In my defense (I'll let Bradley speak for himself), I'm glad to discuss my own psychology because it's a moving target and I am not giving up too much information by discussing interesting things that I have learned at RS and elsewhere. By the time the next session rolls around, I am usually playing differently anyway. However, if I have a particular psychological angle that explains my play against another player, I sometimes gloss over that detail in explaining a hand, because *so many* RS players read this blog.
In other words, it's not that I don't understand these psychological aspects of poker that you mention, it's just that I am not really interested in discussing the hands where I won through psychology rather than solid math. (For example, I raised preflop and then bet from first position into a A75 board with 32o against Matt last night and therefore I am sure he laid down a better hand. But I wouldn't have mentioned except in response to this comment.)
Understood. My post above definitely wasn't a criticism of either of your play, just an observation on the blog contents, and a friendly suggestion to Bradley where he find might angles to strengthen his no-limit game and break out of the bankroll stagnation he described.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
Re: It's the bad play, not the money
Date: 2005-03-02 17:52 (UTC)In other words, it's not that I don't understand these psychological aspects of poker that you mention, it's just that I am not really interested in discussing the hands where I won through psychology rather than solid math. (For example, I raised preflop and then bet from first position into a A75 board with 32o against Matt last night and therefore I am sure he laid down a better hand. But I wouldn't have mentioned except in response to this comment.)
Re: It's the bad play, not the money
Date: 2005-03-02 18:27 (UTC)