I played one of the tournaments and didn't do so well. I have been playing in PLO at cash games too, and that's been a little more successful. It's a fun game. I always tell myself, after every World Series, that I want to learn mixed games, so I can play in them. Maybe, this will be the year.
We'll see. Carl C.: Good deal. "A 500 Pound Gorrilla" asked; "Which one skill or technique do you think you possess over your standard opposition?". Max Steinberg: One technique ... I would just say, I understand strategy better than most people that I play with. I just think that at any given table I'll be the most strategically sound player there. That can go a long way. Someone can have more talent and ability to read someone, but if my strategy is just superior to theirs than it's about playing better. Carl C.: Hello. Can you hear me check this website? It keeps locking up here every once in a while. Just a couple more questions, here. You talked about this earlier, but "FoulMan" asked; "Approximately, how often a physical tell a factor when you make a decision?" Max Steinberg: Sometimes, I think, it's too much of a factor for me. It, sort of, overwhelms me; taking in so much information. Sometimes, I get lost in the hand thinking about ranges and I, sort of, get infatuated with whether someone is physically doing something that makes me think they're strong or weak. It can be really big. I would say, it changes my decision 25-30% of the time, when I'm playing. Carl C.: That is a pretty big percentage. Max Steinberg: I thought about it a lot and I've read books on psychology. I really think it's incredibly important and I value it a lot. Here's one live read that I used, which I think is a really, really good read-especially, in a tournament. If you're in position on a pre-flop raiser and he sees that you called the flop and the turn comes some card, doesn't matter what card. He thinks for a while and then checks. I would say, that that, usually, pretty big weakness because I would assume that if he's thinking about it and then checking he's thinking about bluffing and deciding not to, and checking. A quick check there would mean he has a plan. Usually, a [inaudible 00:29:06.11] Carl C.: Cool, that's good advice, then. I guess that goes without saying. It's so important to take time, 5,10 seconds before your actions. Max Steinberg: Yeah. Well, everyone I tell that to says; "All right, next time I play with you, I'm going to [the turn 00:29:27.03], I'm going to barrel off Yeah, but most people just don't do it. Carl C.: "FoulMan" also asked; "Who the number 1 in the world is?" Max Steinberg: That would be Danny, my twin brother. Carl C.: Yeah, so you were born second, then? Max Steinberg: Yeah, I was born second. That's part of a joke. Carl C.: "KingNat" wants to know what your drink of choice is at the table. Max Steinberg: BV and water. Carl C.: I thought this one, here, was interesting. "KingNat" asked; "What is your breakdown of political leanings among professional poker players?" So, like, Democratic, Republican, or liberal, or conservative? Max Steinberg: I would say ... I don't know. I know a lot of players who are extremely liberal. I would say most of the players are conservative or, sort of, in the Ron Paul conservative wing of conservatism, which is extremely right-wing, and extremely libertarian. I would say, I don't know. I guess it would be half and half, half liberal and half are libertarian-conservative. Carl C.: Interview with us, and this is "givememyleg" from Flop Turn River.com and if you visit Flop Turn River, you can talk to the one and only-Max Steinberg whenever he's on. Max Steinberg: Yeah, so we might have to change my screen name, though, Numbr1intheworld, now. Carl C.: You got the Bracelet, so you're Number 1? Is that how it goes? Max Steinberg: Possibly, possibly. We'll see. Carl C.: I hope you have a good main event and rest of the Series.
0 Comments
Max Steinberg: I doubt he had played with whoever [inaudible 00:21:47.08] I don't know about it, but I do enjoy when people just go with their reads like that. Carl C.: Yeah. It's, definitely, one of the most interesting that I've ever read about. Max Steinberg: Yeah, yeah. It's interesting, but debating it is, sort of, strange because, obviously, if you don't have the read and information he has, there's no way anyone can make that fold.
If you have that much confidence, then, maybe you can-I don't know. Carl C.: Jims from FTR asked; "What's the consensus amongst higher stakes online and live players, as far as online poker and the possibility of a second boom? Do you feel online is dead, long term?" Max Steinberg: I don't know what the consensus is among high stakes players, I know what my opinion is. I don't think there's going to be another boom unless something really incredible happens. I'm, kind of, cheering for someone to step up and become the Tiger Woods of poker. I think that would be really good for the game. Someone who'd just win three or four World Series events in one year, who's a respectable pro and a big name. I think that would bring excitement back to poker that we haven't had in while. Saying it's dead is also I think is an overstatement. I definitely think there's going to be legal U.S. online poker, at some point. Also, another thing is that I feel like poker is, sort of, a young person's game and every year, there's a new generation of people turning 21. That's thousands of people who are going to be playing poker. I think 20 years from now, there's going to be just a massive, massive player pool of players because there's going to be so many young guys, who are now old who are going to be 40-year-olds, like me playing hot-shot 20-year-olds. The 40-year-olds are still going to be around, so I think it'll get bigger and bigger. I just don't think the quality of play will ever be as poor as it once was. Carl C.: Right. If you could go back to 2005 with a $500 bankroll, with what you know now, back in the Party Poker days, you'd be doing pretty good. Max Steinberg: Yeah. I think about that a lot, I think; "Why didn't I start earlier?" Instead of 17, I think I could make pretty good money. That being said, the people who were making good money then, were ahead of their time. They didn't have card runners, they didn't have a ... They taught a few, select people. They had to come up with everything on their own, so that's pretty impressive in itself. I mean, I've had help to get where I am today. I would wonder if I put in enough hours, how well could have done pre-2006. Carl C.: Right, yeah. You're still doing pretty good right now. You can't really complain too much. Max Steinberg: No, I can't complain. Also, if you're looking for bad players, maybe you should start playing some of the other games. Maybe, not PLO, but my friend is really into Pot-Limit Omaha Hi-Lo, and he seems to find some pretty good games in Hi-Lo. Maybe, switching to a different game could help find fishes, for other people. Carl C.: Have you played any of the mixed games? Are you mainly just sticking to Hold-Em? Max Steinberg: I, mainly, was just playing the Hold-Em. I won at some tournament that was a PLO, Hold-Em Mix. I wouldn't really classify that as playing a mixed game. My friend, who's actually staying with me, he's my roommate this summer, taught me some PLO 8. They're just certain spots where they're wider, for example, when people are calling out of the big blind. Most people have an extremely wide calling range from the big blind.
Also, some of the worst players will have a wider calling range from the small blind than I expect. The adjustments are hard because there're a lot of good players who are looking to make the big call in spots where they have a wide range. Usually, what I've got to do is when I decide to be betting, I bet really hard and I bet a lot chips. It allows me to do thinner value bets and I'll throw in a few bluffs, and usually, it works pretty well. In summary; value bet thinner and bluff a little bit, and that's it. Carl C.: This one is an open-ended, simple question but I thought it was interesting. "Hoopie" asked: "Why did you become a professional player?" Max Steinberg: Well, I think, originally, I became a professional player because I really didn't know what I was doing. I was in college and I had no direction in what I wanted to do. Poker was going well, so I just decided I have so much fun doing this, why not just go pro. I think, now, I would say the reason that I'm professional, still, is because I just enjoy playing, and I enjoy playing at a high level. There's just something very satisfying about it, for me. Carl C.: I thought it was interesting that you didn't mention money, at all, in your answer. Is that something that you don't really care about? You're just more passionate about playing, and then, the money the money just follows? Max Steinberg: No, I definitely care about the money, but I guess I didn't mention that because I've, kind of, been pondering this myself, lately. I'm wondering how much longer I'm going to be doing this, and I've just been asking myself this question; "Why do I continue to play poker?" Obviously, money is going to be a reason. If I don't have any reason, besides that, then I wouldn't continue playing. I think the reasons that I stated before is a little more important. I would be lying to myself if I didn't say I enjoyed making money. Carl C.: There was a hand that everyone is talking about from the Big Drop, have you heard about it? Where the guy folded quads, face up? Carl C.: He thought the guy had a straight flush. Max Steinberg: What are your thoughts on that hand? Carl C.: Well, I don't know about the entire action. I read, briefly, about it. I read a statement from the guy who made the fold, and his logic was not terribly flawed. He just thought he had an incredibly strong read. He said, himself, that; "I don't think he had kings, because he would have re-raised pre-flop. I didn't think he had jacks, because he also would have re-raised pre-flop". He also said he looked very excited on the flop. Now, that's fine and dandy that he got all those reads, but it seems like a pretty ridiculous spot to fold quads and put someone on such an exact hand. It seems like he doesn't realize how infrequent it is for someone to have a straight flush, just understanding the ideas of combos of hands. There's only one combo of straight flush in that spot, even if there was a minute chance of Jacks or Jack-8, or the nut-flush. Just having that minute chance almost makes it a call, just because there're so many possibilities for those hands. Carl C.: It's totally different if you feel like you have a soul read in that situation. |
Author Anna CarterI like sport and all types of gambling games. Also, I`m a writer, so I help people to understand the online casino niche and other related niches like betting on sport, iGaming etc. Working with gambling projects: https://www.casinoslots.co.nz/casino-software Archives
May 2019
Categories |