So-called "New Poker" is a disgrace
Let me start this forum by being more confrontational than usual.
Something has been bothering me for years and it's what is often called "New Poker."
Why? Because it treats the science of poker as if it's the fashion industry. According to its adherents, you have to keep up with the changes, because what won in 2016 doesn't win in 2020.
But that's not true. Core poker winning strategy never changes. Players change, though. So, you adapt to opponents' mistakes the same way you always did. You take advantage.
What was true in 1970 is still true in 2020, fifty years later, and always will be. Sure, my recent research has refined that strategy, but the core truths stay the same.
You can't beat rational strategy by playing poorly. So-called "new-poker" players are super-aggressive and tend to promote and teach clearly losing decisions on the basis of what's in fashion.
Ranges, EV -- almost all those terms you hear thrown about are actually recycled variations of concepts I and others pioneered many decades ago. Unfortunately, "new poker" is nothing more than misapplication of those concepts.
If you bet or raise too much or too often, you're easy to exploit. Today, poker tables are populated by players trying to mimic "new poker." And almost all of them fail miserably. Granted, there are those that can brag about the millions of dollars they won. But with so many players making similar nonsensical decisions, a few will get lucky for a year or two. They will pass along their "wisdom" based on that good fortune.
The truth is, you don't have to adjust to "new poker" at all. Those players will self-destruct. Of course, you can beat them even faster if you do adjust to their mistakes, thereby taking full advantage.
But that's no different from the way we handled them forty years ago. There were just less of them back then. And when they came to our tables, we said, "Yum-yum!"
"New poker" advocates are sending thousands of potentially winning players to slaughter -- all so they can feed their egos by babbling on the Internet, in books, and on TV.
Maybe you saw my self-quote of the day on the Poker1 home page yesterday. It was:
“New Poker” allows overly aggressive players to remain convinced of your stupidity while you win their money.
Think about it -- Mike Caro
(I would be honored if you would help start the first conversation at Poker1 Talk by replying. And, no, you don't have to agree. This is your forum.)
I hope we have live poker soon so we can play "old poker" or "new poker".
Do you think you need bigger bank rolls to play against trends like this ?
Keep up the great work Mike!
Mike, I agree with your assessment, and would add the following. What also hasn't changed is that the guys and gals who succeed at the highest level and in the long term still treat Poker played right as an art form. They acknowledge and enjoy the beauty of the game, the joy of crafting a story and defeating an opponent not just through science but also through skill. So, yes, the story being told may have to be different in response to the new Poker, but respect for the game and the need to play the players is still key.
While especially true at the stakes I play (sub $150 daily casino mtt, 1/2-2/5 NL), I imagine even at higher stakes the truism that you tend to make your money from the mistakes of others holds. So even if there is some fancy "game theory optimal" poker being attempted (and you, yourself, have written there IS "optimal" poker), there will be those who try to do that, and fail.
What was that Caro quote: "Any time your opponents deviate from optimal poker, it is in your best interests to [play more hands] against them"?
Of course it still behooves everyone to have a basic understanding of what new "styles" of poker are ATTEMPTING to do, if only for the insight this might give into the "why" behind the exploitable holes those new ideas might create. But that does not mean the benefit of playing in position, with max info to use for your decisions, is ever going to change.
↑ Allows you to post and reply. (You can browse without registering.)