idea would be to have self assessment questions that categorize people into one of these three. Let's look at an example - say 'Hand Reading' which you mentioned and I agree is super important. So a Novice at this factor might look something like this: 'Understands the need for hand reading and can estimate broad preflop ranges in push / fold situations' Strong might read: 'Understands combinatorial maths based hand reading and re-evaluates street by street. Adjusts bet sizing and lines taken based on these reads.' World Class might read: 'Estimates to a high degree of accuracy hand ranges on every street. Re-evaluates by street based on action taken, bet sizing, timing tells and player notes or history of similar situations and lines taken. Is able to make thin value bets and calls based on hand reading with a high frequency of success. Uses hand reading effectively to induce bluffs and can fold strong hands based on these reads. Our self assessment questions would then test a players ability to demonstrate the above and categorize accordingly. This is a useful way of thinking about factors because it allows us to work out what we still need to learn at any point in time rather than just saying - hey I need to get good at hand reading so I'll read this book or watch that video. |
|
huge
Full Member
Posts: 109
|
Post by huge on Dec 9, 2009 12:32:58 GMT -5
I've reposted this..please login to download. I know we have several excellent comments, but I am asking everyone to re-review this paper and really provide us with some excellent feedback so we can grow this properly. We'll see THIRTY additional replies as each member is expected to put down their comments here: I'm reposting Mark's document as a .doc file because I've had a couple of requests from members who don't have the latest version of Microsoft Word and thus can't open a .docx file. We probably should try to stick to the older Word/Office format for general portability... Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by wegz420 on Dec 11, 2009 5:00:17 GMT -5
this is very nice probably don't need 50 things for some of us who are struggling or just starting maybe more like 10 but this is a great framework to start from
|
|
shaun
New Member
Posts: 39
|
Post by shaun on Dec 11, 2009 6:14:57 GMT -5
Good work Mark , looks like you included everything I thought of.
|
|
eemil
Junior Member
Posts: 51
|
Post by eemil on Dec 11, 2009 7:35:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by madtiger1990 on Dec 11, 2009 18:02:34 GMT -5
I think the framework and depth of coverage of these factors is excellent. WIll there be other items that come up as factors deemed worthy of inclusion? Certainly and they can be added as the members see fit. As i have studied the framework, i have wrestled with how we can use the power of the syndicate to gain a level of understanding of each of these factors better than we would independently, thereby improving all of the members level of proficiency in MTT play.
The original document lays out a very solid method to attack this task
"• Agree the basic framework (are these the things we are trying to develop)
• Agree on the list of categories and factors and the relative importance of each (weighting) so that we can prioritize our efforts
• Agree the attributes against each factor (the columns to the right)
• Assign ownership of each factor to a member or group of members (POD) and start to populate the framework. Key to this will be the development of the competence profiles (what makes a basic, good and great exponent) and the corresponding self assessment questions that will allow us to work out where we are on our journey."
I think attacking the ideas by pods is the way we should start. Certainly some topics are going to require more time and effort than others.
The beauty of the syndicate to me is forming a connected group that is never much farther than a skype conversation form providing a separate set of eyes for all things poker. As i type things. As i type this, Ross, EEmil and noe nuno are having a great conversation about bubble tactics. I have had a few decent runs as of late and always enjoy having the syndicate members to chat with as i make my run. The peer review/evaluation is one of the biggest benefits to this group, imo. In my day job (consulting engineer) we always have others review our projects. Another set of eyes can detect a mistake that i have long laid to rest as ok. I think the same appplies with poker. We all may be making plays that we deem correct and therefore don;t really analyze them any more. Another set of eyes can pick up the leak.
I have rambled and certainly haven't shed any new light on anything. Moving in the right direction and excited to do my part.
|
|
|
|
Post by abscat7 on Dec 12, 2009 10:12:38 GMT -5
Hey guys - just went back over Rizen's review of Airedale05 HH. He said during that that he agreed with Sheets that the best way to work on your game is back to front. In other words, work on your short hand game, short stack - push/fold. This makes alot of sense, I think most of us can play the early game fairly easily. Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Dec 12, 2009 15:49:23 GMT -5
mark,
First I've had the chance to read over your paper several times and am floored by the depth and scope of the document. You've obviously taken a lot of time and given us your insight over many years of what it takes to define a great player.
I agree in many respects the "prioritizing" might be the key component to all this.
From your work - a couple of notes:
1. Who is going to be considered our teachers...who is going to be the go to video....interesting in itself. There is no fundamental way to play (so many styles, changes, adaptation) so in reality, one person might learn more from a tight aggressive conservative approach (Cloutier) while one might prefer small ball (Negreneau) and another the math or another the intuition.
So I figure we need a neat cross section of video pro's and authors and understand that each may comment differently on a particular hand...and not so much what they say - but why they say it.
2. Self Evaluation is key to growth - understanding where you are at - so important.
You have some very interesting factors...I guess if I broke down and said what really is important to me - is the MEAT and POTATOES.
Section under General MTT:
Tournament Selection - C
Structure Considerations - C
Stack Size Considerations/Flexibility - not sure what you mean but A
Chipping Up/Building stack - A
Short Stack Play - A (chapter in Full Tilt Tourney Guide)
Medium Stack Play - A
Big Stack Play (Chip lead etc) - B
Preflop Strategy - AAAAAAAA+++++++
Range Evaluation - AA
Early Levels - B
Post Ante - B
Middle Levels AAAAAAA
Bubble Play AAAAAA
Etc.
Last 4 tables, Last 3 so important I think to all of us
Final 2 tables same
And then the Final tables - Heads up AAAAAAA
Deal making not so much.
Blind Play - Crucial and my biggest weakness
Finding Opportunities - IN the nightly Chat seems to be the most important consideration .
Moves - Key, also I think Min Raising, etc. key
Then I love the spreadsheet - which I think we should put up on gmail...for weighing etc.
Some things your missing:
nobody seems to have added anything - but my guess is some of the titles cover - a lot. So in time - we need to add additional topics etc.
For me the key was #12,#13 and #14
I think because I am a novice the actual playing of the MTT is key and the other outside factors - not so important. I think as you become better and start to compete at a higher level - then playing the game is just one aspect - you have to have the ability to improve everywhere.....
Again, I really like the body of work you have provided.
I think the next step is the weigh the factors we have - add any new and move - move hard and swift to get some work done and start.
2010 is going to be a great year.
Thanks again Mark.
|
|
|
|
Post by robe43 on Dec 12, 2009 19:27:03 GMT -5
Wow looks great. I saw there was a note taking and bet pattern section. SHould we ad something like creating player profiles for the game and level that you play at? Not that there isn't enough on to work on already.
|
|
fiber
New Member
Posts: 43
|
Post by fiber on Dec 13, 2009 2:21:05 GMT -5
Excellent work Mark! I felt like I learned a little by just reading your outline. Felt a little overwhelming while reviewing it but I think once we really get this process underway it could really steam roll into something great.
I'm a little confused on where this will be done. Will the info or links be in a excel file or just posted on the forum or something else?
|
|
