MTT Overhaul: Part 1 & 2

kageykagey Red Chipper, KINGOFTAGS Posts: 2,241 ✭✭✭✭✭
As a player who occassionaly plays tourneys - I'm eager to learn more.
But "Lucky Luke's" first 2 videos have got to rank very, very high as the the Worse Red Chip Poker videos, ever. And if not the worse - at the very least the Cheapest Produced RCP videos ever! (Hint - this is what the 1st half of the video looks like.... seriously!)


I've seen better video productions in home-made V-logs (including Chip's) that at least try to be visually interesting. Hell, even my college professors knew how to create slides or use the chalkboard to make their lectures interesting!

@Luke Haward - if you have no idea how to make a video, at the very least, use Powerpoint. And break your topics up into many, many slides. Feed us what's important in bite-sized chunks so we can absorb the material. Find one single important point/takeaway to make for each slide. Give examples... visually! (Engage us. Learning is an active process)

And if you don't have the wherewithall to produce a real video... then make it a podcast.

@Doug Hull @Christian Soto @SplitSuit ...
I think there should be some kind of standard set for videos posted on your site.
I'm not sure if anyone there has viewed it before it got posted, but maybe all videos should go thru some kind of review process before being posted.... seriously.
(folks are paying to watch these....)


  • HAKKA-AAHAKKA-AA Red Chipper Posts: 45 ✭✭
    if I have a suggestion, Luke you should now develop each point you mentionned in your vid with examples calculation and so on...
    like for example in the postflop vid , I'd like more content on attacking capped range or protecting or stack manipulation on the flop, commitment, SPR and stuff like that you can adress in deeper manner.
  • HAKKA-AAHAKKA-AA Red Chipper Posts: 45 ✭✭
    no answers, no reaction so I guess you don't care and will continue your serie as is...I would think it is better to interact here and ask for what people want instead of making videos people dislike. There is not much MTT content and it would be better to have this minimum amount fitting the maximum of subscribers. no?
  • Luke HawardLuke Haward Red Chipper Posts: 4
    Hi, as I posted in a second thread I must apologise for not realizing these discussions existed sooner and coming back to them. I've had a very busy start to the year, and had not yet fully got to grips with the forums here. I will be sure to come back much faster in future!

    The series is already complete (Preflop, Postflop, ICM, mental game) and was designed as an overview, to open up a lot of topics in brief, to get brain cells firing on topics perhaps not considered previously, and to open up topics to see who would like a detailed analytic exploration of one or another of those in a later video. While I've had some positive feedback on the first installment already, I take seriously any feedback good or bad, and will strive to produce material more to your liking in the future.

    In terms of the visual structure, it is certainly simple and straightforward, which some viewers are fine with. Also naturally these videos were of course reviewed and considered by the team @ Redchip before being uploaded. I tend to try to create a simple but effective frame for my theory videos, and concentrate on the content and quality of discourse, rather than the slides themselves. Perhaps this did not come off as well as I had thought. In the past I have produced similarly simple theory slide-based offerings to positive feedback, so I was not expecting this complaint, but I take it seriously and will strive to avoid producing anything similar for you guys in future!

    I think in future videos, at least for the time being, I'll focus on less theory / slides and more direct hand analysis anyway, which should at least shelve that issue for the time being! I will also endeavour, when I do opt to produce a theory type video, to stick to one or two theoretical concepts and bed them down immediately within the video with hand examples. Hopefully that approach will bring you guys more value.

    Please come back to me with any and all suggestions of what you'd like to see going forwards, I'm very receptive and willing to target what I create to suit your needs / wishes.



  • kageykagey Red Chipper, KINGOFTAGS Posts: 2,241 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The series is already complete (Preflop, Postflop, ICM, mental game) and was designed as an overview, to open up a lot of topics in brief, to get brain cells firing on topics perhaps not considered previously, and to open up topics to see who would like a detailed analytic exploration of one or another of those in a later video.

    @Luke Haward
    who was your target audience?
    some guy who just came off the street and knows nothing about poker tournaments?
    you say that these "tips" are not for fish, but for intermediate player... yet you go into very little detail on truly identifying these "leaks" and fixing them. How is that helpful? And if someone is an intermediate player, shouldn't he already know to "adjust to dynamic reads" or "building a 3-bet range?"

    Take the "Making Poor Villain Assuptions" leak... isn't that Poker in a nutshell?
    Didn't Cliff Josephy - a November Niner - actually make some bad assumption against Qui Nguyen? Fixing this leak is like that old Henny Youngman joke: I went to the doctor and said, it hurts when I do this. (he lifts up his arm) You know what the doctor told me? Don't do that!... the difference between tourney winners and tourney loser is knowing what assumptions to ignore and which ones to accept.

    Your vid's very first "leak" in your MTT Overhaul: Preflop Leakbusting...
    • Sizing Down (Open, 3bets)

    you spend approximately 2 ½ minutes on this leak - telling us not to bet 2X but to bet 2.X instead. We're not given any guidance on the what the X should be. But we're told that 2X is bad. Do you realize that Matt Janda has done at least TEN 45mins-1hr videos for cardrunner on this idea alone? He's even used Poker Snowie to show how for each larger .X reduces an opponent's calling range.

    How is hearing ... "Don't bet 2X, bet 2.X instead" supposed to help my tourney game?
    Isn't it V-dependent? Aren't live tournies different than online? Doesn't the stack sizes matter? What about antes? And V's calling frequency? Not to mention, the strength of our hand? Doesn't mis-applying 2.X into my game now create a new and more exploitable leak?

    here at RCP, the best instructional videos avoid vague generalities. We prefer to understand the "why." What's the math behind it? The psychological implication? The reasoning for which tactics to use and when they're best applied.

    the truth is: less is more.

    Your ICM video starts to get more into the "teaching"... but honestly feels more like an infomercial for the Holdem Resource Calculator.

    I think in future videos, at least for the time being, I'll focus on less theory / slides and more direct hand analysis anyway, which should at least shelve that issue for the time being!

    You miss my point. It's not a theory vs. real-world debate.
    It's a teaching vs. rambling-about-the-knowledge-you-have argument.

    Say you were a plumber, for example. If you're going to share your knowledge at a plumber's convention, are you going to talk about buying the right tools and how to store them or hold them properly? You might. But you'd suck.

    Instead, you should give tips on how to solder a pipe in cramped spaces without setting the house on fire. You'd want help them learn how to upsell their customers to copper - which make less noise in the walls - to help them make more money. You'd be passing down "secrets" that only the most experienced plumbers would know.

    Google "poker tournament preflop mistakes"
    You do that and you'll find more than 30,000 hits.
    And guys like Doug Polk and Ryan Fee offering the very same generic advice you've offered. For FREE! Many here are paying up to $50 a month to watch these videos. That's a lot of big blinds for cash players. Or the equivalent of playing the WSOP Colossus for free every year!

    As a coach - I'm sure you've had a number of students who've had "a-ha" moments where you saw the lightbulb go off (as I'm sure you've had as well). THAT's what should be in your videos. Demonstrate how we should thinking or approaching the game that should result in long-term profitable decisions.
    Help us reach the final table of the next tourney we play.
    Give us homework.
    Make us work for the solution.
    Help us become so profitable that we'd shower you with money to sweat us at our next main event.

    Do that, and I promise I won't give you any more guff in these forums.
  • HAKKA-AAHAKKA-AA Red Chipper Posts: 45 ✭✭
    theory vid is good if you make real theory stuff; a slide presentation with a bunch of topics isn't always theory. you can tackle now some of the topics in a deeper manner. Personnaly I would like you do it. there are a bunch of hand review everywhere including some of yourself on pokertrategy, float the turn, .... I can give you an idea of next subject: Planning hand vs stack size; commitment and SPR in MTT.
  • Luke HawardLuke Haward Red Chipper Posts: 4
    Thanks for your further feedback. As regards the point about 2x bet sizing, I do give precise guidance and reasoning on what the X should be, I mention that one should go 2.1x - 2.15x when short-stacked and why, and I go into why we should size larger when deeper. So your criticism is pretty inaccurate on that one, I have to say. I give quite specific recommendations and my reasoning for them. Looking back over that part of the video I have to say I still find it has a lot of value, and I myself as an earlier student of the game would have found many of the guidelines and tips in this video to be of help, I am nonetheless sorry that it was not useful for you. I don't find the criticism about teaching vs. rambling justified, I actually still feel that there is a lot of detailed treatment of MTT leaks in this video. Yes I go over topics in brief, and not in depth, but this was indeed the premise behind the whole piece, to cover a lot of ground in one overview piece.

    Anyway, let's agree to disagree on this and move on. I'll bear your feedback in mind, as mentioned in my reply above.

    As for moving forwards, I will be doing a number of themed videos in future, but firstly I am going to keep it super simple with a two part review of a run I had in an online phase 1 feeder to a live event. I'll be following that up in April with some hand discussion from the live event itself, a £5k £6 million guaranteed with is running in Nottingham, UK in late April. I always do hand history reviews cold, warts and all, I don't edit out any mistakes and I am honest about those mistakes, so that hopefully others can learn from my play, both the good and bad. After that I will come back to themed topic-based study, and will certainly look at your suggestion for a video topic, HAKKA, thank you for that.

    In the meantime, if you're not so interested in seeing hand history reviews, you might want to skip the next couple of vids and wait for the live review piece in April or the themed videos to follow in May and beyond. I do hope they will prove useful and enjoyable to many viewers of course, and that they will set the ground for showing Red Chippers around my game and my thoughts on it.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file