| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
BetMagicMoney
Forum Moderator & Spam Police
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 3595
Skype: samuel.woodhams
Location: This Place Is My First Home
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 2:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kierkegaard1 wrote: | | just watched a few mins of a riskoriented vid on playing kings. wanted to kill myself |
haha yer its pretty bad 
_________________
"When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it."
Borg7
"Lol he'll get there tho. He is a smart guy"
_red_dog
follow me on twitter @BetMagicMoney |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Zipps
Grinder
Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Posts: 110
Skype: zipswip
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| a year ago i bought his ebook and i thought this was the holy grail. damn i was such a naive kid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
riskoriented
Newbie
Joined: 11 Mar 2012
Posts: 3
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 1:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kierkegaard1 wrote: | | just watched a few mins of a riskoriented vid on playing kings. wanted to kill myself |
I just wanted to hop on and thank you guys for the comments, even if they are negative, that's how we find out what people want to see. The YouTube video series, "YouPokerAcademy" is not Risk Oriented, which focuses on intermediate-level HUSNG play. It's a project that I was hoping would drive some traffic to the site from extremely novice poker players on YouTube, and it's had that effect in some cases: a number of people have bought my Start Winning seminar only to ask for a refund when they realized it was too advanced for their level of play.
Most of our higher-level content, like the stuff we produce on game theory, has been verified by external apps like SNGWiz, StoxEV, and by good old fashioned pen and paper math. I always viewed poker in strictly mathematical terms, and I talk a lot about ranges, percentages, and using both unexploitable and highly adaptive lines interchangably. I'm also offering $1,000 to anyone who can disprove the Better Than Nash charts. If you'd like to know more about that offer, it's on RiskOriented. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
U Cook Socks
This Place Is My Second Home
Joined: 13 Mar 2010
Posts: 2763
Location: Walsall
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| riskoriented wrote: | | kierkegaard1 wrote: | | just watched a few mins of a riskoriented vid on playing kings. wanted to kill myself |
I just wanted to hop on and thank you guys for the comments, even if they are negative, that's how we find out what people want to see. The YouTube video series, "YouPokerAcademy" is not Risk Oriented, which focuses on intermediate-level HUSNG play. It's a project that I was hoping would drive some traffic to the site from extremely novice poker players on YouTube, and it's had that effect in some cases: a number of people have bought my Start Winning seminar only to ask for a refund when they realized it was too advanced for their level of play.
Most of our higher-level content, like the stuff we produce on game theory, has been verified by external apps like SNGWiz, StoxEV, and by good old fashioned pen and paper math. I always viewed poker in strictly mathematical terms, and I talk a lot about ranges, percentages, and using both unexploitable and highly adaptive lines interchangably. I'm also offering $1,000 to anyone who can disprove the Better Than Nash charts. If you'd like to know more about that offer, it's on RiskOriented. |
No one ever heard from him again, so we assumed he found the nearest train track 
Fwiw, Kierkegaard is one of the most respected poker players on Tag, he built a roll from a few dollars, and last time I spoke to him (some time ago) he was starting to reg 1k Euro games.
That isn't disrespecting your content, I haven't took the time to look at it yet. However, unexploitable play is over rated imo. Against most low-mid stakes players at least, you can do far better than unexploitable, even at 10bb deep.
_________________
"Cos that's what I do" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chesslw
Reader of Souls
Joined: 17 Jan 2011
Posts: 998
Skype: chesslw
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| riskoriented wrote: | | kierkegaard1 wrote: | | just watched a few mins of a riskoriented vid on playing kings. wanted to kill myself |
I just wanted to hop on and thank you guys for the comments, even if they are negative, that's how we find out what people want to see. The YouTube video series, "YouPokerAcademy" is not Risk Oriented, which focuses on intermediate-level HUSNG play. It's a project that I was hoping would drive some traffic to the site from extremely novice poker players on YouTube, and it's had that effect in some cases: a number of people have bought my Start Winning seminar only to ask for a refund when they realized it was too advanced for their level of play.
Most of our higher-level content, like the stuff we produce on game theory, has been verified by external apps like SNGWiz, StoxEV, and by good old fashioned pen and paper math. I always viewed poker in strictly mathematical terms, and I talk a lot about ranges, percentages, and using both unexploitable and highly adaptive lines interchangably. I'm also offering $1,000 to anyone who can disprove the Better Than Nash charts. If you'd like to know more about that offer, it's on RiskOriented. |
No offence, but you don't really have a great reputation, when people like mers (and pretty much most of the 2+2 reg community) say that he would "never recommend anyone to pay for coaching" from you. So to the lowstakes players- you should rather trust the coaches with good reps first and ignore his infomercials in the style of those faith healing bs products you find in America (buy this holy water- was $500, now only $40, guaranteed to cure all illnesses!).
To be honest, I've never paid for any coaching, and don't really recommend lowstakes players to do so unless they are really lost on their own (I can pretty much guarantee all the info is out there already on the interwebs). The most important part of learning in poker is selflearning. Being spoonfed ranges is only ever going to get you so far. You need to get the fundamental thinking right.
And although the "better than Nash charts" is technically correct (duh if villain is calling less then you can shove moar), it's pretty useless (has always been pretty useles), and only a substrategy of the better, more complete ROFL (I would love to see how you can mathematically prove the converse of this and can offer you $1,000). Can you tell me how can you find out whether villain is folding certain hands to open jams if he doesn't show you his hands? Isn't it still a "feel" game for the most part, so what's the use of exact ranges? I've never used your charts or anyone else's (except some of Mers to estimate the EV of flatting, which is hard to evaluate in a vacuum- since he has a huge sample size and I don't), but I do know instinctively sometimes in game whether I can shove any 2 suited cards <12bb etc etc to exploit villains (I probably can jam atc, but it's borderline and far too obvious vs a rematching villain so I choose not to fwiw). It's a pretty basic concept anyway.
The only thing I can tell that is good on your site is that you do a pretty good explanation of Nash Equilibrium theory to novices untrained in maths. But this can be found amongst other places on 2+2 (here too tbh if you know where to look), google, and even the good ol' wikipedia. Also the rest of your tools on the site aren't that useful, and are available on the web anyway. One is a binomial table, another is just Kelly (which is basically availabe everywhere), and the Bluffbot isn't even yours (or any good- and it's taken down now I think).
To beginners- all you need to do to beat lowstakes, is to read the stickies on here and 2+2 (I strongly recommend Spamz hh reviews- another highstakes baller who has since got bored with poker, and whom this risk oriented guy has attacked in the past), watch the free vids from brokerstar or anyone else you can find, and post hh in forums.
If you are still really lost, then be careful in picking a good coaching package with lots of good feedback. And of course the most important thing is that you are always thinking, and understand why certain ranges are good to use vs different villain types (and actually you might even improve on/disagree with your coach's recommendations).
_________________
'Yields a falsehood when appended to its own quotation' yields a falsehood when appended to its own quotation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search
Memberlist 
Usergroups
Join! (free) >
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
