New Post
Haven't had the chance to play lately unfortunately, but a few thoughts nonetheless.
UltimateBet has updated its software, and well I'm a little disappointed. A few things I would have liked to see are:
1) Stack sizes of the players when you're looking for a game and
2) Fix the stupid hand history crap.
Starting with the first thing, stack sizes are very important in a no-limit game. I really only want to play in a game where most if not all the players are sitting with 100bbs or more. I still have to go into the game to see how much each player has, and it's a little time consuming. Not a huge deal since I'm getting used to it, but I think it's something that's a pretty easy addition.
The hand history thing is something that really needs to be fixed. On every other major site (Stars, FT, Party), you can have your sessions recorded into poker tracker without having to open the hand history (which you can't even minimize) on each table. Also, on UB you have to download a separate program to even get the hands onto PT as you're playing. Perhaps UB is trying to discourage using HUDs and such, but there's always ways around it, and the HUDBots are probably its best customers anyway.
Also, UB has added RoShamBo to the mix of games, where you can actually play rock-paper-scissors for money. I find this slightly amusing, but RoShamBo actually does have some skill to it. It's all about knowing your opponent. It's a little tough to do online, but if you run into the same people enough times maybe you can win at it. Perhaps a RoShamBo tracker needs to be invented so that people can datamine the various players. In any case I won't be playing it.
UltimateBet has updated its software, and well I'm a little disappointed. A few things I would have liked to see are:
1) Stack sizes of the players when you're looking for a game and
2) Fix the stupid hand history crap.
Starting with the first thing, stack sizes are very important in a no-limit game. I really only want to play in a game where most if not all the players are sitting with 100bbs or more. I still have to go into the game to see how much each player has, and it's a little time consuming. Not a huge deal since I'm getting used to it, but I think it's something that's a pretty easy addition.
The hand history thing is something that really needs to be fixed. On every other major site (Stars, FT, Party), you can have your sessions recorded into poker tracker without having to open the hand history (which you can't even minimize) on each table. Also, on UB you have to download a separate program to even get the hands onto PT as you're playing. Perhaps UB is trying to discourage using HUDs and such, but there's always ways around it, and the HUDBots are probably its best customers anyway.
Also, UB has added RoShamBo to the mix of games, where you can actually play rock-paper-scissors for money. I find this slightly amusing, but RoShamBo actually does have some skill to it. It's all about knowing your opponent. It's a little tough to do online, but if you run into the same people enough times maybe you can win at it. Perhaps a RoShamBo tracker needs to be invented so that people can datamine the various players. In any case I won't be playing it.
Getting back to unlimited hold them, Ed Miller has a series of articles called "7 Easy Steps to No-Limit Hold'em Success" that I think all players should check out. At worst, it serves as a check on how to play if you're already an experienced player. The two most important steps to read are (IMO):
I think even better players make these two mistakes. They will often call raises liberally out of position since they believe they can play well after the flop. However, they are at a disadvantage and their postflop abilities will probably not be enough to save them. Also, many players at the higher levels still go to town with one pair. Perhaps they think they are being bluffed too often, but it's still probably not a good idea to put your whole stack on the line to win a small pot.
These two concepts can be used together also. Since playing out of position puts you at a disadvantage, you will want the pot to be smaller when OOP. Even if you have a strong starting hand, it will usually be just one pair unless you're lucky enough to hit a set, and you may face tough decisions on later streets if you're up against a player who has position on you. Setting the size of the pot at the beginning of the hand can help save your stack. Ed doesn't discuss this in the series, but he does in No-Limit Hold'em Theory and Practice, and I'm hoping Professional No-Limit Hold'em (due out sometime this summer) will cover it as well.
Well I'm off to play a $100 tournament this weekend. It's with deep stacks and should be a lot of fun. Later.
I think even better players make these two mistakes. They will often call raises liberally out of position since they believe they can play well after the flop. However, they are at a disadvantage and their postflop abilities will probably not be enough to save them. Also, many players at the higher levels still go to town with one pair. Perhaps they think they are being bluffed too often, but it's still probably not a good idea to put your whole stack on the line to win a small pot.
These two concepts can be used together also. Since playing out of position puts you at a disadvantage, you will want the pot to be smaller when OOP. Even if you have a strong starting hand, it will usually be just one pair unless you're lucky enough to hit a set, and you may face tough decisions on later streets if you're up against a player who has position on you. Setting the size of the pot at the beginning of the hand can help save your stack. Ed doesn't discuss this in the series, but he does in No-Limit Hold'em Theory and Practice, and I'm hoping Professional No-Limit Hold'em (due out sometime this summer) will cover it as well.
Well I'm off to play a $100 tournament this weekend. It's with deep stacks and should be a lot of fun. Later.
Comments