Take a tour. Enjoy some free sample content.

How it works

Free Video: CLP Video No. 287: Home Game Bart Reviews His Splashy At $1-$3 Deep Part 2

Free Podcast: CLP Podcast No. 54: Time Warp And Turn Value
New to Crush Live Poker?

We can't all be Bart Hanson

Rysher8 Posts: 234Subscriber
edited May 2017 in Your Feedback
As I mentioned to a few of you in Slack, I've been in a bit of a poker rut the past two weeks. No big losses, but a distinct feeling that I had lost my edge, and was haplessly searching for a winning game that had become elusive.

I finally fell back into my groove last night, and as I did, I realized something of a universal poker truth. As subscribers to CLP, we're all trying to improve our game by listening to Bart. IMO it would be fair to say that collectively CLP has made a profound difference in our skill level at the table. I know that's been the case for me. However, IMO it's also fair to say that many of us came to CLP as already winning, or least already competent players. In that regard, there are usually one or two things that each of us does exceptionally well to gain our individual edge, and it's different for each person. Whether it's being an expert at exploiting opponent tendencies like @thehammah, employing selective aggression like @pokertime, or the otherworldly hand reading of @bart, each of us has something unique to offer that's difficult to replicate.

As we work to implement core winning elements like thin value, bet/folding, and barreling specific types of boards, I think it's vitally important that we don't lose what makes each of us effective in the first place. In other words, as much as we study and put CLP's strategies into practice, none of us is going to become Bart Hanson. He has a special talent to piece together several pieces of a puzzle in a short time to create a clear picture. We can improve our ability to do this, but we can't replicate it fully. When we abandon what we do well in the service of that goal, we're destined to have mixed results. My realization was that in order to continue an upward trajectory, it may be most effective to use CLP to build on our foundation of a strong game, rather than necessarily use CLP to replace the foundation itself. Interested in others' thoughts.




  • brick Posts: 127Subscriber
    I beleive one should develop a full understanding of the game through all means available. I mentioned journal writing in another post. Sometimes I make excel files to study the EV of a situation. Other times I read old fashion poker books. I talk with friends at work. Use all means available to cement your understanding of the game. This site is one of the best possible ways and Bart's mathematical approach is right on the money.
    by 1Rysher8
  • BartBart Posts: 5,955AdministratorLeadPro
    Thanks for the warm words Ryan.

    DO you feel that CLP gives you enough of the building blocks for the foundations of a strong game?
    by 1Rysher8
  • pokertime Posts: 2,194Subscriber
    I do. I'm 100% better since I joined this site and I was considered good in my player pool before that. Most importantly I really think things through in ways I might not have before. Plugging leaks and extracting max value has made a big differece in my win rate. Sounds obvious now but in the begining it's hard to know what is a leak and what's not so it helps having people with experience lead the way. I especially appreciate that Bart has built and maintained a positive supportive site where we genuinely try to help each other. Along with some well deserved needling of course. It wouldn't be poker otherwise!
    by 1Rysher8
  • neverlearn2 Posts: 2,858Subscriber
    edited May 2017
    Honestly I felt I had a decent, OK understanding of the game but didnt know why i wasnt able to fully translate the online stuff to live until CLP. Then I learned how to bet fold properly. After that it seemed like my understanding got a lot better and to a point where Im confident in my own reads and anaylsis, not having to rely on message boards and stuff. I still need help though and ask here and on slack :)

    The forums itself is OK IMO. Very slow activity, but the quality is really good. I dont know if any of yall post on 2p2 but Im on and off active there and the threads a fucking horrible now. Its not the advice given thats really bad, its the attitudes of posters. So much ego and insults. IMO the best part of CLP is the Slack channel. You can post hand and get feedback almost instantly.
    by 1Rysher8
  • Rysher8 Posts: 234Subscriber
    Bart said:
    Thanks for the warm words Ryan.

    DO you feel that CLP gives you enough of the building blocks for the foundations of a strong game?
    Yes absolutely. If someone wanted to build their game from the ground up using CLP concepts as a foundation, IMO they could do so and become a winning player. At the same time, currently winning players can use CLP concepts to refine their thought process, and substantially increase their win rate.

    Where it gets stickier is when a winning player tries to fully replace what's worked for them with CLP concepts that might run contrary. For instance, you've mentioned a Commerce 10/20 reg named Jeff on your podcasts who will often not charge draws when he has a made hand. In a vacuum not charging draws seems really bad, but as you point out it lets him get max value on later streets, so this is a style that works for him. I think we all have certain things that work especially well for us, and it's important to maintain those individual edges even as we build on them with the material we learn here.
  • ThehammahThehammah Posts: 7,086Subscriber

    thanks for the compliment man! I would still be a losing player if not for Bart and Dave T. I cannot express the gratitude I have for both of them on journey from fish to fabulous. :wink:
  • eyedunno Posts: 215Subscriber
    My thinking is almost completely backwards in this case. Coming from the background of a winning online player, I feel as though I had to completely re-train myself to the fundamental concepts since playing live is so much different (from an average opponent perspective). So my approach has actually been to use the core concepts taught here and then once I started winning regularly, I began to throw in some extra things and see what worked best based on my style, etc... And I really think that's going to be the best approach for a lot of people because you have a solid winning foundation you can always revert back to if you start losing once certain tweaks are added to your game.
Sign In or Register to comment.