POKER1 TALK (forum)

Poker1.com default content graphic

← Go back

— MAIN RULE —

Be polite. Pretend you’re with guests in your living room.

Open for public testing!

POKER1 TALK forum    Register    Log in

Allows you to post and reply. (You can browse without registering.)

Notifications
Clear all

So-called "New Poker" is a disgrace  


Mike Caro
Posts: 9
Admin
(@mike-caro)
Active Member
Joined: 10 years ago

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.

False

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.

Decades ago

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.

No different

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.)

Reply
9 Replies
3 Replies
RoccoM
(@roccom)
Joined: 3 weeks ago

Active Member
Posts: 5

@mike-caro I just had this discussion with a friend the other day. He is a gaming guy and did some analysis and took some advice from some “new school” coaches and ended up making some rediculous plays against very unrefined opponents. It took some convincing and some arguments (that I actually read in your books years ago) to get him to come back to “ABC” poker and relook at what he was actually doing. I was really happy to hear after a few days that he said it was “spot on” and took some of the new school concepts too far, and against the wrong opponents. 

Reply
TheIcePrincess59
(@theiceprincess59)
Joined: 3 weeks ago

New Member
Posts: 1

@mike-caro

Mike,
In a Zoom conference call with my coach, Alec Torelli, I stated to him the main reason behind my enjoyment of his teaching style is simple. He uses the same base system that my late coach and mentor,Terry Ring, taught me years ago. Yes, we have made minor changes to adapt to "modern poker". The fundamental things Terry taught me still work today. Fundamental poker will live forever. It's only the window dressing that changes. If you don't have solid fundamentals and THEN try to play modern poker, you're going to get slapped around. Keep this 1 point in mind, even if you put a dress and lipstick on a donkey, IT'S STILL A DONKEY.

Reply
NJT
 NJT
(@njt)
Joined: 3 weeks ago

New Member
Posts: 1

@mike-caro That is why I stick to authors such as Sklansky, Miller, Shoonmaker, Harrington, and the bibles of poker (Super System 1&2), and of course, I have all your books (Caro on Gambling, Book of Tells, Body Language of poker, etc.) I am also a collector of vintage poker books an magazines. I persuaded my wife to buy Doyle's first printing, "How I Made Over 1,000,000 Playing Poker". I have literature from Tex Sheahan that I love to read over and over; always learning something new each time. 

I say let the new breed of poker players continue to play the way they play, because that helps the poker community to continue to thrive. Sharks need fish or most will die. Just imagine the impact this Corona Virus has affected the poker communities in Vegas, Reno, etc. 

 

Great post!!  

Reply
TheMuckster
Posts: 1
(@themuckster)
New Member
Joined: 3 weeks ago

I hope we have live poker soon so we can play "old poker" or "new poker".  

Reply
Lordrullah
Posts: 1
(@lordrullah)
New Member
Joined: 3 weeks ago

Do you think you need bigger bank rolls to play against trends like this ?

Reply
1 Reply
Mike Caro
Admin
(@mike-caro)
Joined: 10 years ago

Active Member
Posts: 9

@lordrullah

Yes, you absolutely need bigger bankrolls against "new poker" players. And so do they. The fluctuations are much greater -- bigger wins, bigger losses, on average.

Reply
George
Posts: 1
(@george)
New Member
Joined: 3 weeks ago

Keep up the great work Mike!

Reply
TheUngarKid
Posts: 1
(@theungarkid)
New Member
Joined: 3 weeks ago

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.

Reply
JDean
Posts: 2
(@jdean)
New Member
Joined: 3 weeks ago

Agree.

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.

Reply
Share:

POKER1 TALK forum    Register    Log in

Allows you to post and reply. (You can browse without registering.)