The "Get the F*#! Out of Your Comfort Zone" thread: Ring Games

[c9h13no3]

Okay, so we all generally have a normal style of poker. Players who play games as a "TAG" will usually always play that way. I'm sort of a "loose" player, and I'll rarely have sessions where I don't run 30/29/3. And I'm betting a lot of you guys play your usual style of play. Humans are creatures of habit, and its hard to break out of our comfort zones.

However, that's a problem. Playing the same way will not allow anyone to grow as a player.

So here's my challange to you:

Change your game for 1000 hands (about 3 hours of playing 4 tables). And change it in a big way. Get the hell out of your comfort zone, and just try some things that are totally foreign to you.

And there are conditions. Don't multi-table more than 4 tables while you're doing this. This is not a bankroll building exercise. If you have to move down in limits to try this, do that. Playing fewer tables will allow you to focus more on what you're doing rather than just staying in your usual habits.

Also, you must learn from this experience. So you must post 3 hands in the hand analysis forum from your "Non-Comfort Zone Sessions".


I'll go first. And even more interesting, I'm going to let you guys decide how I'm going to be changing my game for the next 2 sessions I play.

These are my typical stats for a standard session:

Voluntarily Put $ Into Pot = 31%
Pre-Flop Raise = 28%
Aggression Factor = 2.6
3-bet % = 11.8%
C-bet % = 70%

So I'd like you guys to pick, how should I change things up:

1) Play like a total nit, and keep my stats around 16/15 or less.
2) Play like a complete maniac. Stats around 50/40 or more.
3) Call/3-bet all pre-flop raises when I'm in position, and float every continuation bet.

And don't pick the one that you think would be funniest/cruelest/whatever. Pick the one you think would be the most informative for me.

You don't have to do anything drastic with your own game. However, do something that you're not comfortable with. It can be as small as making 3 triple barrel bluffs over the whole session, or only playing hands from early positions. Or even just playing a totally different game (Omaha?). But the key is to force you to deal with situations that you're not comfortable being in, and then learning from them.

Other possible suggestions:
-Steal every time it folds to you on the button.
-Never play any hand with an ace, king, or queen in it.
-4-bet bluff 4 times over the course of the session.

So, go easy on me k? Pick maniac, cuz I can't deal with being nitty.

 

[dj11]

What if I just came off a radical change in my game?

I have barely had time to get comfortable with it, but I must admit, it fits like a glove.

Your point is solid tho, there are several players here I hope get in the spirit of things.

 

[aliengenius]

Who cares about nitty?!?

Playing a totally positional game is of HUGE interest to everyone, not just the participant, and I for one am super interested in the results of that experiment.

 

[Dwilius]

Yeah, anyone can play nitty, and from some of your hand histories you're already kind of a maniac .

 

[gn2056]

I agree if you are talking about changing up your style of play, however if it is regarding one's comfort and the management of their chips/money that can be dangerous. I know some players like to play tight aggressive till they have made some money then will loosen up, when these players lose before they made some if they get too loose it can lead to tilt. Online I think tight players will find enough bad players at the lower limits to remain profitable.

 

[c9h13no3]

...If it is regarding one's comfort and the management of their chips/money that can be dangerous.

Certainly. I'm not advising anyone break out of their comfort zone by ignoring bankroll management rules, or doing blatantly dangerous behavior.

 

[Tygran]

cause i'm evil I think you should play a 5/3 style or something c9

However that's only cause i'm evil... a braindead monkey can play 5/3 (if AA OR KK RAISE; else fold) this is a very interesting idea though. I'm not sure I want to try it at my current stakes but I may drop down and give it a go at $25 NL

On another note (didn't type this first time dunno why) my vote is for maniac. Only because I don't think nitty teaches you anything but maniac would!

BTW I wouldn't consider 16/15 nitty... Tight yes, nitty no but that's just semantics.



I think I will try this as well... I'll shoot for a 30/25 style give or take a couple points and come back and report results. might be later this week before I get to try it but I will. Good idea.

 

[Pothole]

After watching a tourney on PS tonight, I suggest this, with ANY starting hand that can give you a flush or a straight, raise the pot EXACTLY 249 if there is no raise before you. Some hands I remember, beat a QQ all in after the raise was reraised with 10d 2d, caught a str8, beat 1010 with 78os caught a straight, beat KK with Js Qs caught a flush and many more examples, all from the same player. I appreciate it was a rebuy tourny but the beats were so bad one player lipped off and got an instant warning. The villain went from 8k to 30 k in about 15 orbits, every time he was behind pre flop. It got to the point I was thinking "is this a software glitch where a 249 chip raise alters the rng. I read a good while ago that instead of pushing all in pre flop, raise and leave yourself 1 chip changes the outcome even if you have to call a reraise. A bit like the Vegas techie who altered the slot game routine so that a 3 coin 3 coin 1 coin 2 coin 2 coin string made the slot payout? Then crapped his pants cause he couldn't stop it paying out.

 

[zachvac]

well apparently my vote for maniac is the only one, but I think in general it's a good way to get better. It'll put you in tougher spots, and you'll have to exercise good hand reading skills. I may try this though. I'm normally a 16/14, which is a far cry from a complete nit, but compared to you that's what I am. I'll try to maintain around a 40% VP$IP, with a similarly high PFR of like 35%.

Personally though I really hope you don't do nit, because I just don't think it'll accomplish what you want to. All being a nit entails is playing less hands and still playing them similarly as you would before. Only difference would be folding the hands you'd usually play, and that's hardly a tough exercise.

Also, it'd be fun if people who do this did a video. If we can get 4-5 people doing this and recording it I honestly think we could all learn quite a bit.

Great idea though c9, definitely gonna give this a shot.

 

[zachvac]

I agree if you are talking about changing up your style of play, however if it is regarding one's comfort and the management of their chips/money that can be dangerous. I know some players like to play tight aggressive till they have made some money then will loosen up, when these players lose before they made some if they get too loose it can lead to tilt. Online I think tight players will find enough bad players at the lower limits to remain profitable.

From what I can tell, this isn't about being profitable. If it were profitable most likely we would be doing it, but on the other hand it opens up to the fact that it is possible to do and we should be able to play various styles as situations change. Also, putting yourself out of your comfort zone will get you to consider other conditions, as well as see it from the point of view of this type of player. You will no doubt run into super maniacs, and if you can put yourself in their shoes you can realize what they must be thinking with their range, and what different actions mean when you run into them at the tables. Also who knows, maybe the different style ends up actually being more profitable?

Also, he did make it pretty clear that you shouldn't do this at your normal limits and if you multi-table you should cut down on tables (although if you change to a nit maybe you should just raise it up to 24 lol).

 

[zachvac]

Sorry for all the replies, but also playing all raised pots in position would be considered bordering maniacal play, so I agree with that choice as well, although I voted maniac.

 

[WVHillbilly]

I've been looking for a reason to try 6-max (I've played maybe 200 hands of it before) and this looks like just the excuse I need.

 

[diamond_06_06]

Who cares about nitty?!?

Playing a totally positional game is of HUGE interest to everyone, not just the participant, and I for one am super interested in the results of that experiment.

A very similar experiment has been done. Annette_15 played a $2 180 man SNG on fulltilt completely blind. She played using only positional play and pouncing on opponents weaknesses. The result was that he finished in 1st place.

 

[zachvac]

A very similar experiment has been done. Annette_15 played a $2 180 man SNG on fulltilt completely blind. She played using only positional play and pouncing on opponents weaknesses. The result was that he finished in 1st place.

You do realize it's a she right? Also she did look at her cards twice I believe for big decisions, and she clearly got a good amount of luck. But it is certainly a good example.

 

[Effexor]

Are you talking about 6max or FR when you list your PT stats. I assume 6max?

 

[bubbasbestbabe]

Hmmmm, this might be fun. So what style do you think I should use?

 

[switch0723]

Who cares about nitty?!?

Playing a totally positional game is of HUGE interest to everyone, not just the participant, and I for one am super interested in the results of that experiment.

Exactly this please

 

[robwhufc]

Hmmmm, this might be fun. So what style do you think I should use?

I think to change style you would need to have a style in the first place! Maybe you should sit this one out

 

[c9h13no3]

Are you talking about 6max or FR when you list your Poker Tracker stats. I assume 6max?

6-max

 

[bubbasbestbabe]

I think to change style you would need to have a style in the first place! Maybe you should sit this one out

OH SNAP! I have more style in my pinky then you do in your bald head.

 

[icemonkey9]

Alrighty, I'm with WV on this one, I'll try 25nl 6max but only 3 tables.

 

[robwhufc]

OH SNAP! I have more style in my pinky then you do in your bald head.

Full head of hair, thank you very much.

 

[Tygran]

I'll post a graph later if I remember... and I have played 6 max before.

Played 2 tables of $25 NL 6-max last night with emphasis on being aggressive, attacking weakness and playing position.

Ended up over ~500 hands with stats of like 32/29/6 and a 3 bet PF of 20 (those of you who know me know that's very aggressive for me haha)

People just kept folding, folding and folding some more. Then I busted the nit who snapped and shoved his AQo on my KK.

Ended up showing a profit of ~$120 over those hands so almost +5 buy ins!

small sample but that was a few hours of 2 tabling. not bad!

 

[WVHillbilly]

I actually 4 tabled 25NL 6-max last night as well for about 40 minutes (~275 hands). I recorded the session and I'll add some commentary this weekend and post it for all. I ended up winning a little more than a buy-in. I plan to finish up the 1000 hands for this thread over the next couple of days.

 

[c9h13no3]

Not bad atall tygran! Isn't 3-betting light nifty?

Omfg, what have I done ^_^