blonde poker forum

Hello all. This is only my second post and so u might have guessed it has taken something that has gotten me soul searching to make this post!

I have been readin through the Harrington series, and am currently 3/4 of the way through Vol 2. As you are probably aware this mainly deals with M and Q for Inflection/Mutliple Inflection Points.

Having put Vol 1 to practice I found my results no end i.e. I have won numerous live tournaments (fields of 120 Coalition soldiers in Iraq) and done well in S n G's online. The approach has been tight, tight, tight all the way. A couple of people I have spoken to have stated that they did not totally agree with Harrington as it seemed so scientific and recommended Phil Gordons approach (my next read).

I must admit my game has loosened slightly and my cash game results/S n G's have improved a little.

But now I have come across Inflection Points. I had worked this out for myself previously but had remained disciplined and tight in the face of increasing blinds. I always made the final table, but was sometimes frustratingly blinded away and other times won from small stack (a position I must admit I play my best poker from).

Since reading Harringtons theory on Inflection points my results have gone on a bit of a downward spiral. I have only really seen it 'work' ??? the once (40th out of 9,000 online). All the other times I hav ebsted out of tourneys much earlier than I am accustomed to. I am aware that some of this has been to my error i.e in some cases going all in a  little too early (eg an M of 6), other times with a caller (s) before me (ie losing first invigorish as Harrington calls it).

So my first question is....how do you all stand by Haringtons approach a. to the game as a whole (I appreciate he has done a whole lot better than the people that I have spoken to about his book) b. his way of dealing with the rising blinds.

My second question is in my next post!!!!

I like to look at Harrington as a good foundation.  But there's a lot to build on it to give you a complete game.  It's also definitely geared towards the deeper-stack tourneys rather than the faster structure ones you tend to get online.

I think the series are very well written, and suit my overall style of play.

I'm sure some of the better players on here will have opinions on them. 

I agree totally with kin


really with the fast rising blinds on internet tourneys the advice doesnt stand up

took me a while to realise this,u need at least 20 min blinds for the advice on inflection play to hold up.

However as for live play and 1st in vig it is very good advice and i do follow it i must admit and personally get deeper playing live than online where the more agressive approach is winning out


I dont think the tight agressive game can win too much online these days, far too many agressors around