Can I win Texas Holdem playing tight and passive?

AllInFool

I found a web site that claims you can win online texas holdem playing tight and passive. All the books I've read state you should play tight and agressive? Does anyone have any advice? The site is http://www.freeholdemstrategy.com

roryc

your name is quite apt......

Any advice I would have for you is to practice and find whichever style suits you best

AllInFool

So are you saying I can win by playing more than one type of strategy...or what?

kincsem

AllInFool wrote:

I found a web site that claims you can win online texas holdem playing tight and passive. All the books I've read state you should play tight and agressive? Does anyone have any advice? The site is http://www.freeholdemstrategy.com

I won a 30 FPP on PokerStars a few weeks ago. Near the finish I looked at my stats and found I was playing 61% of hands. That was tight for me

About a year ago I was in a $10 re-buy on PokerStars. One of the players (Johnster) re-bought about 100 times (not an exaggeration) before the break. As I write this he is 4th ranked player on PokerStars in 2005. Why was he so loose? My guess is he had loads of cash, wanted to lose lots of pots, re-buy many times to put many chips on the table, and win the chips back so he could lead the tournament.

Most players play tight at first, win some chips, then play loose. I think you need to forget about your play and study the other players. If you see a pattern in their play you might see an opportunity. Most players have a style.

Amaru

kincsem wrote:

About a year ago I was in a $10 re-buy on PokerStars. One of the players (Johnster) re-bought about 100 times (not an exaggeration) before the break. As I write this he is 4th ranked player on PokerStars in 2005. Why was he so loose? My guess is he had loads of cash, wanted to lose lots of pots, re-buy many times to put many chips on the table, and win the chips back so he could lead the tournament.

Thats one of the most bizarre things i've ever heard!

kincsem

Amaru wrote:

Thats one of the most bizarre things i've ever heard!

I downloaded the hand history. One of these days I will analyse it fully. At the break (one hour) I think five of the players on our table were in the first ten in the tourney.

Amaru

Did he cash in the tourney?

RoundTower

AllInFool wrote:

I found a web site that claims you can win online texas holdem playing tight and passive. All the books I've read state you should play tight and agressive? Does anyone have any advice? The site is http://www.freeholdemstrategy.com

Hi AllInFool,
I would like to play texas hold'em tight and passive, but I can't find out how! All the websites suggest to play tight and aggressive. If you know a good website, please let me know!

P.S. What do you think of http://www.freeholdemstrategy.com? Maybe this is a good site to learn on! You should go to http://www.freeholdemstrategy.com and check it out!

kincsem

Found it in my email.
PokerStars Game #1420531731: Tournament #6256051, Hold'em No Limit - Level I (10/20) - 2005/03/26 - 16:30:00 (ET)

I finished 23rd from 624 players (23: kincsem (Dublin), $147.66 (0.60%)) thanks only to all the re-buys put on our table. Hand #74 was the hand before the break and my comment was kincsem said, "190,000 chips on table". So 190,000 less the starting 9 players X 1,500 = 13,500. Therefore, re-buys 190,000 minus 13,500 = 176,500 or about 118 re-buys.

I must analyse it fully. Players were double re-buying i.e. getting 3,000 as you could buy 1,500 and if you had 1,500 or less you could re-buy.

padser

kincsem wrote:

My guess is he had loads of cash, wanted to lose lots of pots, re-buy many times to put many chips on the table, and win the chips back so he could lead the tournament.

Possibly the stupidest thing iv ever heard in my life.

So your saying his idea was to re buy 100 times. Give the chips to everyone else at his table. Pray that, in the i dunno, 2 hours it takes to re buy 100 times no one leaves his table, or worse he doesnt get moved to another table. And finally after all that he would plan to win back all these chips with a stack that could at best (assuming no one else re bought) be one eleventh of the average stack?

Have you considered using this ground breaking strategy yourself?? Please let me know where u plan to before you do.


EDIT: even if he had come first it probably wouldnt have covered his 100 buy ins! Have you considered
a) he was a complete fish who has since improved
b) he was a pro either on tilt, or more likely unwinding (expensively in this case) at the low stakes and messing around with 72o?

kincsem

Amaru wrote:

Did he cash in the tourney?

No. He finished 67th. Cash paid to 63rd.

61: tut3000 (Alpharetta), $61.52 (0.24%)
62: mackeral_t (Brooklyn ), $61.52 (0.24%)
63: Tarandus (Maassluis), $61.52 (0.24%)
64: S0 Hot! (you wish),
65: GamePimp (Phoenix),
66: iDumb (London, UK),
67: Johnster (FIGHTIN ILLINI),
68: mmdog (sterling heights),
69: smoky-j (mercer),

Davey Devil

Negreanu used the same tactic at a $1000 re-buy in the 2004 WSOP where he was in for $28,000.

Daniel has a reputation for making more rebuys than anyone else in the poker world. He confessed that the most money he ever spent in rebuys was $27,000. That is not a misprint, folks. Daniel invested a total of $28,000 (buy-in and rebuys) in event No. 7 of this year's WSOP, a $1,000 no-limit hold'em tournament with rebuys. There were 538 players, 534 rebuys, 262 add-ons, and a prize pool of $1,261,700. Phil Hellmuth came over and congratulated Daniel for having made more rebuys than Phil ever made.

Players were openly teasing Daniel, laughing at him and calling him an idiot for making so many rebuys. Daniel, always the good-timer, was laughing along with his buddies, chatting incessantly, all the while enjoying another game of poker.

At the end of the event, it was Daniel's turn to exact the teasing upon his friends, as he came in third, pocketing $100,940! It must have been fun asking those same naysayers how they fared at the end of the event while he was stuffing an extra $70,000 into his jeans pockets.

Someone ban the origional poster it's the worst excuse of spamming I've seen.

Hectorjelly

I just had a quick look at the site (being new to TEXAS HOLDEM), and saw the following gems:

You can call a semi-large bet of about 10% of your stack on the river with a King high flush, but never commit all of your money with a flush that is less than the nuts.

(with a set) Although your odds of making either a full house or four of a kind on the turn are somewhat long at 5.7 to 1 you have a very good chance that you’ll take all of your opponents money if you make your draw. Many players will commit their entire stack with a straight or flush even if the board is paired. This gives you implied odds to call a decent size bet. As a general rule you should only call 4% to 6% of your stack on each street.

However, AA and KK have the unique characteristic of being the very best two holdem hands pre flop, but become a **** hand after the flop if they don’t hit a set (3 of a kind).

I got those three after just quick glance - this isnt loose passive its tight stupid

Dub13

Davey Devil wrote:

Negreanu used the same tactic at a $1000 re-buy in the 2004 WSOP where he was in for $28,000.

I read something about this before...crazy tactic

staringelf

Hectorjelly wrote:

However, AA and KK have the unique characteristic of being the very best two holdem hands pre flop, but become a **** hand after the flop if they don’t hit a set (3 of a kind).

lol, that's my favourite right there.

Ste05

Hectorjelly wrote:

However, AA and KK have the unique characteristic of being the very best two holdem hands pre flop, but become a **** hand after the flop if they don’t hit a set (3 of a kind).

What's the problem with this HJ, do you not use AA or KK as drawing hands????? Maybe I'm missing something




EDIT: Dammit, Staringelf, got in there before me

staringelf

Ste05 wrote:

What's the problem with this HJ, do you not use AA or KK as drawing hands????? Maybe I'm missing something




EDIT: Dammit, Staringelf, got in there before me

you snooze you loooooze

bohsman

padser wrote:

Possibly the stupidest thing iv ever heard in my life.

The $10 rebuy on Stars at 3am is 45000guaranteed if you get the right table everybody is willing to go all in blind, when you hit you will have a lot of chips after the break and with that prizepool its well worth doing - obviously he wasnt hopeing to lose every pot to win the chips back he wanted to build a stack and get more chips on the table

Ste05

bohsman wrote:

The $10 rebuy on Stars at 3am is 45000guaranteed if you get the right table everybody is willing to go all in blind, when you hit you will have a lot of chips after the break and with that prizepool its well worth doing - obviously he wasnt hopeing to lose every pot to win the chips back he wanted to build a stack and get more chips on the table

I agree with this and I would be sure there is method to his madness, it'd take too long to write in detail about it now, but consider the following:

Get a table full of chips - i.e. 190,000, a table of deep stack $10 tourney players that think you're a maniac, he then goes on to win all these chips back in the freezeout and then he's left with a sizeable stack to go on and take 1st in the tourney.....

Risky and costly strategy, but I certainly don't think he's just a mad man....

Obviously there are serious risks associated with this strategy, table breaks (try and only knock out 1 person at a time - to reduce this risk) you could be moved tables (possibly a calculated risk worth taking) , etc. etc. as I say, there are risks associated and I'm fairly sure he has a much better planned out strategy than that above, but it certainly isn't as mad as it may appear.

I also seriously doubt he re-bought all 118 re-buys at the table....

kincsem

padser wrote:

Possibly the stupidest thing iv ever heard in my life.

So your saying his idea was to re buy 100 times. Give the chips to everyone else at his table. Pray that, in the i dunno, 2 hours it takes to re buy 100 times no one leaves his table, or worse he doesnt get moved to another table. And finally after all that he would plan to win back all these chips with a stack that could at best (assuming no one else re bought) be one eleventh of the average stack?

Have you considered using this ground breaking strategy yourself?? Please let me know where u plan to before you do.


EDIT: even if he had come first it probably wouldnt have covered his 100 buy ins! Have you considered
a) he was a complete fish who has since improved
b) he was a pro either on tilt, or more likely unwinding (expensively in this case) at the low stakes and messing around with 72o?

You should probably use the sarcastic smiley :rolleyes: with Have you considered using this ground breaking strategy yourself?? Please let me know where u plan to before you do.
IT WASN'T MY STRATEGY. I was taking advantage of it.

I think he could have recovered his 100 x $10
Tournament finished - 2005/03/26 - 22:35:31 (ET)
1: moop04 (Piscataway), $6152.51 (25%)
2: mcjimmc (cedarhurst), $3519.24 (14.30%)
3: pbdrunks (san diego), $2264.13 (9.20%)


Look at the hand position on the last hand before the break (#74). I think I won 4 hands from 74 before the break.
You will notice that three players have a maximum $3000 re-buy after 4 players went all-in on the previous hand.

*********** # 74 **************
PokerStars Game #1420854824: Tournament #6256051, Hold'em No Limit - Level IV (50/100) - 2005/03/26 - 17:29:47 (ET)
Table '6256051 14' Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: kincsem (29190 in chips)
Seat 2: 666Aces (65105 in chips)
Seat 3: GogglsPaisan (15300 in chips)
Seat 4: SrAPit82 (1500 in chips)
Seat 5: mikestang11 (29980 in chips)
Seat 6: JOJILJO (52675 in chips)
Seat 7: mongeron (12100 in chips)
Seat 8: Johnster (3000 in chips)
Seat 9: TheSeize (3000 in chips)
SrAPit82: posts small blind 50
mikestang11: posts big blind 100
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to kincsem [Ac 4d]
SrAPit82 re-buys and receives 1500 chips for $10.00
JOJILJO: folds
mongeron: folds
Johnster: raises 2900 to 3000 and is all-in
TheSeize: calls 3000 and is all-in
kincsem: folds
666Aces: folds
GogglsPaisan: calls 3000
SrAPit82: folds
mikestang11: folds
*** FLOP *** [Ad Ah Qd]
*** TURN *** [Ad Ah Qd] [6s]
TheSeize said, "3838"
TheSeize said, "38"
TheSeize said, "83"
*** RIVER *** [Ad Ah Qd 6s] [Ts]
kincsem said, "190,000 chips on table"
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Johnster: shows [Ks Jd] (a straight, Ten to Ace)
TheSeize: shows [8c 3h] (a pair of Aces)
GogglsPaisan: shows [Kc 6c] (two pair, Aces and Sixes)
Johnster collected 9150 from pot
TheSeize re-buys and receives 1500 chips for $10.00
TheSeize re-buys and receives 1500 chips for $10.00
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 9150 | Rake 0
Board [Ad Ah Qd 6s Ts]
Seat 1: kincsem folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: 666Aces folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: GogglsPaisan (button) showed [Kc 6c] and lost with two pair, Aces and Sixes
Seat 4: SrAPit82 (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 5: mikestang11 (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 6: JOJILJO folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: mongeron folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: Johnster showed [Ks Jd] and won (9150) with a straight, Ten to Ace
Seat 9: TheSeize showed [8c 3h] and lost with a pair of Aces

kincsem

I guess Johnster re-bought about 70 of the probable 118. Since I've started the ball rolling I guess I must do a full analysis of the hand history. Should have kept my big mouth shut. :mad:
At the time we had plenty of people spectating. Big stacks draw a crowd.

a-k-47

surely there no way anyone could rebuy 100 times in a tourny, that wud take over an hour to do constantly, am i missing something here

padser

bohsman wrote:

The $10 rebuy on Stars at 3am is 45000guaranteed

It would appear if $6000 is 25% of prize pool then there wasnt 45000 on offer.


In response to kinscem:
So finishing first gave him 6 times his money. Not great at all. Coming 3rd only just more then doubles his money.

You still havnt addressed the problem of
a) all the chips he put on the table moving table.
b)trying to win back these chips with a stack that could be at most less then 10% of average stack at table (assuming he had managed a)

Im sorry but the strategy makes no sense in the above situation.

I fully accept that in a re buy tournie you play a lot looser etc to take advantage of the re buy. other then that the strategy has no merit imho.

:rolleyes:

kincsem

You can re-buy twice at a time. Lose your chips and you can re-buy 1,500. If you have 1,500 or less you can re-buy. So many players re-buy, re-buy and get 3,000. Then they put that all-in.

Very possible in 74 hands in one hour to re-buy 70 times (it's only 35 double re-buys). 74 hands in 60 minutes is fast play due to the all-in or fold play. There was almost no calls, or check raising.

kincsem

padser wrote:

It would appear if $6000 is 25% of prize pool then there wasnt 45000 on offer.


In response to kinscem:
So finishing first gave him 6 times his money. Not great at all. Coming 3rd only just more then doubles his money.

You still havnt addressed the problem of
a) all the chips he put on the table moving table.
b)trying to win back these chips with a stack that could be at most less then 10% of average stack at table (assuming he had managed a)

Im sorry but the strategy makes no sense in the above situation.

I fully accept that in a re buy tournie you play a lot looser etc to take advantage of the re buy. other then that the strategy has no merit imho.

:rolleyes:

What have I got to explain? As I said earlier it was not my strategy. Contact Johnster and ask him. I was just lucky to be at a table where players were going all-in on almost every hand. I sat back until I got a large pocket pair and then put my chips in.

AllInFool

RoundTower wrote:

Hi AllInFool,
I would like to play texas hold'em tight and passive, but I can't find out how! All the websites suggest to play tight and aggressive. If you know a good website, please let me know!

P.S. What do you think of http://www.freeholdemstrategy.com? Maybe this is a good site to learn on! You should go to http://www.freeholdemstrategy.com and check it out!

I thought the strategy made sense. Although a few of the other posters didn't like it. What I liked about it is not committing a lot of money if I didn't have a big hand. I suspect it will work at a big site where people don't get to know me. I'm going to give it a try with a little bit of money.

padser

kincsem wrote:

What have I got to explain? As I said earlier it was not my strategy. Contact Johnster and ask him. I was just lucky to be at a table where players were going all-in on almost every hand. I sat back until I got a large pocket pair and then put my chips in.

Ok im going to stop posting on this. Maybe im missing something. I just think the problems with the strategy make it sheer madness to tout is as a potentially viable one which i thought you did.


I had thought you brought it up saying you thought it would be a good thing to try. looking back you didnt. My mistake.

Sorry.

Tourneque

Hectorjelly wrote:

.. this isnt loose passive its tight stupid

lol I think I'll start using that in my notes

hotspur

AllInFool wrote:

What I liked about it is not committing a lot of money if I didn't have a big hand.

Actually this is viable as a strategy at low limits, but you have to multitable and play up to 8 hours per session and not take bead beats for it to show dividend. It's the worst kind of grinding, if you're not gonna play the game why play the game? As for players not knowing you, they'll know when you limp fold for half an hour what you're doing, and if you try it at higher limits you'll never get action.

The thing about this strategy working at low limits is that pretty much any other strategy will work there too if you have a modicum of ability. Like it or not poker is gambling, you have to stick your chips in without the nuts or you have to wait until the nuts comes along every few hours in a situation where you'll get paid and not sucked out.

I'm watching Prahlad Friedman sitting on Prima with over $160k in front of him, wonder if he applied this strategy to get it?

hotspur

Um actually maybe that is how he did it -

Zweig posted small blind ($100)
> Isokala posted big blind ($200)
> tsarrast is waiting for the big blind to play
> Game # 586,605,684 starting.
> Dealing Hole Cards
> 410 raised for $800
> Zweig raised for $2,600
> Isokala folded
> 410 called for $1,900
> Dealing the Flop(9ª10¨8¨)
> Zweig bet for $5,600
> 410 called for $5,600
> Dealing the turn(Qª)
> Zweig checked
> 410 checked
> Dealing the river(Jª)
> Zweig went all-in for $139,485.94
> Zweig shows a Straight, Queen high
(QªJª10¨9ª8¨)
> Zweig wins $156,284.94 with a Straight, Queen high