![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
For those beginning LL poker players ages 18-20, can anyone recommend a good Indian casino to play at? I've tried the Gila River in AZ, which was nice, but I hear they don't have the clientele they once did. Turning Stone in NY had some incredibly soft games, but with a $3 button drop, I can't help thinking I'd do better elsewhere.
Any casino in Arizona except Casino Arizona. Gila river has good action and Ft. Mcdowell is ok too.
Please do not call Native Americans "Injuns" because it is politically incorrect.
why in my day ...
Hey Niels,
San Manuel is where I've been going lately. There's no button charge so low-limit Hold'em is far cheaper than in the LA cardrooms. There's 2-4, 3-6, 4-8, 6-12 Stud and Hold'em. Usually there's a 9-18 Hold'em table going and a 3-6 Omaha.
P.S. Its only an hour from Caltech.
~DjTj
Hello! Will you explain me the meaning of the word "draw", - "flush draw", "straight draw" etc. I`m not an Englishman and don`t understand this word combination... Sorry for possible silly question, but I`m hoping you help me. Thank you!
Arthur,
A "drawing" hand means that the hand needs other cards to be completed. This is contrasted with a "made" hand.
An example from Hold 'Em:
You hold KQ and the flop is 10,J,2. You have a "straight draw" because you have 4 to a straight and need either an A or a 9 to complete your hand.
Similarly, hands that contain 3 or 4 of a single suit are said to be "flush draws"--the player is hoping for more of that suit to give him/her a flush.
A "made" hand means that the player's hand needs no improvement. If you flop two pair, three of a kind, a straight, etc.. you have a "made" hand.
KJS
A draw is having 4 cards to a Straight or flush.
IE: You hold TJ and the flop is 9Q4 you have a straight draw going.
If you hold an As5s and the flop is 9sJs3h you have a spade draw.
Hope this answers your query.
Cheers,
http://www.kimberg.com/poker/dictionary.html
Other terms you may need can be found here.
Best of it !!
MJ
Thank you, KJS, Rounder and MJChicago for your help! Now all is clear for me. With best regards,
Arthur.
me was wondering why they don't play Injun Poker in Injun casinos?
Have ever played Injun Poker? It really good game. Everyone put card on forehead. There one round betting and big card win pot.
Injun poker game of future.
Hi Mr Dabid Panski,
I be a twee yer old beginnin pokee player. I hab reed all you booksis. Dey be berry berry goood. I like dem. A lot, much. I tink Gabby Casson and Mack Glubber is jelus ob u and Mr. Masoon. Dey cain't eben speel good like you and Mr Masoon and Me. And jes who do that beaver guy Bagger tink he is always saying somtin differing than you, huh what do he know anymay.
I hab a quetion fer you, sire. I likee to play de Hold Him game lot's more than the struds game. My quetion is if I hab twee cards how do I gib one amay with out sombodee sein me. It happen all der time. I get twee cads and two is Aces and I don't know how to gib one away. I tink it's because stupid sally always puts peanut batter on the cards when she dels. She is my four yer old girl fiend. I like eld womans. Anymay what do you rink? I culdn find the answer in TOP (see I jes like Pall Fenkey with abreviationos, bet Zee likee dat).
I lik to tANK (OOPS HIT DE CAPIRTRAL KEY, SURRY) YOU AND MR. MASOOON FER ALL DE HELPS U GIVS US YOUNG GUNS!
BEGGINNER!
(I know this looks like sumthin Vince Lepore would do but it's not. No really it's not me)
h
i red tis twoo deys ago. still haven't stopped laffeene
This forum seems to be having trouble getting off the ground, so I'll try to post a serious beginner question. My regular card room only offers limit games, and in home games I'd like to try playing some pot limit, but I'm not sure how the betting works. This is for 7 Stud. So, say I'm playing PL with a $1 ante. On 3rd Street there's $7 in the pot. Low card enters for $3. Next player sees the $3 bet and wants to raise as much as possible. What is the maximum he's allowed to raise? Is it $10 (the amount in the pot when the action got to him), or is it $13 (the amount in the pot at the current time)? When the action gets big, this game would quickly seem to turn into a no limit type betting system. For example, $100 in the pot, player 1 bets the pot making it $200 total. Player 3 can then see the $100 bet and raise $300 (total pot 600), and player 4 can then call $500 and raise 1100!? In other words, can the pot grow at an exponential rate, or is the limit for the entire round of betting based on the amount at the start of the round itself?
thanks, PL beginner
To All: I am as thick-skinned as anyone - I have an EXTREMELY irreverent sense of humor. I have a BIG problem with the free use of "Injuns" on this forum. Would any of you feel so comfortable on this forum, joking or not, to freely refer to any asian as a "chink" or any black as a "nigger?"
I don't think so.
So, then, why is it ok to use Injun?
PLEASE folks - I implore you to not use that anymore.
Thanks, Tim
Tim,
I applaud your stance on this matter. When I noticed the word being used I was going to post a response along the line you took but after getting little widespread support for a post I made calling someone down for making antisemitic remarks (the support I *did* get from Pyramid, Alex and scott was very much appreciated, though) I felt it was of no use. I was wrong, I should have stepped forward sooner and am proud to add my voice to yours.
OK... I probably shouldn't have started this whole thing. My attempt at humor was obviously misguided. If I offended anyone, I'm not sorry, and I think you're being too sensitive, but I will refrain from any postings in the future along similar lines. For the record, my mom is a Chinese immigrant and neither she nor I are offended by the use of the word "chink".
Thanks folks for your messages. Again, I am thick skinned, and with my friends, we are fairly brutal. However, on a forum such as this, or any other form of cyber-media, tone is horribly lost, and it is difficult to ascertain whether or not one is being tounge and cheek. I ASSUMED that all of these posts were tounge and cheek, but my stance remains the same: That other terminologies would not be tolerated on this forum, but derogatory terms for American Indians are still, by and large, permissable in our culture.
I am far different, tone wise, on this forum than I am in person, and I assume that most of us are - in order to maintain a semblance of order and professionalism.
That's all... No harm no foul, Gents Carry on!! Thanks, Tim
I'm just a lurker, and probably should remain in the shadows, but I've been inspired to add my two tokes....
What is said amongst friends in jest is far different than what is published/said in any forum.... just ask John Rocker and Al Campanis...
thanks....
c
"Just do the math on what structure you described with the $1 ante and two players, with one players betting the whole way. You are looking at a game with $3000 pots head-up, with no raising"
No, I'm not seeing $3000. Here's a simulation of a no raise, heads up hand with $1 ante:
On 3rd Street - $2 pot Player One bets the pot ($2) Player Two calls ($2)
On 4th Street - $6 pot Player One bets the pot ($6) Player Two calls ($6)
On 5th Street - $18 pot Player One bets the pot ($18) Player Two calls ($18)
On 6th Street - $54 pot Player One bets the pot ($54) Player Two calls ($54)
On the River - $162 pot Player One bets the pot ($162) Player Two calls ($162)
Final pot - $486
Now if Player 2 raised the maximum every round and Player One called, that'd be a different story. By my calculations, the final pot would be as follows:
On 3rd Street - $2 pot P1 bets pot ($2) P2 calls ($2) and raises pot ($6) P1 calls ($6)
On 4th Street - $18 pot P1 bets pot ($18) P2 calls ($18) and raises pot ($54) P1 calls ($54)
On 5th Street - $162 pot P1 bets pot ($162) P2 calls ($162) and raises pot ($486) P1 calls ($486)
On 6th Street - $1458 pot P1 bets pot ($1458) P2 calls ($1458) and raises pot ($4374) P1 calls ($4374)
On the River - $13,122 pot P1 bets pot ($13,122) P2 calls ($13,122) and raises pot ($39,366) P1 calls ($39,366)
Final Pot - $118,098
So, this could technically happen in a $1 heads up PL game? I won't bother with the math for a 5 or 6 handed game. . . I'm looking forward to giving it a try!
PL beginner
In 21C HE S&M say that you raise for 5 reasons:
1. To get more money in the pot 2. To Drive out other players 3. To bluff or semi-bluff 4. To get a free card 5. To gain information.
I play LL HE. I get the idea that in this kind of game only #'s 1 and 4 really apply. Discussion?
Even in LL HE all still apply.
2. To Drive out other players. You need to be creative but LL Players can still be driven out of a Pot before thay will call 2 bets cold on the flop.
3. To bluff or semi-bluff. Even low limit players start to fugure out that I only play very strong hands. I need to throw in a Raise or bet in when I'm on the Draw or have a mediocre hand to keep myself from being too predictable. Plus the truely terrible players will probably call with worse hands than my semi-bluff.
5. To gain information. Usually you gain information everytime you raise.
CV
2. Check raise with the target bettor to your right you raise and LL players do start to fall. Calling two bets cold after a late position player bets and a blind raises may get some of them to fold.
5. I think it can be used in certain situation against a particular player.
Best of it !!
MJ
All 5 are validin LL some games they just apply a bit more.
In LL raises on the turn and river mean a lot more than pre and post flop. LL players tend to dream of hands and as reality sets in that the quads aren't coming they will drop off to late raises.
This is my experience now that you mention it. But, for someone learning this game like me, I need you to explicitely mention it to really understand the principle.
Thanks
I play in a very loose low-limit game (1-5 Spread limit w $1 antes - no blinds ) with three other people. I've been reading Lee Jones' Winning Low-Limit Hold'em book however I can't seem to find a way to apply the methods to such a short-handed game. So my question is...
What kind of adjustments need to be made to play in a short-handed game?
I understand short-handed games don't give pot-odds enough to go after flush draws and straights as much but I don't seem to know how to adjust starting hands or flop play (as in playing an underpair...). Also with antes you can't afford to be too patient so moves need to be made earlier.
Please someone give me some advice, or even better guide me to a book on short-handed play.
Thanks ,
lowroller
The Jones book will do you absolutely no good in this game. In fact, if you play the way he recommends, your opponents' loose play will destroy you. If this isn't apparent, you really ought to read to section on shorthand play in HPFAP and the relevant archived posts here before spending more time playing under this structure.
Jones' book is geared toward a loose 9 or 10-handed game, where you nearly always need a quality hand at the end to win. In this game, your long-run profit lies in stealing the antes a bit more often than your opponents, sometimes before the flop, sometimes afterward. You therefore first need to teach your opponents that they'll be punished for taking random cards very far against you. Once you've got them to where they'll fold, exploit the difficulty they'll experience in connecting with the flop by betting and raising with nothing hands when they've also "missed."
Thanks for the response Chris. I understand that Jones' book is not applicable for this type of game. So my question is:
What book would be the best read for short-handed holdem? Are there any books that strictly deal with Short-handed play? Is the section in HPFAP the best text dealing with SH play?
Thanks, lowroller
I play short handed on-line. S&M changed me from a net loser to a net winner in sh play. They give you well defined rules and tell you what kind of opponent you want to play against. Read it.
Go throught the archives here and check the posts on short-handed play. In late '97, there was an excellent exchange between Malmuth and Jalib; Landale made an excellent point on the subject just a few weeks ago. You can check old r.g.p. posts on the subject through deja.news. I'm not aware of a book besides HPFAP that addresses the subject to any real degree.
Your opening hand requirements go way down 4 handed.
AX KX QX are good opening hands as they can win unimproved.
Short handed is not that much different except it takes a lot less of a hand to win the pot.
Basically when you are playing short handed pairs and big cards go up in value while connectors and suited cards go down in value. This is because in order to draw to a straght or a flush you need correct pot odds. In most low limit games you will still get these odds even if it is short handed, but the thing to remember is to really make everyone pay to draw out on you.
I've never been to a casino before, but I'd like to start playing soon. I have read Sklansky's intro hold 'em text, and logged about 50-60 hours on IRC poker.
My question is: If I haven't had enough time to properly select a table, would it be to my advantage to throw away the first couple of playable hands when I sit down, just to get a better read on the action? Or, should I just play normally, and take any adverse results that happen?
IV,
Reading people is extremely important in poker, but as this forum proves, good cards played correctly win you money. If you get these cards when you first sit down and you feel confident that the situation is right then by all means play them. You can't sit and watch long enough to get a perfect read on people before you have to jump in. Plus, mixing it up with them when you have the best of it will bring out the information you seek. If you are playing right then you won't be playing many hands--if these come right away don't miss an opportunity.
Consider choosing not to post when you first sit down. That will buy you a little watching time.
KJS
i want to play poker i want to go to tournaments but im just a beginner and the only poker i have ever played is at home with friends can you help me to get started.
Thank you papo
Here's a true story about me being in a similar situation:
I had logged in over 100 hours of 2-4 Holdem and decided to move up to 3-6 for the first time. Not a big move, but to me it was a significant step up. I sat down at the table and said to myself that I would throw away the first few hands regardless of what they were to get a feel for the table. So, I posted and of course got dealt QQ. Well, so much for throwing away. With no read on any of the players at all, I raised, and wound up dragging a nice sized pot with Queens full of Kings. The table was in fear of me for the rest of the game, and I finished my first 3-6 session up $200 after only 4 hours.
good luck on your first live game, let us know how it goes.
shooter
Good hands are hard to come by and you should play them. However, if the game appears somewhat aggressive or some of your opponents appear to play well (or tricky) on the later streets, then you should tighten up a little bit.
Not knowing the table and/or the style of players, it will take you at least 1-2 rounds to get accustomed to the table (i.e. your heart rate to drop to normal). My advice is to be cautious, be tight, be attentive, be quiet and play the good hands only. Don't raise too much till you get the feel of it. If in doubt, just play hands when you have good position. Memorize the chart in Sklansky's book. If you come in to the table after the BB, don't post, just watch till it comes around to you again. Have fun.
I have only been playing for about 2 years, mostly Low Limit, but the one thing I can tell you is great starting hands do not come by often, so you must play them and do not raise until after the turn card if you feel you have the best hand at the time. Good luck.
Memorize your hole cards..Watch the other players watch the flop.
Best of it !!
MJ
Your nerves will show the first hour or so. Use the knowledge that you look like a fish to your advantage. Watch for more experienced players trying to bluff you out. Break your bankroll into smaller sessions bankrolls. Stick to the book !!! Good Luck.
is there a place where you can play texas holdem poker on the net free
Yahoo! Games has a free one. But it is SLOOOOW and no one really knows how to play. Paradise Poker (on the link to the left) has a free play option. Unfortunately, my monitor cannot support it. Maybe yours can. Good luck. Tim
ll
A couple times in either written or audio descriptions of the WSOP I have seen/heard commentators mention the odds of one two card combination being better than another. For instance, "with that JJ he was a 6-1 favorite over the other player's xx (I don't remember any exact ones, so best not say the wrong thing). How do players learn these odds? I have read several HE books but none go into such things. I assume that the hand rankings in HPFAP are based on these odds, but am still curious how someone learns them for specific combinations. Thanks in advance.
KJS
This is all based on preflop heads up.
OK - for example a pair against two over cards is something like 6/4 or 6-5 fav if the over cards are suited the pair is 11-10 fav. I have talked to several experienced players who think an AKs is a fav. to an under pair they are wrong but not by much.
So an AKs is an 11/10 dog to a pair of 8's.
A pair to an over pair is someting like 6-1 dog.
The hand rankings are not based entirely on this at all.
A pair if 8's has the same odds as a pair of 6's against an AK. And a TJ is the same dog as an AK against a pair of 3's. But the HPFAP rankings are not nearly the same.
"Pot limit 7-stud is really a ridiculous game."
Omaha High is the only really good PL game. Holdem plays better NL.
If the argument was a home game may not be able to withstand an exponentially growing pot as is the case in pot limit how would no limit seek to alleviate this problem ?!
On Friday, I am arranging a home tournament in Hold Em. There will be seven participants, and I consider using this format:
6-7 players left: 2/4 Hold Em 4-5 players left: 4/8 Hold Em 3 players left: 6/12 Hold Em 2 players left: No Limit Hold Em
How long would you expect a tournament like this to take? Since neither one of us has played any tournament before, we will start with 100 each for the first tournament (to get a feel for it), and then 200 each for the second tournament.
I estimate that the first tournament normally would take 1-1,5 hours, and second one maybe 3 hours. What do you think?
Suggestions on other pot limit structures are welcome (but we will stick to Hold Em).
Best regars,
Jonas
All tournaments have a time limit for the blind increases. So you start out with T$300 (buy in is irrelevent here) and the blinds are 5-10 and increase to 10-15 then 15-25 then double every 15 20 or 30 min. You can even make the blinds last 1 hour if you want.
TIme it woud take depends on the loosness of the players. If it were no limit it could take from 10 min to an hour to 1 1/2 hours.
For 7 players playing limit. I'd guess 1 hour to 2 hours.
Normally tournaments use time to determine the blind escalation. Technically just useing the number of players left could take forever as you might just push the money around the table. A stack of 100 for 2-4 HE is going to last any but the most determined to lose several hours at the minimum.
If you want to limit the amount of time the tournaments takes then why not use a blind escalation based on time. That is 2/4 for the first 1/2 hour, 4-8 for the next, and so on. By the end of the 2nd hour the blinds are 32-64 or almost 1/7th of the total chips in play. If the tourney isn't already done it will be done very soon.
If you want to inject a little more play into the tourny then you can either lengthen the periods or do a hybrid tourney. Escalate the blinds until 2 or 3 people are left and then go big bet and escalate the blinds slower or not at all.
At the point you are heads up the two participants should be able to decide if they want to change the format. You might choose to not escalate the blinds again or play until a certain time.
So I sat in a 3/6 holdem game after 20 minutes of wait. I was seated on the right hand side of the dealer. The dealer wanted to know if I would like to post, I said yes please. He told me to put out one chip and I said fine.
The dealer shuffled the cards, cut it, and began dealing. I was the third person to be dealt. My cards were 3 of clubs, 5 of spades. I already had my one chip in front and the dealer wants to know if I check. I said sure, then the person seated on the dealer's left put 2 chips and said raise. Next person threw away his cards, next person put 2 chips in front of him, other 2 players threw their cards, another player said let's make it 3 chips, other person folded, other person called and the dealer asked me if I should call. I said sure and put in 2 more chips.
The dealer now flops 3 cards. 2 of spades, 4 of spades and 6 of hearts. I flopped a straight. First person checked, the dealer wanted to know if I like to bet, so I asked many chips, he said 2 chips, I put in 2 chips, next person yelled raise, other players called, but another player again said raise, person first to act folded and dealer looked at me again and asked if I should call, raise or fold. I looked at my cards again and I was right, I have a straight. So I also yelled raise and everyone called.
The dealer flopped the 4th card. It was an Ace of diamonds. Now, I am the first to act. Dealer wants to know if I should bet or check. I looked at the Ace and I told myself, now I have a straight from 1 through 6. I said bet, next person was screaming raise, 2 other players folded, last person to act yelled re-raise, I looked at my card and I said oh well, maybe I will split it with one of them so I said re-raise and the other player screamed Cap. So now, everyone called.
The dealer flopped the river card. It was a 9 of clubs. The dealer wants to know what I should do. I said bet, next player shouted raise, last person to act folded, action came back to me and I shouted re-raise, he screamed re-raise, I screamed re-raise, he decided to calm down and said, I don't want to take all your money so I will just call you but this is a good lesson for you and he turned over a pair of Aces. Whew, was I lucky. I turned over my cards and I said, you lost, I made a straight from Ace through six. He looked at me as if I was nuts and picked up his chips or whatever is left and left.
.
I suggust you quit while you are ahead.
It sounds like you had a lot of fun.
I did but Rounder seems to suggest I should not play poker anymore. My first session I won about $600 and I only played for 4 hours. I did not do too well on my second session, I only won $40 after playing for 6 hours. The players always look at me like I was nuts if someone yells raise and I yell back re-raise. But I only do re-raising now if I see that I already have a made hand and these people want to scare me when what they only have are just drawing hands.
Thanks for responding to my post, Mr. Mason. I will try to learn from your books, by the way, I already bought 3 of them, so I will know why these people look at me funny when I yell re-raise to them.
x
.
i love your work with the stones of cunard. "divine apathia divine aphasia divine athambia" great stuff.
and if you can scream reraise, does that mean that pozzo saw us?
scott
Excuse me? I don't want to sound stupid but what are you talking about? Could you please elaborate?
of a character in my favorite play.
scott
The only reason scott pretends to like it is because nobody else does. Stoppard's better than Beckett.
i liked godot before i knew no one else liked it. stoppard "just a rhymester". and you're so uneducated you don't even know who else called whom else a rhymester.
godot is great and niels is not.
scott
alex - i know you know the rhymester line. and i know you agree with me on stoppard.
Gee, what's happening around here. I was just posting about my first holdem experience and somehow we got sidetracked to Stoppard or Godot or whoever.
Did I miss something, or is this a standard occurence?
I'm very busy right now so I caught this thread on the tail end so I only want the bullet so which is it, Beckett or Stoppard? Also, any word for a KO or is it the distance?? Thanks in advance.
and it goes the distance, of course.
scott
What's athambia, columbia?
(And, careful, I know my greek!)
i think it is the inabilty to feel emotion. (not apathy, which merely shows a detachment from the possible outcomes of his action/nonaction.)
scott
"[Athambia:] i think it is the inabilty to feel emotion."
That's a strange word so we can't be sure; and maybe that's the whole point.(The man steadfastedly refused any "explanation", ever.)
if i knew who godot was, i'd have put him in the play.
scott
Is it OK to bet "all in" when i BB or SB position? I mean, what if, in a 8-16 game, the player in the BB position only have 10 bucks left? Or only 6 bucks (i.e. the SB would be bigger than BB's "all in")? Could someone kindly explain this to me?
Jonas
.
Doesn't matter if tournament or live game. If a playr is all in on the bb then that is all you can win x number of players calling you pre flop and palyers calling must put in the full big blind amount. So if the bb is $16 and you put in $10 callers must put in $16 to call you.
I appreciate them! And I look forward to being the expert myself during my home tourney on Friday.
Jonas
Jonas,
To clarify Rounder (I am sure he left this out because it is so obvious, but just to make sure you are on the right track). The player going all in on the blind (or anyother time in the game) can only win the amount of their bet times the number of players. All the remaining money goes in a "side pot" to be competed for by the remaining players. For example, if the blind posts $8 (out of $10) of the BB in a 10-20 game, and 6 other people see the flop for $10, the BB is eligible to win $56 (7 x $8) and the remaining $12 (6 X $2) goes "on the side". All subsequent bets goes in the side pot. The BB shows down with people only for the $56. Any remaining players show down with each other for the side pot. Maybe you knew all this already.
KJS
I did leave out the side pot thing.
My question assumes that the bettor or last raiser on the river (the guy everyone is calling to see) lays his hand down first. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Hypothetical: Suppose you have a marginal raising hand on the river. You opponent -- who you don't know very well -- has played the hand relatively aggressively (he has called cold, raised in early, check raised, whatever). You also know that if you are in the position to showdown first and you have best hand, he won't show but will muck. My question: is it ever a better play in the long run to pass on a raise or re-raise (and miss a bet or two)in order to get a better handle on an opponent (and win more bets down the road)? I think maybe so.
Jon (just dropping in)
s
Jon (just dropping in)
Hard to stay away I see ò¿ó
Never..You can ask to kill the hand then have the dealer show it. But don't do it very often. It tends to make the others at the table very uneasy for some reason.
MJ
A question about "all in".
Suppose a player goes "all in", say in the BB position (as in an earlier thread). There are a few raises and five people (plus "all in" BB, of course) see the flop. There are now two pots (one sidepot). The one that BB is involved in consists of 6 times the "all in" amount.
Let's say that after the flop, four of the remaining five people fold, i.e. the fifth player (let's call him Danny :-)) wins the side pot (BTW: which pot is called the sidepot?).
How is the "all in" pot decided? Of course, the turn and the river are dealt, but then? Is it between Danny and BB only? And who shows his cards first?
Thanks,
Danny
The "main pot" is the first pot... the "sidepot" has less people playing for it than the main pot... likewise the "second sidepot" would have less people playing for it than the first sidepot...
If everybody else folds and Danny gets the sidepot, the turn and river are put down and the big blind and Danny showdown for the main pot. others who fold lose all their rights to that pot. Whoever shows first is determined by house rules, usually it will be the first player left of the dealer button. Being all in doesn't effect the showing of hands order.
Side pot is the 2nd pot after the all in is declared, size doesn't matter here.
Danny shown down with BB as in dealing the BB shows 1st high hand wins the main pot.
Will you explain me the word combinations "to get a free play" and "to limp". I`m not Englishman and can not translate these ones:"to get a free play against 3 or 4 opponents" and "someone has limped". Sorry for these non-professional questions...
Thank you.
Arthur:
It's ok, besides these are non-professional answers.
Limping - When a player "limps in" before the flop they are only calling the minimum (Big Blind's) bet as opposed to raising it.
Free Card - The concept of a "free card" is actually a misnomer. It's really getting a "cheap card" and it's best to explain with an example. You're on the button (the dealer, last to act) with Ah6h and the flop contains three little cards with two hearts. If someone in early position bets you would raise in an effort to get a "free card" for your flush draw. Your goal is that on the turn everyone checks to you because of your raise on the flop. This way if the turn is not a heart, you may also check and see the river card for "free". If the turn is a heart you would go ahead and bet your flush and you've added money to the pot before you actually made your hand.
So - by raising a small bet on the flop with a drawing hand. You are able to save a big bet on the turn if it doesn't come.
Hope that long winded explanation helps.
Michael
Be the flop... See the flop... You're not being the flop, Danny.
Michael!
Thank you for helping me! Now I understand the meaning of these words! Arthur.
I have seen several suggestions that beginners should practice for free on the Internet. My question is, what is the real value of playing there beyond just getting what hands to play from pre-flop (e.g., you are trying to learn the starting hands recommended in WLLH). After that, is there a lot of value to be learned since you typically see 60+% of the board even after one or more raises, and the majority of those play to at least the turn?
For example, I was playing 3-6 free hold'em and the average pot size was something like 150 bucks. Where as, its something like 30-40 bucks at the for money tables on the same site.
Just wondering how much value there is considering the play you encounter.... Thanks.
Once you have played for awhile you get to know who plays to "practice" and who play to just have fun. You then look for the correct type of game when you Log on. Of course stay away from the 150 avg pot game and look for the low/med avg pot this will give you a bit of a clue as to the type of "practice" game it is. I am one of the people that thinks that there is something to be gained from free internet play. Working on counting the bets till it becomes a reflex is one of the main thing I practice ,pot odds, effective odds and reading hands are all skill that can be practiced on-line for free. Seeing the concepts in real time as opposed to reading them in a book is also helpfull. Has it helped ,Yes I can't sit or watch a live game without counting the bets now. I can even durning a hand I am in project the effective odds. This has given me a great insite into the game I never had before. Players mistakes are very clear(as are mine sometimes after a hand). Reading hands has also improved. I always ask my self "Would I really play this hand for $$" Keeping that in mind I think that it's worth the time .
Best of it !!
MJ
While I think there is some value in practicing on Paradise's free side, for the most part these games are out of control for several reasons. 1. Many of the people who play here are here to "gamble" and have fun, and 2. Pursuit of ranking on the free play area's top money winners list. (Allthough I might say that this game is nearly perfect practice for some of the loose aggressive California 3-6 games I've seen.)
IMO, a better place to practice is via IRC using Greg's poker client.
http://webusers.anet-stl.com/~gregr/
The lower limit games (10-20) are slightly better than Paradise, and the higher limit (20-40) HE game is (I think) the best "live" free game in town. Though I doubt it is an accurate simulation of real 20-40 play, It probably comes pretty close to a 3-6 game on PP (though, I would rate some of the IRC players as a cut above PP's "average" LL player)
In terms of what you can gain from playing past hand selection is, to me, obvious. Practical application of HE play given real (or near real) conditions. And guess what, it doesn't cost anything.
Is this a perfect example of money play practice? No, but I think its close.
IRC using Greg's poker client.
I find that game to be nothing but FAST/LOOSE & WILD at all levels. look and feel was worthless IMHO
MJ
I find that game to be nothing but FAST/LOOSE & WILD at all levels. look and feel was worthless IMHO
Ok, In all fairness, I think this is true SOME of the time. I guess it depends on who's playing and when. I haven't played there for several months so I guess I can't speak for current conditions.
I personally found it usefull for practice before I started playing for real..
I think this is true SOME of the time. I guess it depends on who's playing and when.
That was my original point.
MJ
Just getting into the math with Holde'm. I know I have a 35% chance of hittng a flush when I hold 2 sutied cards and 2 of the same suit flop. What kind of pot odds do I need to stay in and see the river when my only possible hand ( giving me the nuts ) is a flush. Same question with an open ended straight drawing to the nuts.
To have a Positive Expectation over time you need to have odds of at least 1 Big Bet over the odds to your draw.
The correct way to determine the probability of improving with two
(or more) cards to come is to first determine the probability of not improving, and then
subtract this result from 1 (or 100%) For example, in the case of a flush draw,
your chances of not improving are 38/47 * 37/46, or .65 (65%).
Your chances of making the flush with two to come is thus .35 (35%), and the odds against
hitting the flush are .65/.35, or 1.86 to 1.
| Chances on the Turn, River & Both |
| Outs | Turn % | Turn Odds | River % | River Odds | Turn/River % | Turn/River odds |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20 | 42.6 | 1.35 | 43.5 | 1.30 | 67.5 | 0.48 |
| 19 | 40.4 | 1.47 | 41.3 | 1.42 | 65.0 | 0.54 |
| 18 | 38.3 | 1.61 | 39.1 | 1.56 | 62.4 | 0.60 |
| 17 | 36.2 | 1.77 | 37.0 | 1.71 | 59.8 | 0.67 |
| 16 | 34.0 | 1.94 | 34.8 | 1.88 | 57.0 | 0.76 |
| 15 | 31.9 | 2.13 | 30.4 | 2.28 | 51.2 | 0.96 |
| 13 | 27.7 | 2.62 | 28.3 | 2.54 | 48.1 | 1.08 |
| 12 | 25.5 | 2.92 | 26.1 | 2.83 | 45.0 | 1.22 |
| 11 | 23.4 | 3.27 | 23.9 | 3.18 | 41.7 | 1.40 |
| 10 | 21.3 | 3.70 | 21.7 | 3.60 | 38.4 | 1.61 |
| 9 | 19.1 | 4.22 | 19.6 | 4.11 | 35.0 | 1.86 |
| 8 | 17.0 | 4.88 | 17.4 | 4.75 | 31.5 | 2.18 |
| 7 | 14.9 | 5.71 | 15.2 | 5.57 | 27.8 | 2.59 |
| 6 | 12.8 | 6.83 | 13.0 | 6.67 | 24.1 | 3.14 |
| 5 | 10.6 | 8.40 | 10.9 | 8.20 | 20.4 | 3.91 |
| 4 | 8.5 | 10.75 | 8.7 | 10.50 | 16.5 | 5.07 |
| 3 | 6.4 | 14.67 | 6.5 | 14.33 | 12.5 | 7.01 |
| 2 | 4.3 | 22.50 | 4.3 | 22.00 | 08.4 | 10.88 |
| 1 | 2.1 | 46.00 | 2.2 | 45.00 | 04.3 | 22.50 |
I took the 9 out line for this example from that chart.
9 | 19.1 | 4.22 | 19.6 | 4.11 | 35.0 | 1.86
Drawing 1 card (Turn)
9 outs
Percent chance to make your hand: 19.1 % is
9(outs)/47 * 100 = 19.14%
Odds against making the hand(Dog)
4.22:1 is 100 - 19.14 / 19.14 = 4.23:1
If you miss the turn and are drawing 1 card (river):
Percent Chance to make your hand. 19.6 is
9(outs)/46 * 100 = 19.56% (19.6 rounded)
Odds against making the hand(Dog)
4.11:1 100 - 19.56 / 19.56 = 4.11:1
Chance of making a flush with two cards to come
35.0%
Chance *against* making a flush with two to come is
38/47 = 8.08
37/46 = 8.04
8.08 * 8.04 = 64.96 , or .65
Chances of making the flush with two to come is .35
100% - 65% = 35%
Odds:1 against making a flush with two cards to come
1.86 = 100-35 /35 = 1.857 (1.86 Rounded)
Best of it !!
MJ
Thanks MJ !!! I think I get it? So if I miss my flush on the Turn, I need to be getting 5.11:1 (4.11+1BB:1) odds to stay. Example...I'm on the button drawing for the nut flush. The turn card is a blank. I am bet into and I would have fold or call $20. The pot would have to be at least $102 for me to be getting the correct odds. Am I on the right track? Thanks Again !!!
For pot odds that is correct. You can also justify a call if your "Implied odds" (knowing that the others in the pot will also call the bet..) to project your pot odds also but thats another topic you should also check into.
EX)
There is 3 Big Bets in the pot it's 1 bet to you from an early position and you have a Open Ended Straight (OESTR8)well you may say that "Dang I am only getting 4:1 and would like to be getting 5:1 ..but if thoese two fish in the later positions call also then I am getting the correct odds for this call and if I hit the nut straight and WIN I will collect even a few more big bets"
MJ
You don't need a full big bet above the odds against making your draw in order to have a positive expectation.
For example, if you have something like 83s in the BB, there is one late limper, the small blind folds and you flop a 4-flush, you should call your opponent's bets on the flop (getting just under 3.5-1, depending on the rake) and turn (getting just over 3-1 immediately), assuming you feel the need to check.
From the flop forward, you have a marginally positive expectation if you believe he'll always at least pay you off and that sometimes you'll get two bets out of him on the river. It's just less than break-even if he never pays you off, but in most cases when an opponent is that timid your ability to outplay him if scare cards fall (assuming you don't have a wild image) should push you into positive territory anyway. (This assumes that your opponent can not have 2 pair or a set and will not semibluff bet a flush draw on both the flop and turn).
Chris,
You are correct!!
Since we are in the "Beginners" forum I was just giving a simple anwser. There are a lot of other factors I know but I was just trying to keep it simple.
MJ
Thanks Guys !!! I am learning that the hard part is making myself lay hands down. Its getting easier, but I wanted to know what the pro's expect in return on their investment. I am getting good at laying down flush and especially straight draws when the board pairs. If anything is getting to me, Its when the board pairs on the river to give someone the nuts.
Thanks Again !!! I enjoy your post.
Joe,
I hope you're not laying down too many flush/straight draws when the board pairs. Don't forget to take into account the preflop action with what card pairs on the board.
Ex: Significant raises on the flop and preflop, when a board of Td8d5h pairs on the turn with a 5c shouldn't make you lay down your AdQd (or any other decent flush draw). The raises preflop and postflop should let you know that there isn't much chance for a player to have a 5 in the hole.
Jon (just dropping in)
Never lay down a straight or flush draw just because the board pairs, you need to know your opponent extremely well. With the exception of very passive opponents that won't raise without these hands, you can't assume that somebody flopped a set or two pair. In fact, the board pair makes it slightly less likely. Also note that a set is more of a threat to a flush draw than a straight draw because it removes 1 or 2 outs and you won't always know which ones (it's easier for the flush and full house to both get there). Straight draws are hurt more by 2- and 3-flushes and better straight draws.
These hands are probably the easiest to play in limit hold 'em.
When you have a draw to a nut flush, a flush is rarely your "only possible hand." You often have 3 and possibly six more outs by virtue of pairing one or both of your hole cards. For example, if you face a bet with AdJd and a 9d6d3s flop, you typically have better than a 50% chance of improving to beat your opponent, and you might even have the best hand already. Being concerned about correct "pot odds" is not the way to go here.
Rule of thumb: in the absence of extreme circumstances, always at least call with your flush draws until the river. By "extreme circumstances," I something like facing 2 or 3 bets cold with a pair on board and a non-nut flush draw. If you unconsciously played every flush draw to the river, especially in typically loose low limit games, you'd still end up ahead on these hands.
Also go to the river with just about all of your open-end straight draws. When the flop is 2-suited, however, your potential win has to be greater because you'll occasionally have only 6 instead of 8 outs (24% vs. 32%). When your draw is to less than the nut straight, the board is 2-suited and paired, and the betting action is heavy, and other players might have a better draw or you might be drawing dead, you should fold unless the preflop betting created a huge pot.
Notice that I'm not recommending that you just call to the river. Betting and check-raising with these hands in multiway pots is very profitable.
When you catch but your hand will not win, you'll often know it before having to put in the last bet, especially against certain players. Although this is infrequent, don't let the fact of a lucky catch keep you off your toes. Never just call or raise because your hand is good in some sort of absolute sense, always consider the situation at hand. Also, even though it is sometimes obvious (e.g., the card that makes your straight puts a 3-flush on board and a tight player who has been calling raises an opener before it gets to you), remember that some inexperienced opponents will misread the board on the end and misplay their hand into what you would think is your "obvious" monster.
In short, knowing when to draw to a flush or open-end straight is not much of a hold 'em skill but knowing when to lay them down when you catch is. In the final analysis, however, making truly great laydowns with these hands doesn't add up to much money.
This aspect of knowing when to lay down a made flush or straight is one that has given me trouble. As with everything, I know it depends but do you have some basic criteria for laying down a made straigh/flush?
Next, are you saying with a nut flush draw w/ correct pot odds and ditto nut straight draw (assuming no flush possibility) should be called to the river.
When should you raise.
Thanks
I don't have any critieria, it's a case-by-case thing, and I need to be very sure to avoid paying them off.
Sometimes it's easy, such as when a passive player that normally checks two pair when the 3rd flush card hits comes out betting and raising when it hits, or when there's a raise and reraise on the end when the board pairs. But obviously you can't throw something like the T-high flush against an opponent that could be playing lower suited connectors.
I raise on the flop with these hands against 3 opponents when it tends increases the size of the pot more than it tends to knock out players. So I do a lot of check-raising with a likely opener to my left and a lot of bet-raising with a raiser to my right. When I have an overcard or a pair to boot, I'll usually raise only 1 or 2 opponents.
nt
This is a rant... feel free to respond if you want, but I don't necessarily expect any.
So there I was, playing free poker, and reading, and playing free poker. I had tried a little live poker on a recent trip to Vegas and finished even at 3-6 (two up sessions and one bad beating). I knew I still had holes and that last session really pointed some out. More studying. More free poker. Played in home games and hadn't had a losing session in a few months where the players may not be good, but they try hard! ;-)
Time to take the plunge again - real money on Paradise Poker. I admit it might have been a bit early since I still didn't have any great benchmarks for my playing skill, but I had watched real money games on PP for a lot of hours and even I could recognize that there are A LOT of bad players. Figured it was worth a shot. Did I expect to make a killing like others had talked about - nope. I would have been happy breaking even since this was really more about learning than making money.
What a disaster. I didn't expect to make a ton and I figured even being down a bit would be acceptable and worth the investment if I learned a few things. In the end, I just don't see how you can win at low limit - at least on the Internet. And maybe that was the lesson I learned.
I started out with my first investment, and things went ok at first, but then gradually went down hill until I tapped out. Ok... I got the hand history from PP and reviewed my play (pain in the ass that was). Ahhhhh.... several places I reached and chased - time to plug those leaks. More free play, more reading. I won consistently on free play - but I wonder if the huge pot sizes make it easy to survive because when "you get the best of it - you really get the best of it"?
Back into the lion's den with another buy in. Played tight (not frog pucker hole tight, but close). I get whacked a couple times on top two pair by a guy/gal drawing out on me (pure gamble for them in each case). Maybe I played them wrong, but looking back I don't think I messed it up. Follow that up with a couple of legitmate bad beats and a wave of frozen cards that let the blinds eat away at my already diminished stack.
Then finally it happened... a hand that should have marked the beginning of some kind of turn. QsQc on the button and nine players see the flop including a raise from the SB. WOW! Flop falls Q73 rainbow. It's checked to me - damn - I would have liked to raise. I bet - unbelievably, eight of the remaining players call and the SB folded (so much for that pre-flop raise). I can't believe the size of the pot.
At first I am nervous with all those players drawing on my trips, but the board is rags and I figure most called because of the big pot. Next card is an 8 - still rainbow. BB bets, all call, I raise, all fold except BB and one I will call "Lady Luck's Lover" - a maniac that had been winning more than he should have and a raiser just because. Ahhhh... my chance as a beginner player looking to be a solid player to punish this dope for his wild play. I put this guy on two pair (he's played it to the dirty end many times before), but he didn't raise which he tended to do, so maybe some kind of draw (JT maybe, I don't know). Last card comes a 5. He checks. Hah - missed your draw, I think, and I bet. He raises back. Ahhhhh crap - not again. The only thing that could beat me is a friggin straight to the 8. Did he actually hit his gutshot. Could someone actually play 64 from middle position. YOU BET YOUR SWEET BIPPY HE DID!!!! Bam - one huge (at least for me) pot dragged down by another bad player. That finished me off by and large.
Now I will admit that not all of that thinking took place at the table. I never saw the 8high straight - just the Q straight. I like to think subconsiously my mind thought no one was dumb enough to chase a 64 from the get go. Ahhhh, a problem identified. Looking back I see he was getting the right pot odds to hang in for the river, but what a friggin' loose cannon to hang around with dirt before and after the flop. Near as I can figure, he calls the blind just for grins since he's been winning, then calls the raise cause of the big pot. He has outs the whole time with a big pot, so why not hang around. Ugghhhhh... that scenario, albiet on a smaller scale, happens over and over again.
25 hours of real poker and more money down the tubes than I care to admit, not that it is that big amount. I know that that is a drop in the bucket statistically, but I just don't see how to approach this disaster. Am I demoralized? Somewhat. I know I still have leaks in my game, who wouldn't after only so little real time playing. But hopefully nothing huge. One nice thing about Internet poker is you have more time to think (at least it feels that way) so my pre-flop and post-flop play seem decent. Did I make mistakes, sure, but I don't think they are big enough to result in this kind of beating. I would like to think that I should at least be able to hold my own against the level of competiton on PP - not get beaten like a dog. The humility of "sitting" at that table with my teeny tiny stack of virtual chips, knowing that everyone was "looking" at me thinking "gee, there's a bad player" when I watch them play hand after hand like maroons. That's probably what gets me more than the money - the perception of being a bad player. I go to bed at night hoping that my play is not what other people are referring to when they talk about the "fish" on PP or other poker venues.
Ohhhhh the humanity. I guess it's back to the books and I think I will watch more live play than so much free play. Another home game in a couple weeks so another opportunity to play against real people. After several years of successful blackjack play, this is certainly a new challenge, but much more interesting.
For those of you who actually made it through this post/rant, thank you. I'm sure some where you have earned a few points of karma that might help you get that perfect flop some time in the future. I know I feel better..... and if there are flaws in my thinking, I would love to hear them since I could very well be in Little Dutch Boy mode - plugging leaks.
Thanks again.
MichSt,
Welcome to the game of Low-limit Holdem!! You will continue to see this type of play time and time again. Sounds to me like you played this hand correctly. It's just another case of suck out blues. I have been playing on PP for about a month now, it's been real interesting. I have posted a couple of nice wins and have even cashed out once.
It sounds to me like your doing your homework, and you are posting on this forum, that leads me to belive that your looking to improve. It is imperative that you continue to start with quality cards. This is where it all starts. If you play these good cards, over time, you will start to see results. When you start to fudge a little and calling raises in early position with KToff or the like, then you will continue to get pounded.
You are learning a new game, you must sit in a seat, get the experience, and continue reading 2+2 books. It will turn around.
Good Cards Walleye
Is MichSt your PP name?
First, my PP name is Sparty... I guess my frustration is that one bad beat is ok - two is hard - multiple ones just start to suck big time.
Don't know if this is a valid question, but assuming this learning curve scenario, what kind of bank roll is required at 2/4 or 3/6. I'm just looking for a gauge on losses to date vs. reasonable expectation at this point in my development.
Starting the long climb..... ;-)
Well I have logged probably about 400-500 hours in the last two years, I play about 2 times a week. I stay mostly at the 4-8, 5-10 6-12 levels. I have my own ideas about my bankroll, Im sure there are many ways to look at it, but I like to have about 500-800 for my bankroll. I usually buy in for a rack and I never I loose more than 2 racks. If I'm stuck 200 in a game, I leave. Go home and think about what I did wrong.
If my bankroll goes above $1000.00, $500.00 of it goes into a savings account. I tend to spend it sometimes, but always replace it.
In the past I have lost all my bankroll, I would try to take a week to reflect think about some of my losses and read some 2+2 books, post my questions on the forum. Then I put my hat back on, get some money out of my personal account and build my bankroll back up. It takes some getting use to in the beginning, just wade through it and see what feels right for you!
Good Cards Walleye
Don't know if this is a valid question, but assuming this learning curve scenario, what kind of bank roll is required at 2/4 or 3/6. I'm just looking for a gauge on losses to date vs. reasonable expectation at this point in my development.
Everyone seems to have thier own idea of bankroll requirements. I seem to remember being told 500 small bets for bankroll and 50 small bets for buy-in.
I would think $200-300 would be a decent start at 2-4. Enough for at least a few sessions at least, but realize a bad run and/or playing errors can eat it up pretty quick.
Analyze winning sessions as well as loosing ones, and by all means post hands and/or questions to the collective wisdom of these forums.
With only about 250 hours experience, I still consider myself very much a beginner. It has only been in the last 150 hours or so that my results have turned positive.
Speaking for myself, the first 50 or so hours were years ago, after reading one holdem book, thinking I knew what I was doing and getting fleeced.
Well, I found my way back. This time I actually took my time and studied the game more seriously and so far it seems to have paid off. I play primarily 2-4 and 3-6 both online and live, though recently more online due to convienence and better rake than the local LL games. I'm trying to work my way up to 5-10 but want to make sure I can consistantly beat the lower games as well as build a sufficient bankroll to ride out any negative fluctuation that might come.
As for your QQ hand, as far as I can tell you played it just fine except I might have raised preflop (not that it would have made any effect on the final outcome), though with such a wide field, it become more likely some will river you with some miracle draw. Just remember who the person was who played 64, you want him/her at your table next time.
Yesterday, I had 3 big pockets snapped in similar fashion. It happens, but overall I felt good about the way I played them, and in the same situation, I would probably play them the same.
Keep at it, I think you're on the right track by reviewing your play, studying, and posting here.
Thanks...
I started this whole thing initially as something to do instead of play blackjack. I think at times my blackjack experience is a hinderance from time to time since the mental approach to both games is different (zero "feel" in bj).
On the positive side, this had only doubled my resolve to become a good player.
MichSt;
Thank you for your rant. I can't get out to play much and where I live they spread a bizarre spread limit game of half hold'em and half omaha high 1-4-8-8 with $1 and $2 blinds. I don't know what to make of that except that the local rocks must love it so I won't touch it.
I've read all the books and fancy myself as something of a hold'em player against my friends in our home game. Even had a little success on the West Coast playing 2-4 and thought I knew what I was doing for a while.
Then I discovered Paradise (misnomer???). I'm just at the play money stage, but I sit in on a couple hours of hold'em and have no idea what's going on, 8, sometimes 9 people seeing a capped flop every hand. WTF? I'm thinking, 'am I going to learn anything about how to play live in this looney bin?' and promptly get my ass handed to me.
So I'm depressed and get bored getting shellacked. I spend a little time watching the play money 7-stud and decide to give it a try (this is my game and I am good at it). Again, loose and wild, so I just sit and wait for the stone cold and get it twice, both times dragging ~500 unit pots and profanity from the losers :-).
I get my confidence back. (You see I can play poker, I just haven't really studied hold'em for a year like stud). So I go back to the hold'em tables and get a little more selective about the game I want to be in. Lo and behold, a game that resembles what I expect out of a sane hold'em game. All of a sudden, I can put people on hands, top pair good kicker is a reasonable holding post-flop and so on. (I can talk the talk but I can't yet really walk the walk, BTW).
I'm thinking to myself, what is going on here? Then a player named Bishop chats to a player MJChicago about 2+2 and a little light came on in my head. I recognize those names. I'm playing with sane people. I can learn here.
Here's where I'm going with this. I appreciate hearing about your woes because you are obviously thinking correctly about odds and outs and so forth where I am just beginning to appreciate these concepts. I'm still just playing the cards. You're obviously on the right track, and I hope to be right behind you.
Stick with it and I will too.
Cytokine
Thanks for the response. I'm heaving into reading and watching again, but I can tell that just that little experience is starting to pay huge divends. While it was costly, the studying really comes alive now that I can relate it to actual experiences.
See you at the tables!
hey MichSt..don't lose your tuition money online....
I've heard occasional reference to the practice of angle shooting (obviously not a popular practice). Could anyone offer me a quick definition and some examples of common angle shooting schemes? Thanks.
Jon (just dropping in)
This is taken from Dan's Poker Dictionary, which can be found online:
"An angle is any technically legal but ethically dubious way to increase your expectation at a game. Depending on who you ask, a particular weapon in your arsenal may be a sleazy underhanded trick (a typical angle) or a vital strategic tool that no player should be without. An example might be pretending to be about to fold (or even folding out of turn and then retrieving your cards, if the rules allow it), in order to encourage a call (when you are about to raise). A player who regularly takes advantage of angles is said to be an angle shooter. "
A few months ago there was a good example of an angle play, it went something like this:
Player 1 has a good read that Player 2 has a weak but not beatable hand. On the River, Player 1 says "Tell you what. . .fold now and I'll show you my hand". Player 2 folds and Player 1 wins the pot while showing that he had crap cards. Technically, he did what he said he'd do in showing the cards, but it's an angle play since he led Player 2 on to thinking he was beat by making a misleading statement.
Hello,
I'm new to poker. Can someone explain to me how a structured $2-4 7-card stud poker game is bet. Is the ante $2? How does one bet if in structured $2-4 or $1-4 games. Are tournaments different. How are they normally played with 7-card stud?
Thanks, Malcolm
$1-4 is a spread limit game, while $2-4 is a structured game. In spread limit, you can bet anything from $1-$4, and raise anything between the previous bet/raise and $4.
In a structured limit game, the 3rd street card is a little complicated (see below). The 4th street card bet is $2 (unless there is an open pair, where a bet of $4 is allowed by anyone). The 5th, 6th, and 7th street cards are all bets of $4.
Everything after the 4th card, can be explained by this. For the ante and the 3rd card, it's a little different.
If it is 2-4 structured, usually there will be an ante (depends on casino whether its everyone pays $1/.50, or a rotating ante). In $1-4 spread, there is usually no ante.
The first round of betting has the forced bring-in always by the lowest card (2clubs is lowest), usually of $1. But it may be $.50.
On that first round of betting, the rules for raising can vary enough that no one will question your asking. If the ante is $.50, the raise may be to $1, or it may be to $1.50. If the ante is $1, a raise may make it $2, or it may make it $3. Saying raise in a structured limit game makes it so that there is no confusion; the dealer will figure it out for you.
As an example of the confusion... At Artichoke Joe's in CA, the $3-6 game has a $1 bring in, and the first raise must be to $4. At Lucky Chances in CA, the $3-6 game has a $1 bring in, and the first raise must be to $3! At Bay 101 in CA, the $4-8 game has a $1 bring in, and the first raise must be to $4!
It's screwed up, but watching a few rounds of betting from the rail will explain it.
Thanks! That really helps out. Here's another question, hopefully I won't wear out my welcome. Hope during a tournament. Does the bettig/ante structure work the same?
Not at all. 7stud tournaments vary widely. There'll be a schedule dictating for each round 1. The ante structure (does everyone ante, or is there a button) 2. The bring-in 3. The limits otherwise.
Tournaments are usually structured, although I haven't found a good 7stud tournament anywhere.
Ok, I have seen people posting odds charts with the outs...and all the numbers, but I am a little confused with the meaning of the terms used..outs...and such.
Being a new player entirely, who's only exerience in playing is on paradis poker...would someone please sink to my level, and explain what all the terms mean, or send me an email with them.
Bishop
Sorry I didn't really put my question well. An example of a hand or two with the odds explination would help a ton.
Us: As,Kd vs. Them: Qs,Qd
Flop: 5c, 6s, Jc
Our As,Kd only has 6 "Outs" in the next two cards. The only thing that could win it for us is the 3 Aces and/or 3 Kings left in the Deck. Of course we don't want to see an other Queen.
The odds of that happening is kinda complex to answer. It is not (6/45)+(6/44) but it's close.
One easier way to figure it out is to figure all the ways the next two cards can come without a Ace or King. That would be (39/45)*(38/44)= 0.75 The numbers come from the 45 unseen cards minus the 6 needed cards. If we didn't know what the other players had as their hole cards we would use 47 unseen cards minus our 6 needed cards which would be (41/47)*(40/46)= 0.76
To make this the % of the time we will make our hand we subtract the ammount of times we won't make our hand from 1 and then multiply the answer by 100
(1 - 0.75)*100= 25%
We now need to turn 25% into odds. Since 25% = 25/100 we can turn it into odds by subtracting the numerator from the denomonator and then setting it up as a ratio. 25/100 = 75 to 25 or simplified to a 3 to 1 Shot.
I hope that helps.
CV
A lot of people in this forum complain about their bad luck and bad beats. I want to tell a story about good luck.
I arranged a home tournament last week. We played "Increasing Limit" Hold Em until there were only two players left; we then played No Limit Hold Em.
Anyway, we were down to three people. We played 8/16 Hold Em and I only had two chips left (the others held about 220 and 80, respectively). I had to go all in on BB, and unfortunately, only SB called. I won and was up to 4 chips. As a dealer, I got K5o and decided to go all in again. A pair of Kings was enough to win another pot :-). Up to 12 chips! Then I went all in again (third time in a row), this time with A2s.
One of my opponents held JJ and QQ, respectively, these last two all ins, and was devastated afterwards.
After those three all ins, I was back in business and actually managed to win in the end. What a pleasant come-back! :-)
Jonas
It is possible in NL to make a big come back with 3 or 4 wins. I have been at final table with no chips at all and ended up winning the tournament I have also been chip leader by a big margin and just made 8th.
It is truely a crap shoot - I swear next time I have a big chip lead I am mucking every hand until there are only 5 left.
we killed them all, or forced them West of the Mississippi!I'm such a good Christian!
Don't even get me started on Jacksonian Democracy. Why don't you go find a nice political science forum.
I'm really unsure of how to play a hand where I have multiple draws and I'm hoping some of you can help me out.
For example say I have As8s and the flop comes Kd8h4s.
I have second pair, an over card and three to a flush. Among my outs are three aces for two pair, two eights for trips and 10 spades for four to the nut flush. That would be 15 outs for the potentially best hand or the draw to the nut flush.
I can't really think of it as 15 outs though since I need to get two running spades to complete the flush.
How should I consider these types of hands? Most importantly how big would a pot need to be to call a bet on the flop? I'm assuming a fold on a bet if nothing hits me on the turn.
-Paul
This hand runs the gamut depending on what you're up against and can be played in a variety of ways. Generally, I'd say lead with it short-handed and call with it multiway, unless you're absolutely postitive someone has AK, AA or KK. You have about a 1/4 chance of improvement, if improving is what you need to do. If one of your opponents has a weak king that he might fold and is prone to steam, this is the hand to bluff with.
I just got off of the Card Player Magazine site after reading Lou Krieger's column entitled "A Beginner's Course in Texas Hold'em -- Part II." How do his recommendations for starting hands differ from DS's in Hold'em Poker? Whose are better, in your opinion? Is Krieger credible?
Thanks,
Jon
Buy the book and see for yourself ;-)
Could you tell me what 'redraw' means, and could you please give a simplified example of how it would apply during a Hold'em hand?
Thanks, Lana
You flop two pairs and the other guy flops a four flush. The next card makes his flush. The last card makes your full house. You have re drawn out.
..
...
Barry,
Your "outs" are defined as the cards in the deck that will make or improve your hand. For example, if you hold 8,7 in hold 'em and the board is T,6,2 then you have 4 outs--the 4 nines in the deck that make your straight. This is important in determining your odds, because to do so, you must divide the number of cards that don't help you by your "outs". In this example, of the 47 unseen cards, you have 4 outs, therefore your odds are 43/4, or about 11:1 to call. If you are asked to put in a bet that is more than 1/11th of the pot, you do not have odds to continue.
KJS
..
I have been playing blackjack (spreading black) at an expert level for some time, but recently have begun playing poker (another weapon in my arsenal).
Since I have played 7 stud in home games I am beginning my study of poker with that game. I have read Theory of poker, the 7 card section of Super/System, 7CS at low and medium limits(Roy West), and 7CSFAP. Many of the sections of these books I have read several times or taken notes.
So far I have logged 50 hours at $1-5 and I am up $370. My plan is to move up in limits to $2-10 if I am up $500 after 100 hours of play. Then, if successful at $2-10 after 100 hours I will move to $10-20. If successful after 100 hours at that level I will begin to study a different game with a similar plan(probably Texas Hold'em)
It is ironic that when I wait for a table I play blackjack, usually winning or losing $500-1000, then sit down at a poker table and make $1 bets.
During my fourth session ever in a public card room I was delt a royal flush (with the suited nine on the river to boot) I'm sure it will be a long time before I see that again.
It is wonderful the confidence you get once you know a player to bet into him suspecting he has nothing, or to fold suspecting he has a strong hand. At these limits players often show you their cards after the hand to confirm what you suspected. I'm not saying I'm very good yet at reading people's hands, I need more experience, but when it happens its fun.
Constantly I catch myself making mistakes, but with each session I make less and can see myself improving.
I have a couple of questions.
I am confident I am attacking poker correctly and as I become better and stronger you all will need to fear me. This will be your only warning. (tongue in cheek)
I have a couple of questions.
Most of what I read recommends raising with a big pair (and sometimes small trips) on third street. In these games with no ante (just a low card bring for $1) it doesn't seem worth it, especially in early position, to raise, knock everyone out, and win only $1, which often happens, after being delt a premium hand. Am I risking too much to just call, and wait for fourth street to raise and maybe win right there a bigger pot? I suspect it is worth it, especially in early position. Once I move up to limits with an ante, I know this question will become moot.
On several occasions I have paired my doorcard on fourth street for a high pair that I thought was the highest pair on the table. I subsequently made the maximum bet to try and scare the pot out everyone. Twice I was called by someone with a benign looking board (a two and a three, or a five and six) I suspected trips, but like a dope I continued to play my scary board strong to the river just to lose a pot to trips (rolled up)one time and the other time I made two pair and lost to a full house (he also had rolled up trips) How should I have handled this. When someone bet (or called) into my strong pair showing should I have folded then? From what I remember one time my pair was live, and the other time one card of my pair turned over.
good luck
I have some words I do not know and cannot find in normal dictionary in novel "Shade Work" by Bill Pronzini.
This is for cheting in game and I am not sure if I can ask here or not. But I want to know.
Here is the quatation; "He wasn't a good enough mechanic to play in even medium-stakes game and hope to get away with crimps or hops or overhand runups or Greek-deals or hand-mucks.." What I do not know is "cripms","hops","onerhand runups","Greek-deals" and "hand-mucks".
I am not native in English and it is very helpful if you could explain in easy words.
Many thanks!
"Crimping" means marking a card by bending it slightly. I suppose a "greek-deal" is dealing from the bottom of the deck. I don't know the other terms.
Thanks! Chris,
I understand the two phrases.I heard they were old slangs in 40yrs.
RARARA
RARARA,
You might try looking in a book which explains how to perform card sleight of hand. Check a local library because books like these have been around for well over a hundred years.
John
There's the scene in the movie Rounders where Matt Damon's character is talking about Edward Norton's various mechanic techniques; "pickup calls, discard calls, the double-duke". I found a very good book on card cheating (can't remember which), and found it had a good glossary. You might find one at your local bookstore.
Hey Rarara,
I'm a good magician, but a beginning card player, so I'm glad to be of help here.
Crimps: putting a bend in a card, so it can be cut to.
Hops: A technique for defeating the cut: After the deck is cut, instead of completing the cut, it is invisibly returned to its original order.
ALSO
the move used in 3-card monte, in which one card is shown, but another is thrown.
Over hand runups: Stacking the deck in the course of an overhand shuffle. Slightly easier than a riffle stack.
Greek deal: You've got me on this one, but a "Greek break" involves holding two cards separate from the deck with the fleshy part of the thumb, based on that, I'd guess that the Greek deal is a "Second deal" in which the top card is retained on the deck and the second one down is dealt.
Hand mucking: Switching cards..stealing a good card from your hand and switching it back in later.
Anyone recommend a good book or other resource on learning all of the math involved here. I see many of the better players giving probababilities such as "chance somebody has a better hand than you given xyz"... I can do pot odds and associated simple things, but I'd like to understand the next level as well.
"Getting the Best of It" by David Sklansky
Please excuse my (probable) nievety. I was playing in a tournament last night with a number of experienced players, for which I won a satelite to enter. I was just about holding my own,with about 3 and a half thousand units, although on a couple of occasions felt a bit overmatched. I was in one of the 2 equal blinds, which were 200 points, and had Qd 5h. Everyone folded to the 1st blind (there were only 2). He checked as indeed did I, getting a 'free one'. The flop came Ac Qs 5d. My opponent bet 500. I raised it to a thousand, putting him on aces. He came back at me calling me 'all in' for my chips. I 'bit' and he turned over Ah 5h which stood up and knocked me out. What should I / Could I have done differently? I would welcome any advice. I feel this could be a valuable and painful lesson in my education.
pre flop you had position on him acting last - his check might have caused me to make it 800 to go. I want to win it right there. Depending on the aggressivness of the opponent I may just check like you did. It is so situational if I have a tight table image - showing god cards and not playing a lot of hands - and other guy is weak I make a big bet to win the blinds and move on.
You didn't raise pre flop and got trapped - Since he didn't raise preflop you cannot put him on a Abig - so his trap $500 and all in bet over the top set you up.
Of course you had to call with the 2 pair. Only a really experienced player may have seen the trap and mucked the 2 pair. Don't feel bad most everyone would have played the hand the way you did.
In future, in tournaments use position to your advantage.
Yeaterday I had 4 consecutive hands cracked onthe river Q's full if kings, top two KQ on the flop, top pair top kicker on the flop and top pair 2nd best kicker. I was ahead on the flop every time and lost every one on the river. Hey it is the game we choose to play.
Since you won a satellite and got to 200 blinds in one of your 1st tournaments you probably have some natural talent. I suggest getting TJ Cloutiers NL PL HE book it will cont you around $40 but will pay for itself in no time.
Cheers,
If I had raised before trhe flop surely he would have called heads up with A5 suited, if only to see the flop. He was probably just about the chip leader on my table (about 2-1 on my stack. Therefore is the only way out to fold on the all in raise?...and what if he was bluuffing at this point?
He could have made the all in bet with as little as A9 in the situation you were in you had to call. It is a case of doing everthing correct and still losing get used to it it is part of poker. On the bright side if you continue to play solid poker the wins will come.
Bert As a new player also I don't see how you could have done anything but what you did preflop whith the cards you were holding..It seems to me you did everything right..I agree with the 2nd answer you received..You can do everything right and still lose..but I bet then majority of the times you awould have been succesful with that play...
I guess this is just a question of Theory vs. Practice. In a perpetual attempt to make sense of what I read, I've been going through Sklansky's intro HE. In the chapter of 'implied odds' (a concept which I'm now getting the hang of over the table -- slowly but surely), David mentions 'reverse implied odds'.
In order for this technique to work at the table, I'm figuring the following must occur:
1.) Both players must know what they're doing.
2.) Each player needs to have a good read on each other's hands.
3.) Based on the accurate read, the bettor must correctly know the odds needed for his opponent to stay in the pot, and play accordingly.
While easily stated, I'm guessing this is a lot more involved than meets the eye, and can only be thought through with (what seems like) incredible amounts of practice.
What I'd like to know is, how often do you see this happening? I can only assume this type of play is effective and experienced at higher limits. Can someone give me a practical example?
Thanks.
Can someone please give a good explaination of what checking is, how checking is initiated, how it is offered and how often?
The way you phrased this makes me think you're thinking of something else, but...
Checking: declining to bet when it is your turn
For example, if you are the first person to act after the flop in Texas Hold'em and you do not wish to bet, you can check and allow the next person to either check or bet.
Hope this is what you're looking for,
~DjTj
My only poker outlet as of late is Paradise Poker -- playing for play money. One situation has been occurring that I don't know if I have been handling well.
Twice I have had KQs in early position -- and I raised it preflop. Loose game -- tons of callers. Even a raise or two behind me from loose, yet decent players.
The first time, the flop came 7hQdAs to my KhQh. I start off the betting only to get raised behind me in middle position from a guy I have seen win some hands on questionable holdings (and who didn't raise preflop). The turn was a blank. I bet, same raiser raises, one other caller. River comes K, giving me two pair. I feel pretty good with the loosey-goosey raiser. I bet he raises, I reraise, he pops me back, I call. The other caller is still involved. He shows AA.
Same situation except the I had top pair with my KQs on a 9JQ flop (two suited). I bet it out. An Ace falls on the turn. Now a raiser behind me. My K shows up again on the river. I again lose to the raiser with AJ.
I am wondering how I approach these situations, and how not to become gunshy in light of an Ace. Any advice would be helpful. Keep in mind these are loose games for play money on Paradise.
Jon
The hard-to-shake "any ace" players make KQ a troublesome hand in low limit games, I imagine that it works about the same for play money. To answer your question, you need to be less than gunshy of the ace short-handed against real opponents that fear you. In the games you describe the ace kills your hand, end of story. As your examples show, you often don't even have 5 good outs when it lands. Also remember that these are cases of negative implied odds: you'll lose more when you're behind than you'll win when you're ahead. When the ace hits, toss KQ unless the pot is huge.
when the ace hits you should be checking and folding when alot of players are in or checking and calling if you have odds for drawing out. when only a few are in it gets tough. then good playing comes in. tend not to go very far if you cant beat the ace.
Jon: Re your KQs it seems to me as a relatively new player that that would certainly be a betting hand pre flop.after the flop whin an ace showed I guess it would behoove you to be checking.. however I've noticed that alot of players will raise when an ace flops bluffing that they have an ace in the hole. In your example there were a pair of aces..However I have to ask what the odss are on having a pair in the hole??? Also you had 2 pair .. even if the raiser had an ace he still needed another pair to beat you..Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think you can drop out everytime as ace shows on the flop; with the hand you had..afterall what everyone is advising is when as ace shows on the flop and you don't have one its time to get out.. or am I mesunderstanding some of the answers?
KQs and KQo are real pretty - much better looking than they in fact are. In tournaments I don't play them much more tham 50% of the time. This is the ultimate trap hand. There are so many ways to lose with these great looking hands it is sad.
Be careful about calling raises with them and don't get in the habbit of calling 3 bets with them in decent games with good players.
KQ offsuit post-flop with an A in the flop and either a raise or more that 3 players = fold for me.
KQ suited post-flop with A in the flop and 2 suited cards to me is a play to the river.
s
Here is a hand I won recently but want to make sure I actually played it right.
Fairly loose-passive game, but I don't have a good read on the players since its early. I get JJ one off the button. Five calls to me, I call, dealer folds and both blinds call/check. I figured with all the action and little chance of narrowing the field, a raise was risky.
Flop is 8 4 2 rainbow. Checked around to me and I bet, both blinds drop and one other, leaving four opponents. I'm assuming that there is probably some Ax and Kx out there, maybe even a straight draw or two, but I probably have top pair and wouldn't want to give a free card. I figured somebody with two pair would have bet in which case I would have called (should I raise?). Turn comes K, two to a suit now on the board. Once again it is checked to me... I bet here, but not sure if I should have since I could be losing to KK, but I would have thought they would have bet that ahead of time and if I'm raised I know I'm probably beat. Two call. Last card is a J... checked to me, I bet, one call and I win vs. two pair (JJ44).
Comments...
I assume the looser is holding KK44.
You played it OK the K4 holder should have raised you on the turn he blew it not you.
When you said passive you weren't kidding.
I think he meant that his opponent held J4 in the hole, and made two pair on the river. If that is the case, should the person with two pair have bet out and just call if raised by MichSt, or reraised? The reason I ask is because I would have probably raised with the two pair, and called if reraised. (Actually, I would have never played J4, unless I was in the big blind. Even then, I would have probably folded on the flop.)
Liquid Swords
The other guy held J4 and hit the two pair just like Liquid said. Massively passive game to the point that I saw people with made straights/flushes calling bets and just riding along. Weird...
If someone had bet the flop, should I have raised with my JJ? My thinking is a bet would be either a smaller pair since or maybe two pair but the board was pretty ragged so I would hope nobody matched up - but it is no fold 'em so I guess that is taking something for granted.
yeah with the over pair you should be betting/raising the flop. King just call and set have the last word.
This is a good game, but don't try to run over the players by aggressive play with marginal hands. However, betting or raising on the flop to buy free cards for subsequent streets is very effective in this type of games. Don't try too hard to think what they have, since it can be very easy from their action and also can be very hard due to wide range of hands they play regardless of position.
The advantage of betting on the turn when the K came is to avoid a free card if you have the best hand and, at the same time, to buy youself a free showdown on the river. As long as you don't call the check-raising, I think it is a good bet. I would raise before the flop with JJ in this situation.
regards,
jikun
Can anyone outline the best basic strategies in low limit stud with players that chase alot? It would help very much since i find it hard to win although im playing players that arent that good. What hands should i start with? what hands should i shoot for? please help im hitting the casino ina couple days again.
SCSFAP. Roy West's 42 lessons. Do your homework. Play solid poker.
David
Low Roller,
Books would be the best answers for these intricate questions. I'll turn it around on you by saying you post your answers to your questions on this forum and people will critique your answers. Otherwise it's hard to give direct answers to huge questions.
paul
I play in games similar to those that Low Roller describes. A situation that occurs often is when I have a high pair on third or fourth street, and I think it is the best hand at that point. I bet the max and get either heads up or against two other players.
What I have been doing then is betting the max each round (unless something becomes threatening on their board such as a pair or four flush) and forcing the chasers to pay for their cards.
My question is if I should continue to bet the max on each round even when I don't improve. It creates large pots and large swings. This doesn't bother me if it is the correct play in the long run (and after 85 hours I am ahead $400 at $1-5) Also at times I find I am betting for someone else who has made trips from a pocket pair or who makes two pair, when I don't improve. Is it foolish to bet the max with a pair of kings on sixth street, or is it foolish to let someone with a nonthreatening board, or a draw hand get the free card.
My answer is that I think it is the right thing to bet (otherwise I wouldn't be doing it) because it creates a big pot when I have a decent hand, and it forces players with worse hands to pay for their cards. But it has got me into trouble many times and I wonder if I would be better off backing off at some point. If I do back off it may show weakness and a player may stay who may otherwise fold on sixth or seventh street. But it sucks to bet strong all hand and lose to two small pair or a straight while I hold only a pair of aces.
Gladstone,
That's a hard question to answer.
I'll answer it with three positions: Third street. UTG just call unless you see three high cards out there T or above, depending on the players you can decide to make it 3 or 6. You can still call and see if they raise and then reraise. Middle pos'n I always make it 3 as long as a couple of limpers are in and no raise, then I reraise. Late pos'n raise to max, whether someone has made it three or six, reraise.
4th street. Your first to bet, if nobody has paired their door card maximum bet. Raise maximum if someone else bets no pairs.
5th street. Your first to bet, who's left and what do they have 3flush, 3straight, etc. If you think your still leading bet max otherwise check and see what happens.
6th street. Up to your hand and who's left. If you still have a single pair and think your ahead bet, if not check.
7th street. Call or bet.
A very rough outline I would suggest buying SMZ 21c7csfap. Nothing I said is right at all times just maybe some guidelines to help you. You seem to be doing very well, so just read what I said if it helps you use it if not toss it.
paul
Hey Mr Dabid Panski!
You nebber ansswered my fust quetion? Wht'sa maater you don't like me! Well it's otay I forgib you. You be my faborite poker wuzzard. Jus like Ozzie!
Mr pansi, I only get to pay with the silly kids in my monkeystorie class. We is the oldest 5 years. And not bery god poker payers eiter. I hab to say Mr Panksi that u be 1 smart cookie person. My teakers cannnt eben unnersand my tieping. Wow it good ting u be smart. Ob course you nebber answerr, me but I knew dis tine will be different.
Hey, Hows Mr Masooon? I hoep he be fine and not too mad at the wite mop head guy. Mr Masoon not as fanny as you. You de best!
O.K Mr Panski I hab a dweam! I know yo being all powertool and ebbyting dat you can gibme my dweam. Me dweam is to hab a picture ob dat gweat poker player, Bince Repore. U know da guy on da porum dat is albays pwaising you cause u be da smartee guy in da world and all. Bince ain't like dem otter sissy's on da porum. Like, Abfool, who albays bad mooting Mr Masoon. Bince be almos as smartee as you Mr Spanski. Yup I can tells by his woids on here porum. So pulease send me a piture of Bince. I lob him and u should gib him some money too because he is poor and tilts a lot. I no dat wit a piture ob bince in my pocket none ob deese widdle kids I pway poker wit will hab a chance to win me.
Now if you don't answerr me dis tine Mr Pansli I gonna com by you hose and pee on your Jagmar, Verdamt. Hab a nice day!
Beginner.
I finally find someone who write english worse than me.
This is your second inane post, Mr. Beginner. Quit wasting everybody's time. Your posts serve no purpose but to patronize Mr. Sklansky and others on the forum. This is not the place to vent your personal feelings about others. If I were in charge of the forum I would delete this stupid post which is completely unrelated to anything poker. It is simply a personal attack.
WFM
"I would delete this stupid post "
Hey Mitha wong Porum Guy. We agwee, your post is "stupid" I hope dey debete it!
Beginner
"Too bad I wasted my time coming to the Beginners forum" If just one person reads this and feels like this due to your post, it's a shame. If that was your intention it's impossible to judge if you won this great battle or not, but to the many beginners this is a learning ground for them to try and get up the courage to play or understand what goes on in a casino or a home game so it may eliminate some of their fears or anxiety about playing there. It also helps veterans who have to explain and give examples of plays in their simplest form. By doing this you sometimes discover a chink in your armor that you may of not known you had. I enjoy reading this forum on a regular basis so if you want to post whatever it is you wrote as I couldn't get thru it all plz post it on other topics and let people read it who are not looking for poker related topics.
paul
s
PF,
Ib dis da same Pf dat be albays makin with da YBJRZ comments to otter folks on da porum. You sire gotta lotta nerves. You problem is you got no wife. Yeh nuttin bester to do dan critic 4 yar olds. You an WFM gots lots in comeon.
"but to the many beginners this is a learning ground "
Den by you basting their tine wid posts chastising me! Betides I ain't no bedinner! I bin here right abong wid you from da bedinning. And and and I hab hepped you wid Zeeman fore here. YBJRZ = "You Big Jerk Ray Zee". When you stop mit da Alphabet Zoup posts ob yours you will hab sommen to smay.
Beginner!
hehehe
At least he spelled "chatising" correctly.
Dan
Take a hike, jerk!!
I want to jump into my first game 1-5 spread 7 stud but am still a little confused. Can any player raise when it comes his/her turn to bet? In a 1-5 spread can you raise above $5.
BTW- I know this is one the wrong forum but anyone endorse practice with Wilson or any other software?
Thanks
Thomas,
In my understanding of things in stud the low card showing has a forced "bring-in" bet (maybe $.50 in $1-5 stud?). From there subsequent players can raise the bring-in. The raise can be anywhere between $1-5. If I am wrong, somebody please correct me.
As for Wilson's software, I think you'll find that the general consensus is that Wilson's stuff is good practice, but is no substitute for the real thing. It help build fundamentals, but the specific advice it can give is often misdirected.
Jon
1-5 game usually no ante, $1 bring-in for low card. can be raised to 5 or 6 depending on the house rules. $5 bet anytime with 3 raises.
Wilson software is better than most. It is also tunable so you can get variety in styles. I recommend it highly. It is not copy protected so it loads completely on the hard drive (one for home and one for work when the boss is not around). Get it if you have a wintel machine or a mac with virtual PC.
d
Could someone tell me what a live straddle is? I've heard this term a few times but never understood what it meant.
Thanks
it's an aggressive play in Hold'em, in which the player first to act after the blinds (Under the Gun or UTG) immediately raises without looking at the first two cards. It can serve several purposes, such as trying to shake up a tight table, or giving the straddler a 'wild gambler' table image. However, I think the general consensus here is that players who do this lose their money.
Example: In a 5-10 game, small blind posts $3, big blind posts $5, and while the cards are still being dealt, player to the left of the big blind posts $10.
shooter
Live Straddle = A bouble Big blind bet UTG (BEFORE ANY CARDS ARE DELT.) What do these people think "Hey I am in the worst position for this hand, I guess I will throw in and extra big bet to make matters worse" ...Yeah that's the ticket!!....LOL
SEE the "You Gonna straddle my Big Blind in the Texas Hold'em forum" I received some great responses.
Best of it !!
MJ
Yeah raise in the blind in the worst position.
It also gives an extra bet before it is capped.
I once told a pal it he ever saw me straddle just put a bullet in my head cuz I have lost my mind and don't want to live as a crazed individual. :-)
I have played all kinds of games for money and I think the straddle is the worst bet going.
But that's just me.
a
I once played in a no limit game that allowed you to place a live straddle from any position on the table. I would place the straddle only when i was on the button. first round betting started at my left with the person who originally placed the small blind. That ment I was last to act during the first round and every round after. That play made me thousands! Position is everything!!!!
When you're on the button, aren't you the last to act in every round, live straddle or not??
no...the blinds act last in most hold 'em games.
Is there any diffrence between the play at 6/12 and 9/18? Or do you have to jump to much higher limits to see any diffrence in play ? I saw the same play at 6/12 that i saw at 2/4.
Sure the change in limits make most players play a bit differently but the changes are subtle.
I think you should have seen a difference between 2-4 and 6-12. There are typically a few players who know something in 6-12 and for one reason or another are playing lower then they like. Perhaps the majority of the players will not be much different but you still need to be careful with a few players.
Now for 9-18 I think it of course depends on your game but some fairly good players might play that game. It is possible for someone to make a modest living at that limit. I would expect to see a some really bad players still and probably not any really great players.
If you don't notice any difference either you are not evalulating the game well or you need to post directions so we can all jump in.
D.
When I started playing holdem, I hardly have an opinion about the game type. What I can see is cards in my hand and cards on the board. After many hours on the table, I started to get the feeling that how other players play can influence the cards I played and the results. I believe after more experience, there would be more difference to be seen from game to game, which is still what I am trying to learn. Getting the feeling of the game is important. Within the 6-12 level I played, game types can be very different or subtle different from session to session, so I adjust my play accordingly. I played a few times 10-20 but never 9-18, and I felt the game was more on the tight aggressive side of the band. I also find this kind of game in 6-12, but not as often.
regards,
jikun
I think so. More rocks in the higher limit. Possibly easier to bluff or at least to thin out the crowd. Overall, it should be similar but more predictable. Is that better? I do not know.
In everything I have read Axs should only be played in later position and against many opponents, if played at all. This to me makes intuitive sense. However, when evaluating the various Axs hands wouldn't A2s and A3s be superior to hands like A6s and A7s? With A2s - A5s you have the same nut flush opportunities but you also have wheel straight potential. I think Axs would rarely make playable pairs on the flop, so the Axs combos that have wheel straight potential might be preferable to those that don't. I'd like your comments.
Jon
As I've mentioned before on the Hold'em board under the current thread about 2-4 play, I think Axs is a potentially profitable starting hand, for the very reasons you mention. However, I think the most important thing about it is knowing when to throw it away, and that includes when an ace hits the flop. It's top pair, but I'd say 8 times out of 10, it's out-kicked and beaten. My stance has always been to be careful and only play it in either 1. late position against many limpers 2. in an especially loose game (as most 2-4 games are) or 3.if after the flop it's on a clear and unchallanged wheel draw, nut flush draw, or both cards are paired by the board. Otherwise, dump it.
shooter
That under the conditions you listed above A2s is more playable (or is a better holding) than A6s?
But you have to look at the big picture. 97s is better than 93o but I wouldn't play EITHER of them in early position.
Same with AXs, unless the game is really passive. And yes, A, 2-5 make the straight but every one of them is a gutshot. That means that if you don't flop a made straight, you've got to have the odds to continue on to the turn. 90% of the time you aren't going to have the odds. 10% of the time you will, which means there was enough raising pre-flop that I have to wonder what you're doing in there with AXs in the first place.
The fact is that in lower limits you're going to find more times when you're playing against people who play "any ace" hands than the times when you'll flop a made, or even semi-made straight. That means that if they play A2-5, suited or not, for the straight, hit an ace and stick with it to the river, you'll beat them with A6 and above. And the higher the kicker, the more often you're going to beat those "any ace" players.
Dan
Don't forget to factor in the times you draw for the wheel and it ends up losing to a higher straight. If you out of position in these situations, not only are you going to lose, but probably bet before you know you are beat. Games where people think about the straight potential of A3 are the some ones that people love starters like 56o and 67o. Forget it.
KJS
I think the argument (and it's a good one) has been settled beyond doubt: although A-little suited has slightly greater straight potential, A6 and above are the more valuable hands. You should much prefer having A8s over A5s or A3s. (The actual ranking of the hands is complicated, but the little ones always lose out). Ask Mason, Abdul, or anyone else.
I think Doyle Brunson first made the claim to the contrary in Super System, and he might have been influenced by no limit play, where the nut potential of the wheel cards is more valuable. But run some turbo sims or just watch how these hands play out and see for yourself if you question the points put forth by the other posters in this thread. There are also several threads on this in the archives.
I know I read somewhere that it is worth seeing the flop iof you hold a small pair such as 7's or 6's if there are no raises on the chance of getting trips. It would seem to me that the same would apply to Axs. If the flop is not favorable get out...But if there are no raises preflop wouldn't it behoove you to see the flop????
Fred:
You are in middle position with As2s. No raises. 7 people see the flop: 3s4c5c. Do you like this? You flopped a straight! Yeah, and you still lose to any 67, and people with 2 clubs are staying in with you too. (Everyone else is playing medium/one bet pre-flop hands too!) You still have many ways to lose. Do you want to be in this situation?
It is good discipline to have a number of hands that you are just playing to see the flop and get out if it misses. For example, the small pairs you mention. It is not good discipline to look for rationalizations to make this list longer and start playing this type of hand from any position. Soon you will find yourself calling raises with them and betting them post flop when they are not the winner. Tighter is better when it comes to these hands. Play 'em late and cheap only.
KJS
KJS: Thank you for your insight, as a fairly new hold em player I can use all the help I can get... However let me ask you a couple of other questions pertaining to this subject My original premise was that you see the flop if there is no raising...in your example there wasn't any raising..now if2 of your suit came out on the flop you have the possibility of a nut flush. If not you can fold or hang in there with the possibility of the A-5 straight being the high hand. Maybe someone does hold an 6-7 giving them the higher straight but aren't the odds in your favor that that wouldn't be the case? I do play conservative but could use your expertise as to the above questions thank you
Fred:
What you read about small pairs was correct. These cards are worth one pre-flop bet on the chance that they hit trips. Let's talk about why this is fundamentally different with Axs.
Three of a kind on the flop is a made hand, not a drawing hand. A set is a strong hand that can often stand up until the end. If you hit your card, you often have some deception value (with small pairs) and can use various tactics to try to increase the pot you have a good chance of winning. This does not imply however that your set is always a winnner. If you hold 7d7h and the flop is 7c,8s,9s you need to play very carefully. You might even have to muck on the turn even though you got the card you wanted on the flop!
In contrast, Axs is a drawing hand. Barring the rare occassions when you flop a flush (1 out of every 185 times, I believe) you are in there in hopes that what started as a four flush materializes into the nut hand. You are not best until that happens--a very different story than flopping a set, where you are often the best on the flop, and many times the whole hand. Therefore, you have to bet on this potential, which may or may not come. In addition, you may have to bet in two rounds and someone might be raising you. Using the same example as above, what if you held As3s against 77 and 3 other hands and the board is 7c,8s,9s. You are drawing to the nut flush but someone has a set (which could hit a full house) and maybe someone else has a straight. Your hand will cost you a number of bets; probably more than its odds suggest. Still, if it hits it will pay off handsomely. Get a copy of Theory of Poker by David Sklansky and read the chapters on Implied Odds and Effective Odds to get great explanation of how to decide whether to bet in situations such as this.
Also, both your posts talk about playing certain hands for one bet pre-flop but do not mention position explicitly. Playing position is one of the most fundamental aspects of winning hold 'em and you must always think in terms of it. The only way to come close to guaranteeing that a hand worth one bet is only played for one bet is to play it only in late position. That is why most experts advocate not playing very small pairs and hands like Axs and Kxs unless you are in late position (or maybe middle position and everyone up to you has called). These hands are not good enough to be played against a raise, so you should not bet with them in early position, or else you will be forced to muck them to a raise, or be tempted to wrongly call a raise with them. (Both of which will cost you in the long run if you do this routinely). Even if you do get in for one bet from early position, you are betting first on subsequent rounds and therefore, you may have to pay more bets than a hand like Axs suited is worth, even if you hit a four flush.
Finally, your second post talks about hanging in there with possibility. The point of my analogy with the wheel and a board of 3,4,5 is to illustrate that not all drawing hands hit the nuts or are drawing to the nuts. When you start to talk about "hang[ing] in there with the possibility" you have the best hand you are treading on unsteady ground. Only one hand will take the pot, and if yours is strong, but not the best possible, you often need to proceed aggressively, but cautiously, looking for clues that you are beat.
Your use of the precarious analogy "hanging in" illustrates why hands like A2s through A5s are troublesome hands and difficult for newer players to play well. Until you feel comfortable managing all the difficult decisions that go along with trying to determine if they are the winner, or how to make them the winner, stick with playing them cheap and in late position, drawing only to the nuts.
KJS
PS. The odds that someone has a hand like 6,7 (or any particular combination) are the same that you have A,2 (or any particular combination). Only if you have one of those cards, or see one on the board, can you statistically say the odds have been modified. In hold 'em it is usually safe to rule out certain combinations that any decent player would not play (ie.8,2) but you must know your opponents in order to do so (and you still might be wrong!). A hand like 6,7 is, however, something that many people would play pre-flop for one bet and in my example it is not correct to say "the odds are in your favor" that someone does not have it.
KJS: Thank you for responding to my question about ace-rag suited..I have always played that hand in any position in the past, but will surely be more selective in the future..P.S. I picke up a copy of Poker Digest yesterday at a casinon I was playing hold em at and Slansky had a Q&A and one of the questions was about holding A,2 suited. Interesting reading Thanks again
I was only addressing the relative strength of a suited ace with wheel cards versus mid-sized cards. I agree that ace-little suited can generally justify seeing the flop for one bet.
How do you adjust your play when there are only a few players left (let's say four) left in a tournament? I suppose you start seeing the flop more often, but which normal "folding hands" are you going to bet with? Any Ax and Kx?
And another question: when do you go all-in in a two-handed No Limit Hold Em game? Usually pre-flop or post-flop? And with which hands?
Jonas
As players thin out in a tournament, the lower hands one would not ordinarily play become significantly more valuable; position becomes critical; defendingthe blind becomes an art. The size of the respective stacks are critical esp in no limit. Think about if for a while. Deal some 2 handed holdem, and watch what happens.
When to go all in in NL H....1) when you have a marginal advantage and wantt he other player to fold. 2) when you think you know what he is holding based on experience and he knows you know. 3) when you have a weak hand and have the big blind and control over your opponent. One caveat is that he might go all in and you want at least a chance to draw out. Oh yes, make sure there is a rebuy just in case
I have never played 7 card stud in a casino and am playing in a tournament with a couple buddies tonite...how is the betting structure? How does the 'bring in' work, etc. etc.
Thanks in advance!!! All the help in appreciated.
Aren't you glad you posted? So, how'd you do?
I was wondering what the normal progression for raising the blinds in a typical tournament is. How often do they typically go up and by how much? Do they always double at every raise or is the increase more subtle? I realise I haven't given much information on what type of tournament but lets say a small no limit tournaments in particular.
Any comments appreciated..
Ben.
Blinds go up from 15 min to 2 hour incriments. Usually the smaller the tournament the quicker the blinds go up.
15min 20min 1/2 hr most common.
Blinds usually start at 5-10, 15-30 and go up from there. They don't always double but are relentless in their moving up just as the blind comes to you.
Thanks Rounder. If you could recommend a structure for the following scenario I would be eternally grateful !
8 people in a NL home tournament, the buy in gets 1000 in TC's. A max of 2 optional RE-buy in's are available during the buy in period (2 hours). The first RE-buy in gets another 1000 TC, the second RE-buy in gets 2000 TC. An add on is available at the end of the buy in period only to players who have not already used their 2nd RE-buy in. The add on also gets 2000 TC . All buy ins, re-buy ins and add on's cost the same in real money.
Assuming were happy to play for 4 to 5 hours..
Thanks, Ben.
Lots of chips. Start off with 25-50 blinds double every 30 Min. That ought to get you done in 4-5 hours.
Maybe I'm misreading it, but your buy-ins, rebuys, etc. all actually cost between $1000 and $2000 for an 8 person home game?
That seems a bit much, don't you think? Especially when you consider that you don't understand the tournament structure to begin with.
If it doesn't cost that much, then what does the last sentence in your second paragraph mean?
Dan
What I meant was that all the buy ins add ons whether for 1000 or 2000 tournament chips (2nd RE-buyin and add on) cost the same in real money, which is roughly 30 dollars. But we won't be dealing in dollars, rather punts.
Ireland huh, make sure there is planty of Guinnes and Bass for the 1/2 and 1/2's - Cheers and have a nice tournament.
x
x
I am relatively a beginner, but I have read three books on seven card stud, including SCSFAP21 (an excellent book by the way). I recently made some money, but am still in the red. there was one hand that bothered me.
I had jacks in the hole, with a 7 up card. late position. there was 5 players on thrid street, the low brought it in, a queen called, and king called, as the remaining players. There was an ace to act after me, but I figured I would try to get heads up with my jacks and raised. the Ace and the bring in and the queen dropped, but the king and the 9 stayed in. I figued them for a drawing hand and kept it expensive and by six street, I have jacks over, until king pairs another king on the board.
I fold, and the remaining player chase and makes a straight. BUt he loses to kings full. Apparently, the king had a split pair of kings on 3rd street. my question, did I make a mistake of trying to get heads up with my jacks? Didn't the king make a mistake of not raising with his split kings??
should I have folded on 3rd street when the king stayed in?? what if I had an overcard as my door card?
You seem to be playing in a rather loose passive game, and in these types of games, it may be correct to forego the bet on fourth or fifth street until you have improved to two-pair and none of your opponents have caught anything scary.
It is still correct to raise on third street with your wired jacks - don't feel obligated to continue to bet on fourth street unless you improve somehow (a 3-flush, an overcard to the K, two-pair, etc.) If your bets aren't going to get anybody to fold or to give away any information, save them for later streets when they are more apt to make a mistake by calling.
~DjTj
Trying to get it heads up against ace-high makes sense, but what made you think the player was aggressive enough to 3-bet with just an ace? If he was the type that wouldn't raise unless he had aces, your play had no chance.
chris, you misunderstood. the ace folded when I raised on 3rd street, but the split kings did not. My question was after third street, since the king and the 9 stayed in, should I have folded?
I think DjTj's comment about saving the bets on 4th and 5th streets if I can;t get heads up is on the money.
in retrospect, I was clearly the fish at that table.
You initially wrote: "low brought it in, a queen called, and king called, as the remaining players." You then raised with an ace yet to act with the goal if getting it head-up.
Raising with a 7 showing with all these callers is not likely to make it head-up unless you think the ace will 3-bet. In other words, even though the Q and K just called, I wouldn't have raised into them, especially with other hands working. But I wouldn't fold after 3rd just because you were called by a K and a 9. I think you folded at the right time.
I've logged in 100 hrs. at $1-5 7CS, and was doing well, up $400. Most of my opponents are retirees looking for something to do all day. From reading the books and my playing I learned alot, and decided it was time to move up to $2-10. While for most of you this isn't significant, for me this was a big step. i got clobbered. In 45 minutes I lost $200. Just like that. I found myself in an aggressive game. I participated in four pots in my brief stay. Each time I had a medium high pair (like jacks) and was drawing to a four flush or open straight. I never improved and payed dearly. The largest pot I lost to eights up. The $1-5 game doesn't prepare you for this. But I'm not discouraged. I can't wait to get back, wiser. I'll keep reading, and I'll play tighter until I figure this out, but I don't intend to have another session like that again. If anything I've become more inspired. The passivity of the $1-5 game was boring me anyway. Now I'm playing against some people who actually care if they win or lose.
Good Luck to everyone
Spread-limit games like this can really clobber people who aren't prepared for them. Situations come up which dictate a fold you would never do in a standard limit game.
You mention that you lost a lot chasing four flushes. Because the limits don't go up, sometime the implied odds aren't there for you to chase a flush. If the pot is tiny and someone's betting the full $10 into you, it may just be the correct play for you to muck your four flush. On the other hand, if people are still betting the minimum on the flop, you can limp along with some pretty lousy stuff if you think you can get some $10 bets out of your opponents if you hit perfect.
The trick to beating spread limit games is to pay attention to your pot and implied odds. Also, some of your opponents will base how much they bet on how good their hand is. You, on the other hand, will bet the max when you're ahead, almost all the time. If you're not getting called, start stealing until they catch on. If you're extracting $10 bets, one caller who "keeps you honest" is really all you need.
I am a newbie, I make no bones about it. I get to a real poker room once every five or six weeks. I've discovered that I neither win or lose at 1-5 stud. I've read a couple of books and have a couple of more on order. I play very tight and tend to get bored at the 1-5 level. I can play for hours and be in the +-$30 area. What would I need to sit down for a session of 5-10, not what would I need to play long term. I've got one more year of grad school and then I'll decide if I want another real job or if I've found my enjoyment. If you've got the I'm smarter than you mean-ass post, don't bother, I'm in law school and everybody thinks that way, but if you actually have positive advice I would love to hear from you. I've read enough posts to realize there are some out of this world smart folks giving good advice on this board. Masonlaw
Here's my rule of thumb. I don't like to play in a game unless I have 50 big bets in my pocket. That's $1,000 for a $10-$20 game or $2,000 for a $20-$40 game. However, for a game like $5-$10 stud which has a tight structure, I could make do with a little less. Perhaps I would feel comfortable with only 35 big bets or $350.
Thanks for the quick response. I guess I'll stick to 1-5 at the Trop for a while. I would love to play in a higher limit game but until I am not an unemployed student I'll play within my means and continue to read twoplustwo books.
hmm...on these same lines-i'm in a similar boat that masonlaw is in. when you say "in my pocket", do you mean you want 50 big bets worth of chips on the table? or do you want maybe 30 with 20 in "your pocket"?
I have recently entered the dark world of pot limit hold'em in a local home game. The game is quite loose and the early bets small. This means as many as seven players will see the flop, regardless of raises (which are still fairly small this early). I understand Sklansky's ideas from TOP about calling these small early bets to win big pots later on but am unsure about raising. It seems to me that in this game all a raise does is build the pot, doesn't thin the field, knock out garbage hands or anything. Everyone wants to see the flop! My question is this, when I get strong raising hands, should I be raising, knowing I will get 7 callers and end up being beat by two small pairs, or gutshot straights. Help most welcome. Thanks.
in pot limit as opposed to no limit you must build the pot early with good hands or you cant get enough later on. you have to learn to be able to get out when the flops go bad. figure what you have to raise early on to have the pot grow to a size that your later bets can break the players with the biggest stacks.
Jimmy ! Don't you be so cheeky !!
:-)
Dad!?
My family did me right for my birthday this weekend. My wife bought me Turbo Texas Hold'em and my sister picked up HPFAP. I am really excited (seeing how Wisconsin has no poker, I can't afford to play right now anyway, and my friends aren't big hold'em fans). A quick question, though, relating to using Turbo.
What lineup should I start out against? I played about 300 hands this weekend against the "loose" lineup. I figured that would be the best place to start. However, is it loose enough, or do I have to make even looser profiles? The loose lineup had a lot of uncontested pots preflop and more than 3 guys seeing the flop was a rarity. They seemed to play questionable, but not outrageous hands. That doesn't seem to conform with the make-up of loose games that I hear about on the Hold'em forum. Should I make Maniac profiles? Any suggestions for how to best use this resource would be appreciated. Thanks. (Oh, and I know that Turbo is of limited use.)
Check the switches relating to the adjustments the players can make. If the switch allowing players to adjust according to opponent is left on, your loose lineup will tighten up a lot after a few hands.
s
Personally,I make my initial settins so that players will leave and enter the game at random as I feel this is more representative of the real world.
In an article I read by a columnist named Phil Hellmuth, he talks about a Hold'em-tournament situation where he had 9s 9d and his opponent had K-8(both hearts). Before the flop they both turned up their hands, and Mr. Hellmuth says that he is more than a 2.5-to-1 favorite over the guy with K-8 suited at that point.
My Question is: Can someone explain to me how to mathematically pit a two-card holding against another using the example above? (9-9 vs. K-8)
Thanks, Barry
Phil is talking about the odds of his opponent hitting one of the 3 K's left in the deck.
So the odds of a King coming by the river is just over 2.5-to-1 against it happening?
Thanks for the help, Barry
The most accurate way to determine how much of a dog one hand is to another in hold-'em, you can compare the two hands to every single board there is. Since the order of the cards becomes irrelevant when at least one hand is all in, there are 205476480 unique boards with those 4 cards in hand. Kinda makes comparisons cumbersome, huh? Wanna trying making 205 million computations at that table?
Here's the simplified way of figuring things:
Approximately 29% of the time a King will fall, making the opp the winner. Approximately 3% of the time a heart flush will happen making the opp the winner.
Given just this, we come to an approximate, though not entirely accurate, percentage of 32%. This means that Phil will win 68 times out of 100 attempts in 99 versus K8s. Not bad odds to be in, if I was going all in.
Realize that this figure does NOT include things like: a straight happening to one of the players. the opp hitting a K and Phil hitting another 9. The opp hitting two more 8s.
And other wacky wild things that can, and do, screw up the percentages. In the end, 2.5 to 1 isn't that far off for a rough estimation.
Dan
Use a computer, it's easier. Poker Probe and Turbo Texas hold 'em are good for this.
So, where can I pick up Poker Probe, or Turbo Texas Hold'em?
I recently played for amusement in a very low stakes game with other naive inexperienced players. Many of the games were crazy, with wild cards, buying cards, pass-the-trash, etc. I'm not financially interested in hustling for pennies, but am conceptually intrigued. What are the best types of games to play in this situation?
My impression is inexperienced players overestimate the strength of their hands. They especially do this with pass-the-trash games and lowball. Given a choice, they are more likely to overestimate the strength of "high" hands, and consequently go for high rather than low in high-low split games. What are the other common mistakes, and how can they be exploited? Is there a decent book on the subject?
I seem to think I've seen a book by Mike Caro about some poker games with "wild" variations ("follow the queen", etc.) and I think I saw it at a Border's bookstore.
Kim The best book I have read is Wolpin's "The Rules of Neighbourhood Poker According to Hoyle". It is a lighthearted read but explains hundreds of variations and gives a rough idea about strategy and what usually wins.
Can someone explain the signifigance of pot odds and how they are calculated? Thanks
Invest $29 and get Theory of Poker. It'll answer your question better than any poster can. And with the rest of the information in the book, you'll have a return on your investment in no time.
good luck.
Shooter is correct but if you check down a few posts to
Odds and Pot Odds
Posted By: Joe Date: Friday, 11 February 2000, at 9:12 a.m.
You can get started here.. But do get the book it will be well worth the cash.
Best of it !!
MJ
I recently started playing Hold'Em, and I just ordered "Winning Low Limit Hold'Em" by Lee Jones. Is this a good book for a low limit (3-6) beginning player? What other books would you recommened?
Thanks for your help
Yes, this is probably the best book for a begining low limit hold 'em player.
Other books to consider purchasing: Hold 'Em Poker For Advanced Players (21st Century Edition) by David Sklansky and Mason Malmuth The Theory of Poker by David Sklansky Hold 'Em Excellence by Lou Kreiger Poker Essays I & II by Mason Malmuth
Liquid Swords
BT:
I'll risk being banned from the 2+2 forum and various negative comments from GD and others by saying this.. :)
Consider WLLH as your bible for your first 40-50 hours of play. Don't read it - study it. Memorize the starting hand requirments. Remember, the book is great, but if you don't have the discipline to actually play that way - your bankroll will feel it.
After a while you'll want to consider adding 21C Hold'Em for Advanced Players and Theory of Poker but in your 3-6 game advanced, tricky plays will generally just lose you money because many don't work on weaker players.
Good luck
Packerfn1
Be the flop... See the flop... You're not being the flop, Danny.
Agreed. WLLH is, IMHO, a great book for the begineer. 21C Hold'Em for Advanced Players and others often assume you know the more basic concepts and plays. While WLLH doesn't dwell much on the theory you will need to play against better opponents, it gets you started on the right path and makes understand more advanced books easier once you advance.
It's not a bad introduction but it won't get you thinking about a lot of things that you not only should think about but are interesting and fun to think about. If you've read HPFAP and are still mystified about beating low limit games then just read it again and again instead of something else.
On Jones, for example, let's say you are in late position with the 9h8h, there is an early but and a bunch of callers, including you. The big blind raises, everyone calls and its up to you. You know that the BB is a very tight, predictable player that wouldn't raise here without a big pair. Should you call? Yes, folding would be incredibly dumb. Let's say you missed the flop and it turned out she had aces. If you had to do it all over again, would you still call? Absolutely, and I think Jones would agree.
Sometime later you are again in late position and the same player now opens the pot with a raise under the gun. An very loose player calls and everyone else folds. You look down and see AhJh, obviously a much more "playable" hand than 9h8h. Should you call? No, always fold. But the Jones book suggests, if I'm not mistaken, that folding here is crazy.
From what I recall about Jones' advice on calling raises, you should go to that section, the part where he lists the hands with which you can call two cold, and write "THIS IS WRONG" over it with a large black marker. Instead, you need to think about the things on which "it depends."
Not to plug the 2+2 books, but don't let that "advanced player" stuff put you off. I'm not even suggesting that you not buy the Jones book. Just don't think of it as a manual for how to play hold 'em. (Actually, if you're thinking of using it like a manual then don't buy it).
The best cheapest introduction to Hold 'em is still Sklansky's first book. Others I wish I had read before I played so much: Roy Cook's book, Bob Ciaffone's Improve Your Poker and Zen and the Art of Poker by what's-his-name (Larry Anderson? --but forget all the stuff about changing your outlook when your "running bad"). And never forget TOP.
"Sometime later you are again in late position and the same player now opens the pot with a raise under the gun. An very loose player calls and everyone else folds. You look down and see AhJh, obviously a much more "playable" hand than 9h8h. Should you call? No, always fold. But the Jones book suggests, if I'm not mistaken, that folding here is crazy."
Interesting suggestion. I don't think WLLH it says that. Can you quote page and paragraph? There is a section on the number of players in a hand that discusses implied odds. The section on late position pre-flop play does list AJs as a hand you can call an early raise with but you also have to apply his earlier advice about the number of players in. I don't see where he states that not calling is crazy. You also have to remember that Lee is specifically talking about your "average" crazy ram'n'jam 3-6 game. The hard rocks are diamond and most others are "so loose your wide open" to quote Ginn. A tight raise followed by a bunch of fold is pretty uncommon.
Similarly HEP does suggest you might call depending on the number of players (bottom of pg. 43 to 44 in my copy).
HEPfAP21 also suggests that with multiple opponents you can call (if not reraise) with AJs.
Personally I'd be wary of calling with a "tight" (would have to know what this actually means) raiser and a loose caller unless I was sure the blinds were going to act passively. Once I got another loose caller or two in there I'm a lot happier. If everybody comes in and I don't have the button reraiseing becomes a possibility.
In any case I echo your comments about learning the whys and not the whats. Many paths lead to learning the necessary knowledge and I believe Lee's book is on one of them. I don't know of ANY current book that is a "poker manual". TOP is the best we have in that respect.
It's on page 40, under the topic "If there is a raise in front of you." Jones writes:
You can play most of the hands you would have played in late position for no raise. However, you should drop the lower end of your calling range. Don't player the smallest pocket pairs and smallest suited connectors unless just about everybody at the table is in the hand. Don't play any one-gap lower than J9s.
(My emphasis). On page 41 he lists the hands with which you should call a raise in late position, presumably including one from a tight UTG raiser. They include KQo, QJo, JTo, KJo, QTo, KTs, Q9s and Axs. I wrote that the book suggests it would be "crazy" to fold AJs in my scenario because that hand is clearly better than most of the hands that Jones says are worth two bets cold.
Nothing in the book suggests that you should ever fold AJs against a tight early raise, even if no one else calls and the blinds are tight.
Here is a fair summary of the book's advice on playing against an early raiser when you're in late position: "If you have two big cards or medium cards that are suited, go ahead and call even if you're sure that he either has a premium pair or two cards larger than yours. As the number of players increases, your call becomes even more correct."
I think this advice is not only incorrect but disasterous. It amounts to one of the biggest leaks that low limit players tends to have: calling too many raises with dominated mediocre hands.
The correct advice would be: "If you're pretty sure that the raiser's average hand is better than yours, get out. If you have two big suited cards, you should be more inclined to call a raise as you become less sure of the raiser's hand and as more people enter the pot. However, if you are sure your hand is dominated, fold regardless of the number of opponents."
You might disagree with this last statement. I know that most people play as if they disagreed. The disagreement, however, may be largely academic: when I'm sure my suited hand is dominated by that of a tight early raiser my opponents are rarely so brain dead that they tend to unconciously jump in. In other words, if there is some number of opponents that would make a calling a tight early raise with AJs correct, I never seem to get them.
I also disagree that the book qualifies the advice above according to the number of players in the pot. On page 31, where it discusses "The number of players in the hand," the book points out that certain hands do better multiway (small pairs and connectors) and others do better short-handed (big cards and big pairs). It concludes "[t]hus, in general you'd like to play your big cards and high pairs against a small number of playes and your smaller pairs and suited cards against many opponents." In addition to being awfully pedestrian, this description doesn't suggest any need for an adjustment in the situation I described.
(While it's true that Jones is describing games where nearly every hand is multiway, some hands in most games aren't and most hands in some games aren't. In these hands, it seems that the Jones book doesn't even apply).
Now that I'm looking at the book, I see that there's also advice on how to play AJs after the flop. On page 64 Jones discusses the case where you have AcJc and the flop is Jd9h2h. Jones writes:
If you raise and are re-raised (or bet and are raised), you must decide how to continue. If you think that raising again will limit the pot to you and the raiser, it may be worth re-raising, even if you suspect he has you beaten right now. ... If you don't think you can eliminate other players or you are sure that the raiser has a strong hand, you can back off -- call the raise and then check and call to the river.
Just imagine playing AJs like this against someone with AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AK or AQs who let you know it because she doesn't raise UTG before the flop without these hands, and also doesn't bet or raise on the flop with the latter two when she misses. (That's a lot of players, even and perhaps especially in low limit). You'd get barbecued. I suspect that this is exactly what is happening to a lot of players in the relatively tight $5-10 and $3-6 games on Paradise.
The paragraph before the one you choose to quote reads "If the raise happened in early position but a bunch of people have calledit already, you know that the pot will lay you proper odds for your drawing hands." After rereading the whole I can see how you can read it as you did but I don't believe thats what LJ intended and I don't see how you could read "crazy" into it at all.
I disagree with the advice that if you think the raisers average hand is better then yours you should fold. This is often incorrect. The examples in 7 stud with a big ante are fairly common. I believe there are fewer examples in average mid limit HE games but thats not what LJ is talking about. We're talking about ram'n'jam HE games with a lot of dead money in the pot.
1. Jones's express recommendation that players "call" raises with AJs (and worse) is nowhere qualified by the need to have other players, much less a lot of other players, in the pot. Nothing in the book suggests you should fold AJs, or even consider folding it, when it's obvious your hand is dominated. In fact, the book doesn't even discuss that concept. On page 55 he even suggests that AJs should call three bets cold from two raisers. (Specifically, he says that calling with AJs would be "less questionable" whereas calling with AJo would be "marginal." Pardon my hyperbole, but in nearly all cases I think this would be insane).
2. You're reading into the book a multiway action requirement for calling that isn't there. In the paragraph you quote, Jones is discussing whether you'll know what you're up against if the raise is late or early, not how many players you need to call. The full paragraph reads:
Playing from last position, you'll have a pretty good idea of the effect of the raise. If the raise happened in early position but a bunch of people have called it already, you know that the pot will lay you proper odds for your drawing hands. If the raise happens in late position after a lot of calls, you're probably still OK since very few players will call one bet and then throw their cards away for a single raise.
By "drawing hands," its pretty clear that Jones means the medium and small suited connectors, which would make the foregoing consistent with his advice that one need only drop "the lower end of your calling range" if there's a prior raise. The paragraph doesn't suggest that Jones believes that AJs is a "drawing hand" that needs "proper odds" in order to play, or indeed if he does what those "proper odds" would be.
3. Actually, neither do you. No offense, but at one level you're criticizing me for attributing nonsense to Jones and then telling me that what I think is nonsense is actually an OK way to play.
4. If having a bunch of callers is some sort of hidden premise to the recommendations, then the Jones book is useless for anything other than multiway pots. I doubt this is what Jones intended. You may think that the scenario I layed out, an early raise with one call before it's up to you, is rare, but as a veteran low limit player I can tell you that it occurs with some frequency.
#1 The question is "You are in late position with AJ. The last five pots have had the pre-flop betting capped. It's been raised twice before it gets to you. What should you do? Suppose you had AJs instaed of AJ. What should you do?"
The pieces of data that are missing is how many people are involved and is it a pair of maniacs doing the raiseing. Given that lack I think "much less questionable" is an OK response. If its going to the flop 5+ way capped AJs is a hand I'd take into battle. It sounds like we disagree on that point.
Actually LJ does discuss domination on pg. 44. AFAIK S&M don't ever explicitly discuss it although its implied throughout HEfAP (I havn't read the 21 version though cover to cover so it might be more explicit in there).
#2 Maybe I am. The intro talks about multiway wild CA holdem action. In a multiway pot AJs is living off implied odds and thus is a drawing hand to me. I'm trying to remember how I thought of it when I first read WLLH but I can't remember. That would be a better measure of what the book is actually communicateing to its intended audience.
#3 Yeap, it sounds like we disagree somewhat on how the hand should be played although I think most of that has to do with assumptions about game type. Would you really throw it away in late position against a couple of loose aggressive testosterone freaks and a herd of loose passive cows?
#4 I think the paragraphs under "The typical Low-limit Hold'em Game" (pg. 19) express the typical looseness of low limit games. Together with the rest of the intro text sets the tone for the rest of the book.
OK, you got me. What's AFAIK?
In a free-for-all characterized by the first two rounds pretty much always capped, AJs falls just below the threshhold of reliability that I'd need to play, even in late. But I generally avoid these games and wouldn't criticize anyone else for playing it. (AJo is another matter, and to his credit Jones doesn't recommend it as well against an early raise, although I'd prefer it over junk like KTo, QTo, and JTo, which he apparently likes because of their allegedly greater "drawing" power.)
On the other hand, I think it's a good hand against one or two maniacs or a maniac and a loose caller. In any kind of normal game it's folly to call 3 cold with it.
We disagree over cases where the AJs is certainly dominated, with you and Jones suggesting that it's playable against a number of opponents (I guess two to four at minimum), where I think it can't be played at all for two cold. (Okay, maybe in a family pot. I'd also call a single bet in the BB against 4 opponents. But I'd worry if I flopped a pair without a draw).
The basic problem is that there isn't a strong enough consensus about the effect of an early raise. Because so many low limit raises are nearly arbitrary, many players probably survive by accepting Jones's assumption that enough opponents will eventually make nearly all playable hands profitable (although nobody seems to know how many opponents you need for what hands). When the opponents become just a tad tougher, however, I think this advice goes from marginal to deadly.
I doubt that most low limit players agree with me. If you told the average $3-6 player that without a pair he generally needs a better hand than the tight raiser in order to play, he'd find this laughably tight.
FWIW there is one simulation on Abdul's site (posev.com) that shows AJs calling 2 cold as profitable but its a wildly different situation then the one we are talking about.
AFAIK == As Far As I Know FWIW == For What Its Worth
What ever book you get take what they say about suited cards and devalue it also gapped cards that have numbers in the corners should be devalued. Other than that most of the advice is good.
Then you will play the correct number of hands and not blow your bank roll chasing cards.
The first 3 books I read and studied in order were... 1. Sklansky's Theory of Poker 2. Jones' Winning Low Limit Holdem 3. Sklansky and Malmuth's Holdem Poker for Advanced Players.
I think starting with TOP helps you understand the plays suggested in the other two.
I play in a 1-5 7cs game in which there is a 3 dollar ante button and most players chase providing tons of multi-way action and nicely sized pots. i have two problems... one- i enter the game with 60 dollars which i think is making it hard for me to play tight and aggresive since the ante button keeps sucking away at my roll and i make 5 big bets and half my starting cash is gone. do i need a much much bigger bankroll? also what hands should i start with in this generally loose game, should i play tighter(since the players are loose in the sense that they call often yet rarely raise or reraise) or should i play looser (since there is always at least one shmuck who goes for flush draw with 2 suited cards providing they get another suit on 4 street) What type of hands should i be starting with in late mid and early pos. i really have no idea? please help, Low Roller
Hi,
What does the term "chopped" mean in reference to Hold'em?
Thanks,
Marc
In addition, what's a kill pot?
Thanks
kill pot refers to the anti-drug league and their crusade to eliminate sweet sweet cannibis from the lives of upstanding citizens.
Chopped is what I decided to do to my hair on my thirteenth birthday. I looked like I had a sheet of sandpaper on my head.
oh fine....
chopped refers to the blinds. They divide the money up between the small blind and the big blind when no one else enters the pot. It's to save time because, quite obviously, the SB and BB can't have much and so it would just be a waste of everyone's 30 seconds to continue on with the hand. This isn't a rule of hold'em. It's just an increasingly common practice that thankfully hasn't reached my casino yet.
Kill is another increasingly common way to play. But this one is an actual rule, when the casinos decide to employ it. If you have a 3-6 HE game, and someone wins 2 hands in a row, the next hand is killed. The person who won must now put in 6 dollars, in the blind, regardless of his or her position. The table then becomes a 6-12 game for that hand only.
Hope this helps.
Dan
Would someone explain the differnce between a call and a "cold call"????
Thank you
If I'm not mistaken, and I might be, to call is to call a single bet, but to cold call is to call multiple bets. Again, I could be wrong, and someone please correct me if I am.
Liquid Swords
One can call a bet, then if it is raised behind you,call the raise. But if it is bet, then raised in front of you and you decide to call, this is called(nice pun heh), or rather, referred to, as calling two bets cold. Call me if you still don't understand. On second thought, don't call me, I'll cold call you sometime.
At the end of the hand when the 5-card flop is such that the best 5 cards are either all in the flop, or at the showdown, the best 5 cards from all the remaining hands are equivalent (i.e. hands are ties), the pot is "chopped" up equally. Also, when only the BB and 1 player remain, often one of the players will say "chop?" meaning split the pot now and deal another hand.
The option to "chop" only presents itself when the only two players remaining are the blinds. What usually occurs is that the small blind will turn to the BB and ask "do you chop?". If he says yes, the two players take their blinds back and the dealer restarts the hand. It has to be agreed on by both players. I have played against players who always chop and ones who never chop, but the general consensus is to do one or the other EVERY time you play, not chop your bad hands and play your good ones.
Could some one explain the term cut-off seat to me please. Thanks
It is the 1st seat right of the button.
I'm not 100% sure on the subject "betting for value". Anyone mind setting me straight on this?
Betting with what you think is the best hand at that point. Your in the lead (or think u are).
MJ
MJChicago is right on. Contrast "betting for value" with the notion of the "semi-bluff". A semi-bluff is a bet with a hand that you don't think is best, but either the hand may improve to the best on latter streets or the bet may win the pot outright on the present street.
They're similar, but kinda like opposites. Semi-bluff is when you're not in the lead at the moment, but have outs to catch the leader, but the main reason is to win the pot right there. Betting for value is also to hopefully win the pot right there, but now the board is such that you're in the lead, but other players have outs to catch YOU. right?
It's more than that. One of the best ways to make money is off passive players who you can bet for value against. Think about the river bet. There's no cards left which means your hand, and all your opponents hands are fully defined. Imagine you're heads up against a very passive player. Now you've got top pair and a pretty good kicker with a very raggedy board. Do you bet here? The question you might ask yourself is: if I bet and he calls, can I guarantee that I have the best hand? Normally, no. So you check it down. But against a very passive player they will call you with a lot worse hands than you have, because, hey, there's the slightest chance that their second pair or top pair bad kicker will win. What the heck, they say. These are the people you can bet for value against. You've got a fairly average hand, but you can bet it on the end because it will still hold up against the callers.
"Imagine you're heads up against a very passive player. Now you've got top pair and a pretty good kicker with a very raggedy board. Do you bet here? The question you might ask yourself is: if I bet and he calls, can I guarantee that I have the best hand? Normally, no. So you check it down."
I disagree! This is the type of situation where a bet is the better play. Let's say you've got AQ in the hole, and the board looks like Q9732 rainbow, and you're against a 'very passive' player. The play is bet, because of a topic that David discusses well in TOP: Let's say you figure your hand to be a 50/50 chance of winning. If you check, you're playing that 50-50 chance. However, you also read that there's a 50% chance that your opponant will fold rather than call your bet. Now you're getting 75% odds, since the other player is a 50-50 shot to fold, and then a 50-50 shot to win in a showdown. By analogy, would you rather bet someone:
1. That a coin won't come up heads, or that 2. That a coin won't come up heads TWICE IN A ROW?
The odds are greatly in your favor in bet #2.
I made a mistake in my scenario by saying completely raggedy board. Imagine a situation more along the lines of this: 9s-Jh-2h-5s-4c. Somewhat raggedy, but not completely. Right from the flop, a straight draw and a flush draw are out there. On the turn, the backdoor flush appears. Then the river brings no one good news.
Now I didn't say great kicker, I said pretty good. Let's give you QJ. Now, a complete blank fell on the end. So normally, if you bet what's going to happen is all those straight draws, and heart and spade draws will fold. So either you win a pot you were going to get anyway, or...you lose to KJ, AJ, J9, I don't know. Make up a few other hands that would call you down. But now you're playing against Mr. Passive. He'll call you down with 10-10, 10-9, 8-8. Heck, he might just call you down with 3-3. What does he care? It could win and if it doesn't, he mucks it without showing.
The basic point I was making is that there are a lot of hands that you shouldn't be betting on when the river card comes. But I've had people actually announce to the table that, heads up, they will call a player down though the river. I've had people who will show down bottom pair. Against them I will always always grab that one extra bet on the end. That's what betting for value is all about.
Dan
I received Ray Zee's book the other day and have read a few pages, and unfortunatly, it is beyond my current Omaha skill level. I was wondering if there are any books that target the begining players and that would help with areas such as starting hand requirements, perhaps with some type of chart, since I seem to be able to memorize them easier than plain text. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.
Liquid Swords
Try Andy Nelson's books. I believe you can get them from amazon.com.
The first part of Ray's Omaha eight-or-better section is targeted for less experienced players in the lower limits. You should start there. If it seems over your head, in a short time it won't.
I empathize. I bought HLSFAP in 1996 or 1997 when I started all this poker stuff and read it pretty carefully. I even outlined it. Then I played about 40 or 50 hours of O/8 and maybe 5 hours of 7CSHL, and generally learned that I'd rather play hold 'em. I put the book on the shelf and never looked at it.
When HL7CS and O/8 recently became available online, I thought read it again after a few years. I was amazed at how much of the book I obviously hadn't grasped the first time. Just playing holdem made a lot of things stand out in sharp relief.
My point is that you have to combine a lot of experience and thinking with the book, otherwise it's just words on a page. I would think that you'd have to read the book a dozen times or more while playing more than a 100 hours before even the fundamentals truly sink in. (Of course, I might have a lot less poker intuition than most).
Another thing I noticed after rereading it: it's a rare case of an expert who is not a professional writer lucidly describing a fairly complicated subject. It's not exactly "A Brief History of Time," but while reading it you can sense the pains that were taken to make the material comprehensible, to lay out on the page clearly what the writer understands intuitively. That makes it more pleasurable to read, and for that reason it's my favorite of the AP series.
As Mason said the entry section to the O/8 section in the 2+2 high/low split book is very straightfoward. I doubt you'll find anything with a lower entry cost.
Another worthwhile book not mentioned so far is Ciaffone's book on Omaha. I have the older version and the amount of info on O/8 is fairly small but the overall concepts are well laid out. I believe the amount of O/8 coverage was increased in the newer version of the book.
Stick with Ray Zee's book. I suggest studying the first section of the book first. Eventually, it will stick with you if you spend the time. If there is something specific that you do not understand, I suggest posting it here.
If you don't have the nuts, all you've got is the shaft.
The rest is commentary, go and learn.
Dan
This book is largely acknowledged as an important addition to any poker players library. My question is this though, is the book geared largely towards limit play as opposed to big bet poker (PL, NL)? Perhaps it is so geared towards limit play that it's value diminishes significantly for the big bet poker player?
Thanks, Ben.
I think he is gearing it to 10-20 limit games.
The strategy and hand rankings in HEFAP don't work for PL & NL.
top is just about poker. all poker. any poker. any game. any limit. any structure.
the advanced player sequence is aimed at mid limit games in the appropriate games. they do not directly discuss big bet poker. but, if you understand why correct limit play is correct, you could probably get a pretty good guess at correct big bet play.
scott
Sorry scotty,
The two don't really have much to do with one another.
So is it worth buying Rounder for someone who plays (plans to play!) mostly PL and NL tournaments?
I am going to buy TJ Cloutiers PL\NL book and a couple of other items from GambelerHome so considering my order will have to be shipped from America to Ireland I don't think there is much point adding to my order unnecessarily.
Thanks, Ben.
Ben - TJ's book in my estimation is the best publication on NL PL poker you can get. There is an assumption in it that you can play poker and TJ puts the NL PL in perspective. It has changed my game for the better.
in your original post you make the point that hefap is geared towards the mid limit games, which is true. but top is not.
i think it is irresponsible for you to discourage ben from buying the top when you haven't read the book yourself.
and if you have read it, i think you need to reread it.
here's a quote from top "notwithstanding the great variety of poker games - high games and low games, stud games and draw games, limit games and no limit games - there is an inner logic that runs between them, and there are general precepts, concepts, and theories that apply to all of them."
he even specifically uses several examples of big bet poker to discuss various concepts. look to pages 23, 54, 60, 68, among others. but the real point is there is an underlying way to understand poker in all its forms and the theory of poker expounds on it.
scott
Scott if you read my post I was talking about HEPFAP with regard to NL and PL not top.
Which I have no intention of reading top.
if you were not implying anything about top, then whose question were you answering?
ben did not ask about hefap. he asked about top. which he (and you) should read.
scott
scott you read it twice once for you and once for me. I am just fine without it.
OK
Well just to clarify, yes I was only talking about TOP and not HEFAP. I think from what scott says, i.e. it being a broadly theoretical book rather than over focusing on one poker variation and/or structure, it would be worth a read for me.
....."If there's something I know about the game that the other doesn't and, if he's not willing to learn or can't understand, then I take his money"..
:-)
Interesting comment.
Is this the same book designed to show players how to eeek out 1 bb an hour.
Geee what a deal.
The quote that Cac_trader uses is from David himself (quoted from Alverez's _The Biggest Game in Town_). It is absolutely true.
I think the TOP is better than HEFAP if you really know how to wrap your mind around it. In fact, I feel like HEFAP often is just a hold-em specific version of TOP.
If Rounder doesn't want to read it, that's fine. But anyone who has _not_ won a WSOP bracelet (hi Badger) should.
I might add. With huge variations.
Rounder,
I am going to take issue with you on this here. It is extremely irresponsible to tell someone not to read a book that you have not read yourself just because, well I don't know, how the hell can you back this advice up ? On a Beginners' Forum, when the book is as invaluable as TTOP, doubly so. If you are so resistant to learning anything new and you have such a big problem with David Sklansky (see Other Topics) then why do you bother posting here ?
Ben, I advise you to go any buy this book, it is invaluable for any type of poker and you will get back many times the cover price whatever game you play in.
Andy.
Andy you have the wrong end of the stick on this one. I never recommended against Ben reading TOP - he asked for NL PL reading and I recommended TL's book.
I have a huge problem with some on this board and find myself less and less interested in what posters have to say here - most are cookie cutter answers - I am finding RGP much more interesting.
BTW - the 6/12 trip is on to the UK I am looking forward to playing at Reading and London.
Hope to see you there
Mike
I have ordered both!
As a limit poker player, the most valuable thing I got from the book is how to deal with poker situations from the right angle with a lot of logic reasoning behind. It is very useful for decision making process.
regards,
jikun
I will have to say I agree with both sides. I think that TOP gets you thinking about some good strategy, and some good ways to think about your play. I also agree with Rounder that the hourly expectation of 1 BB is a little meek. But I think its an excellent book to add to your arsenal of reference material.
J.
I have been frustrated over what appears to be a streak of losing that I have been on. I have employed strategies suggested by the authors, i.e. betting with large pairs in the hole on 3rd street, but I find that because I am playing low limit 7card stud, not many people fold. as a result, I am often outdrawn, and down a lot of money.
I feel that I am not good enough to move up to higher stakes, yet. What can I do to counter people who make misplays on low limit 7cs? do the strategies in the books (7csap 21 and caro's book) not work against low limit players because it is relatively cheap to see the next card even with a maximum bet?
You need to pay attention to the loose games section of 7CSFAP21.
You shouldn't always raise your big hands on third street - it often just ties the low limit players to the pot and on later streets they can correctly call with their draws and suck out on you.
I've found that its often a good strategy to keep it to one bet each round until 5th street with your big pair and then consider raising if it seems you are still in the lead. You can get a lot of the weak draws and small pairs to fold this way. You can also fold this way on fifth street when someone else pairs their door card or catches something otherwise scary without having put too much money in the pot.
Just keep playing tight and try to understand what these low limit players are thinking - then you can actually manipulate them and make some money.
Good luck,
~DjTj
You are not alone here. I agree that learning the pages under "loose games" is necessary. I will almost bet that you probably need to re-read this, as I also have. Specifically, if you are in a game with no ante. Most of the 7CSFAP is written for a game with an ante, making it correct to raise the maximum on 3rd street. Not so in a game with no ante. It is important to try to keep the pot small on third, with small raises. This is tricky, you want to raise enough to drop some players but not so much as to make a big pot on 3rd. If the pot gets too big on third, then your opponents are actually not making a mistake to call on fourth and fifth with their chasing hands. If the pot is kept small on third, they then do not have the correct odds to chase. The exception is when you have a straight flush kicker to your big pair on third. In this case if you put in a big raise on 3rd, you may get the pot heads up...fine. Or you may get several callers.....also, fine, as you have a potential drawing hand.
I think the best solution to 3rd street raises is to bet $3 if you are playing 1-5 stud. I think the players tend to do exactly the opposite of what they have been characterized as doing in some of these posts: that is, they will quite easily fold for a max. bet on third street, but will rarely fold for the max. bet on fifth street. The dilemma is this: if you protect your high pairs with max. raises on third street, you will often only win a few dollars, and all your profits will be eaten up by the rake and tokes. But if you give people free cards, then you will be outdrawn every single time. I find that considering $3 the max. bet on third street is the best compromise.
On another note, I think that even playing $1-5 stud is a mistake. The rake and tokes will absolutely kill you. I have never been able to consistently beat the game, but I have consistently won at $5-10 stud and $3-6 hold'em. I gave up 1-5 stud, and I am glad that I did.
thanks everyone for your advice.
Vince was a little harsh, but his statements/questions rings true. I play for the complexity of the game. If I break even everynight, I would be just as happy.
with respect to the advice given by others, I too agree that my raises on third does nothing but gve the proper pot odds for others to chase later on. I have somewhat adjusted to slow playing my big pair on 3rd, and make them pay on 4th if they have not improved. I found that this was easier to get the game heads up. I mainly play 1 to 5, and found that the 10% rake (max 5) is tough to beat.
last game I played, I dropped 190 in six hours. Unfortuanately, it was not due to the leaks in my game, but cold cards. I played extremely tight. for example, when I made ace high straight, a beginner made a boat on the river. She later told me that she started with a pair of 9's and chased me all the way! I hope to have players like this on my table when I start getting good cards!
anyways, thanks for the advice. I will keep pluggin' away at getting better (after a long break).
one last question,...what does a rounder make a year on average?? I make a hansome amount of money playing lawyer during the day, and even I can barely handle the stress of a bad streak. Pro players must have high stress!!
Regards, Gota
Problem with LL players is hey don't know wnat they don't know. No way to play them when they paly all kinds of crap. Sorry move up or quit.
Your candor is refreshing and your attitude should give you hope. Not to give you cheap encouragement, but remember that your ability to even consider quitting as an option probably gives you a leg up on some of these guys. You also might want to think about all the players you've seen that have made you think: he ought to quit. An objective observer probably wouldn't say that about you.
If you think you might get a lot of long-term pleasure from the game you probably owe it to yourself to first try to plug a few leaks. Or at least identify some reasons that you're running bad other than the nature of your game. This especially makes sense if you can't play bigger because you need improvement.
For example, you might be playing your pairs to loosely or your draws too tightly. You might be raising too early too often instead of waiting for 5th street. Even though you're frustrated by your lack of experience, you can make small adjustments immediately. Small adjustments might make a big difference over time (or a small difference immediately? You know what I mean...). On the other hand, time and a little thinking can fix things too. As long as you don't fall into the rut of thinking that you play as well as you can or need to, you'll eventually just learn. Experience makes all sorts of things apparent to those that are looking for patterns. When you think about it, it has to.
If nothing else, you can choose slightly tighter lineups to play against. This might seem like contrarian advice, but I'm accepting at face value your statement that you're running badly because the loose game fluctuations are tough. Also, I wonder if the very loosest of these games might not be beatable outside of a long run that's too long to wait around for comfortably. (Actually, I doubt this, but I still wonder.)
Also remember that the biggest reason for your recent results might be luck. If you figure out some ways of playing better, you might be playing stronger while the pendulum swings back, which can help it swing faster and farther. Perhaps because I'm a slow learner, I've done this more than once. In any event, it's fun.
Quitting for a while might help. You might want to consider trying to transition into the the higher games and not just because of bankroll concerns. It seems to me that going back and forth between games with different styles can make you more aware of their differences and force you to adjust faster and better, which should make you a better player.
I have been there. I feel your pain. The best advice is to quit if you do not enjoy playing. If you enjoy PLAYING (I did not say loosing) then keep playing and change your style a bit. here is what I would do.
1. Get the blue book "7 card stud in 42 lessons" by Roy West.
2. If you insist on a 1-5 game with no ante, play only good starting cards which means live cards.
3. Forget about low straights and low flushes unless they just happen along.
4. Generally, forget raising to get players out. Raise to tie them in and get more money in the pot
5. Trap them when you have a powerful hand. Let them get their flushes but make them pay.
6. Keep records, don't play if tired.
7. If game is tight and passive, find another table
If you feel confident AND you feel you have enough knowledge and bankroll, try to move to 5-10 and later 10-20. They are truer games with less rake. The only redeeming feature of the 1-5 is no ante, and that REQUIRES that you only play good cards at 3rd street. A mistake on 3rd st will be costly later, especially if you stay with a small pair/small kicker and end up with 2 small pair on 5th street. You won't like what happens to you at the showdown if there are more than 2 callers.
I will also add that although I do not like it, it seems that I have always learned more from a losing session than a winning one. I mean if one is on a winning streak, one may think: Why should I change or try to improve? I'm good enough already. When in fact it was just a good run of cards. And if one is having a tough time, it really does help to get away from the game for a while and read, read, read. You will be surprised at what you may discover.
You know, I've learned from some bad runs lately in hold'em. The money just bleeds out and I'm too quick to blame it on fluctuations and luck. Turns out, when I returned to the books a bit, that I was overvaluing some hands and undervaluing others. For me, chasing with overcards and middle pairs is a sign of being on tilt, and I can bleed away $100 pretty quickly at low limits. OTOH, when I wait 'em out for a couple of hours and put a couple hundred away, its often just solid, tight play and tons of patience.
take another look and make sure there aren't leaks in your game...
I did feel the same way playing 1-2 stud, but feel OK at 3-6 & 6-12. The play is much better raises are more respected and when you win a hand you have something.
you cannot play scared. youmust have enough money to bet comfortably. don't move up unless you have enough money. higher limit players can smell a scared rabbit and will crush you. stay where you are comfortable. play good starting cards (did I say that before?? -yes, I did).
I really think you should get Turbo-stud from Wilson Software for 2 reasons, (1) to let you play a lot of games and see for yourself what happens when you play shitty cards. (2) to give yourself confidence once you see you can win. The new version is improved and can be set for low limit (I have absolutely no financial interest in the company)
Remember this; folding on 3rd st is easy. Ninety-five percent of the time you only have to look at your cards to determine if you should fold. In order to play past 3rd st, you must consider your cards and the cards showing. To go further you must additionally consider your up cards and position and more.
I have quit...and returned again after years (sometimes weeks) to poker. The truth is that I've never had a bankroll that can withstand a bad run ..at all. I've gotten better over the years..though..and now a 2 or 3 week break brings me back to a good outlook. I'll run well for a while....until the next down slide. Trying to limit the downs is what its all about I guess.
Just what is it you are thinking of giving up? Is it Poker Playing? Why? Because you aren't winning? What's your problem anyway? Why do you play in the first place? Money? Ego? What is it? Did someone tell you along the line that winning money at poker was easy?
You say you are frustrated by losing and that you are not good enough to move up to higher stakes. Well what am I missing here? If you are not good enough to move up then don't. Wouldn't that be silly?
What can you do to counter people that make misplays? Think about what you are saying. That's what. Misplays are what poker players look for.
The 7CSFAP basic strategy is tight and aggressive. It is the fundamental strategy for players at all levels. However, the concepts and strategy in 7CSFAP assumes the reader is not a beginner. It assumes that the reader is a journeyman ready for prime time. Do not attempt to use 7CSFAP unless you understand the concepts and unless you are prepared to go through a frustration plagued trial and error period learning to apply each concept.
Back to my original question. Just what is it you are thinking of giving up? If it is poker playing, don't worry about it. You don't seem to know enough about it to be giving up a lot.
Vince.
Vince puts it very well.
We all go through loosing periods. For example; I had strung 16 consecutive winning sessions (avg 5 hrs each) over a month and a half. That's right--no losses for a nice tidy sum. Now, the last 5 times I have been hammered so badly, I feel like am part owner in Stanley Tools. My bankroll has withstood the down side; so has my ego. I just realize that sometimes you get beaten up. I'll spare you the stories and bad beats, but it was so bad, I actually went to play at the Sands (session 6) where I finally found a lose agressive game and ate it up....finally.
Back before I started to get serious about learning poker, I use to almost always win (I mean consistently for years), friends wanted to know if I was cheating or just incredibly luck.
For the past 6 months, I have been reading poker books (Doyle Brunson's super system and Sklansky's Theory of Poker). Since I have become educated and started implementing some of what I have learned, I am on a losing streak. Is it possible I was always just lucky, am I just in an unlucky streak now, or is the transition from my old style of play to a style that fits the rules effecting my winning.
Has anyone else had this problem? Please help.
Also, I am looking for the name of a good book that gives me the odds for different hands (specifically in Texas Hold 'em).
Thanks in advance for your suggestions, Lynn
Lynn give us some indication how you have changed based on the "education' you have gotten.
Post some hands or starting hole cards you play now that you didn't then or visa versa.
I don't believe in luck I believe in solid poker - but there is some luck involved for bad playerd doing well in the short run.
That's a common problem I've heard over the years, somebody who used to do well at the tables buys a book or two, and now they can't win.
Before you bought the poker books you relied more on your instincts/gut feelings, and now you play more by the book which often means ignoring your intuition and adhering to general advice, advice that couldn't possibly take into consideration all the things you'll be encountering throughout a session. Sure it's important to read the books so you know what everybody else knows, which will help you to identify and predict what others who play by the books will do(among other reasons too), but if you want to get back to winning on a regular basis, my advice would be to go back to relying on your instinct's. (I'm not suggesting your gut-feelings/or instincts are triggered by luck [or E.S.P.], I think they're triggered by information you've gathered consciously and unconsciously during the course of play, so listen up!)
You're really better off than most people who can relate with you, that's because you've caught the problem early before it's set in stone.
Now I'm off to Vegas for two days, Good Luck
P.S., A great book that will help you with learning to compute odds is "Winning Low Limit Hold'em", by Lee Jones. Check the index in the back of the book under 'Odds' for the page numbers. It's only $19.95, and can be ordered through most big-name book stores, or through advertisements in the back of Card Player magazine.
I agree with Louie, Lee Jones's book is a must buy!
-Larry
Neither of the books you describe are specific for the game you are playing.
Doyle's book is pretty useless for limit holdem as it is played today.
Theory of poker is extremely useful for understanding the concepts that will be used in any good specific game book, however you can't simply play holdem after studying it.
I suggest:
Lee Jones, 2+2 books HFAP and essays I and II
Roy Cooke Essays
Improve your Poker by Ciffone.
BTW "odds for different hands" whatever that is, is not going to help you much. Limit holdem is a very complex and subtle game with many different skills required to win at it. Developing hese skills takes a steady of effort of study and experience applying what you learn in games.
D.
Where can i get starting hands recommends for NL Hold'em? Is Brunson's Super/System out of date?
TJ's book gives you a good Idea of what hands to play in what situation.
You haven't found a list of recommended starting hands in no limit because it doesn't exist. (It's not in Super/System either). There are hands you almost never want to play and hands you almost never want to fold, but between them everything depends on position, prior action, stack size, opponent and image. Whether and how to play depends so much on these factors that any attempt to prescribe play based on the cards you hold would be inaccurate for most circumstances.
How do you read messages there.
Try typeing news:rec.gambling.poker into your browser. This will invoke the newsreader built into your browser.
If your browser doesn't support reading news then you'll need to find an external newsreader. If you are on UNIX that is easy. [s]trn or tin are both reasonable. If you are on Windoze I don't know what your options are.
http://www.remarq.com/list/pkrgmbl?q=REC%2EGAMBLING%2EPOKER&si=board
There's a new card club about to open in my area that is going to allow 4 RAISES. I'm used to 3 RAISES before the action is capped. What sort of effect will that have on my game if any? thanks j
Probably not much. By the 3rd raise most games are head to head where there is usually no limit to raising. Sounds like a marketing scheme to me
Aren't you a regular in AC?? Be honest, how many times at the 2-4 tables has a capped pre-flop isolated the table down to heads-up??? Hell, I've seen capped FAMILY pots at the Trop on more than one occasion.
to the original question =D DOES it affect anything? thanks again j
Where could i find a website listing possible games in the chicago area... any experience out here? are there a lot of fish to make your money on?
thanks
There is a lot of poker on the river boats I like to play in Aurora when I visit Chicago. As for websights I don't have a clue. Sorry.
Empress Poker Room has Closed :-(
Harrah's in west Chicago or head out to Hollywood.
MJ
Harrah's (both in Indiana and Joliet)
Hollywood (in Aurora)
Empress (in Joliet on weekdays, on weekends they set up slots where the poker tables were)
The poker room at the Empress in Hammond is CLOSED.
HAllo,
I´d like to know, who was doing POKER first. Everybody is thinking, that this games is original american. But is that really right. Who knows, where Poker is coming from?
Thank you for information
hwatzl
poker? I hardly even know her! Who was doing her first? probably some seven card studs. They were doing it high and low. Tell that little pokemeister I've got some rolled up jacks for her.
I'm sure poker originated in Europe along with most every card game. Honestly, I really don't know. Check a bathroom reader. They're good for that type of information.
Dan
Bob Ciaffone and Stewart Reuben's "Pot-limit and No-limit Poker" contains a section on poker history. I don't have it in front of me, but I think the earliest poker games evolved from the English game of "Brag", and that more modern poker forms like draw, stud, and holdem were developed in the United States.
.
About 2-3 times a year I make it to Vegas to play poker. With a small bankroll, always looking for a low stakes game. At the Excalabor I found a 1-5 texas holdem. If I remember correctly one could bet 5 at any time. I expected most bets and raises to be 5. But often they were in the 2-3 range. Does that say any thing about the level of the players? My take is that if I have a hand worth betting or raising, I'll bet/raise 5.
Even though I thought the game suited my style (very tight and agressive) I ended up playing the 3-6 game at the Mirage.
If a player typically bets less than $5 he's short on experience.
You'll want to occasionally bet three when an opponent will bet if you check and you'll have to call, but would prefer to call for as little as possible. In other words, when they won't give you a free card but will raise much less often than they'll call if you bet. (Betting $2 is more of an invitation for them to raise). Sometimes they'll raise, but even here it's sometimes by only $3 (go figure).
Another reason to bet $3 (and rarely, $2) is when you're afraid they'll fold.
I think Caro says to bet less than the max on the end when you want them to call because it's something out of the ordinary and makes them curious. I've had more success betting less than the max on the turn when I'm bluffing and feigning a need to adjust the bet in order to get them to call ($4 here, not $3). But they have to be really live to fall for this.
Your aggressive approach is correct and will pay off in spread limit games. People who bet less than $5 are advertising that they have a marginal hand. By betting $5 every time you show a good, aggressive image and never show weakness. When I play these games I stray from the full bet strategy only rarely, such as calling a tiny bet with a drawing hand (89, 56s) out of position in a passive game. Sometimes you can trap a little too by opening for $2, getting raised to $7 and reraising to $12. Overall, I think spread-limit favors the experienced, aggressive player. Good luck.
KJS
I don't know how the blinds work in HE, but when I played 7stud 1-5, the bring in was taken as the drop. So a $5 bet on third street wins nothing if everyone folds.
So the game becomes one of trapping players. You adjust your bets on the early streets to keep in just the number of players you want. Also, you may want to keep the pot small in the beginning to maximize the errors made by incorrect calls on later streets.
But you are, of course, correct in saying that by 5th street in 7stud and by the flop or the turn in HE, all your bets and raises should be the max.
Once there is a decent amount of money in the pot, you should *always* bet the full $5. There are few instances where you want opponents to call when the pot is large, and even so, by always betting $5 you don't give away information about your hand.
When there isn't any real money in the pot, then sometimes you would make smaller bets. If you have AA, and you're the first one in, you don't want to bet $5 and scare everyone out and just win the blinds. So then you might just bet $2 or $3. But after the flop, you almost always bet or raise the maximum.
I played, or should I say watched mostly, Omaha hi-lo and 7 stud hi-lo for the first time at the weekend. Can anyone tell me the best book a beginner can buy on hi-lo poker in general?
Ray Zee's Hi-Low Split Poker for Advanced Players has a section targeted towards the less experienced players, although it took a couple of readings, as well as watching the game, for it to finally click for me. But now it's all starting to make sense. It was also suggested to me, when I asked the same question, to check out Andy Nelson's books on Omaha, which can be found on amazon.com. Hope this helps.
Liquid Swords
I have read the advice on the other boards of taking $300-$500 when you have it and making a run at a 10-20 game.
I am currently playing 3-6-12 and the best player at the table. The only other game available is 10-20, which I'd like to get into. I wouldn't be the best player at the table, but there are defintely some bonafide fish. Combined with the fact that the rake is the same in both games, I want to move up as soon as possible. So what sort of a bankroll do I need to grind out at 3-6-12 before taking a shot at 10-20?
$500 buy in should do it.
If you are gonna play regurally at least 3-4K.
Perhaps I was unclear. I understand that a $500 buy-in is enough to sit at the table. But I'm asking about a bankroll, not a stake. If I lose the $500, how much do I need to be left with?
Obviously, when it comes to bankrolls, bigger is better. But keep in mind that after I decide on a magic amount, I have to put in the hours at the 3-6 table grinding it out.
Would $1000 do it? Losing $500 at 10-20 would leave me with $500 to try and work back what I lost.
Ah just jump in with both feet. It's only money.
Take the $500 give it a go.
Otherwise like I said you ought to have a few grand behind you -
Niels,
I would say try $300/RZ and if you bust or win go back and analyze what happened and why. After analyzing your results go back with another $300 and see what happens. It usually takes a couple of shots to feel comfortable at those stakes. If you bust both sessions analyze your results from both and see if you see any common threads to hands that you lost. Or post them here on the forum. This way you get two sessions in and if you win both times you found a new home. If you lose both sessions go back to your other game and try again when you build up your BR.
Good Luck Paul
To take a shot you just need what's necessary to play well over a several hours, at least $280, preferably $400 or $500. If you intend to play $10-20 more than occasionally, and you mean a bankroll that you'll have to replenish by grindout out bets and the lower limit, it should be at least a few thousand. (Figure $5,000 if you can consistently win between one or two small bets at 10-20). There isn't any "bankroll" you need to "take a shot," just have enough to play with for as long as you plan to play.
The trick with bankrolls is to avoid the pattern of winning small and losing big again and again. You need thousands to regularly play $10-20 and protect yourself from this risk, and this assumes that you play very well compared to your opponents.
While palying in a tournament, I lost two hands while being dealt a pair of aces. Did I misplay? Scenario one-at 150-300, with two preflop callers in addition to myself and the big blind, flop comes three unsuited rags. I am on the button, all check to me, I check also. The turn comes a 4, all check, and I open. Only the big blind calls, and he does so all-in. A 4 comes on the river, and needless to say, he turns over 8,4 to beat me w/ a set to aces up. Was I correct to slowplay? I knew the middled players were tight. Also, I raised before the flop, and checked there to show weakness before a raise, knowing they would likely fold at the raise, which they did, leaving me against a blind. Scenario 2 leaves me heads up with a preflop raiser, acting after, with a pair of aces. He raises the blind, all fold to me, I reraise, he reraises, and I capped betting. The flop comes 2 rags and a queen. He bets, I raise, he reraises, I called. Should I have folded? We are both in good chip position, and I called the rest of the way at a 100-200 level. We both have about 2000 in chips. Should I have folded, or would it have been correct to continue to call? As it turned out, he had a pair of queens in the hole and beat me. One final non-aces question. I am dealt 7/8 of clubs, flop comes k,9 of clubs and 10 of diamonds. Preflop included 4 callers to an early raise of the blind, and after the flop, I called three raises. Was i correct to do so? I was last to act, so was likely an underdog, but believed I had enough outs. The turn came a 2 of hearts, and the first raiser bet, and I called after two folds at the 100-200 level. I called but did not make my draw, and lost. Should I have saved the bets by folding after the flop to those raises?? Any thoughts would help me immensely, as this was my first tournament. I finished 41st out of 212, which wasn't bad, but I wonder if I did indeed cost me a chance to cash by misplaying. It was the New England at Foxwoods, which would have been nice to cash as my first tourney. Should that fact also have been considered, as at the time the majority of players were also strong and likely more experienced than I?!!
I've been playing Hold em once a week for approx. 6 mos. I.ve been keeping track of my games # of wins and losses per session.. Hours played ..total money won or lost. I divide money won by hours played and get a per hour value. However I,ve noticed in several posts references to "big bets" per hour. Would appreciate it if someone could explain this to me. It seems as though 2 big bets per hour is the norm?? Is this correct??. Apparently this is something I should be keeping a record of as well. Is there anything else I should keep track of. I play mainly In 3/6 and 5/10 and would like to move up to 10/20 when I feel I'm ready. In 19 sessions I am 12-6-1 wtih a plus of $650. Total hours 80. This averages out to &8.00 per hour. at what hourly rate should I be able to move up to a 10/20 game? Or is there another way of figuring?
Fred,
The "Big Bet" referred to in the posts here equals the amount bet on the turn and river in the games you play. For example, if you play only 3-6 and win 2BB an hour, that means you win $12/hr (2 X $6). Sounds like you beat your games for about 1 Big Bet per hour, depending the split between 3-6 and 5-10 in your 80 hours.
I haven't jumped up to 10-20 yet so I'll leave it to others to elaborate on that. I say, once you've got the $ to play and feel ready than go. Good luck.
KJS
I just wish to make a statement after going through the whole thread for beginners that I was amazed at the people responding to some very unsensible comments outside the realm of poker.. This is just a thought but it sure as hell makes moral conscious sense.DO NOT respond to any remarks outside the realm of the purpose of this forum. Sadly this world is unblessed with people who really dont know any better no matter what their background may be,and once we respond we feed their illness. I live by example so lets all have a moral conscience and never partake of immoral issues. Go and win................
jim
Ok... this really has no value except perhaps to those of you who are also in the early stages of learning to play this wonderfully intriguing game. Hopefully some of you will find some small grain of value.
Background: Beginning player following the classic training program as advocated by many on 2+2 (read, play free online, read, play free, play money, learn, read, play free, and so on...)
Took a recent trip to Seattle and played at Diamond Lil's (thanks to KJS and ATWOOD for suggestions). Great place to play - very friendly and low key. Completely enjoyed myself though I ended up down $40 at 4-8 after about 6 hours of play.
Lesssons learned: 1. I think beginneers hear a lot of horror stories about getting drawn out on at lower limit games. This certainly does happen, but in reality top two pair is normally good enough to win. Just different than my expectation from 2+2 and experience from free online. Maybe I'm wrong, but that is the way it seemed. 2. Agressiveness pays off. This was more of retrospective lesson and I didn't get to put it into practice, but I can remember several hands that I played to timidly and could have won more money had I gone after it. I think my play style was tied to my expectation from 1 above - afraid of getting whacked by the miracle draw. No more... 3. Never take any one hand too seriously. A couple of times I could have got tilted, but I think I kept my cool ok and it all evened out in the end. 4. Reading hands is almost too much to ask of a new player. General feel for a player's style (tight/loose) is about all you can reasonably expect in the early going. Too many basics you still need to keep track of.
Worst Play: 1. Layed down Aces instead of calling it down after the board turned ugly. An embarrassing play and one I will not soon forgot. That's why I play for real - to get these valuable lessons.
Best Play: 1. 8d6d on button with 5 other callers. Hit top pair and opened straight on button. Checked to me and I bet with everyone calling. Turn is an Ace, checked to me and I took the free card (figured at least one Ace out there). River comes another 8, giving me trips, two bets, raise, fold to me, I reraise, original two drop, raised back, I raise again, called and I beat two pair A6. Guy was torqued off saying I was an idiot for staying after the Ace. Made me feel good since the idiot didn't recognize I had the opened ended on the flop even though he was staring right at my cards. Marked him as a boob and took him down a couple more times that evening.
All in all, I felt it was a tremendous learning experience for only $40. I can easily identify three or four hands that had I played them differently, ok - correctly, I would have finished up for my time. Played tight - perhpas too tight. Game was very, very passive.
Taking a trip to Vegas in a few weeks and looking forward to playing there. Plus, a card room finally opens up here in Minneapolis and look forward to sharpening my skills.
Perhaps the best part was that I had hoped for a 3-6 game, played 4-8 and did ok, and now won't feel shy about sitting in a 5-10 if that is all I can find(though I would rather stick to a lower limit until I get better).
Thanks for reading, Sparty
maybe the guy should have bet his A's up. did he really expect you to fold to no bet?
scott
There was a lot of bizarre betting going on. I was really surprised at the number of times people checked it around. I couldn't figure it out. It was partly frustrating, partly amuzing.
Sparty,
There is a hidden lesson here too. Don't check a hand you will call with in LL. Free cards are too valuable in games where people play drawing hands too much and too long. If you are gonna call a bet, you should bet out; that is my philosophy in LL. The Aces guy gave you a free one and you whacked him. Bad move on his part, and yours if you are in that position. It eliminates a lot of checkraising because you bet out more, but free cards are too damaging, IMO.
Glad you enjoyed Seattle.
KJS
Hey Sparty,
Sounds like you had a nice trip. Keep at it, it will pay off in the long run.
Best of it !!
MJ
It was great - and see you on Paradise!
I noticed you felt that you made a big mistake folding AA when the board got scary. I don't know the specifics of the hand, but AA is really only one pair, and there is no shame in folding it if the board gets ugly. There are times that I have folded my AA on the flop, and sometimes they were even the best hand. The one thing I know for sure is that the ability to lay down a good hand is something that will save you more money in the long run.
I'm glad you enjoyed the real thing (I have played some IRC poker and it really can't compare to real casino poker).
P.S. The only thing you need in order to improve is patience and the desire to learn from your mistakes. It appears that you have both of these.
On the main hold em forum the question was raise about raising with pocket 10's on the button..As a fairly new player I am haviong some difficulty with this. I believe the main reason to raising is to get out some of the callers as well as the blinds. However won't the original callers see the raise? If there calling in early position they must be holding decent cards. The odds on an overcard appearing on the flop are about 3-1. Where do you go from there assuming you have 3 or 4 players still in the game?? It seems the only way to win is with a set?? Wouldn't it be better to raise after the flop if no overcard appears?
I tend to agree that the raise is not always good. If you expect the blinds to call to make it 4 or 5 way, then calling must be ok. If the blinds are fairly tight and you may get it 3 way then the raise is good.
There seems to be constant disagreement with how to handle 10,10 or JJ amongst the better players.
In early position, I am confident that raising in the tight game and calling in the loose game is right ( as HFAP recommends ). With late position perhaps you have enough extra edge to just raise but I am not sure.
D.
At the present timeI believe my best play with pocket 10's on the button would be to raise pre-flop. If no overcard shows on the turn, bet or raise again.. However if an overcard shows I believe I would raise..If re-raised muck the hand..Of course this play doesn't take into account the opponents tells,possible bluff with the reraise or checkraise etc.. What do you think???
To me, the main reason for raising with TT on the button is to get both blinds out of the hand. The assumption that the early limpers must have good cards, otherwise they wouldn't have limped at all is not true in most loose and/or low limit games. Most of the players at these games seem to have the attitude of "well, maybe I can sneak in and see the flop with these" with crappy cards. Then when the late position raise comes, they figure "well, I'm in this far! no point in dropping them now". In most of these games, I don't limp from early position without asking myself if these cards can stand a raise from a later position player. That decision includes an assessment of the chances of it being a multi-way pot with at least 6 or 7 callers, giving drawing hands more value. If the answer is no, I pass on the hand. So far, this has kept me out of early position trouble. However, if the # of players in the hand is shaping up to be small and I don't detect bigger over-pairs so far, I think raising is a good play pre-flop, especially if the blinds aren't likely to defend. A very conditional answer, I know. Sorry for that.
You raise because you have the best hand and can outplay the rest of the table post-flop. If you are a beginner and lack the experience to know when to bet or fold with your unimproved pair, you will only win with a set and should call.
If I am on the button with 5 or more people in the hand and only 1 or less raisers, I would raise. The pot will be giving me the proper odds. If I get a set (7.5:1 against), I am in pretty good shape. In early position, I probably would call, but fold if raised and if not raised and no help from flop containing an overcard, I also fold.
Pocket tens and jacks are great cards to start with but must be treated with care.
They have great value in two different situations: with one or (to a lesser extent) two opponents, or with at 5 or more opponents. 3 or 4 opponents is death.
If you are heads up, pocket tens are a HUGE hand. In fact they are the fifth best starting cards you can have heads up. You can win with them most of the time unimproved.
But if you have lots of people seeing the flop, you must almost always flop a set to make money from them. And, in this case you want to get in cheaply with them. So don't raise with them unless you are sure you will get 5 or more callers. Or, raise with them if you will knock out everyone but one. If you already have exactly 3 limpers before the flop, just limp along in and pray for a set.
Dear Sir/Madam
I am writing from Sydney, Australia, urgently requiring information for an assignment. I am seeking the names (past/present) of the best, most honest, card dealers & mathematicians in history.
Extensive websearch has not helped me so far.
Any names would be MOST appreciated. Thanking you in advance for your assistance.
Regards, vmcinaus@yahoo.com.au
gaaaahuh?
Much as I like the Priest and Rabbi jokes that Harold tells at the table, there's a good reason why Einstein and Hawking are a little easier to find on web searches.
Poker Dealer Hall of Fame. Kind of silly, if you ask me.
http://www.pokerworld.com/pdhall.html
I am looking to get better ant 7CS and Hold'Em. What are some good software packages for practicing and refining strategy? I have had some recommendations for Turbo Texas Hold'Em. Any others?
Also, if this is not the correct forum for this question, please let me know what is. Thaks,
Riceman
Mike Caro's Poker Probe. Not as elaborate as Turbo but simpler and easier to use. Turbo and Poker Probe are all you'll need.
I use Wilson's Turbo. It needs some tweeking, but it is quite good and runs very fast and smoothly on a pentium machine. The programs are $80 each with reasonably priced upgrades. they are not protected so you can do a full load to the hard drive without inserting the cd (i.e. you can play your music cd's on the computer as you play poker). You will not be disapointed. I have absolutely no connection with the company. I received them as gifts form my son.
I played seven card stud at the casino poker rooms in Tunica, and I have a question about burnt cards. (The dealers burn a card after each street is dealt. I think they start burning cards after third street is dealt.)
Why do they burn cards?
They do it because of the possibility of marked cards. If there's a marked card that hasn't been announced by a player or caught by a dealer, it gives an unfair advantage to the player that knows about it and hasn't reported it.
Let's say the Jack of diamonds is marked. If I knew for sure that it would be coming up on the turn, it would give me a huge advantage. But now there's a burn card blocking my view of the turn card. If the only thing I knew was that it would be burnt, I couldn't take advantage of that as much.
Hope this helps,
Dan
In an Omaha high/low game is the best low hand A 2 3 4 5 or A 2 3 4 6? Also if they made a flush does that disqualify the hand for a low?
In Omaha high/low, straights and flushes don't count for low. The best low hand is A2345.
The easiest way to compare lows is to order the numbers from highest to lowest, and the lowest number is the better low.
54321 is lower than 64321, so 5432A is a better low than 6432A.
74321 is lower than 76321, so 7432A is a better low than 7632A.
-Sean
what a silly game! why not discount flushes for the high as well? it seems like a double standard. i just don't get it
I suspect that you are, but this is the "Beginners Questions" forum, so I'll answer seriously in case beginners are curious. In most commonly spread hi-lo games, including Omaha 8 or better and 7 card stud 8 or better, straights and flushes don't count for low, so an A2345 is the best hand for low. The only game I'm aware of that counts straights and flushes against a low is deuce to seven lowball, which doesn't get spread much these days.
-Sean
I'll tell you the truth about my above post. . .I've just started learning Omaha Hi-Lo and I'd just played in a cheap buy-in tourney that day, and not only did the dealers on a regular occasion not know what hands the players were holding, THE PLAYERS OFTEN DIDN'T EITHER! Players would turn over their hands and say things like "two pair. . . . oh no!! Wait!!! I've got the nut straight!"
Maybe I'm just hanging out around the wrong players? Or maybe I just love Hold'em too much. Anyway, I'm sorry for setting your sarcasm detector off. I'll be more careful in the future.
I'm classifying this as a beginner question because the answer seems so obvious, but I want to know if there's an actual rule out there. Yes, I know that cards speak, but is it possible to intentionally declare a lower hand than you actually have and use that as your hand?
Examples:
Board is AAKKQ. You have A-Q, another person has an Ace. Can you intentionally declare that you have Aces full of Queens and NOT Aces full of Kings?
Board is KQJT3 all spades. Opponent has the Ace of spades. You have the 98 of spades. Does your hand have to be a king high straight flush or is there a rule allowing you to declare a queen high straight flush?
If you haven't guessed, this is in regards to bad beat jackpots. I never play soley for the jackpots, but as long as they're there, I'd like to know options that are available to me, assuming the need arises. The rule in our casino is that both of the loser's cards must play.
Thanks.
Dan
Cards speak.
Can't declare 2 pair when you have 4 of a kind.
ya ya, that's what I thought too, but I had to check for loopholes anyway. Like the need will ever come up. Thanks though.
Dan
I'll be in Las Vegas in a couple weeks. Have never played poker there, and would appreciate advice on a newbie-friendly place for lowest stakes Hold'em and/or Seven Card Stud. Also, which of these two games would be better for starting out in LV? Thanks in advance.
Excalibur for hold'em (2-6),Flamingo for stud (1-5).
If you are new to poker,lean towards stud,but learn both.
Good Luck,
Howard
I'll second the Excalibur as a friendly place with a pretty easy game. Just be aware that the game is played with the attitude "there are no bad cards, only bad flops". Its fun though.
The Luxor also runs a beginners game (or used to) - heard it was ok to get started.
I can't agree more - the Excalibur is the BEST place for a newcomer to the game. Lots of people new to the game like the single 2 dollar blind structure.
It's a 2-6 game and you pay 2 bucks each orbit around the table. If you play 3-6 at the Mirage you'll be paying 4 each time for smaller pots. (I THINK the mirage has 1 and 3 dollar blinds in that game, don't they?)
Anyway, the very first few times I ever played poker in a casino were at the Excalibur I won after just reading a 20 page explaination of extremely basic strategy. Knowing even just a little will get you off to a good start in that game. There are no sharks there.
Be advised however that it is really hard to make money at low limit tables because of the rake. I have spent many long nights playing poker at low limit tables because that's all i have available.
The table will take about 100 dollars in rakes per hour. Add to that tips for the dealers and waitresses. Now think about how much people are buying in for. There have been many times that I've seen 20 people buy in and 3 cash out. Or one.
Anyway, this is a great place to start. Good luck!
-SmoothB-
Excalibur also brings out food for the players every night.For some strange reason,I have done very well at 2-6 there.
I'm not sure that this is the right forum for this, but I'm wondering if anyone knows information about poker dealers. How much do they make, generally? Is it difficult to find work as a dealer? If anyone knows specifically about Foxwood's dealers, that would be great but any information would be appreciated.
I'd guess $30-$40 an hour, including tips.
Depends where the dealer works.
In Los Angeles dealers make $20K-60K. Daytime and week dealers make less than those who work on the weekends and during the evening due to bigger pots and larger tips at those times. Most Commerce Casino dealers make $40-50K while those at the Bike make less. Bay area dealers don't make enough to live on their own. For instance many Bay 101 dealers live closer to Santa Cruz.
Las Vegas dealers don't make much(cept at Bellagio). Several at poker rooms there with fewer than 10 tables have told me that they are lucky to make $15-$20K per year. What amazes me is how much more competant they are than those who make twice as much in Los Angeles.
Where is the best place for a new casino player to go at AC? I'm looking for low stakes Hold'em.
If you like to smoke while playing, go to the Trop and play 2-4, 3-6 or 5-10. If you're a non-smoker, go to the Taj and play the same limits.
Taj has more tables, and is a bit easier (in my opinion). The Trop is friendlier and overall nicer (again, IMO). Try both. They have 2-4, 3-6 (lately 4-8) 5-10, 10-20, 20-40 and with summer coming even higher. Every once in a while you will see a 2-4 pot limit and a 10-20 pot limit.
How is the Taj easier?
Hi,
Would anyone mind explaining the difference between 'limping in' and 'cold calling'. I first thought they meant the same and that different people just used their favorite, but I've since seen hand descriptions like 'there were three limpers and two cold called'. If you bet (eg BTF) and the person to your left calls, have they limped in, or called cold, or just plain called?
Thanks in advance.
Winwood
Try,
http://www.kimberg.com/poker/dictionary.html
In the example you give there's no difference; they're all doing the same thing. But one of the writers is misusing the expression "cold-call" when he really means "call."
Limping means calling a forced bet, such as a blind, as opposed to raising or folding. The term subtly emphasizes the absence of a raise.
A "cold-call" means to call a raise. It emphasizes the fact of calling after another player shows strength.
;)
Winwood,
Chris wrote: A "cold-call" means to call a raise. It emphasizes the fact of calling after another player shows strength.
It is my understanding that a "cold-call" is the act of calling a raise (or raises) *when one has not yet called any bets*.
For example, the first player to act after the blinds in Hold 'Em raises and you put in two bets. This is different than 4 people putting in one bet, having someone raise, and then the 4 put in another bet. These 4 would be calling a raise, but not "cold calling", in my understanding.
KJS
aye. but if you limp, then call 2 raises. that is a cold call. i think.
scott
That's what I meant to say. You have to put in two bets to cold call.
Hi,
My Turbo Holdem software says that the odds of hitting a str8 with AQ and JTxx on the board is 14.4 to 1. With 46 unseen cards and 4 to make the str8, why isn't it approximately 11-1. Where am I wrong.
Thanks in advance.
Pyramid,
That is the odds for a three outer. I am guessing that there is two or three of a suit on board and the software is not counting the King of that suit as an out for you because it might make a flush for an opponent.
Just a guess, but it is good practice to keep track of your odds as well as what outs you might share with opponents.
KJS
I'm not exactly a beginner, but i have never seen this before.
I was playing on line at Paradise Poker and for some reason i missed my small blind (i posted the big blind), But after the blinds, instead of posting only the small blind, i had to post another big blind. I e-mailed them asking them why, and they replied that it was because, and i quote "you posted another big blind because you missed the small blind AND you missed playing the worst position in the game. This is a standard rule in most card rooms", end of quote.
Is this really so ?, i've never, ever been aware of such a rule.
Thanks
Letting someone sit out the small blind and then post it on the button would give them an unfair advantage because they'd never have to play the small blind position, that being first to act for three rounds in a hand. Any player given this option should take it every time.
In low-limit games in some cardrooms, however, the dealer is probably instructed to let it slide as long as it's not abused. The fairer rule is to make them pay.
I play mostly 1-5 7cs in very tight games. My question is; if I have a three flush at third street w/two over cards hidden & a low card on board to a possible high pair raise, should I raise back and hope for a free card on 4th street if I don't catch another to the flush, improve to a over pair or catch a scare card?
Should I just muck this hand at the lower limits with no cost to me?
Or should I just call and see what happens?
???
it depends, if you have two overcards, and they were alive, I would play. With regard to you reraising, I would first determine if there are other players who have called. If two or more callers, I would call and hope to catch my flush. Flush does better mutiway. If one other caller, I would raise to get heads up to improve your chances of catching a higher pair backdoor.
with two overcards and a flush draw, and in low limit, I don't know if you can play your hand "definitely" wrong.
IMHO.
what I meant was that if you pair up the overcard backdoor, you will be better off in a heads up game.
Regards, GRF
We'll be moving the forums to a new server shortly. Just before that happens, I'll disable posting on the forums. You'll still be able to read them, but not to post replies or new messages. Once the transfer is complete, I'll re-enable posting.
Sorry, in advance, for any inconvenience that this may cause.
Chuck
Sorry, the downtime was longer than I expected. Everything should work now.
Chuck
Just started playing Omaha hi\lo 8 or better. Could someone answer an odds question for me as numbers make my head hurt! If I start of with two of my cards 8 or less and my other two are rags, are the odds in favour of me making any kind of low hand by the river, bearing in mind the possibilities of pairing the board etc. I get the feeling that the odds are slightly against. Answers? Goldfish
I may be wrong here but I remember reading something like 39% of the hands are high only leaving 61% for the 8 or better. I'd like to know for sure.
I have just started playing in Omaha 8 tournaments and would like to know for sure.
According to the Shane Smith O8 book, if you hold 2 different low cards in your hand before the flop, you'll make a low by the river 24% of the time. I think Rounder's 61% figure is the number of times there are 3 low cards on the board, but these won't all make you a low because of pairing. (I.e. if you hold 23 and there's A25 on the board, there's a possible low, but you have no low.)
If 2 low cards different from the ones you hold flop, you'll make a low 59% of the time.
-Sean
Hi there,
I have a question about the poker game I play in. We're all students and we play a 10c/$1 spread-limit texas hold'em home game. The average buy in is $5 each which normally lasts everyone all night. Also there's almost always only 4 or 5 of us. The final fact is that I'm pretty sure I'm the only one of us with any interest in the more in depth features of the game - and when I say 'in depth' I mean any kind of strategy based on probabilities, pot odds, implied odds, position, basically anything a real player should know. I don't claim any expertise at all, I'm just a beginner like them, I'm just the only one who reads poker forums and owns poker books (well I've got a few on order8-) )
So my question (apart from the subject line) is what kind of strategy can you use in a very shorthanded, very very low limit, very weak game. And how applicable are any strategies for even a $2/$4 game to such a low limit game as ours. The play tends to be fairly loose, with one player at least who'll raise any two suited cards, even from UTG, and multiway showdowns quite common.
I have read a lot of the postings here and in the HE forum, and they all contain valuable information which has certainly improved my play, but I don't think I've ever seen a posting regarding our type of game.
Please feel free to flame the hell out of this crappy type of home game, but if anyone has any tips, or can recommend any good books for (very) LLHE I'd be very grateful.
Thanks in advance,
M.W.
there really is no strategy to apply here - have fun play all the hands and if you get the run of the cards you might win a few bucks.
It really isn't poker - if you get selective about the hands you play they won't invite you back and if you start check raising I suspect the same thing will happen. Play 1/2 the hands Ax, T+ suited, coupled and any 2 T or bigger. That ought to get you playing 50% with a decent chance for success.
The only big lesson you'll learn will be handling the agony of having Aces cracked by 83o. Master it at $.10/$1, and you'll be more graceful when it starts happening at 2/4, 5/10, etc.
good luck.
The structure you describe favors trapping and bluffing, much like no-limit or pot-limit. If five big bets normally lasts everyone all night, then all of you are equally skilled, or none of you knows what you're doing, or both.
As for strategy, a certain amount depends on when you can bet the buck. Generally, you want to see the flop cheaply, refrain from fighting when you flop very little, but bet the max when (1) you're loaded (2) anytime you can blow them off the pot. After your opponents adjust by copying you, you can start slowplaying and trapping more.
You are to be commended for seeking advice.The responses you have recieved come from very good knowledgable players. Keep reading ...get software like turbo hold-em learn discipline ....Always pay attention between hands( this is truly where you get to understand behaviour of the players ..tells,betting patterns etc...) One book i found absolutely valuable was " Zen Of Poker".A calm,disciplined, focused,knowledgable mind rarely loses. You say you ordered books heck if I was you i`d check out the major bookstores near you.. I`m doubting very much your hunger will be quenched till you hit the tables loaded to the nuts...
jg
This game is going to resemble very much many loose LL short handed games in any casino. This is assuming your gang is using the same blind structure - one small one big. Short handed is going to make it even easier to win at this game becuase you'll have fewer suck out hands up against your good starters.
I don't think you've gotten good advice so far from other posters. Here's how to play this game:
Start with good hands most of the time. When the flop helps you at all, raise and re-raise and you'll get all their money. Listen and watch the other players because they probably will tell you when they have a big hand. Your primary concern will soon be guarding against pissing your friends off so much they don't want to play you anymore.
Listen to Nick,it is still poker.David Sklansky said "Whether you are playing $1-limit at the kitchen table or pot-limit poker at the stardust in Las Vegas, whether you are playing poker for fun or for a living,once a week or every day,you have to understand that the object of the game is to make money.That's were the profits are.That's were the fun is.That's the way the game is scored".
Wiser words(in poker terms) have never been spoken.
As far as not being invited back,if you start taking the game seriously,let me tell you a short story.
When I first started playing many years ago,I too decided to better my game through study.One of the first things I learned, was about folding on 3rd street in stud,since no one ever did this in the home game I played in,in Florida. When I put my new strategy/tactic{ :-) } into play,the reaction was,"what kind of moron would fold after three cards,you have no idea what your final hand will be after only three cards". After a few hours,one of the players who had been loosing says,in a deep brown voice "I'm gonna start playing like Howard,he's winning". He did,and he started winning too.
Good Luck,Howard
Start with good hands most of the time
Why would he need a good hand if the cost of seeing the flop is one-tenth of what he can bet if he hits it?
When the flop helps you at all, raise and re-raise and you'll get all their money.
Uh, how? This is comical. I see, you raise and re-raise . . . and you get all their money! The secret revealed! Aren't you assuming that his opponents are too stupid to realize that since he'll jam whenever the flop helps him "at all," they can leisurely shift back and forth between playing "rope-a-dope" and pounding the crap out of him with any big pair? And doesn't it mean that whenever he misses the flop he has to surrender the pot in a 5-handed game?
Hi,
First, thanks to everyone who replied. I appreciate you taking the time.
I just wanted to add a little to my first post. I take Chris' point about seeing the flop as cheaply as possible then betting big when it hits. But this doesn't really happen, I think because everyone wants their money to last (hey we're only students) and I think we all see it as more fun this way (not that playing 200/400 at the Bellagio isn't fun I'm sure). In truth I said the game was $.10/1 because the smallest chip is worth a dime, and the biggest bet I've seen is $1. In actuality we don't really have a structure. I would say a typical bet ranges 20-50c, (our blinds are 5 and 10 BTW), although last night someone bet $1 after the river put a full house on the board. His opponent folded to what turned out to be a good bluff. The winner had been the BB, and bet very strong (40c) when 552 flopped, again after the turn brought another 5, and then the $1 after the final 2 convinced us all he had the quads - turned out he had AJo to his opponents A2s.
Anyway what I really wanted to know was sensible starting hands, and whether in a 4/5-handed game I should even consider my position (or any other factors other than my two cards)when deciding whether to play. Ie should I fold 56o from UTG but call it from the button (two seats from UTG!)? I currently play much as Rounder advised; Ax, T+ suited or connected, any 2 cards J or higher, plus lower suited connectors. This generally does me well, though I play less hands than most, and naturally fold hands I would call down to the river if I'd just called that measly 10c.
Any further advice would be gratefully accepted.
M.W.
I take Chris' point about seeing the flop as cheaply as possible then betting big when it hits. But this doesn't really happen, I think because everyone wants their money to last (hey we're only students) and I think we all see it as more fun this way....
I was slack-jawed when first reading this but remembered, oh sure, a lot of home games are like this, no max limit because it's so friendly. Perfectly ok and perfectly reasonable -- to a point -- and of course it's poker. So don't skin these guys and kill the game, just remember that the object is to win the money. You'll do that if you venture toward the edge of the betting envelop with the best hand more than they do.
Also, games evolve. Six months from how you might be playing pot limit with $.25 and $.50 blinds.
Starting hands suggestions. The following is crude and not to be followed by the letter, but it should get you on the right track of things you need to consider. Also, take it with a grain of salt as I am neither an expert nor a professional. Much in poker is subject to reasonable debate, although mostly around the underlying assumptions to the recommendations. Once all the assumptions are agreed to there isn't much left but the numbers.
1. Calling hands.
If you've read HPFAP or some other hold 'em book, you should have a good idea about what kinds of cards qualify as a "starting hand." Adjust these downward for your game, but only to a point. Hands with aces in them and all pairs go up in value. A6o is junk in 10-handed, but I'd always play it in your game and see if I could flop an ace. Baby pairs 22-55 are always playable for one bet, just tend to get rid of them after the flop if they don't improve, which will be about 90% of the time.
You can also raise with any pair, including 22, if you're sure you can get it heads-up with one opponent, unless your opponent will just call you all the way even if he doesn't have a pair or a good draw after the flop (you'll end up with the best hand about half the time in these cases, but will win less than he will because he'll be able to bet more when he's ahead). In that case, try to see the flop cheaply with 22-55 and let it go as soon as your opponent indicates he has a better pair (without at least a gutshot draw to boot, virtually never call after the flop with these hands when you're behind -- it's 11-1 to improve to trips with 2 cards to come, 22.5-1 with one to come).
Hands like K2s and Q2s are playable for one bet when there hasn't been and won't be any raise before the flop. (Q2s is pushing it -- Q7s is much better). About the worse hands you want to play for a dime preflop (unless you think a raise will win $.15 regardless, in which case you should raise with any two cards) are J7o and 96s. Fold all hands that are worse. Don't play a suited J2-J5.
2. Hands to call raises with.
If the pot is raised preflop (I'm assuming a raise of about a dime or a quarter), in order to play you need a hand that either (1) has a reasonable shot at being better than the raiser's hand -- like QT if he sometimes raises with T9o, or (2) can make a big hand or a big draw on the flop, and there's enough money in your opponent's stack to make it worth the risk if you hit. This would include hands like pocket sixes or Axs, but not pocket deuces, Kxs or 87s unless your opponent played terribly.
If you think your hand is better than the raiser's more than (say) 60% of the time he makes this raise, you should always reraise, although if your hand is much stronger you might want to wait to trap him later. For example, say you have QQ and your opponents raises in front of you, and he'll raise with any two cards 9 or above. Generally reraise, but sometimes call and put it a big raise on the flop after he bets, unless of course the flop is bad for you (it contains an ace).
3. Raising hands.
There are more hands with which you can raise than you can call raises with. This is because (1) when you raise, your opponents haven't shown strenght, and (2) your raise might make a better hand fold (now or later). Those components of value don't exist when you're the one who's facing the raise.
Always raise and reraise preflop with the big pairs (88 and above), big suited cards AJs and above and ATo and above. Vary your play a bit by limping and then reraising a raiser with the stronger of these hands, but not if your opponents hardly every raise preflop.
Don't tend to slowplay these hands and give the blinds a cheap shot and hitting something. It's better to pick up the blinds with these hands so that you can also pick up the blinds with worse hands than it is to "trick" your opponents into thinking you don't have much. (By "pick up the blinds" I'm including times when you get one caller who folds on the flop unless he flops big). The problem with this strategy is that even when they think you're not big, they still won't pay much if the flop misses them (as it ususally will), but you'll pay when the flop hits them. When you start off ahead, this is the time to make them pay, not in the middle or the end of the hand after they've had a chance to catch up.
As your position moves closer to the blinds you can adjust these standards downward. Also remember that AK is huge and AJ is just good. If this game were more aggressive these calling guidelines would probably be a bit too loose.
Never hesitate to put as much money as you possibly can into the pot with AA or KK unless your opponents are so cautious that you can win much more by slowplaying (which will be rarer than you think). KK is much weaker than AA because it can be outdrawn by A-anything and on rare occasions will get duly slaughtered by AA. Still, it towers above the next closest competition and cutting your opponents slack when you hold it is giving away money.
4. "Trouble" hands.
The term coined by Doyle Brunson for big unsuited cards below AK, so named because you so often make a second best hand with them. Also because you'll pay more to lose against a better hand than a worse hand will tend to pay you. Here I mean two face cards or ten without an ace down to JT.
Despite their weaknesses, these hands are strong in this game and should just about alway be played. With a regular preflop raiser behind you fold KJ, QJ, QT and JT, but if the game is passive limp early with them, with a rare occasional raise for deception. Tend to raise with them as you move closer to the blinds without a contest. Be very careful about calling raises with them and often fold them if you feel the raiser needs a bigger hand.
Thanks a lot Chris for all that great advice. I'm sure my poker game is going to really improve by following is (well most of it). Hey, soon I might be making 50c or $1 and hour playing poker!! I might as well drop out of college earning that sort of money!
Thanks again MW
At the 6/12 stud game at HP, there is a $1 ante. With 6 or more players the drop is $3 and on the card at the table it states that with 5 or less then $2 drop.
However, with 4 or less, if a player requests it, the floor will OK a $1 drop. Sometimes we can get a $1 drop with 5 players. The dealers always have to get floorman’s OK and this takes time. The dealer’s will drop $3 most of the time unless it is called to their attention, not underhanded, just a habit.
Is it worth the effort to get the drop reduced?
If no one else is asking for it, I always request to go with a reduced rake (or drop in your case). We've got a $4 drop with a $1 jackpot. With 5 or less players it can, if everyone agrees, go down to $1 drop and no jackpot. Fine by me. I'm ultra ultra conservative in full games but get it short handed and I start raising the bejeezus out of the cards. Every pot I bully my way through is 5 more dollars in my pocket than I would have had with a full rake. With a drop, you're flat out saving $4 an hour. If you don't take advantage of that, I'll e-mail you my address and you can send me the $4 too.
Dan
I first played a hand of HE 6 months ago and have been recreationally playing it every other weekend at the local casino. I started on 3-6 and after about 3 months I moved up to 5-10 which is the limit I currently play. Ignoring a more techinical discusison on variance and SD, I am just wondering how I am doing given that I am up $440 after 6 months (have not kept track of hours). I was constantly losing for the first few weeks and since then I have had alternating sessions of winning $300-400 and losing $300-400 with one memorable win of $1800 over a 8 hour session (a statistical anomaly, I am afraid). My insight into the game I believe has improved substantially as I have gained experienced. I play purely for leasure and I am not delusional to think I can make any significant money out of 5-10 HE. I am just curious what experiences other people have had in the early stages of their playing career and whether my current performance suggets that poker can be affordable hobby.
Comments appreciated,
Azad
Hey look on the bright side you are beating over 90% of the people who play in the games you have been playing in. Up $440 in 6 months - hope you are including all your playing expenses like meals and soft drinks.
Say you play 3 nights a week and 5 hours a session that's 390 over 6 months or about 1.13 an hour. Not min wage yet but not negative numbers eigther.
My 1st 6 months were a disaster but once I learned to stop chasing and playing marginal hands in marginal position I started to become a winner.
Good luch to you and keep us posted on your continuing success.
A decent start, but you should approach $10-12/hr. Considering that you play for leisure, any positive amount is acceptable especially considering that going to the movies costs about 5-15/hr
My movies cost 2 an hour usually go to the cheap before 6 shows and they cost $4 for a 2 hour movie.
Such a deal.
Yea, same here but that is for all those "senior citizens" shows. AH, retirement---sounds good. Only 15 more years.
Rounder, I have been playing for a couple of months and have a basic concept of marginal hands, positions and groups according to Sklansky. I would really appreciate anyones insight to position and what that looks like from a players point of view. Also, what is a loose game, tight game etc. I know this is a lot but would appreciate any input. I learn more from discussion then reading. Thanks to all who participate. Novice
Loose tight passive aggressive -
Guess the best way of determining this is the amount of players seeing a flop and for how many bets.
If say 5 or 6 are seeing flops for the a small bet you are looking at a loose passive game if 5/6 are seeing it for with raises. It is loose aggreessive
Tight would be less callers like 1 to 3 no raises = passive.
I'm sure S&M have a much more elaborate way of describing this.
Far as position - I sort of break up the table in 4 groups. early = UTG +1, Mid = next 3, late = button and 1 right and the blinds.
The hands I play in these positions very according to the type of table.
In a passive game I'll play premium hands, pairs and Axs from most anywhere, T9 on up from mid position and 45 on up from late. I don't play many gapped cards under T and view suited as a bonus but won't play ranks suited that I don't play unsuited with the exception of Axs.
Hope this helps.
If you are in a 5-10 or 10-20 game and everyone folds to the bring in once in 30 minutes, it's a very tight game. If early callers (2 or more) call in early position with non picture cards and there is an Ace and or King showing, the game is moderately loose. If the Ace or King raises and the others call, it is very loose.
What type of Hold'EM games does Colorado have on bet structure on the low end. Spread limit or structured. Looking near Colorado Springs?
Everything in the casinos is on the low end because the max bet by law is $5. The standard game is $2-5 spread limit with one $2 blind and $2-5 bettable on all rounds, five raise max. I don't know Cripple Creek, but Blackhawk also has $5-5 hold 'em (one $5 blind, $5 min/max bets all rounds) and $3-5 (one $3 and one $5 blind, $5 on all rounds -- no fold 'em insanity). Rake is $4 including jackpot, so focus on the very loosest games. Plenty of those. Also, Bullwackers in Blackhawk and Harvey's in Central City host small tournamants during the week. You probably want to call the Midnight Rose casino in Cripple Creek for more info. If you don't mind the drive, you'll probably see better weekend action in Blackhawk.
Thanks I came out ahead. I went to the Midnight Rose. I later in the Vacation went to Vegas and played at the Mirage, Bellagio, Flamingo and the of course I had to play a few at Binions Horseshoe.
Take it from me, poker sucks in Colorado because of the maximum you can bet-5 dollars. Almost everyone stays in and you just cant get anybody out because of the small bet limit. 9 times out of 10 someone will suck out on you with a piece of cheese. I hate it-dont even play here anymore and I love to play poker.
as an arizona holdem player visiting card rooms in california, I am curious about the posting on the button, in addition to the posting of the blinds. arizona play does not require the posting on the blind. considering the percentage this reqirement takes away from the players winnings over an extended play period. it appears to be an advantage for the house and a detrimment to the player. I welcome all comments.
It's unclear to me what your asking. But after a few readings I think maybe you're asking about the dead drop that is posted on the button in many small limit hold'em games in CA. Is that right? Yes, it's a very bad thing for the player. It is an excessive rake, and is probably costing the house money in the long run as it prevents lot's of players who could win if the rake were reasonable from doing so. When they don't win, they are of course less likely to move up, creating more games at other limits. Some, of course, just drop out of poker.
Do the rules of traditional 7CS Hi-Lo or 7CS Hi-Lo 8 or Better require a player to declare his hand as Hi, Lo or Both before the showdown? If yes, how does this work?
Thanks,
Jon
Jon,
No declare in any card rooms, only home games declare . Cards read.
s
Yesterday at a local casino, a hold'em table exploded with anger because a third person involved in a pot somehow screwed up a jackpot for two other guys who had jackpot hands. I thought they were going to kill him, security came running over just in case it got physical.
Can you explain to me(with an example) how a third person involved in a hold'em hand can screw up a jackpot? I'd really like to know so I don't unknowingly screw one up myself for two other people.
Thank You, Todd
Yeah - here is a scenario - most casinos want you to use all the cards in your hand in a HE game. Say the JP is A"s full of T's or better beaten by 4 of a kind.
Board is AAAQ5 - Player a has AK and player B has JJ these two qualify for the jackpot UNLESS a 3rd player has say a Qx in their hand. He can beat the JJ and NOT qualify cuz he is not using BOTH cards in the hole.
Say the board unfolded like this, you have Q-K and the flop comes A-A-Q. You bet and the guy with A-K decides to wait until the turn before going nuts. The guy with pocket Jacks only calls because he figures he's dead and needs a miracle. The last Ace comes on the turn, now you feel pretty good about your hand, right? So you bet and get raised by the A-K, anybody in your position is going to at least call, right? If I were the guy with pocket jacks, I'm most likely not going to initiate a capped pot for fear of the Queen.
Ok, so the river is a blank, you possibly decide to check and call(or bet out get raised then call, whatever), now you see that you've ruined the jackpot.
My questions are (1): how in the heck could the others at the table get so incredibly pissed at you (like what I saw the other day)? Who could blame you? I can understand an incredible sense of disappointment on their part, but to be enraged to the point where they want to beat you up, I just don't get it. They were treating this guy like he should have known better. Like as though he should have had the sense to know he was screwing up a blatantly obvious jackpot.
(2)Is there an example you can think of that would show how a third person involved should be able to recognize he's probably interfering with a jackpot?
Thanks, Todd
If 3 A show up and you don't have a high pair dump he hand it could cost you thousahds.
The guy with the (hypothetical) single queen, can muck his hand without showing it when he knows he's beaten. I'm sure the winner in a jackpot hand would have put the last bet in, so it costs the second place hand nothing to muck without showing. The third place hand, which does qualify, can then show his hand and the table can throw a party.
I've heard of a situation exactly like what Rounder has described. The table was "warned" ahead of time that both cards must play. Nevertheless, a guy turned over his Kx anyway to make Aces full of kings and disqualify the guy with pocket queens.
How do you know when you're screwing it up? If there are three people in the hand and you have a hand in the qualifying range but that does not qualify, ALWAYS ask to see the other two hands first! If they refuse, explain to them the situation. I guarantee you that they'll gladly turn over their qualifying hands out of turn if not doing so costs them a few thousand dollars.
Dan
Todd,
Rounder's example is the most common scenario. The exact situation happened near me about a month ago. Bottom line: if three Aces show up on board, dump any hand besides an A or a high pair.
KJS
x
As an arizona holdem player, I question the posting on the button in addition to the blinds I observed in the california card rooms. This posting is not required in the arizona card rooms. Request comments on the effects to the player, concerning percentage of winnings from pots.
I'm going to play my first game at AC this week. Any pointers on how to conduct oneself -- or is there anything, beside the rules of the game, that I should know?
The question seems general, I know. But I just want some general advice.
beside the rules of the game, that I should know?
Don't forget(to many times) to post your blinds without the dealer asking you.
Be alert to the position of the button. (the white disk)
Since it's your first time (3/6??) bring as much cash as you feel good about loosing and just have fun.
Play a bit tighter at first to get a feel for the table. Don't be a rock!! (theres plenty of time for that later in life ) Remember you can RAISE!! Play your big cards BIG and try not to chase, save your cash for your strong bets and again have some fun....
Best of it !!
MJ
MJC is right on, but I'd like to second his comments about speedy play. In this respect, poker is like golf. Slow play (not posting blinds, not knowing when the action is on you, putting in a long drink order during a hand) can create unnecessary tension at a table. I'm not talking about taking all the time you need for making decisions during the play of a hand. If you need time to think about your play, say "Time" loud enough for the whole table to hear.
Most of the dealers are slow enough down there. Most players appreciate when everyone keeps the game moving. You'll have a better time, and you'll boost your EV.
Get ready for rude obnoxcious SOBs - rules those people have no social rules. You should see the human debris that has migrated west to Arizona from NJ and NY - I hope I haven't offended and of you east coast regulars.
When the "boats" opened in Ill and Ind a few years ago they hired pit bosses from AC - what a zoo these guys were screaming at everyone. Made me sick.
AC is a pretty friendly overall. You will be treated as you treat people generally. The dealers are pretty good especially at the Tropicana. I think the floor people are by far the best at the Trop. They are efficient, friendly, knowledgable and fair. Most players at the Trop are patient to new players who know the game, but are just new to casino poker. Dealers will help you and often will look out for you if they feel you are a nice person. I would stick to the lower limits till you feel comfortable. Stud at 1-5, 5-10 and HE 2-4 and 3-6. Bring enough money and try to avoid the Mac machines which charge too much. Play tightly at first to get the feel of the game then make adjustments. Make sure you do not suffer any big loss early. Early, stay away from marginal hands and confrontation against players whose style you do not know. If you go to the TROP, ask for a Comp card so you will be able to get free food. Most of all, observe what is going on about you; sit at a table where you feel comfortable. Get up or transfer if you do not like your seat. Remember you are the customer.
The Taj is also good. I actually have a better win rate there but I prefer the Trop. I like the crowd better at the Trop. Confine your poker to those 2 places. Take a walk on the boardwalk, relax. You might even win.
I've put in a lot of hours in AC. . .thousands. And I've NEVER seen a pit boss yell at anyone. Not in the poker room, not in the blackjack areas.
And as for the 'human debris' comment, no offense taken ya friggin iguana eatin' Cedona hippie! : )
Ditto to ratso.
But you should see the trash that washes up in Arizona casinos from your part of the country. I am sure there are a lot of wonderful people there but your east coast retirees in the west are not doing their job.
Maybe the east chicago boats just hired the a-hole floor men from AC but they were a real piece of work and were all replaced pretty quick.
Perhaps the problem is with hiring standards at whatever casino(s) it is that you had bad experiences. I haven't had problems at AC.
Also, the image that you conjure is a room packed with angry old retired floor men from AC who washed ashore(in Arizona?). It sounds quite horrible. Can't they find people from Arizona to do this job?
I need articulation lessons.
The floor (Pit Bosses) men were in East Chicago casino boats - the old foggies are in Arizona casinos.
The foggies are tourists? Probably some of the bus people that like to spend their SS checks on slots.
Yeah, they can be pretty nasty, actually. They like to hog slots by stretching their little fat legs over three seats (to lose money thrice as fast).
I was chased away from a blackjack table from these coots at the Hilton a few weeks back.
But this is not a staff problem. The Pit Boss punished these menacing oldsters by raising the table limits and thus chasing them away.
And keep in mind that these types do not usually play anything that takes thinking (poker). Even their style of playing Blackjack can be fun to watch. I saw one double down on a total of eight VS a dealer upcard of ten.
Anyhow, please do not think this sort represents the east. That is not true.
Posted by: Jack Pitt (Jack-Pitt@worldnet.att.net)
Posted on: Tuesday, 16 May 2000, at 12:30 a.m.
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Tuesday, 16 May 2000, at 11:05 a.m.
Posted by: Jack Pitt (Jack-Pitt@worldnet.att.net)
Posted on: Tuesday, 16 May 2000, at 4:09 p.m.
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Tuesday, 16 May 2000, at 4:32 p.m.
Posted by: Jack Pitt (Jack-Pitt@worldnet.att.net)
Posted on: Tuesday, 16 May 2000, at 11:35 p.m.
I've got plans in the works to set up a poker tournament for my friends and me. Having never participated in an actual tournament I have some questions about how it should be structured. It will be eight-handed, $100 buy-in, no limit.
1. How do you accomodate the playing of multiple games? We want to play at least hold'em and stud, and maybe even Draw. Do you have a set number of deals before the game is switched, or is it time based? I see that the WSOP Women's Championship is played with both hold'em and stud -- how do they do it?
2. What is the advantage of offering a re-buy? What are the prerequisites for rebuying?
3. With $800 on the table to start with what is an appropriate size for the blinds in hold'em? For the antes and bring-in in stud? For the antes in draw? When do you raise the blinds/antes/bring-ins and by how much?
Sorry. Lots of questions I know, but thanks in advance.
Jon I.
I'll be the first to admit that I'm not an authority on tournament poker so be sure to grab others advice after reading mine.
I would reccomend having the tournament chips be at least 500 per person. If you go 100 per person, especially in NL, the game's gonna be over too quickly no matter what the blinds.
The advantages and disadvantages of rebuys get into a game theory aspect that I really couldn't comment on. As far as when you rebuy, you can have unlimited rebuys whenever you want, when a person's chip count goes below a certain amount, or when they go broke. Whatever you choose.
I would recommend a round of each game. Switching off every other time would not only be confusing, but also be near impossible when one game has blinds and the other has a bring-in. Expect play to be somewhat tight at the begining because players, while they obviously don't want to be elimnated in the first round, now have the added "incentive" of lasting long enough to play the other game.
Hope this helps
Dan
1. Switch when the blinda go up.
2. Rebuys add money to the pool and make play last a lot longer. 8 in NL could last 15 min with no rebuys.
3. I'd raise the blinds every 1/2 hour to an hour. start out 10-20 5-10 blinds. Then 10-20 blinds - 15-30 - 20-40 - 25-50 then double until through. Antis in same vain.
Jon
Dan and Rounder's advice is very sound. One note I can add: don't play No Limit Stud. It is a dreadful game. Keep the stud limit, maybe make the limit tied to the amount of the blinds in the HE game. That way the limits will keep increasing through the tournament.
KJS
I appreciate the advice -- could you please elaborate about what makes No Limit Stud so dreadful?
Jon,
Go to remarq.com and look for the messages in rec.gambling.poker. From there do a search on No Limit Stud. There was a discussion about it there, and the comments will be better than just mine.
KJS
That was very helpful. What other game would you rotate with Hold'em in a tournament, then? I'm think Duece to Seven Lowball, Draw, or Omaha Hi-Lo/8.
A flop game like pineapple or Omaha works well - 2 games to rotate is just fine.
s
Hi Just been reading and interesting thread on the HE forum all about raising or not raising with AKo against an 'unthinnable' field. Rounder mentioned that the problem is that lots of people do not know how to play AK post-flop. I am one of those. All I know is that there is no 'shame' in raising pre-flop then checking and folding if the flop doesn't fit and there is a bet. I've tried raising early then betting it out post-flop if it looks like the flop helped nobody. Still get losts of callers. So some advice please on playing AKo (or AKs?) post-flop with our without a pre-flop raise. Thanks Goldfish
It is all about the texture of the flop - If it is rainbow with no straight possibilities, Or is it TQX meaning IF you do hit your big pair someone is certainly gonna hit their straight as you will if the J comes you have to determine if you want to play further with a gut shot and almost certain disaster if you hit your hand.
Thing about AK for me if I don't hit it on the flop I pretty much get out of the hand - I will in the right circumstances raise the flop for a free card on the turn this often works and some times wins it right there. I do like AK in smaller fields and raise it about 80% of the time. In a tournament I will not call big raises with it by good players in multi way pots as they usually have me beat dominated and/or have the cards I need to win.
In a 3/6 game of Hold'em, what would the small and big blinds be?
Also, I am playing for the first time and don't want to sound like I do not know how to play -- so how does one say 3/6 when asking for a seat at a casino. It seems like a silly question I know, but I'd rather not come off as a "tourist" player.
Thanks, by the way, to those of you that posted responses to my last message (Neophyte). As you may remember, going to play the first time is a bit intimidating and it is nice to get advice.
Blinds are 2 and 3 for the small blind and big blind respectivally. Ax the board person to put on the 3-6 list. just say "3-6 hold'em for JP or JackP"
In the casino I play at blinds are 1 and 3. You'll be able to tell when you sit down though. Just watch the guy one to the left of the button.
Dan
You are right in most casinos - it's been a long time since I played 3- but I think it is 2-3 in some casinos.
For Jack. Just a tip muck your 1st 20 hands - really get the feel of the table and flow of the game it may sound nuts but if you are comfortable not worried about details you will be better able to consentrate on the game at hand.
Just a thought.
I wish you success.
When you ask for a seat, you'll be talking to the "brush," (the guy who maintains the wait list for seats), not the dealer or anyone at the table, so telling him you're a new player is no big deal. He probably sees tons of new players every day. If you don't want to come off as a tourist type, just remember to post your blinds in turn, pay attention to the action and act in turn at a reasonable speed, don't splash the pot or make string bets, and don't play with your chips right out of the rack.
When visiting a new casino, I introduce myself to the brush, tell him what limits I like to play, and ask about the structure of their game, if there are any special rules specific to their casino that I should be aware of, and also if there are any comps available for play. As a new player, I would simply introduce myself as being new to casino poker, and looking to play $3-6 Hold'em.
Finally, many casinos and cardrooms offer free poker lessons in the morning where they'll teach you the basic rules, how to post blinds, etc.
-Sean
Thanks for the advice.
FYI -- Taj has 2-4 Hold'em (for anyone interested in the lowest possible limits).
I played for about three hours or so. I actually came out ahead, but only seven dollars. I figure that's not bad for the first time.
I did what Rounder said and kinda watched for awhile before placing any real bets. It helped me get an idea of the players around me, but scared them out of the pot when I finally called a bet for the first time after nearly fory-five minutes.
Although I do not remeber what I held at the time I can tell you that I was cheated.
jack glad you did well.
rounder makes a point that very few people stress and that is scout the game your going to be in.study the players in depth.
also never think that asking questions is intrusive or embarassing.
this is the place to fire away anyyhing on your mind..
I think from your post that you dont have a book on this game.PLEASE buy one immediately.
$20,00 now is worth not losing and winning thousands down the road.
jg
Say you are in a low-limit game where everybody plays ANY ace, and you have pocket Kings. How many bets would you need in the pot to continue if an ace falls on the flop?(I'm afraid my always choosing to see the turn for one bet is slowly cleaning me out, among other things too.)
Thanks, Art
Yes, Art, that will cost you. Basically you expect to catch a winning hand if you hit a king on the turn. But the remaining kings are only 2 out of the 47 unseen cards. That makes it 45-2 or 22.5-1 odds against snagging that king on the turn. So, you might think that for the call to be correct the pot before you call has to contain at least 22.5 small bets.
But that's not quite right. You need to factor in "implied odds" (See Sklansky's _The Theory of Poker_. He coined the term.). That refers to what you can expect to win, over and above what's in there now, if you do hit your hand. So, say the pot only contains about 20 small bets. Is it big enough to make the call. Generally, yes, because it's usually going to be easy to pick up several more small bets (each big bet = 2 small bets) if you do hit your set. This will take you beyond the 22.5 bets that you need. (This is especially so because if the pot is that big, it's probably a multiway pot with a few players who will hang around to pay you off.)
Finally, you also need to consider those times that you hit your card but still lose. Because you can't always count on winning the pot when you hit your card, unless it's very clear that no one would likely end up with a hand that could beat 3 kings, you actually need to expect to win a little more than 22.5 bets. You add in this "fudge factor" and shoot for a little more, maybe 25 bets or thereabouts.
In a nutshell, you want the pot plus whatever you win in addition to go a little beyond 22.5 small bets. So getting around 18 or 19 to one on the flop should usually be enough. Just make sure that it isn't a situation where a set is much less likely to win. For example, you'd be less inclined to make the call with KcKs and a flop like AhJhTh, more inclined to make it with a flop like Ah9s3d (and no reason to supspect another player of having AA).
Heh, I just reread your post and see that your question is a little different from what I had thought it was. For some reason I was assuming that you "knew" an opponent had an ace. i.e., I was looking at it as I would an underpair to the flop, which you are almost certain cannot win without turning a set.
But your question is simply about having KK and whether to go past the flop when an ace flops. There your KK IS the best hand some reasonable portion of the time. So whether to go past the flop, and how to play in doing so is a judgement call. You specify that it's a LL game where they play any ace, so yes there's a better chance that someone has an ace. Still, you will sometimes be able to see the turn and sometimes the river. You will need to do some hand reading.
Are the players ones who won't bet without the ace? If so, you can check and fold if they bet. Have several players checked to you? Then you may be able to bet. If, say, the one player left behind you raises, NOW you can fold if you can put him on an ace. Likewise if you're check-raised by a predictable player. If someone bets and a couple of players call, now SOMEOME almost surely has an ace in such a LL game, right? Other times the judgement is trickier. The situations are many and varied. Sorry, there's not a cut and dried mathematical answer here as there was in my misunderstood version. It depends on the kinds of opps and what you read them for.
...you WILL have to fold quite often in this situation, ESPECIALLY in a LL game such as you describe. Choosing always or even usually to see the turn will cost you. But there are certainly times you can continue with the hand. That's where hand reading, including knowing the tendencies of your opps, comes in.
My God! Thank you for those essays John. I hardly expected anybody to go to SO much trouble! I've printed out your responses and will study them.
Thanks again, Art
No problem. I would just add that you *will* have to fold a great deal of the time. But as you get better and better at reading hands (talking about long term improvement as a player here) you'll be able to find a few extra times where you don't have to fold on the flop. Of course by then you may be in a higher limit game where players are less likely to have an ace, and more likely to be on a "move" as well. In those LL games, and until you're a pretty advanced player, it's wise not to get too far out of line looking for reasons not to fold in that spot if anyone has represented that ace.
Not sure why I couldn't get all my thoughts together in one post but...
Note that the need to fold is greater in multiway pots. e.g., someone bets, representing the ace. You're next with players behind you. Well, that bettor is more likely to have an ace than he would be if it were heads up (especially in a LL game), and even if he doesn't there's a strong chance that someone behind you does (and, in a LL game, probably won't fold even for two bets cold). Still, be careful even heads-up.
Unless the flop comes suited with an A and you have a K of that suit get out of the hand if you are sure you are in 2nd place - get out of the hand. Chasing here is costing you a lot of money and fishing for the 2outter is a loser.
If you want to fish just do it when there is a huge pot but at this stage I doubt if the pot is gonna be big eneough to draw.
I suggest this when ever you have over cards on the flop in a LL game your pair is hardley ever good.
The money you don't lose is just as valuable as the money you win.
I do not see any problem in chasing in holdem, but if you do, you had better know the math.
notice that with a pocket pair you have only two cards to improve but if you had second pair you would have five cards to improve your hand although some of them might not make the best hand for you. most times with many in you will throw away all pocket pairs when an ace falls and someone bets.
I've only been playing Hold'em at the local casino for a couple of weeks and I frequently am unable to tell what hands can be made from the board. I often can't even tell what the other players have when they show down! What can I do to learn to see and read poker hands better?
Get a deck and practice. Hope this helps.
Practice. Get a deck as Gus says. Get a computer poker game (Wilson Software). Play some low limit conservatively just to wet your feet. And practice even before you read too much. Try Andy Nelson's befinner book. It's cheap; it's small and it's good for a beginner. Sklansky's book is excellent but it is not a beginner's book. Even his 1st HE book (also excellent) is a bit advanced compared to Nelson's.
If no pairs on board - which means there are no full houses, if not 3 of a suit on board it means there is no flush and if there is almost always a straight on board - it is up to you to figure out if the available hands are something that fits the playing of the player holding cards.
Now it is a simple problem of comparing your holding against the possible/probale holdings of the other players.
Hope this hepls.
Thanks ever so much for the info. I bought a deck!
Now, how long does it take to get over the nervousness of being in a hand and tossing money into the pot? ;)
For Low Limit Holdem:
Seriously, watch for a while. See what the players do. When in doubt, the dealer will guide you. For example, when you are in the big blind (BB) and the bet comes around to you, the dealer may (should) say "Option" which means you have the option of raising. If you have a good hand-- raise. If not, simply push your blind toward the pot. Things like this are always a concern in the begining.
You might be tempted to make fun of yourself when you do something incorrect. Don't. I would not tell players anything like, "Hey, this is my forst time playing". Simply pay attention to what is going around you. Play solid poker. I would play only premium hands. When you are out of a hand, watch the players. Don't watch the flop, watch the players. The flop will not change, but you might see a wince in a players face giving you a hint as to what he has.
Often when you first sit down, you will be asked if you want to "POST". That means that you sat down after the BB and if you want to play now, you will have to "post" the equivalent of 1 big blind. This might be a good time to say,"no, I'll wait" so that will let you watch about 4-9 hands and allow your heart rate to get almost back to normal. Finally, when you are ready to play, make sure you have enough money, and be VERY conservative for at least the 1st time around the table. Have fun and make a couple dollars.
Not long - remember you make money from others bad decisions as much as from your good decisions. It all boils down to decisions you make what to play and when when to bet, raise, call or fold.
Decisions decisions decisions.
I tell beginners to muck their 1st 20 hands (ok play AA KK QQ AK if you want) to get an understanding of the "personality" of the table before putting any money in the pot. It will give you a tight image and a good feel of what is going on.
Good advice. I would have said exactly the same thing, but I thought it might be interpreted as being too cautious. I often muck my first 6-8 hands (depending on position) unless they are Type 1 (AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AKs, AQs) if I do not know the players just so I can get the feel of the game
Excellent advice...thanks again...I'm actually starting to feel better about going back to play. Can't wait to try out your tactics and I'm sure the nervous feeling will simmer down with more practice...I hope? I started wanting to play after this movie I saw a couple months about Poker (Rounders) and thought it looked really wild...unfortunately I didn't realize how difficult it was to play for the first time *grin*.
Now, of course I'm addicted and want to do my best...your help is grately appreciated. This is a great forum!
The nerves will pass, but prepared for them to show up every time you go up in limits. I've played alot and any time I play 20-40, which is rare for me, the fight or flight mechanism kicks in. This really increases the entertainment value or, simply put, the fun I have.
You must learn how to figure out what the 'nuts' are as early as possible. Take a deck and deal out 5 random cards. Pretend they are the community cards in holdem. Now try to figure out what the absolute best possible hand could be, and what cards someone would have to have to have that hand.
If there is a pair on the board, the nuts (best possible hand) would be 4 of a kind (assuming no straight flushes, but those are very very uncommon.) Quads are also uncommon but far less so than straight flushes. Next come the full houses. If there is no pair on board, look for 3 of the same suit. If there are 3 of the same suit, a flush is the nuts. If the board is not paired and there are not 3 cards of the same suit, look for 3 different cards all within 5 of each other. IE J T 9, 5 4 A, 9 7 5. If this exists, and it usually does, then a straight is the nuts. If no straight is possible, then three of a kind of the highest rank is the nuts. And so on.
Hope this helps.
-SmoothB-
You need to practice noticing when your hand can make a double gutshot straight draw. When I was beginning the hardest hand or draw for me to see was the double gutshot. For example: I have T,Q in the hole, and the flop is: J, 8, A or 6,8,9. Notice that I have legitmate 8 card straight draws made with two gut shots. Doyle Brunson likes Double Gutters so much that he has a special section in the Super System just for them.
Remember that 8,9 can make a straight four ways 8,T can make a striaght 3 ways, 8,J two ways and 8,Q one way.
cv
Trik your going about your poker future in a way that very few do my hat off to you.
my idea is this..start with AA in the pocket.. make your flop now ask whats the best of this flop does my hand fit to win and whats against me... then do the turn card... again the same question...now do the river card.. again the same question..before you know it it`ll become second nature..
do this excercise only with premium starting hands as you would in a game...remember your in this to win money not chase or have second best..only play garbage in the SB or BB where your sure to not face a raise and cost is minimal.
always remember the first round of betting defines your hand over 70% (youll get 5 of your 7 cards)and its the least expensive round in general.
always always always make quality decisions neverrrrr guess
beast of decisions
jg
Trik,
Sign on to Paradise Poker. You can watch all the games that are being played and try and figure out what each player has. It's free which I like and then when you feel confident in your game start playing the lower limits. Or you can watch the lower limit games and decide which one you think you can beat. You can play for a minimum amount and you won't have to worry about your tells if you have any. That way you can acquire knowledge and remember the Good players names if there are any so when you play against them you'll know. You can also play the same games for play money, but I found they don't teach you much except how to hit the buttons on the keyboard and get acquanted with the system.
The games on the net are much tighter than casino's I feel so don't expect to make as much as a casino. You can develop confidence in yourself so when you venture into the casino you'll be able to play more than one game.
good luck paul
I hops for a concrete replay concernin loose games.
When is it loose, 4 and more players, 5 and more players, or 6 and more players?
Many thanks Johan.
I would consider a game loose if there are 4 to 5 players in most every (say 80%) of hands.
yes mainly when many are seeing the flop its a passive loose game when pots are unraised preflop.
its aggressive loose when there are many with many preflop raises to see the flop.( stay out of these games.there is no brain function in these games)
jg
Having read MM's Winning Concepts in Draw and Lowball I am under the impression that A-5 Lowball uses a single big blind. Are there antes too? Is this same structure used for Kansas City (Deuce to Seven)?
Also, I was told how in Draw you can have 8 players (lack of cards isn't a worry because you can use previous players' discards). Is this true in Lowball too? I would think that allowing late position players to draw from the discards of previous players would be a distinct disadvantage in Lowball (as opposed to Draw).
Thanks.
I caution you that I've only played lowball in home games.
"Having read MM's Winning Concepts in Draw and Lowball I am under the impression that A-5 Lowball uses a single big blind. Are there antes too? Is this same structure used for Kansas City (Deuce to Seven)?"
I've seen A-5 played in different ways - sometimes it's played with (1) one blind and an ante (which was the original structure of holdem), (2) two blinds, no ante, (3) two blinds and an ante, or (4) three blinds, no ante - like blinds of 10-20-30, and $30 bets.
"Also, I was told how in Draw you can have 8 players (lack of cards isn't a worry because you can use previous players' discards). Is this true in Lowball too? I would think that allowing late position players to draw from the discards of previous players would be a distinct disadvantage in Lowball (as opposed to Draw)."
In lowball, people rarely draw more than one card, so having eight players is ok. It would be a huge disadvantage to have to draw from the discards in lowball.
What does "capped" means in poker?
Johan
Most cardrooms limit the number of raises per round of betting to either three or four. To "cap" it means to make that last raise in the round. Ex. "The pot was 'capped' preflop" means that the raising was maxed out on that round of betting.
Thanks very much jon.I
What does "cold calling" means?
Johan,
I'm not picking on you but you might find the answer down below in the thread I've copied below. For all beginners on asking questions try searching the archives, when I first started reading this forum I didn't know what all the abbreviations meant so I researched thru all the archives to learn most of them and I wrote them down in case others didn't know what they meant. The archives are valuable for searching for just what you asked "cold calling" and you will get most of your answers at worst you may learn something. There is nothing wrong with asking questions, but you may find it more satisfying if you find the answer yourself. I did.
Paul igaf
•Limp in / Cold call Winwood -- Thursday, 4 May 2000, at 7:38 a.m. •Re: Limp in / Cold call Ben Greene -- Thursday, 4 May 2000, at 8:30 a.m.
•Re: Limp in / Cold call Chris Alger -- Thursday, 4 May 2000, at 11:06 a.m. •Now all is clear - thanks (nt) Winwood -- Thursday, 4 May 2000, at 12:24 p.m.
•Nitpicky Clarification KJS -- Thursday, 4 May 2000, at 12:29 p.m. •Re: Nitpicky Clarification scott -- Thursday, 4 May 2000, at 1:00 p.m.
•Re: Nitpicky Clarification
Johan,
There are also a numerous poker dictionaries and glossaries on the Net. Any one of these will define the terms to which you are referring. Its as simple as typing "poker" into Yahoo. Moreover, any poker book worth its salt will have a glossary in back.
I know that for a newbie who first starts reading posts here it looks like a foreign language. You'll get the hang of it.
Jon I.
I'm going to be at Canterbury during the 4th of July weekend if you want to meet and sling the bull let me know
paul
johan... www.pokerpages.com, has a poker dictionary.
jg
Not to display my ignorance, but I have no idea where or what Canterbury is. Please advise. :)
Jon,
I'm sorry probably wrong person. I take it your not from MN.
paul
Actually, I remember having a forum conversation with you about Minnesota poker (or the lack thereof) because I was driving up there for the weekend. I can see where you got the impression that I lived there. I live in Madison, WI. Enjoy the trip.
P.S. I was told Minnesota didn't have legalized poker?
I was wondering if poker videos were helpful in order to become a better player?
How about the World Series videos? Which is the best one 1998 or 99?
trik you need to explain more of what your experience is in the game,so that people can better judge what recommendations to offer if any. the two videos i have on hold-em I would only recomend to very new players.I have no knowledge of the content of the WSOP videos jg
Tommorrow, when I go to the casino to play Hold'em, it will be my 5th time at the table. I've just finished "Low Limit Hold'em" and am almost done with "Zen and the Art of Poker". I was just wondering if watching pro players would help me learn faster and which videos are the best?
The advice I have recieved here has been extremely helpful and very much appreciated!
My opinion: WSOP videos as training aids...> ???
Mike Caro's Tells .....---> very good.
Others ...---> ???
Where he talks about a bunch of things - "extra outs" and such. It's ok and I'd recommend it.
Just for the record,DS has two poker videos.
you won't learn a thing about LL HE from the WSOP videos but they are fun to watch and educational for NL HE tournament players.
they are all good except the 1999 binions produced one get the discovery channel 1999 tape it is OK.
Caros tape on tells is good ...I could not believe the tells I got from several tables at mid limits once i focused on the action .
also there are some good straetegy tapes from slkansky and caro.Caro has audio tapes out as well for a mere $10.00
I`m a visaul audio type of guy I absorb much more this way then reading..
you need to decide whats the best aid for you.(super highway)
jg
Where can one buy/order the audio tapes you talked about or the videos?
Bishop
I think I read where Mr. Sklansky said it's correct to call a raise cold with a small pair, as long as you're certain there will be at least 5 other people involved in the pot. Is this correct?
If you were last to act, would you consider re-raising with let's say pocket sevens if there were many callers already in? If not, what size pocket pair would be you're minimum re-raising requirements when you're last to act with many callers, and the guy on you're direct right is the first raiser, and this guy typically raises with hands as weak as A-5 offsuit.
Thanks, Randy
yes. it is correct to make that cold call.
while reraising is usually only correct if you are facing the whole table, you should sometimes raise as few as 4 limpers with a small pair. you can assume one blind will call your raise without any indications to the contrary.
the reason that this raise is profitable is that it creates a very large pot. this pot induces people to call flop action with as little as one overcard. if you hit your set you welcome this action as they are drawing slim or, in the case of overcard(s), dead.
another reason to raise in late position with a small pair is to sometimes get a free turn. this increases your chances of making your set to 1 in 8.5 to 1 in 6.4. but the raise does not always get you a free card.
also, as you can see, the raise still depends on icnreased futute action to make the it profitable compared to a call against 5 or 6 opponents.
reraising a loose raiser with a small pair is a good play to use sparingly and only when you think a raise will get it heads up with the raiser.
when i say small pair i mean 2's-6's.
scott
.
Is there a "rule of thumb" for raising pre-flop in NLHE as not to give away too much information? I think I read somewhere that double the BB or double the pot size was the standard raise.
Anyone know where I can find this kind of "how much to bet" information as it pertains to the later streets?
Thanks.
3xbb is a pretty usual standard.
you have to figure out if you want to bet the same everytime so as not to give up any info or vary your betting for the same reasons.
It can also be used as a deceptive tool.
alot depends on the size of your stack. but many players will bring it in for about 4 times the bb. if someone is in already your raise is based on money and what you guess he has.
I am a new player to low limit no fold'em Texas Hold'em and have some basic odds questions. I am sure that this question has been addressed before, but I was unable to find answer in archives. I would really appreciate some help from the veterans. From review of posts on hold'em, I know the following for figuring odds on flush/straight probabilities e.g. Hold 2 of a suit in pocket & flop 1 of needed suit then the odds for a Runner Runner flush draw is 24:1 if you need to 2 of the same suit. (10/47 * 9/46 ) = 24:1 47/10 = 4.7 46/9 = 5.1 5.1 * 4.7 = 24.02:1 of making flush by river.
OK, great. I can use this for determining if I am getting correct odds to call, raise or fold.
However, If you hold 2 of a suit or 2 connected in hole and flop two of suit leaving leaving 9 of suit remaining, or flop 4 card open ended straight What is the correct formula to use to determine odds of making the flush/straight by river? I appreciate the help as I am mathematically challenged. I guess I was wrong in high school when I cut class to go hunting and fishing since I would never need to know that kind of stuff!! Thanks for the help. I think that the Forum is the best thing a new player can utilize to help improve. I really appreciate the time that a lot of the posters take to answer questions. Jeff
Can't sit down to tell you right now, but if you check out the following site, click "MCU Library" and then "Poker -- Odds and Statistics" you should be able to find the answers (but not the formulae) you are looking for:
http://www.planetpoker.com/mcu/default.htm
Jon I.
The correct way to determine the probability of improving with two
(or more) cards to come is to first determine the probability of not improving, and then
subtract this result from 1 (or 100%) For example, in the case of a flush draw,
your chances of not improving are 38/47 * 37/46, or .65 (65%).
Your chances of making the flush with two to come is thus .35 (35%), and the odds against
hitting the flush are .65/.35, or 1.86 to 1.
Chances of making a hand on the turn/river/both
Outs Turn % Turn Odds River % River Odds Turn/River % Turn/River odds 20 42.6 1.35 43.5 1.30 67.5 0.48 19 40.4 1.47 41.3 1.42 65.0 0.54 18 38.3 1.61 39.1 1.56 62.4 0.60 17 36.2 1.77 37.0 1.71 59.8 0.67 16 34.0 1.94 34.8 1.88 57.0 0.76 15 31.9 2.13 30.4 2.28 51.2 0.96 13 27.7 2.62 28.3 2.54 48.1 1.08 12 25.5 2.92 26.1 2.83 45.0 1.22 11 23.4 3.27 23.9 3.18 41.7 1.40 10 21.3 3.70 21.7 3.60 38.4 1.61 9 19.1 4.22 19.6 4.11 35.0 1.86 8 17.0 4.88 17.4 4.75 31.5 2.18 7 14.9 5.71 15.2 5.57 27.8 2.59 6 12.8 6.83 13.0 6.67 24.1 3.14 5 10.6 8.40 10.9 8.20 20.4 3.91 4 8.5 10.75 8.7 10.50 16.5 5.07 3 6.4 14.67 6.5 14.33 12.5 7.01 2 4.3 22.50 4.3 22.00 08.4 10.88 1 2.1 46.00 2.2 45.00 04.3 22.50
I took the 9 out line for this example from that chart.
9 | 19.1 | 4.22 | 19.6 | 4.11 | 35.0 | 1.86
Drawing 1 card (Turn)
9 outs
Percent chance to make your hand: 19.1 % is
9(outs)/47 * 100 = 19.14%
Odds against making the hand(Dog)
4.22:1 is 100 - 19.14 / 19.14 = 4.23:1
If you miss the turn and are drawing 1 card (river):
Percent Chance to make your hand. 19.6 is
9(outs)/46 * 100 = 19.56% (19.6 rounded)
Odds against making the hand(Dog)
4.11:1 100 - 19.56 / 19.56 = 4.11:1
Chance of making a flush with two cards to come
35.0%
Chance *against* making a flush with two to come is
38/47 = .808
37/46 = .804
.808 * .804 = .6496 , or .65(percent)
Chances of making the flush with two to come is .35
100% - 65% = 35%
Odds:1 against making a flush with two cards to come
1.86 = 100-35 /35 = 1.857 (1.86 Rounded)
Best of it !!
MJ
- Nice one, MJ...TY (nt)
Posted by: ratso222
Posted on: Thursday, 25 May 2000, at 8:56 p.m.
x
- Re: , ...jeff
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Friday, 26 May 2000, at 3:51 p.m.
ken warren also has this chart with examples in his book 'Texas Holdem Poker" you might check out a book store thats where I saw it ..
jg
- Re: The Chart:
Posted by: Joe28
Posted on: Friday, 26 May 2000, at 7:07 a.m.
What is an out?
I am brand new to the game, so this may come off as a stupid question, but how exactly do I read this chart?
- Re: The Chart:
Posted by: MJChicago (m7h1j5@aol.com)
Posted on: Friday, 26 May 2000, at 10:23 a.m.
outs = cards that can make your hand
You have 4 parts to a flush there are 13 cards of that suite(clubs lets say) 2 suited cards in you hand, 2 more on the board that leaves 9 left to make the flush draw
thats 9 outs.
Best of it !!
MJ
- Much appreciated (nt)
Posted by: Ben Greene
Posted on: Thursday, 1 June 2000, at 8:10 a.m.
x
- 8 or Better Qualifier
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Tuesday, 30 May 2000, at 11:24 a.m.
I know that both 7CS Hi-Lo and Omaha Hi-Lo can be played with an 8 or Better qualifier. What is the purpose of this qualifier and what is its practical effect?
Thanks.
Jon I.
- Re: 8 or Better Qualifier
Posted by: Sean Duffy (sean_duffy@my-deja.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 30 May 2000, at 6:40 p.m.
The practical effect is that it makes high-only hands playable. As an illustration, if there's no qualifer for low in 7-card stud hi-lo, if you start with KKK and I start with 542, the only way I don't win the low side is if I pair 3 times, which is very unlikely. Since I'm almost guaranteed the low half, I have that locked up and am freerolling for the high half. (A "freeroll" is a situation where you have half of the pot locked up, with a chance to improve to win the whole pot. It often occurs in split pot games where you have one side locked up and can win the other side, but it could occur in high only games, for example, in hold'em, with a flop of 6h5h4c, if I hold 8h7h and you hold 8d7d, I can do no worse than get half of the pot, but if I improve to a flush, I win the whole pot.)
-Sean
- Sean...
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Wednesday, 31 May 2000, at 9:54 a.m.
Thanks. Nice explanation of the "freeroll".
- Confirm or refute early observations
Posted by: Linc (kalls001@tc.umn.edu)
Posted on: Tuesday, 30 May 2000, at 2:43 p.m.
New card room at Canterbury Downs, MN. Me - played plenty at home, but never in a casino. I'm reading and doing some light computer practicing, but decided I needed to get my feet wet, so I've played about 20 hours over 4 sessions, about two-thirds 7CS and one-third hold'em, all at the 2/4 level. Results to date:
Session 1: Down $20 (stud) Session 2: Down $60 (mostly hold'em) Session 3: Up $50 (mostly stud - profit due to one great pot) Session 4: Down $160 (stud)
In general, I felt like I was getting bled slowly in both games, as I've been trying to play pretty tight and only betting to reasonable openers. Some very early observations that I would like help in confirming or refuting:
1. Most (but not all) tables are pretty darn loose with many new "home" players. There were plenty of 7CS hands with EVERYONE except me seeing the 4th and 5th cards. Since I'm a rookie with just enough knowledge to be dangerous, I'm playing pretty tight. Can I assume I have to loosen up somewhat? If so, what are some starting hands to add to my arsenal (e.g., Caro suggests playing more 2 cards to a flush in 7CS than I probably do)
2. 7CS seems like a card game where you have to consider people. Hold'em seems like a people game where you have to consider cards. So far I'm much more comfortable at 7CS. Common? If so, what is the compelling reason for learning Hold'em? As an aside, I think its important that I learn both just for game selection purposes, but I'm really struggling with my first two hold'em experiences.
3. I'm at 2/4 to learn, and I plan on staying there a while until I feel comfortable. However, given a 10% rake to $4, am I right in saying that the only one getting rich at this game is the house? I assume that I have to move up at some point just to beat the rake.
4. Loose-aggressive play rattles me, and I'm playing tight- moderately aggressive. Am I better off playing looser and looking at more flops (HE) and 5th streets (7CS), or should I play a tight game and try to get more aggressive. I'm already one of the tighter players at any table I hit. If loose-aggressive raises, do I have to reraise sometimes just to keep him (and the table) on their toes?
5. Please tell me my last session is within the realm of possibility. In 5 hours I won one pot. I had plenty of J72 starts with no matching suits….these are hands I just couldn't possibly play. When I did have something going, someone would have pocket aces or similar to beat me. I really thought about chasing more hands here, but decided just to stick to my tight strategy and then ask questions here J.
Any help/advice would be appreciated. I am continuing to read, and have the West book on order for Hold'em, and 7CSFAP for my stud game. Any good beginner 7CS books?
- Re: Confirm or refute early observations
Posted by: ratso222
Posted on: Tuesday, 30 May 2000, at 10:59 p.m.
First, I would recommend Roy West's Book for 7 Card Stud" as a beginner's book. It is easy reading and has very sound advice especially for basic low limit 7CS. It is easy to read and cheap. Next you should buy Sklansky's 7CS for Advanced players then Sklansky's Theory of Poker. For beginner's Holden atthe 2-4 and 3-6 level, I like Andy Nelson's beginners book. For beginners, you MUST be patient in Holdem until you get the feel of the game and have read more.
In general, 7CS is a game of "LIVE" cards and Holdem is a game of HIGH cards and position since your position is fixed for the hand. Both are games of patience.
I like Wilson Software Turbo for practive.
I understand Bob Chiffone and John Feeney have good books out.
- Re: Confirm or refute early observations
Posted by: Rik
Posted on: Wednesday, 31 May 2000, at 10:37 a.m.
Hi,
I don`t play stud only low limit holdem but I think the worst thing to do when you are starting out in either game is to loosen up and play more hands.
You will go through big swings everyone does. I have $500 down swings at 2-4 even though I am a winning player. 10% rake is real high though mine is 5%.
Also I would say stick to one game so you can concentrate more, since you prefer stud learn that first you can always pick up holdem later.
The Lee Jones book is great for holdem.
Good luck I hope you are winning soon.
- Re: Confirm or refute early observations
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 31 May 2000, at 1:30 p.m.
linc you mention you feel more comfortable at stud ..so i would advice you to focus on that till you feel quite at ease ...then and only then expand to holdem simply because if your trying to master two games at once you`ll just compound your delima
ratso`s advice is very solid ...
expect your ass to get burned many times..your wins will come as well.
In the beginning it really is about getting the feel,the rythym and the various personalities you`ll encounter..
Just a side thought.We tend to be tough on ourselves more then an unknowledgeable player cause we put so much heart into being adequate at the game..your day will come and you`ll look back and smile knowing your years ahead then most.
jg
- Thanks to all!
Posted by: Linc (kalls001@tc.umn.edu)
Posted on: Wednesday, 31 May 2000, at 1:53 p.m.
Thanks to everyone for their helpful comments! I was especially taken with jg's last comment:
"Just a side thought. We tend to be tough on ourselves more then an unknowledgeable player cause we put so much heart into being adequate at the game..your day will come and you`ll look back and smile knowing your years ahead then most."
As a BJ player that has honed his skills over a number of years, its very wierd being at a complex casino game where I am the "sucker." This probably bothers me more than anything else....but I'm convinced you need to play in live games just to get the feel of what is going on. I'm willing to pay my "tuition" to learn the game, so on I go.
Thanks much for all the advice!
- Re: Confirm or refute early observations
Posted by: Lin Sherman (linsherm@gte.net)
Posted on: Wednesday, 31 May 2000, at 7:46 p.m.
I'll answer your points by number:
(1) Just because everybody else is playing badly doesn't mean you should. :) Super-loose play is common in low-limit stud games, but that doesn't make it right. In the long run, you will come out ahead by playing tighter than the typical LL stud player. In the meantime, you will see them pushing big pots back and forth, but let them.
Whether to loosen up a little is hard to say. Caro's advice is probably better for games with something like a 1-5 structure where you can often get the next card for $1 then bet $5 if you hit. With 2-4 the cost of buying the next card is higher relative to what you can bet if you think you have the best hand. So I say stay tight for now. You may be losing for reasons that have nothing to do with your starting hand selection.
(2) If you're more comfortable with stud, I suggest focusing on that for now until you become a consistent winner, then move to hold'em later.
(3) You won't make a living at 2-4, but you should be able to show a small profit, especially as the opposition at these limits is usually pretty weak.
(4) At this phase of your development, avoid playing head games - you'll lose to more experienced players, even if they're otherwise terrible. Reraise when you feel you have the better hand. Otherwise fold. I stress this because the biggest leak in every beginner's game is that they call when they should either raise or fold. It's almost never right to call except when you have a drawing hand.
(5) One losing session is common. You will sometimes go through much longer losing streaks than this. You just have to hunker down and not let it get to you. Stay within your game, and within the limits you can afford to play, and don't try to make things happen. That's very hard to do, but it's one of the defining differences between the very best players and the rest of the herd.
(other) Read all the books you can, including the 'bad' ones. There aren't that many.
- Counting Bets
Posted by: Sarid (dsarid@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 31 May 2000, at 6:25 p.m.
Sorry for what I'm sure is a very mundane question, but here goes:
I'm having trouble keeping up with counting bets as people fling in money from around the table, while I'm supposed to also be looking for reactions, listening for verbal tells, tracking raises, and -- oh yeah -- checking and thinking about my own hand.
Any suggestions on how this is more easily accomplished?
Thanks very much!
- Re: Counting Bets
Posted by: Lin Sherman (linsherm@gte.net)
Posted on: Wednesday, 31 May 2000, at 7:28 p.m.
Mike Caro has a good article in the latest Card Player about trying to learn too much of the game at once. His point is to focus on one aspect per session and not worry about everything else. Master that part of your game, then go on to the next aspect of your game that needs work. While this may have a short term negative impact on your profits, you will learn the game a lot faster if you approach it this way. This means you will become a winning player sooner.
Counting the pot is hard to learn, but easy to do once you get the hang of it. You may have to work on it for several seessions before you become comfortable with it.
- Re: Counting Bets
Posted by: MJChicago
Posted on: Wednesday, 31 May 2000, at 9:25 p.m.
It takes practice, practice & more practice but after you do it enough it becomes second nature and you wonder how you ever could play any other way.
Keep at it.
It's well worth the time.
Best of it !!
MJ
- Re: Counting Bets
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Thursday, 1 June 2000, at 1:04 a.m.
I think the easiest way is to count the bets in the pot and NOT the money in the pot. if you get lazy you can count after every street, for example 5 see the flop for 2 bets (10 bets), 4 see the turn for 3 (12+ 10), etc. I don't think its that hard.
You could aslo count the bets as they go in...
I have seen some people actually coutn the money in the pot. I think this makes things harder than it needs to be....
- Re: Counting Bets
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 1 June 2000, at 8:22 a.m.
in a say a 5- 10 game each 5 is 1 bet AS IT GOES IN each 10 is 2 bets AS IT GOES IN ..so say at the river card you want to know your pot amount you simply multiply your known bets by 5..so lets assume we know there have been 20 $5 bets so its $5x20 bets =$100.00
jg
- Re: Counting Bets
Posted by: Lin Sherman (linsherm@gte.net)
Posted on: Sunday, 4 June 2000, at 3:38 a.m.
That's the easier method in structured limit (e.g. 2-4, 10-20) but it won't work in 1-4-8-8 or other spread-limit formats. In those cases you have to keep track of the amount. This is also true in pot limit and no limit.
- Re: Counting Bets
Posted by: Chris Villalobos (zardoz@micron.net)
Posted on: Thursday, 1 June 2000, at 1:31 p.m.
I believe counting bets is overrated especially later in the hand. Early you need to know how many bets are going in and how may bets may need to be put in later if you make a drawing hand or a good but not great hand. Actually, knowing how the hand will be played and how many bets are likely to go in later is probably as or more important than knowing how many bets are in the pot now.
Poker isn't like Blackjack where you need to keep perfect information. If you miss a couple bets you'll never be making a big mistake. I believe the reasons for this are a) Your opponent's are trying to be deceptive. b) Unless no one has been betting, the pots get so big on the end that it is usually right to call with any hand (don't go to far with this last point, its probably never right to call on the end in Texas Hold'em without at least an Ace High, and the hand should be heads up).
CV
- Re: Counting Bets: I would disagree
Posted by: MJChicago (m7h1j5@aol.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 1 June 2000, at 3:10 p.m.
Chris,
I believe counting bets is overrated especially later in the hand.
I would disagree with this statement. I think that you need to keep track of the pot at all times in order to know where your at. Even when your ahead you can calculate your expected win of the hand.(the total rake also.I have see players correct the dealer on the total amount of the rake a few times mostly on smaller pots but they must be keeping track to know) I like to keep track of each hand. This helps me see where my opponents have lost or gained and keeps me focused on the game.
lt also helps me see other players mistakes in light of the odds they play for. "Did you know that you just tried for a gut shot with only 6:1 odds" Then I can make a note that seat #5(Cowboy Bob) is clueless to pot odds. Next time (or in the current game )I will have this information on this player it also helps with game selection. (sit me at table 2 with the Cowboy Bob(clueless to the pot odds)and The passive Jock(Richard)He cold calls way too much and plays 2 and 3 outers on the river)
I would also like to add that since poker is about making decisions in relationship to money wouldn't you want to know what the pot is offering you at all times.
Best of it !!
MJ
- Re: Counting Bets
Posted by: Chris Alger (algerc@idt.net)
Posted on: Thursday, 1 June 2000, at 10:40 p.m.
In HE, count small bets one at a time as they go in beore and on the flop, then divide by two on the turn. If you lose track for a second, multiply the number of players by the number bets each. In low limit games, omit a small bet to account for the rake.
Do this for every hand, even the ones you don't play, and after a while and it becomes nearly automatic. Or at least easy.
- Re: Counting Bets
Posted by: JJ (jjbarret@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 25 June 2000, at 8:53 p.m.
I've tried counting the total number of bets before and on the flop and dividing by 2 and then add each bet on the turn and river as had been recommended. I find it easier to keep track of the total $$$ in the pot pre-flop and on the flop and then divide it by the big bet amount ($10 in a 5/10 game). This gives you the number of big bets in the pot. I then add the big bets that go in on the turn and the river. I want to know how many big bets are in there to compare it to my outs with the river card coming. Perhaps I am over complicating it but this seems to work for me.
- RGP
Posted by: Fred Monti (fmontisant@aol.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 1 June 2000, at 8:34 p.m.
I would appreciate it if someone could post the RGP website address as I have been unable to find it yet its mentioned many times in various posts.....Thank you in advance..
- Re: RGP
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Friday, 2 June 2000, at 7:58 a.m.
fred its www.remarq.com..then type poker into search box..
shit theres this thread there right now that makes me wonder what the hell makes people tick
its on Roy Cookes ,"Edge Concept"
its a very different forum as to what the topics evolve into..
jg
- Re: RGP
Posted by: Lin Sherman (linsherm@gte.net)
Posted on: Sunday, 4 June 2000, at 3:36 a.m.
RGP is actually a newsgroup, not a website. RGP is short for rec.gambling.poker.
- Pineapple
Posted by: hold'em player
Posted on: Saturday, 3 June 2000, at 11:49 a.m.
How do you play Pineapple?
- Re: Pineapple
Posted by: KJS (kscullin@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Saturday, 3 June 2000, at 6:07 p.m.
HE Player,
There are two versions of Pineapple: Crazy Pineapple and Pineapple (or "regular" Pineapple). Both are played the same as HE, but three cards are dealt to each player at the start. In "regular" Pineapple, one card is discarded by each player at or before the time of their pre-flop bet. In Crazy Pineapple, players bet pre-flop with all three cards in their hand and must discard one at or before they bet on the flop. In all other aspects the game is identical to Texas HE.
KJS
- Re: Pineapple
Posted by: Lin Sherman (linsherm@gte.net)
Posted on: Sunday, 4 June 2000, at 3:35 a.m.
Well that may not be entirely true. Hold'em is played high-only. Crazy Pineapple is often if not usually played high/low split 8 or better. I didn't think anyone played Pineapple these days. Is the game regularly spread anywhere?
- Sleeper?
Posted by: NoPair
Posted on: Monday, 5 June 2000, at 1:04 a.m.
What is a sleeper and how do they work?
- Re: Sleeper?
Posted by: Dan Osman (enderw19@aol.com)
Posted on: Monday, 5 June 2000, at 3:22 a.m.
A sleeper is someone I should be right now. Too bad this forum is distracting me from doing my actual work so that I can become one. Not that I will be anyway with three cups of coffee in my system.
Dan
- Re: Sleeper?
Posted by: NoPair
Posted on: Monday, 5 June 2000, at 8:34 a.m.
Thank you. That's very helpful. Any real answers would be appreciated.
- Context would help.
Posted by: Sean Duffy (sean_duffy@my-deja.com)
Posted on: Monday, 5 June 2000, at 1:04 p.m.
I think Dan's point might have been that you didn't provide any context with your question. The most use of "sleeper" I've heard is in sports betting, "sleeper" is also synonymous with "dark horse." For example, the Rams would have been a good sleeper pick to win the Super Bowl last year. But I suspect this isn't what you mean.
-Sean
- Re: Context would help.
Posted by: NoPair
Posted on: Monday, 5 June 2000, at 1:25 p.m.
OK, I'm an east coast player and every once in a while a wild player will post double the small blind out of position and not under the gun (straddle) and say "Sleeper". The dealer then announces to the table "Live sleeper". When the action gets around to the sleeper, I think he can then either re-raise to 3 bets, or pull it back and call, or fold. . .that's the point of my question. I don't know what he can and can't do. And do players before him have to call the sleeper raise before the action is around to that player?
Maybe this is a very local play. . . anyone ever heard of this?
- Re: Sleeper?
Posted by: Dan Osman (enderw19@aol.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 6 June 2000, at 4:16 p.m.
Actually, NoPair, the first thing I thought of was Bowling. A sleeper in that game is a pin whose view is being blocked by another pin. If you don't see the "sleeper" in the back, you could throw the ball wrong because you didn't realize you had to be aiming for two pins instead of one.
In the movies, a sleeper is a film that no one expected to turn much of a profit and suddenly hits the cover of Time and Newsweek as the latest flick everyone must see.
And though in poker I've never heard the term, your description pretty much answers your question. In essence, it's like my first two definions.
Personally, if I had to choose something to describe a sleeper, it would be the Check-raiser, not the straddler.
Either way, my guess is that's it's not an actual poker term, but rather a slang word for the region.
Dan
- holdem tournament book?
Posted by: rookie
Posted on: Monday, 5 June 2000, at 8:00 p.m.
any good suggestions? thanks...
- Re: holdem tournament book?
Posted by: Steve (mrniko@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Tuesday, 6 June 2000, at 5:24 a.m.
There aren't really any good tournament books out there from what I've heard, but I just bought T.J. Cloutier's book, "Championship No-limit & Pot-Limit Hold'em." I like it very much and would recommend it, although it's a little advanced.
- Straddle
Posted by: Dan D.
Posted on: Monday, 5 June 2000, at 9:22 p.m.
In Hold'em, what's a straddle? Is it some kind of manditory post?
Thanks, Dan
- Re: Straddle
Posted by: Howard Burroughs
Posted on: Tuesday, 6 June 2000, at 4:50 a.m.
A straddle is not manditory at all.If the big blind is on your right,and for some strange reason, you want to raise before you see your cards,here's what you do.
As the players are posting their blinds,you put in the first raise and say "Straddle" loud enough where everyone can hear you.Most places play with a live straddle rule,which means if someone wants to make a straddle bet (raise before they see their cards),they can still raise again,after the action has gone around the table.
BTW/ Although not as popular,I have seen the straddle used in stud,here in Vegas.
- Thanks (n/m)
Posted by: Dan D.
Posted on: Tuesday, 6 June 2000, at 11:46 a.m.
.
- Re: Straddle
Posted by: Dan Osman (enderw19@aol.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 6 June 2000, at 3:57 p.m.
You'd be surprised at the number of people who consider it mandatory, though. Along with capping it pre-flop with 7-2o.
Dan
- 2 Questions
Posted by: Bob (bob@gogo.net)
Posted on: Tuesday, 6 June 2000, at 12:26 a.m.
1. What is meant by "playing on tilt"?
2. How is the order of play determined? For example, Seat 8 is on the button, 9 the SB, 10 the BB. Pre-flop: Seat 3 calls, 6 raises, 8, 9 ,and 10 call. Which of these players acts first after the flop?
- Re: 2 Questions
Posted by: Howard Burroughs
Posted on: Tuesday, 6 June 2000, at 4:24 a.m.
1)Tilt-"Refers to someone who has started playing badly after a few beats.The player is referred to as ON TILT."
Above from, Poker For Dummies by Harroch and Krieger.
2)Seat 9 ,the small blind ,acts first after the flop.
- I won a thousand dollar twice this week!
Posted by: crazyrich (richardbherbert@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 6 June 2000, at 5:12 p.m.
It’s amazing! Last Saturday I beat’em for 1100 $ and today – 1000 $ again… www.netprofitcasino.com
- SPAM (nt)
Posted by: Chris Villalobos (zardoz@micron.net)
Posted on: Wednesday, 7 June 2000, at 2:27 a.m.
SPAM
- Re: I won a thousand dollar twice this week!
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 7 June 2000, at 7:08 a.m.
makes ya wonder ..two exact posts in two different forums.....and I`m still working my way up through the threads...
jg
- Mr. Panski lend me your ear!
Posted by: Beginner! (leporeva@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 7 June 2000, at 7:50 p.m.
(sung to the tune of Mr Sandman or close to it anyway)
Hey Mr Panksi lend me your ear I got sometin you just gotta hear I know your busy and got lotsa money But you might just find this kinda funny
Mr Panski say it ain't true Can Badger really get the best of you I know he's pretty and smart and all the rest But Mr Panski we all know you are the best
Mr Panski can you really play Poker. Or are you just another silly old Joker! Come on Mr Panski we gotta know Is Mason your clone or just someone you know
Gary Carson hates you so much I wonder if it's really just a crush! And Mike Caro won't come on this Forum I bet he's afraid you really can cure him
Your buddy Ray Zee phoned me yesterday Claimed he would pay me just to take you away Listen Listen Mr Panski please Glover says you got a social disease
So Mr Panski please lend me your ear Just tell me what I want to hear Tell me you thought that this was kinda funny Better than that just send me some money
Beginner!
- Re: Mr. Panski lend me your ear!
Posted by: John Cole (jcole5044@aol.com)
Posted on: Friday, 9 June 2000, at 10:09 a.m.
Beginner,
I know you're still young, but, keep in mind, you're future is all in front of you.
John
- Re: Mr. Panski lend me your ear!
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Friday, 9 June 2000, at 2:01 p.m.
"getting a life for dummies"
then again maybe not
jg
- Jackpot questions
Posted by: DP (AAswin@aol.com)
Posted on: Friday, 9 June 2000, at 1:04 a.m.
Where I play there is a HE high hand jackpot every three hours. If there is an average of six nine person tables going continuously, how often will I win the Jackpot? {I play a little tighter than the charts in Lou Kreigers books.}
Also, What are the odds of AAAAK holding up as the high hand with one hour to go. thanks
- Re: Jackpot questions
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Wednesday, 14 June 2000, at 2:15 a.m.
Ill sketch a soln for the second Q. The first is much harder, and is very dependent on how you play.
This depends a) how fast the game is played b) how many people people see the flop, and how far they will go c) the jackpot rules.
I think the following method will give an ok upperbound:
1st Find the probability the board has a straight flush as the nuts, then find the probability that one of k players has a hand which will give the st flush. (where k is the number of players seeing the flop). Then multiply these numbers together...
Tell me if you want me to work this out more...
- How is Bounty Limit HE Played? (NT)
Posted by: Steve (mrniko@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Friday, 9 June 2000, at 1:30 a.m.
x
- Hold'em/ chance of success vs. odds of..
Posted by: Dan D.
Posted on: Friday, 9 June 2000, at 5:54 a.m.
I read an article where it was said that most pro-players use a 'Chance of Success' method, as opposed to the 'Odds Against Success' method (he was talking about Hold'em). Example: with 4 outs your 'Chance of Success' was said to be 16.5%, where the 'Odds Against Success' are 5.1-to-1 (I assume that is on the flop with two cards to come).
I'm growing comfortable with the Odds method, but I'm not so sure how to use the percent method when deciding whether or not to continue. Could you give me a simple example of how to use the percentage method when playing Hold'em?
Thank You, Dan
- Re: Hold'em/ chance of success vs. odds of..
Posted by: Chris Villalobos (zardoz@micron.net)
Posted on: Friday, 9 June 2000, at 1:52 p.m.
A good gambler should be able to tranlate percent to odds and back in his/her head. Doesn't have to be exact most of the time, just close.
CV
- A math oriented guy like me.
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Friday, 9 June 2000, at 6:02 p.m.
Uses % and odds interchangably. It will become 2nd nature for you in a sort time.
Just kidding about the math oriented thing but I do use the math in my game a lot it is just not the predominent part of it.
- odd on flopping a set in hold 'em
Posted by: staley
Posted on: Friday, 9 June 2000, at 7:51 p.m.
I'm trying to understand the odds things and need some help. Can anyone point me to a good source of figuring odds and understanding how they apply?
If I hold any pair, what are the odds of flopping a set?
- Re: odd on flopping a set in hold 'em
Posted by: Chris Alger (algerc@idt.net)
Posted on: Saturday, 10 June 2000, at 12:30 a.m.
about 7.5-1
Petriv's Hold 'em Odds Book is very good on this. Also Sklnasky's Getting the Best of It. Available through Conjelco.
- Re: odd on flopping a set in hold 'em
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Saturday, 10 June 2000, at 8:58 a.m.
Also planet poker has a whole section on odds
jg
- Re: odd on flopping a set in hold 'em
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Wednesday, 14 June 2000, at 2:03 a.m.
I think most poker odds aren't that hard to figure out, and I think it is better to know how to figure things out than memorize a mess of statistics...
What are the probability of flopping a set? Well whats the probability of not flopping a set. Thats easy and = (48/50)(47/49) (46/48). (The first figure is the probability the first card doesn't give you a set... etc. )
- Re: odd on flopping a set in hold 'em
Posted by: J.
Posted on: Thursday, 15 June 2000, at 12:44 p.m.
To explain more of what Suspicious means, here is the break down:
You are holding 2 cards so there are 50 unseen cards left. The probability of NOT increasing your pair to a set is 48 cards (only two cards remaining would help you) out of 50 unseen cards, this equals (48/50), now after the first card is seen there are 49 cards left unseen and if the first card didn't help you there are 47 that still won't help you (47/49). Do this again, (46/48).
(48/50)(47/49)(46/49)=~.88
Success is roughly .13 which is roughly 7.5:1 that you make a set on the flop holding a pair.
Hopefully a helpful explaination. J.
- Re: odd on flopping a set in hold 'em
Posted by: G. Ed Conly (econly@poweruser.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 4 July 2000, at 12:22 a.m.
These numbers may be misleading. The chances of flopping EXACTLY a set are 8.3:1 (you must account for full houses and quads). The chances of flopping a set or better are 7.5:1.
- POT ODDS BOOKS
Posted by: Lil Ray
Posted on: Saturday, 10 June 2000, at 4:25 p.m.
Hello everyone I'm new to this form. It' "GREAT"
I'm starting to play hold'em. I've been to the casino twice and just looked. I've bought Turbo Texas hold'em. I'm not good with math at all. I need some help. What books can I get that will explain pot odds and expectations of making a hand. My friend told me that I can count the bets and get my pot odds from that, he said that's easier than counting the money. Is that correct and how do you do it.
- Re: POT ODDS BOOKS
Posted by: John Feeney (johnfeeney@home.com)
Posted on: Saturday, 10 June 2000, at 10:19 p.m.
Yes, counting bets is the way to go in limit poker. You can just keep track of the number of small bets in the pot, keeping in mind that one big bet = two small bets. Some prefer to keep track of big bets... just the converse.
There is a simple little introduction to odds/percentages in the back of Sklansky's _Hold'em Poker_. There are lots of tables in the back of Doyle Brunson's Super/System. Just memorize the common odds (e.g., odds of hitting a flush draw on the turn, on the river...), but also learn how to calculate them.
- Re: POT ODDS BOOKS
Posted by: Goat (Punkrok777@aol.com)
Posted on: Monday, 12 June 2000, at 11:30 p.m.
All you need is Theory of Poker. It explains all you need to know about pot odds, implied odds, reverse implied odds and effective odds. A little practice counting them up at the table and it all becomes second nature. I also suck at math but its not hard to learn this stuff.
- Exposed cards question
Posted by: Poker Amateur
Posted on: Monday, 12 June 2000, at 7:53 p.m.
I have found that in keeping track of exposed cards, I have problems keeping the suits. Does anyone have a "trick" that helps to remember both?
- Re: Exposed cards question
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Tuesday, 13 June 2000, at 8:33 a.m.
I simply keep mental count in order clubs, diamonds, hearts, spades like the last 4 digits of my social security card. When one of reaches 5, I am no longer concerned (well it depends, but I am less concerned)
- Book learin'--important
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Tuesday, 13 June 2000, at 8:40 a.m.
As I watched my per hr rate drop from $19 to $11 in the span of 6 months, I figured it was time to sit down and evaluate. I'll spare you the details. In short, I was playing too tightly. I was not taking advantage of IMPLIED ODDS. Understand please I was still winning at a high rate (70%+) but I would come home from a $10/20 game with a net $35 for 8 hrs.
I visited the Yellow Book (Sklansky's The Theory of Poker) and reread the chapter on Implied Odds. This was (and is) very important. On the 1st read through, you might find it difficult to really understand, but after a short time at the tables, you will find it becomes quite easy to comprehend.
So, to all you beginners, understand this chapter and the rest of the book and good things will happen. I am moving back uo into the $14/hr range after only 4 weeks witth a very nice $900 night for 5 hrs work.
- Re: Book learin'--important
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 13 June 2000, at 1:36 p.m.
You cannot stress enough what you just stated..
Reading through a book once does very little to improve your game ...its that 3rd,5th,7th time that everything starts falling into place.the pieces start coming together, the light gets brighter the confidence oozes ,,,your game becomes more complete.All the why`s where`s how`s begin to make sense.
I enjoy just skimming as well when i dont feel like getting deeply involved.cause what happens is sure as shit something catches your eye and your deeply involved anyway..
jg
excellent post
- Small Pair on the Button
Posted by: JoeD
Posted on: Wednesday, 14 June 2000, at 6:54 a.m.
I've got 44 on the button. Three limpers. Cutoff seat raises. What do I do? A solid player told me that he would only stay for a single bet with small pairs and suited connectors. What do you guys think?
- Re: Small Pair on the Button
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 14 June 2000, at 8:16 a.m.
Very much depends in my opion the type of players staying....your also praying for trips with 4 seeing the flop....combine that with the flop not liking your hand 90% of the time and or 2 outs with 50 cards remaining preflop unseen to save your hide...
so as you see its not really optimistic....
jg
- Re: Small Pair on the Button
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Wednesday, 14 June 2000, at 11:56 a.m.
Worth a call if you think there will be no more raises. The 4 callers makes it close. I think you will need to get the 7.5:1 trips in order to play post flop or a 3,5,6 off suit. If you hit, you'll make money. If you think the raise will dump the limpers, fold because you will not have enough implied odds to continue.
- Re: Small Pair on the Button
Posted by: Steve (mrniko@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Thursday, 15 June 2000, at 9:54 p.m.
I was in a tournament on Wed and called the big blind w/pocket 3's. He and I were heads up and I flopped a set. He called every raise I made and got his flush on the river...does that suck or what.
- Good win rate?
Posted by: Goldfish
Posted on: Thursday, 15 June 2000, at 11:16 a.m.
Just moved from spread limits in home game to structured, two tiered. I think I read in a 'Card Player' article that a 10-15 time the big bet is a good win rate. Am I right in thinking this, and secondly, does this change depending on the limit ie 1/2 or 5/10 etc. Goldfish
- Re: Good win rate?
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Thursday, 15 June 2000, at 5:09 p.m.
10 times the big bet? Maybe in a session, but certainly not per hr. I can only dream of a win rate of $200/hr in a 10-20 game. I think $10/hr net is good and $20/hr is phenominal
- Re: Good win rate?
Posted by: Goldfish
Posted on: Friday, 16 June 2000, at 5:52 a.m.
Yeh I mean per session, like you say 10 times the big bet per hour seems like a dream. So you think 10 times BB for a session is a reasonable target?
- Re: Good win rate?
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Friday, 16 June 2000, at 8:51 a.m.
loose passive games can really prove profitable should you possess a strong image with the skills
jg
- Re: Good win rate?
Posted by: zooey
Posted on: Thursday, 22 June 2000, at 12:23 p.m.
While I agree with your numbers, I gotta quibble about your reference frame a bit. An accurate win rate calculation is meaningful only after hundreds of hours. You will very rarely hit the relatively small theoretical predicted win in one session, and you shouldn't expect it!
For example, if your win rate is 1.5 BB/hr, and your STD (standard deviation) is 15 or so BB/hr (roughly my numbers), then after 10 hours you will be between +10 and +20 BB only 8.3% of the time!! So only one time out of 12 will your results be "normal".
Make sense?
zooey
- Starting Bankroll
Posted by: Rookie (Rookie@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 15 June 2000, at 12:07 p.m.
I am planning a trip to AC to play 2/4 and 3/6 Hold Em. Can someone give me some guidelines as to how much I should sit at the table with? I have heard anything from 10 times to 80 times the big bet. Suggestions are appreciated.
- how to look fearsome
Posted by: scott (sms134@columbia.edu)
Posted on: Thursday, 15 June 2000, at 1:35 p.m.
i buy in at 30 big bets when i play holdem or stud. this is usually one of the bigger stacks on the table.
you want people to percieve you as a winning player. you want to be intimidating. i suggest trying a few different stack shapes.
mason recommends the pyramids of typical 20 chip stacks. this works ok. also, i sometimes try the sprawl of 20 chip stacks. only 3 stacks deep but very wide so that it encroaches on my opponent's space. a third option is to have less but bigger stacks, typically 30 or 40 chips. dont do this if you can't fill at least 4 oversized stacks.
at least that is what works for me.
scott
- Re: how to look fearsome
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Thursday, 15 June 2000, at 5:07 p.m.
Is this really significant? Is there an edge to this. What intimidates me is a bunchs of greens and blacks.
- Re: how to look fearsome
Posted by: scott (sms134@columbia.edu)
Posted on: Friday, 16 June 2000, at 3:19 p.m.
i don't know if there is an edge or not. i think appearing to be a winning player and appearing to have a winning session affects how your opponents play. though it is probably not significant. it's just a small thing that an already winning player can do to get a slight image advanatge.
i think a stack of reds is more effective intimidation that a black chip. in a 15-30 game, the guy with 15 stacks of red looks like more of a winner than the guy with 13 black and 2 stacks of red. at least, i think so.
scott
- Re: how to look fearsome
Posted by: WeeJimmiKranki
Posted on: Friday, 16 June 2000, at 5:56 a.m.
I like to stack my chips like a phalus, you know with two chuncky stacks on either side with one tower in the middle. I find this intimidates players,especially the chicks.
- Re: Starting Bankroll
Posted by: Lin Sherman (linsherm@gte.net)
Posted on: Friday, 16 June 2000, at 4:20 a.m.
A lot of advice about bankrolls is really directed at pros and wannabe-pros. For the recreational player, which you are if you're playing at these limits, then your buy-in should be no more than what you are prepared to lose that session. At 2/4 or 3/6, I would suggest buying in for $100. If you can't play for at least a couple hours with $100 at these limits, then it's not your night or your game and you should probably get up and leave anyway, or at least try a different table.
- Re: Starting Bankroll
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Friday, 16 June 2000, at 8:47 a.m.
You know many times someone sits down with this idea of ,"hey I`ll dazzle them with my stack", problem there is that you have to play that stack like a winner...this is always the biggest laugh or realization he has the stuff.
Stacks mean shit ,unless he plays well.If not welcome to my table
P.S, people seem to associate stack with skill.It usaully means I get drooling within the next ten hands...
jg
jg
- Re: Starting Bankroll
Posted by: Rookie (Rookie@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 16 June 2000, at 11:53 a.m.
I wasn't shooting for a 'dazzle them with my stacks' idea. I just wanted to know a reasonable amount to start with that would withstand some potential negative swings, despite playing 'smart'.
Thanks to all for the input.
- Re: Starting Bankroll
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Friday, 16 June 2000, at 10:20 p.m.
rookie.. it`s just a side thought i wanted to share..
jg
- Re: Starting Bankroll
Posted by: MJChicago (m7h1j5@aol.com)
Posted on: Friday, 16 June 2000, at 2:47 p.m.
Rookie,
$120.00 (1 rack for 2/4 ) $160.00 (3/6)
20 to 30 * the Big Bet is a good rule.
Best of it !!
MJ
- What are LV Rakes?
Posted by: LarryG (lgoss@attglobal.net)
Posted on: Saturday, 17 June 2000, at 12:32 p.m.
Can anyone provide a brief rundown on typical rake sizes in Las Vegas and/or Reno?
TIA,
LarryG
- Re: What are LV Rakes?
Posted by: Howard Burroughs
Posted on: Saturday, 17 June 2000, at 5:36 p.m.
In Las Vegas:
Low limit stud- 10% to $3.50,10% to $4.00, and 10% to $5.00 ( the $5.00 is just at Mandalay/Circus properties).
Low limit hold'em- About 50% of the rooms deal 5%, with the other 50% dealing 10%.A max out of $2.00 to $3.00,with $2.50 and $3.00 being the norm.
I can't help you with the middle or higher limits,for $10/20 is the highest I play (mostly lower then that).
Hopr that helps,
Good Luck
Howard
- Re: What are LV Rakes?
Posted by: LarryG (lgoss@attglobal.net)
Posted on: Saturday, 17 June 2000, at 8:48 p.m.
Thanks, Howard.
Someone had told my friend that $2 was the max rake in all of Nevada. I felt that this could not be the case, and you've confirmed that.
May I assume that there is usually no additional money held out for jackpots? Especially in Hold'em, which is what I intend to play next time I visit.
My local (60 mile drive) Indian casino maxes the rake at $3 at the 3-6 tables and also keeps the $1 small blind for the jackpots. I'm simming this with Turbo THE, and I just can't seem to beat that, and I'm ascared to play for any more than that just yet.
I think I need to get some of the books they sell on this site!
LarryG in Portland, OR
- Re: What are LV Rakes?
Posted by: Howard Burroughs
Posted on: Sunday, 18 June 2000, at 3:33 a.m.
Larry:
If the poker room has a jackpot,then there is another dollar deducted from the pot.If you don't like jackpot games,there's plenty of non-jackpot games to play in.
I think your idea ,to purchase some of Two Plus Two's books, is a good one. I have them all and think they are excellent.
Good Luck
Howard
- Re: What are LV Rakes?
Posted by: Mark the K (msk914@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Monday, 19 June 2000, at 9:52 p.m.
Rakes are higher than $2 as Howard said.
If you cannot beat TTHE, play tighter!
Mark
- What does Freezeout mean?
Posted by: Tommie (tommieb44@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 18 June 2000, at 3:54 p.m.
I have this schedule for a casino's poker room, and it says they have Hold 'em $15 Freezeout, as well as other games with freezeout. What does that mean?
- Re: What does Freezeout mean?
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 18 June 2000, at 10:38 p.m.
they play till they have a winner.but sometimes the players who are left(usaully no more then 2or 3)agree to split the money.
jg
- Re: What does Freezeout mean?
Posted by: Ray Zee
Posted on: Tuesday, 20 June 2000, at 9:48 p.m.
freezeout means you play until all the money is won.
- Re: What does Freezeout mean?
Posted by: Louie (LLandale@EarthLink.Net)
Posted on: Wednesday, 21 June 2000, at 2:27 p.m.
I thought freeze-out meant there are no re-buys. When you loose your chips your out.
- O/8 ??????
Posted by: Parkie
Posted on: Monday, 19 June 2000, at 11:30 a.m.
Just started to play O/8 in home game. Clarification please. If I hold say A 7 2 K and the final board is 6 8 3 Q 2 is my best low A 2 from the pocket plus 683 from the board or does my 2 automatically pair on the board meaning my best is A 7 683. What Im saying is I can use any three on the board, I can ignore the other 2 right? Help before fights break out Parkie
- Re: O/8 ??????
Posted by: Howard Burroughs
Posted on: Monday, 19 June 2000, at 1:59 p.m.
Parkie:
Ignore the other two !
- Re: O/8 ??????
Posted by: Howard Burroughs
Posted on: Monday, 19 June 2000, at 2:07 p.m.
Parkie:
Also,You may know this already but Ace 4 is the nut low for the board given.
Good Luck
Howard
- Re: O/8 ??????
Posted by: Ray Zee
Posted on: Monday, 19 June 2000, at 4:19 p.m.
use any two from your hand and any three from the board. the best hand for you here is 76321. which is a poor hand as it is easily beaten. for the high hand you do the same but dont have to use the same two cards that you used for the low.
- Re: O/8 ??????
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Tuesday, 20 June 2000, at 5:12 p.m.
Parkie,
I'm new to O/8 to and its taking me a while to figure out how to calculate the lows, too. But here, as Ray suggests, your best hand uses the A7, not the A2. Using the A2 requires you to use the 8 on the board, giving you an 8 low. But your A7 sucks -- you will lose the low to any guy holding A4, A5 and 45. You will split with A7.
Jon I.
- Re: O/8 ??????
Posted by: Ray Zee
Posted on: Tuesday, 20 June 2000, at 9:46 p.m.
use the scientific method like i did.
take out a bunch of low cards and put them in front of you. put some in the flop and grab some for your hand . then go find the best low. keep mixing them and grabing them till its almost automatic. then in real life always double check before you fold.
- Re: O/8 ??????
Posted by: Louie Landale (LLandale@EarthLink.Net)
Posted on: Saturday, 24 June 2000, at 12:46 a.m.
[A72K] [683Q2] Best 3 from board are 632. Best two from your hand which do not pair are A7.
It gets trickier if the fourth low card on the board 8 was less than your worst card (7) such as a 5 on board. In this case you'd play 653 from the board and A2 from your hand. You would have a "live ace".
- Louie
- Big bet poker question
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Tuesday, 20 June 2000, at 6:44 p.m.
Can Seven Card Hi-Lo 8 or Better and O/8 be played pot-limit and/or no-limit? I noticed that they weren't played that way in the WSOP, and I was just curious.
Thanks.
Jon I.
- Re: Big bet poker question
Posted by: Ray Zee
Posted on: Tuesday, 20 June 2000, at 9:42 p.m.
yea, when we started playing those games in the late seventies and early eighties thats the way we mainly played them. but the games get too big too fast and the easy money goes to the good players quickly so the games died on the grapevine and turned into limit games. they never were no limit as it would be a complete crapshoot. it was tried only a few times.
- Thanks, Ray
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Wednesday, 21 June 2000, at 8:16 a.m.
I'm trying to organize a little home tournament for my friends and I. We all enjoy O/8, so I was thinking about adding a pot-limit O/8 rotation. Thanks.
- list of definitions and terms for new players
Posted by: Dave in Cali (dave@genbio.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 21 June 2000, at 12:34 p.m.
I was writing an email to a friend of mine concerning texas holdem. She is learning the game and I was giving her some definitions so she would understand what is going on in the game and in 2+2 posts. This post is primarily for beginners who don't understand all the lingo on the forum. I know there is a beginner forum but some probably never look at it. I will also post this there. Advanced players should probably skip this post.
definitions:
BTF = before the flop
SB=small blind (1$ in a 3-6 game)
BB=big blind (3$ in a 3-6 game, the BB is always = to the bet size on the first two rounds in limit HE)
HE=holdem
Live Blind= the BB in HE is a "live blind". this means that after everyone calls the blinds on the first round, the BB gets a chance to raise his own bet. so if everyone just calls the blind and no one raises, the BB has the option to raise the bet himself. Because of this rule, the BB is always LAST to act on the first round (BTF). On subsequent rounds, the SB always acts first then it goes clockwise in order with the button acting last
IMO=in my opinion
LAG=loose aggressive
UTG=under the gun. this is the first person to act BTF, which is the first person to the left of the BB
Flop=three cards turned up, bet size is still the smaller amount
Turn=fourth card gets turned up, bet size doubles
river=last cards gets turned up, bet size still double
overcard=a card in your hand higher than any card on the board.
limp-reraise=calling one bet, then after another player raises to two bets, you reraise it to three bets
check-raise=checking, and then raising after another player bets. this is a crucial play in limit HE
the nuts=highest possible hand given the cards on the board. Example, with the board showing 8c 8d 9s 4d 3c the "nuts" would be four eights.
pair the board=when there are two of a given card on the board, ie Jc Kh 2c 2d 9s
capped=when the third raise is made, this is usually the maximum # of raises allowed on any given round (some casinos have a four raise maximum)
semi-bluff=making a bet when you definitely do not have the best hand, hoping everyone will fold, but, if you get called, you have a good chance to improve and win the pot anyway on the next card or cards. example would be betting with AsKs in your hand and the board showing 5s 8s Jc. You could get another spade to make a flush or you might get an ace or a king giving you top pair, top kicker, which could also win the pot. semi-bluffing requires that there are more cards to come.
backdoor draw=when you need two running cards to make your hand, ie you have 89 and the flop is T 2 3, you need two perfect cards to make a straight.
runner-runner=when you get there on a backdoor draw, ie you catch two perfect cards to make a five card hand.
killpot=the stakes are doubled after someone wins two pots in a row, ie 3-6 becomes 6-12 until that person loses a pot. The person who wins two pots in a row is required to post a an additional double sized blind called the "kill".
the cards are notated by their rank and suit - ie Kc=King of clubs, Th=ten of hearts, 2s= deuce of spades
- worst possible starting hand!!!
Posted by: big nose
Posted on: Friday, 23 June 2000, at 8:20 p.m.
What is the possible worst starting hand you could possible have in Texas Hold'em, if your all in preflop against one opponent (assuming the opponent have the best possible starting hand against your hand)? I am guessing it have to be A-A against A-6o? maby there is something worse? In omaha high you could have like 4-4-4-4 against A-A-x-x and have no possybililities of winning. I know that can not be done in holdem, but is my example with A-A against A-6o the worst? / big nose
- Re: worst possible starting hand!!!
Posted by: SmoothB
Posted on: Monday, 3 July 2000, at 10:57 p.m.
In omaha the worst possible starting hand is 2222. Although this can, in principle, win against some hands heads up (even some good ones) there are many hands that it cannot possibly win against.
This is never true in holdem. There is no matchup where one hand CANNOT beat another.
-SmoothB-
- short question
Posted by: bigelibiggus
Posted on: Sunday, 25 June 2000, at 6:02 p.m.
can anyone tell me what "n/t" and "n/m" or "nm" means...I have seen it a couple of times but dont have a clue. Thanks! bigelibiggus
- Re: short question
Posted by: Howard Burroughs
Posted on: Monday, 26 June 2000, at 3:47 a.m.
No text
No message
Good Luck
- Reconstructing 7CS Hands
Posted by: Rocklobster (rocklobster@nh.freei.net)
Posted on: Sunday, 25 June 2000, at 6:58 p.m.
Hi All--
I'm relatively new to casino poker.
In trying to reconstruct 7CS showdown hands I find it difficult to be sure which hole card is the river card. In other words, when players display their hand they often make it nearly impossible to tell which 2 hole cards they were originally dealt and which 1 was dealt on the river.
Any tricks / suggestions? Should I just ask?
Thanks--
- Re: Reconstructing 7CS Hands
Posted by: Ray Zee
Posted on: Sunday, 25 June 2000, at 9:07 p.m.
sometimes i ask if the person is a friendly amateur or a pro that knows that this time it wont hurt to tell me because it wont give any info on how he plays. but as you learn to read hands, almost all the time you will know what card he caught on the river. also unless they really work at mixing them you can learn to watch and get it right. but its not all that important.
- Small Pocket Pairs in No Fold'em Hold'em
Posted by: Mal (mal@cmpsourc.com)
Posted on: Monday, 26 June 2000, at 12:41 p.m.
I play in low limit no fold'em games in Mississipi and Louisiana. I know the odds of flopping a set with a small pocket pair. In these games it is fairly common for capped pots pre-flop with 5 to 7 players seeing the flop. I like to see the flop and will normally get out if I don't spike a set or a straight draw. I read in the books and articles about not playing small pocket pairs in early to mid position. What do the experts and seasoned veterans think? Especially since a lot of the callers will have trash hands, like I said typical LLNFHE games. Thanks for all the excellent posts on this forum as they are very helpfull for a beginning player.
- Re: Small Pocket Pairs in No Fold'em Hold'em
Posted by: Goat (Punkrok777@aol.com)
Posted on: Monday, 26 June 2000, at 5:00 p.m.
Small pairs are great in nofoldem holdem games. One of the most important factors to take into account is how much action there is after the flop. If you have to enter with a small pair and it is capped you will need to be playing in a game where it could potentially go to 2,3 or 4 bets post flop. If the game is passive post flop, then you need to tighten up with your pairs preflop. Small pairs make money because of implied odds. Even in situations where you would be correct to play your pair when it capped (for instance 8way action capped) you will face giant fluctuations and this can be frustrating and break you if your bankroll isn't big enough.
- Re: Small Pocket Pairs in No Fold'em Hold'em
Posted by: Mason Malmuth (MasonMalmuth@TwoPlusTwo.com)
Posted on: Monday, 26 June 2000, at 9:33 p.m.
If you are consistently getting seven way action you should be playing all pairs even if the pot is getting capped. However, in these very large pots it will sometimes be correct to take a card off on the flop as long as your card is not making a straight or flush for someone else.
- Re: Small Pocket Pairs in No Fold'em Hold'em
Posted by: Sean Duffy (sean_duffy@my-deja.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 28 June 2000, at 7:52 p.m.
I agree with Mason and Goat, with the caveat that the game should also be fairly loose and aggressive postflop. Sometimes you'll find a game with capped 5 or 6 way action preflop that calms down a lot on the flop. Part of what makes the small pair playable in any position is the ability to drag a monster when you flop a set, but if these types calm down a lot on the flop, your implied odds are cut significantly.
As a related aside, you should almost never slowplay a set in these games. Many low-limit players play a set the exact same way every time: check-call flop, check-raise turn. Not only are these types very predictable, but it's usually a lot more profitable to jam on the flop in these games.
-Sean
- beginner's experience
Posted by: jimdapimp (jimdapimp@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Monday, 26 June 2000, at 4:37 p.m.
I just played hold em for the first time this past weekend. I sat at a 2-4 table and ended up losing about $200 in an 8 hour marathon. I had read a little about strategies and read some posts.
I was wondering if losing this amount was really bad or if my experience was comparable to some other peoples' first time. And also, how long should it be before I see some returns here and there?
If it's helpful, I know that I played some hands incorrectly... I was at a loose aggressive table and I got chased quite ofte. Also, it wasn't like i didn't win any hands- i was actually up 175 at one point. Which brings me to my last question, what kinds of retunrs should i be playing for? When should I walk? Any advice or feedback would be helpful.
- Re: beginner's experience
Posted by: ohKanada (ohKanada@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Monday, 26 June 2000, at 6:45 p.m.
I have seen many people lose more than $200 in a low limit game. The problem with low limit games, is that people tend to play too many hands and they stay too long with them. Don't get into the habit of saying to yourself "it's only $4". If you do that twice an hour, you have lost $64. Another thing with low limit is the rakes are a higher percentage of the pots which is bad.
I would recommend reading some low limit books and find the kinds of hands you should be playing.
As far as returns go, it would be nice to average 1-2 BB per hour. In your case, $32 - $64 in profit.
Where were you playing?
Ken
- Re: beginner's experience
Posted by: jimdapimp (jimdapimp@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Monday, 26 June 2000, at 7:31 p.m.
I was playing at Commerce Casino in CA. I'll probably try Hollywood Park this week or might go back and try to tighten up at Commerce again.
- Re: beginner's experience
Posted by: David D
Posted on: Tuesday, 27 June 2000, at 7:40 a.m.
You played 8 hours straight your first time out. When were you planning to analyze how you played the different hands? When your not in a hand are you how the other players play, are you analyzing how you played your previous hand?
- Re: beginner's experience
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Monday, 26 June 2000, at 10:39 p.m.
On the one hand, I'm a winning player, and despite not having that many hours under my belt, I've had a $600+ losing streak in the low limit games I play. On the other hand, your losing streaks are much worse when you're playing badly.
So read some books. Talk to some friends and have them watch you play. You should be able to decide if you're playing well without worrying about how much you're making.
- Update to Beg. Exp.
Posted by: jimdapimp (jimdapimp@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 27 June 2000, at 2:35 p.m.
I just wanted to post an update to my first message. I went back to the same casino yesterday and played a lot tighter. Had I not been so tight and seen the river card instead of folding on the turn, I would have won 3 more pots all around 75-95 dollars. But overall, I was happy with the way I played. I realized that the other players at the table were really loose and chasing too many hands. I sat for about 2.5 hours and won a little over $160. I think I learned a lot from my experience the first time. Also, from my second time, I learned that I should be less intimidated by other players with larger pots who raise often. Lastly wanted to say thanks to OhKanada for his advice as I didn't get to greedy and try for $200. Probably saved myself a few bucks. Thanks for the responses.
- I CASHED OUT 6000 DOLLAR from Casino on Net !!!!
Posted by: Jack (jack200@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 27 June 2000, at 3:20 p.m.
Yesterday's night I entered www.netprofitcasino.com and opened a 250 $ account for playing Blackjack. Unbelievable!... during the third game I WON 5768 dollar !!! Today I received it on my bank account! Wish you guys good luck too!
- Go AWAY. (nt)
Posted by: ohKanada (ohKanada@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 27 June 2000, at 9:32 p.m.
nt
- get a life dork...(n/t)
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 28 June 2000, at 9:30 a.m.
.
- Beginner's pot-limit question
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Wednesday, 28 June 2000, at 12:51 p.m.
Having read Bob Ciaffone's recent article in CardPlayer on pot-limit rules, I am under the impression that pot-limit has some betting rules that go beyond the basic idea that the size of the pot is the maximum bet.
1. Is there a minimum bet at the beginning of each round? How about pre-flop?
2. What governs the minimum and maximum size of a raise?
I know these are basic questions, so if you just want to refer me to where I can find the answers that is fine.
Thanks.
Jon I.
- An additional raising question
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Wednesday, 28 June 2000, at 1:05 p.m.
I just went to a poker FAQ and found the following example of raising in pot-limit:
"Say that the pot contains p units before a previous bettor bets (or blinds) b units. You wish to raise the maximum. What is the total amount that you should bet?
The size of the pot when it is your turn to act is p+b. Your action includes a call, making the pot p+2b, and thus the amount of your raise will be p+2b and your total bet will be p+3b."
This makes no sense to me. If the size of my maximum raise is the size of the pot before my call, plus my call, the formula would be 2(p + 2b). Right? Or where am I going wrong?
- Re: An additional raising question
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 28 June 2000, at 6:45 p.m.
Hmm... perhaps you should get some chips and actually try this.
Let's say the pot is $200 and someone bets $100. You call $100 and now desire to raise. The pot is $400, which equals $200 + 2*$100, and this is the amount you can raise. So you were informed correctly.
- Re: An additional raising question
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Thursday, 29 June 2000, at 1:05 p.m.
Niels,
You were wise to use actual numbers for the formula. Doing so, I can now see that the above equation given to me on the FAQ for the TOTAL BET is correct.
Thanks.
Jon I.
- Re: An additional raising question
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Thursday, 29 June 2000, at 8:00 a.m.
Pot limit is just that.
If it is pre flop and you are not one of the blinds you may raise the pot which is what ever is in the pot plus the blind. Example say the blinds are 10/20 your turn to act there is 30 in the pot - you may call the 20 then raise 50. now there is 100 in the pot next guy can call the 20 and raise 120.
After the flop what ever is in the pot may be bet if you are calling and raising you may make your call then raise the pot including your call.
So if the pot is $500 and when some guy in front of you has just bet $200 - you can see his $200 and raise $900 which is the $500 pot plus his $200 your call of the $200.
- But whats the minimum bet ? (nt)
Posted by: DJ
Posted on: Thursday, 29 June 2000, at 8:18 a.m.
?
- Re: But whats the minimum bet ? (nt)
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Thursday, 29 June 2000, at 8:27 a.m.
The big blind.
- Minimum bet
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Thursday, 29 June 2000, at 12:56 p.m.
Rounder,
Thanks for the explanation. But what is the minimum bet on the flop and beyond?
Jon I.
- Re: Minimum bet
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Friday, 30 June 2000, at 8:11 a.m.
if its 10-20 the bet on the turn is 20.. Please invest in a good book or just go to a book store and read what they have on the shelf.
jg
- Its a pot limit question!
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Friday, 30 June 2000, at 9:46 a.m.
jg,
Its not a 10-20 game, its pot limit. I've read the books, so make sure you read the thread before you start giving snide advice. And if you can find a pot-limit book in a bookstore in the Midwest...
Jon I.
- Re: Its a pot limit question!
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Friday, 30 June 2000, at 11:48 a.m.
Pot limit games have blind structure. if the blinds are 10-20 then the min bet is 20.
You can find a lot of books right here and on Amazon.com living in the midwest in no excuse for not educating yourself.
- Rounder
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Friday, 30 June 2000, at 1:57 p.m.
I've been avidly trying to educate myself for six months. I'm twice through 7CSFAP, HEFAP, TOP, and Sklansky's Hold'em Poker (and one time through Winning Concepts in Draw and Lowball).
My midwestern roots were not mentioned as an excuse for not knowing the answer. However, I cannot browse through a pot-limit book in a Wisconsin bookstore because no Wisconsin bookstore that I have been to has carried a pot-limit book. I can't afford to buy a book off Amazon every time I have a minor structural question -- $30 is nothing to wink at in my shoes. This forum is the best spot for such "simple" structural questions.
For getting unduly snippy with jg, I have apologized.
Jon I.
- Re: Its a pot limit question!
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Friday, 30 June 2000, at 12:36 p.m.
jon..my remark was not to be a jerk but to help you to better understand the game more quickly and thoroughly.
your question was what is the betting beyond the flop..my response was its the big blind on the turn
best of decision
jg
- jg
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Friday, 30 June 2000, at 1:41 p.m.
We apparently had a mix-up. I didn't understand that the big blind continues to be minimum bet standard. I had read that the minimum bring-in in a pot-limit game can be X x the BB, so I was truly in the dark as to determining the standard for minimum bets on the various streets. Bob Ciaffone's recent Card Player article on pot-limit rules served only to heighten my confusion (through no fault of his own). Didn't mean to get snappy. Its hard to convey ideas and attitude on the forum. My apologies.
Jon I.
- Re: Its a pot limit question! sorry
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Friday, 30 June 2000, at 5:08 p.m.
geez i better clear my mistake up.in 10-20 the bet is $20 on the turn as i first mentioned, not the big blind
jg
- Re: Its a pot limit question! sorry
Posted by: Ben Greene
Posted on: Monday, 3 July 2000, at 7:57 a.m.
Is it me or does it sound like you are talking about limit poker again !?
- Re: Beginner's pot-limit question
Posted by: Ray Zee
Posted on: Friday, 14 July 2000, at 5:51 a.m.
when 3 or more are in the minimum bet in pot limit or no limit is the size of the big blind. headup the general rule is you can bet whatever amount you want. although some places still require the big blind sized bet.
- Calling a Raise
Posted by: Trips (priest_bill@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 2 July 2000, at 8:17 a.m.
In the Big blind, with what hands would you call a raise from Early, Middle, Late positions in the light of the fact that you have already made a compulsory bet ?
- Re: Calling a Raise
Posted by: Chris Villalobos (zardoz@micron.net)
Posted on: Sunday, 2 July 2000, at 1:41 p.m.
That's a very complex question and not easily answered in a post. You would do best to study HPFAP-21.
CV
- Re: Calling a Raise
Posted by: Trips (priest_bill@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Monday, 3 July 2000, at 2:25 p.m.
Yes, it is a complex question and I pose it because I don't find the literature very helpful. As a start, let's assume the raiser is known to raise with hands that are considered sound raising hands for his position and that he gets 3 callers , before or after his raise with the big blind still to act.
- Re: Calling a Raise
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Wednesday, 5 July 2000, at 9:52 a.m.
Generally, you'll have to defend the Big Blind from time to time with almost anything. My guideline for answering 1 raise against 2 people is 2 high cards or 1 ace and a card >9. To call 1 raiser, I would need a card>10 and would see the flop. If no improvement, fold. To call 2 raises I need an ace or better.
- Re: Calling a Raise
Posted by: Chris Alger (algerc@idt.net)
Posted on: Sunday, 16 July 2000, at 9:41 a.m.
Play all pairs, all suited connectors and two-gaps except stuff like 32s and 52s, and all suited big cards Txs and higher. Muck the big unsuited cards lower than AJ and KQ. 3-bet with AA, KK, QQ and AKs.
- Exacting the odds
Posted by: Bartholemew (bart@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 2 July 2000, at 1:39 p.m.
You are sitting with the nut flush draw after the turn card. You need 37/9 odds to make your call. It's 5-10 and it's $10.00 to you against one opponent who has you beat unless your suit comes on the river. There is exactly $41.00 in the pot and if the flush comes your opp will not call your bet. If I did the math right, and there's no guarantee that I did, you are getting exactly the right odds so that if ten thousand of these situations came up you would break even on your $10 bet. Should you bother? Wouldn't it be like winning a dollar all day on heads and losing a dollar all day on tails?
- Re: Exacting the odds
Posted by: Chris Villalobos (zardoz@micron.net)
Posted on: Sunday, 2 July 2000, at 1:45 p.m.
How do you know that the opponent will not call your bet on the end. They most likely will check and call. If you can win by pairing aces (from your nut flush draw) then your hand is better than it seems.
CV
- Re: Exacting the odds
Posted by: Bartholemew (bart@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 2 July 2000, at 2:00 p.m.
I can appreciate that, Chris, but I was trying to concoct a scenario where your pot odds equalled your bet EXACTLY and implied odds were nonexistant. I'm trying to get an answer to the question that if it's "break even" does it even matter if you bet or not (in the long run).
- Re: Exacting the odds
Posted by: Chris Villalobos (zardoz@micron.net)
Posted on: Sunday, 2 July 2000, at 2:17 p.m.
Poker is usually to complex to ask your question.
If you and your buddy were flipping a coin for a 1 to 1 payoff, you would just be waisting time.
One thing to consider is that if you do start off a winner you can always quit and stay a winner. If your buddy is a compulsive gambler who will keep playing until you eventually become a winner, you can play with a positive expectation.
CV
- Time to fight some fuzzy thinking
Posted by: SmoothB
Posted on: Monday, 3 July 2000, at 10:53 p.m.
With all due respect, I think there is a flaw in your logic, Chris.
You seem to be implying that, if you were both equally matched, you could always win if you simply played till you were ahead and then quit. This is not true.
Take a piece of paper, a coin, and a pencil. Start recording the results of a series of coin tosses. Now, every time the number of heads exceeds the number of tails, start a new line. After a sufficiently long period of time, the number of heads MUST exceed the number of tails, right?
Wrong.
If you would like a more detailed discussion of the workings of this 'paradox' let me know.
This is the same kind of fuzzy logic used by the 'hit and run' artists. They assume that, if they always quit after they have made a certain amount, then they will be consistent winners. But we know this is not the case.
-SmoothB-
- Re: Time to fight some fuzzy thinking
Posted by: Chris Villalobos (zardoz@micron.net)
Posted on: Tuesday, 4 July 2000, at 2:06 p.m.
You read too much into my post.
First, I said if we keep playing this coin flip game nobody will have an edge.
A strange thing happens when we play only "once" with this degenerate who will play us forever until we win.
We first have a 50% chance of winning then quiting
We then have a 12.5% of losing the first toss but winning the next two.
Since our opponent doesn't have the option of quiting we have to have an edge over him.
CV
- Re: Time to fight some fuzzy thinking
Posted by: SmoothB
Posted on: Wednesday, 5 July 2000, at 4:52 p.m.
This is not true. You actually do NOT have an edge over the other player, even if you can choose to quit whenever you like and he cannot.
That is why I offered to explain the workings of this 'paradox'. The offer to explain it still stands.
I'll give you a brief rundown.
Let's say that you find someone to agree to your coin toss game. You will quit the instant you are the tiniest bit ahead, but he will always continue playing until YOU want to stop.
You claim that you have an edge - how big is it? We will assume that it is small - 50.1% to his 49.9 %. In reality you are both 50 50 so it does not matter what hypothetical edge I give you.
Ok, so you play the game. You play the game every day until you are ahead, and then you quit.
That would make it seem as though, in the long run, given an infinite amount of times that you play the game, you MUST be a winner. But you cannot.
In any finite sample of coin tosses, you each have an equal chance of being ahead of the other, and if the number of tosses is even there is some chance that you will tie. Any mathematical treatment that concludes that you must get more of one result than another is logically flawed.
If you still do not believe me I suggest you broach the matter with Sklansky or some other game theorist and have them explain it better than I did.
-SmoothB-
- Re: Time to fight some fuzzy thinking
Posted by: Dan Osman (enderw19@aol.com)
Posted on: Friday, 7 July 2000, at 10:33 a.m.
Here's what will actually happen in this scenario:
You will become richer at $1 per scenario, you will go broke, or you will continue playing for the rest of your life. No other option is available.
You've set up two parameters for yourself: You will quit as soon as you get ahead one dollar from where you started or you will continue playing forever until that happens because you cannot leave a loser. Your opponent will continue playing for as long as you do.
So the results are that you make $1 and stop, or you continue playing forever with an infinite amount of money. Because when you reach infinity, there's also a 100% chance that there's an infinite run of coin flips where the result is not in your favor. The strange thing is that there's also a 100% chance for an infinite number of flips in a row in your favor. Infinity is quite a large number. How's that for a paradox?
Here's the end result: While the odds of getting heads or tails are equal, the result of this experiment will NOT be that you both end up even. There is, however, an equal chance that you will be up P dollars for P attempts, or completely broke.
Summing up, in the amount of time you would have spent trying this experiment you could have been flipping burgers at Micky D's for more profit.
Dan
- Re: welcome back, dan
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Friday, 7 July 2000, at 2:43 p.m.
computer seems fixed?
- Re: welcome back, dan
Posted by: Dan Osman (enderw19@aol.com)
Posted on: Friday, 7 July 2000, at 8:28 p.m.
Actually no. The strangest thing, my computer randomly updates webpages. Usually once a week or so. No one at work can figure it out. Rather than try to solve the mystery, I've just been dealing with it.
So anyway, I've probably posted on 2+2 about 6 times in the last 4-5 weeks. I think it's been good to take a hiatus from poker for a bit. About the 17th or so I'll be moving to a new building for work and I'll have a new computer. Expect me back in full force of writing sarcastic irrelevant postings after that. Oh, and occassionally I'll quote verbatim from 2+2 books and hope no one catches on and just thinks I'm naturally gifted at poker. Until then,
Dan
- Re: Time to fight some fuzzy thinking
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 7 July 2000, at 4:13 p.m.
I'm going to have to step in here because the inanity (is that a word?) of these posts is getting to be too much to bear.
I think Dan is trying to explain it correctly, but never have I read such a lousy explanation of probabilities. (No offense, Dan. Your posts are usually excellent, and the post where you asked Nick if the universe implodes when 17 people sit at a Hold 'Em table remains one of my favorites.)
If you flip coins to infinity, you'll come out even. The problem is that if you hit an infinitely long losing streak, the chance that you'll come back from it also becomes infinitely small.
Consider the case in which you did figure out a way to beat the coin flip game. Then you could just find yourself another "sucker" and win again. It's like playing slots and quitting when you're up, the dumb roulette theory where you bet geometrically increasing amounts of money, and Rounder's stop win technique. They're all logically flawed.
So the answer to Barthlomew's original question is yes. There could conceivably be a situation in which it doesn't matter what the hell you do.
- Re: Time to fight some fuzzy thinking
Posted by: Dan Osman (enderw19@aol.com)
Posted on: Friday, 7 July 2000, at 8:56 p.m.
Well, you're right. I did explain it quite lousily. Fortunately, my math is gooder than my English.
One of my last statements was not correct. Let me try and clarify a bit (or complicate things even more, both are fun).
"There is, however, an equal chance that you will be up P dollars for P attempts, or completely broke."
This is NOT correct. Here's what I meant to say.
The larger P becomes, the greater the odds are that you earning P dollars and you going broke will be even.
Hypothetical: you have $10 to your name. You play someone for a $1 stake with the rules previously mentioned. The odds are very much in your favor to win that $1. But, the longer you play, the more likely it becomes that, at some point, you will hit upon a losing streak that wipes away your winnings and your $10 you had originally. This could happen the first time you play or it may never happen after 10,000 trials. The more money you have backing you, the less likely that scenario is, but keep playing the game forever and it will eventually happen no matter how large your backing is.
Another example:
You play Blackjack for $5 a hand. If you win, you bet $5 next hand. If you lose, you double your previous bet until you win. You have $10,000,000,000 backing and there's no table maximum. 99.999(etc.)% of the times you play you'll come out a winner. This is a good reason why tables do have maximums. But the longer you play, the higher the probability becomes that you will lose 36 hands in a row and wipe out your entire 10 billion dollar stake. Play forever and it becomes an absolute certainty.
Is this any clearer? Or am I just talking out of my ass again?
Dan
- Re: Time to fight some fuzzy thinking
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 19 July 2000, at 4:57 p.m.
OK... I've been away for a week, or I would have responded sooner.
I think the light at the end of the tunnel is getting closer. Hopefully, we can agree on the following:
In at the situations discussed, for the reasons you mentioned, most of the time you will come out a winner. However, when you come out a loser, you will come out such a spectacular loser that it will (exactly) cancel out all your paltry winnings. And so we end up in the peculiar situation of having found a number of games that we can play and expect to win, though each of them has an EV of zero.
- Re: Time to fight some fuzzy thinking
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 6:52 a.m.
SmoothB,
If I recall a random walk on the integers visits every point infinitely often. SO if you flip a fair coin eventually you will have more heads than tails.
I should pbly read the rest of the thread but what you are saying isns't correct.
- Re: Exacting the odds
Posted by: G. Ed Conly (econly@poweruser.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 2 July 2000, at 9:40 p.m.
If the bet is a true odds bet, then it doens't matter if you call or not. Keep in mind, though, that the odds are only 4.11:1 as far as your hand is concerned. If you have even a glimmer of information about your opponent's hand, the odds can be different. Read {poker, gaming and life} Sklansky, for a simple technique.
- Re: Exacting the odds
Posted by: Darren
Posted on: Thursday, 6 July 2000, at 2:15 a.m.
I think in Big Bet Poker it might be different. e.g. if it's $500 to you and your dead even money for the call, as long as your bankroll can take it then call everytime. This tells your opponent you can't be moved/bluffed of a pot and you might put your opponent on tilt.
- Re: Exacting the odds
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 7:06 a.m.
I cannot some of the things I read in this thread!
Suppose you bet$1 on a fair coin on heads (and you win 1 if it lands heads and lose 1 if its lands tails). And continue playing until you either a)win a dollar b) lose 1 dollar. You will win 1 dollar half the time, and lose one half the time.
Suppose now you bet$1 on a fair coin on heads. And continue playing until you either a)win a dollar b) lose 2 dollars. You will win 1 dollar 2/3 of the time, and lose 2 dollars etc 1/3 of the time.
So if you counted the number of heads- thenumber of tails eventually it will be positive.
There are quite a few erroneous things in this sequence of posts but I think Ill just leave it at that for now.
- Home game reading
Posted by: Parkie
Posted on: Tuesday, 4 July 2000, at 7:36 a.m.
I play in a low-limit home game. We all take it quite seriously and try to play the best we can. We play alot of HE and Omaha. I've read a few books on poker, TOP being the best so far but what I want to know is what books are best suited to a home game setting where the play is perhaps a little looser and more passive than the average card room and the thought levels behind players play perhaps not a complex or analytical? 'Winning low limit Hold'em' by Lee Jones. Do you rate it? How well does the TOP fit to a home game? Advice, suggestions or ideas please.
- Re: Home game reading
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Wednesday, 5 July 2000, at 4:42 p.m.
If these games are around Chicago I'd like to play.
- Re: Home game reading
Posted by: scott (sms134@columbia.edu)
Posted on: Wednesday, 5 July 2000, at 5:29 p.m.
the main difference between home games and card rooms is that you have the same group of guys in home games. you will find players in cardrooms that are just as loose or as shallow minded as any home game player you've ever seen. maybe these players are slightly less frequent, but you should be adjusting to the game makeup in any case, just like in a cardroom.
what happens in homegames is psychological. some people get real competative. some get real friendly. one thing is that playing with the same bunch of guys allows you to sieze control and dictate the action far more than you could in any card club, provided you are by far the best player.
top fits into any game with any structure.
scott
- Re: Home game reading
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Thursday, 6 July 2000, at 8:05 a.m.
I've liked the Loose Game sections to HEFAP and 7CSFAP when applied to my home game.
- Re: Home game reading
Posted by: Parkie
Posted on: Friday, 7 July 2000, at 5:37 a.m.
Thanks for the posts guys. Rounder, I'm not in Chicago, sorry.
- Playing 44 when 5-3 has been exposed
Posted by: Dan D.
Posted on: Saturday, 8 July 2000, at 9:07 a.m.
Hold'em Question,
If you had pocket 4's and somebody exposed two cards that would help your pair make a straight, like 5-3 helps 44, would that cause you to maybe not play the pair?
How about if you were facing a raise? And it doesn't only have to be 4-4, it could be any small or mid-size pair.
Thanks, Dan
- Re: Playing 44 when 5-3 has been exposed
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Saturday, 8 July 2000, at 11:35 a.m.
In a normal game I am not nuts about playing small pairs to a raise anyway. I am more concerned in the set than the straight at the preflop phase. It would have little impact on my decision my position and personality of the game would be more of a dictator of my actions.
- Re: Playing 44 when 5-3 has been exposed
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Tuesday, 18 July 2000, at 11:10 a.m.
I am not crazy about playing 4,4 either, but I would on a couple occasions see the flop
1. In late position when I know there will be least 4 more players so I am getting 7:1.
2. To vary my style a bit esp if I have just won a good hand with a monster.
- Reading Opponents
Posted by: Pyramid (pyramid@mm.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 13 July 2000, at 12:39 p.m.
After an expensive learning process, I am beginning to get a "feeling" for the range of hands an opponent could be holding. I am beginning to re-play opponents but generally, most of the opponents are new players to me.
I would like to transform this "feeling" into something with more explicit criteria. I know that there are a number of things to watch and remember about opponents. As a starting point, can someone give me in priority, the three most important factors to study and remember about an opponent during a LL (or otherwise) HE game?
Thanks,
- Re: Reading Opponents
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Thursday, 13 July 2000, at 12:55 p.m.
1. Their reaction to the flop - the single most important moment in a flop game is when the flop hits the felt.
2. How they bet - strong when weak or weak when strong.
3. Betting patterns. Do they come out betting on the flop with a marginal hand and check a monster or visa versa. What hands they are playing and raising or calling raises with and in what position.
It is tough to put these in priority no.1 will always be no1 in my mind but there is so much to consider. I think putting players in categories like loose, tight and passive aggressive then there is the ever popular maniac category.
- Re: Reading Opponents
Posted by: KJS (kscullin@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 13 July 2000, at 1:16 p.m.
Pyramid
Rounder's advice is excellent.
Specifically in LL games, I would concentrate on how people play draws. Since most pots are multiway, and many have 5 or 6 seeing the flop, it is difficult to keep tabs on everyone. Still, try your best to discern what players are staying in on by determining betting patterns for people who showdown straights and flushes. Did they raise a openender or four flush on the flop?
Did they check and call until they hit, then raise?
Do they check and call a small straight or small flush on the end?
On a related note, how do players play their non-monster made hands? Will they hold their second pair, hoping to pair their kicker?
Do they raise with top pair, bad kicker, trying to get better hands out of the pot?
The most overused, and worst overall, betting strategy in LL poker is the check and call (or just calling after a bet). When I play LL, I find it imperative to discover what players will call my bets with after they have checked. Discovering that will help you determine what course of action to take when someone comes out betting after a scare card (third of a suit, one in the straight zone, big card after small card flop) hits. With people playing too many hands and staying in too long, many crazy things happen. Knowing when you are beat will save you money. Plus, having a good read will help you build big pots when you have a good made hand and think everyone else is in there with shit, or on a draw. Good luck.
KJS
- Re: Reading Opponents
Posted by: John F. (johnfeeney@home.com)
Posted on: Friday, 14 July 2000, at 3:32 a.m.
In addition to what others have said, just try to categorize your opponents in terms of the most salient features of their play. Is he loose, tight, a calling station, a maniac, a thinking player who reads others well, an habitual bluffer...? Try pegging them along the dimensions loose/tight and passive/aggressive. In most ring game situations the better players will be tight-aggressive.
- Re: Reading Opponents
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Monday, 17 July 2000, at 1:46 p.m.
Don't watch the flop. It will not change. Watch the players especially in late position. Do they look back at their hands afterthe flop. Do they look pleased? Do they look away quickly? Then how do they bet? Finally do they showdown, and if so what can you correlate with your observations?
When you are out of a hand, and that should be about 70% of the time or more, use this time to study the players' body language. Pick 1 or 2 players and observe. Then move on to 1 or 2 more. It will take 30-60 minutes to complete a table. In that time, just play premium hands. Problems arise when the table changes a lot.
- What is 1-4-8-8?
Posted by: Freddy
Posted on: Thursday, 13 July 2000, at 6:34 p.m.
Whenever I've played in casinos it's been 3-6 or 5-10? But I saw that some Vegas casinos are 1-4-8-8, and I'm going out there in September, so I was wondering what exactly that meant?? Thanks.
- Re: What is 1-4-8-8?
Posted by: thecat (thecat_08021@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 13 July 2000, at 7:02 p.m.
7 Card Stud the bets are 1-4 on 3rd, 4th, and 5th streets the bets are 1-8 on 6th and 7th streets
- Re: What is 1-4-8-8?
Posted by: Chris Villalobos (zardoz@micron.net)
Posted on: Thursday, 13 July 2000, at 9:30 p.m.
In Holdem the blinds for a 4/8 game should be 2 and 4 but in a 1-4-8-8 they are 1 and 2. I know the Orlean's had a game like this last time I was there. This makes preflop and flop play different.
CV
- Re: What is 1-4-8-8?
Posted by: G. Ed Conly (econly@poweruser.com)
Posted on: Friday, 14 July 2000, at 1:20 a.m.
It's a spread limit game. Just as the cat suggests, the bets can be from $1 - $4 before and on the flop, and from $1 - $8 on the turn and river. You will need to make some adjustments (though minor) to your game when coming from a fixed limit game.
- tight or loose
Posted by: Robert
Posted on: Thursday, 13 July 2000, at 8:39 p.m.
Is the saying true:
Play loose in tight games and tight in loose games?
- Re: tight or loose
Posted by: G. Ed Conly (econly@poweruser.com)
Posted on: Friday, 14 July 2000, at 1:17 a.m.
Read Sklanksy's "Getting the Best of It".
- Where to now?
Posted by: Beginner (craigsmith@okstate.com)
Posted on: Saturday, 15 July 2000, at 6:00 p.m.
I spent the 4th of July weekend in Las Vegas and sat down in a casino cardroom for the first time.
I played at Binion's ($1-$4-$8) for approximately 25 hours over 4 days.
I was surprised that I really didnt feel intimidated (possibly due to the fact that other "fish/tourists" were at the tables.
Anyway to make a long story short----I ended up with $142 profit for the four days. I played pretty damn tight, but bet the cards when I got them. I got popped with pocket aces once for a big pot (beat by 2 pair)and once I stupidly raised BTF with JJ and then reraised but NOBODY would get out! LOL...sheez, but overall I was happy with the 4 days. It beat the shit outta the variances at the craps table.
Anyway, my question....would any of you recommend Turbo Texas Hold em for practice. I can play at an Indian Casino about 60 miles from here, but thought Turbo would be a good idea. The "play money" tables at Paradise and Planet are ridiculous....I cant learn anything from those tables.
Any advice is appreciated
- Re: Where to now?
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Sunday, 16 July 2000, at 9:48 a.m.
nothing like the real thing - of course I'm a guy who never hit a bucket of balls but "played" him self to a respectable handy cap.
Poker is about the other players. Putting them in categories, reading hands and playing the man. Oh yeah there is the card thing and math thing too.
:-)
- Re: Where to now?
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Monday, 17 July 2000, at 1:41 p.m.
I would definitely recommend get tingthe program and playing if for no other reason than to be able to "SEE" a lot of hands. Observe what effect the flop has on your hand and others. Play by a set of rules like only play big pairs in early position; raise with any hand in late position that you would "play" in early position etc. It will let you see situations that recurr and give you a feel for the game. BTY, if you cannot beat TTHE, then you will have a tough time on real tables.
- Re: Where to now?
Posted by: packerfan1 (packerfn1@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Monday, 17 July 2000, at 2:27 p.m.
Beginner:
Congrats on your early success.
I live 135 miles from the nearest poker room and only get to play all day on one Sunday every month. I'd be lost without TTH to keep me somewhat on my game between sessions.
Rounder makes a good point regarding the "people" side of poker. But if your playing LL, you gotta practice playing the cards correctly too.
Just my 2c
Michael
Be the flop... See the flop... You're not being the flop, Danny.
- Re: Where to now?
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Tuesday, 18 July 2000, at 11:05 a.m.
You MUST see a lot of hands just to get the feel of the game. "Go slowly and carry a big stick" (sic)
- When to Look at your cards in HE?
Posted by: KJS (kscullin@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 20 July 2000, at 2:43 p.m.
I have been thinking a lot about tells, both how to pick up on them and how to avoid giving them out. As a fairly new player (3+ years at 2-4 to 8-16), I feel that my card playing skills are moving along nicely but I want to concentrate some more on my people skills. So, I ask:
A)Is it best to look at one's hole cards right after the second is dealt
or
B)When the action reaches you?
It seems to me that if you choose A) you may miss out on getting information being given out by others who choose this approach because you will be looking at your cards and not them. But,
If you choose B) you run the risk that all or most of the players are looking right at you when you see your hand for the first time. If you are not that experienced, you may be giving them too much information .
I have seen experienced players choose both approaches.
What do people think is best for the learning player, and why?KJS
- Re: When to Look at your cards in HE?
Posted by: Mason Malmuth (MasonMalmuth@TwoPlusTwo.com)
Posted on: Friday, 21 July 2000, at 3:30 a.m.
I almost always wait until it is my turn to act before I look at my cards. But I actually recommend that beginning players do the opposite. That is look at your cards as soon as you get them. This way you will have the maximum time to think in case a tough decision develops.
- Good point, thanks. (nt)
Posted by: KJS (kscullin@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 21 July 2000, at 12:16 p.m.
a
- the best strategy guid to buy
Posted by: frank (olblueeyes@aol.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 20 July 2000, at 11:57 p.m.
i am fairly new at hold'em but i have a good grasp of the game,i am a seasoned stud player. but i want to be the best i can be so i was wondering waht would be athe best guide to pick up to help me improve my skills so i can be at the top of my game.
Thanks, Frank
- Re: the best strategy guid to buy
Posted by: David Klatte (dhk42@mediaone.net)
Posted on: Friday, 21 July 2000, at 8:07 p.m.
You didn't say what stakes you'd be playing for. Hold'em Poker for Advance Players, 21st century edition, is excellent. It's geared toward mid-limit play, but I'm a low limit player and I re-read it regularly. This isn't necessarily an easy read, mind you. It's more of a poker textbook. Well worth the effort, though.
If you want something simpler that will help you beat low limit, loose-passive games "Winning Low Limit Hold'em" by Lee Jones is good.
David
- Should I switch gears?
Posted by: MattG
Posted on: Friday, 21 July 2000, at 3:46 p.m.
I am a new player (6 months exp.) at holdem. I live in Vegas and have been playing at the Mirage in the 3-6 game. I have not been able to make much progress. I pretty much break even. Over the course of 6 months I am up $940. However, my win rate has been decreasing. I find myself getting frustrated because I seem to be playing the same people every day. If the table is all locals I'm just playing for the comp. When there is a mixture of tourist and local I either win big or get crushed. For ex. I got drilled in a capped pot with pocket Queens by a King 2 offsuit. Two hands later I got reraised on the river by a bottom straight when I had the nut flush! Like I said, big fluctuations. Should I be playing with different starting requirements than what is recommended in HEFAP? Should I build up a bigger bankroll and wait till I can afford ten-twenty? Should I look for an easier game even with the higher rake, like at Excaliber or Luxor? I want to continue to improve, but I could use a little less volatility.
- Re: Should I switch gears?
Posted by: Chris Villalobos (zardoz@micron.net)
Posted on: Friday, 21 July 2000, at 5:37 p.m.
6 months.. eh? My friend you have many years of frustration ahead of you. Keep your nose to the grind stone, and read the 2+2 books about a seriously as you would a major college course. I mean take notes, test yourself, ask questions here. If you are really serious E-mail David S. for a private lesson.
I remember my first lesson with David after posting here for a couple months and really studying all the Texts. I quote, "You're still a Baby!"
CV
- Re: Should I switch gears?
Posted by: Chris Alger (algerc@idt.net)
Posted on: Friday, 21 July 2000, at 9:16 p.m.
1. On "changing gears," I don't like this metaphor because it suggests that one should more or less arbitrarily play incorrectly for some period of time, or for several hands in a row, and then switch back to winning play. I'm more comfortable with the idea of making moves for a single hand because it's the right thing to do in that specific situation. For example, raise a limper with a suited connector in the middle not because you haven't done this for a while, but because (1) the limper tends toward a "fit or fold" strategy on the flop and never limp-raises with big pairs, (2) no one has seen you bluff (or do what looks like bluffing) for a while, (3) the blinds will likely drop, and (4) your target has looked you up on the river in a similar situation before and lost. In general, if your opponents pay attention (e.g. locals), give them enough variation on accasion to keep them off guard, keep them guessing. A little does a lot. If they're already guessing, and particularly if they tend to guess wrong, you're already there, and screwing around with suboptimal play is wrong.
2. The surest way to reduce your fluctuations is to improve your hand reading ability and the discipline to do the right thing based on what your opponents have. Watch, think, and follow through with the right play. Another area to concentrate on when you're new is picking your spots. Rather than agonize over squeezing out every penning out of every marginally good hand, concentrate on those situations where your EV is pretty clearly positive. For example, most new players aren't aggressive enough when they have a pretty good hand but the board gets a little scary, such as when they hold an overpair heads up but a flush card or ace hits on the end. Checking for fear of the better hand is virtually never correct here, and is an awful mistake against weak callers that pay off with anything, but I see it a lot in low limit. Another example is building the pot on the flop with a solid draw.
- Re: Should I switch gears?
Posted by: jg (lionheart111@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Saturday, 22 July 2000, at 9:36 a.m.
The beauty of the game of poker is its wonderous & frustrating complexities and variables..to me once the basics are down its a matter of experience, continaul evalaution and reading.
its the only game in town to stimulate the neurons .
jg
- Re: Should I switch gears?
Posted by: .
Posted on: Thursday, 10 August 2000, at 1:41 p.m.
.
- Re: Should I switch gears?
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Sunday, 23 July 2000, at 7:34 a.m.
ALWAYS play in the easiest game available.
Rake smake if the game is easier go there.
You might consider raising the steaks to 4-8, 6-12 or 5-10. The game is different in these limits.
- Hold'em: Position
Posted by: Pyramid (pyramid@mm.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 26 July 2000, at 8:34 a.m.
Hi,
Nine players. No. 1 seat is the Button; nos. 2 & 3 are SB and BB respectively. Which seat numbers are early, middle and late.
Thanks
- Re: Hold'em: Position
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Wednesday, 26 July 2000, at 9:21 a.m.
pre-flop
4 - 5 early
6 - 8 middle
9 - 1 late (assuming 9 handed game)
2 - 3 blinds.
- Thanks Rounder/ nt
Posted by: Pyramid (pyramid@mm.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 26 July 2000, at 10:18 a.m.
nt
- Loose Aggressive Raiser
Posted by: Pyramid (pyramid@mm.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 26 July 2000, at 4:50 p.m.
Hi,
Two situations:
1. Loose Aggressive Raiser on your immediate or near right: other than mucking more hands BTF and tightening on the flop and successive cards (a passive response), what tactics can I employee to use this player's aggression against him.
2. Loose Agressive Raiser on you immediate or near left: other than tightening up on card selection/play continuation, what tactics can I employee to use this player's aggression against him.
Thanks,
- Re: Loose Aggressive Raiser
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Thursday, 27 July 2000, at 6:31 a.m.
I'd play these guys the same way - try to isolate them then punish them for playing to many hands which means they are playing any suited, coupled 1-2-3 gapped and Ax Kx maybe Qx any pair.
Typically they are aggressive pre flop, bit less on the flop, passive on the turn and fold on the river.
These guys are the eternal optomists any 2 cards looks like a straight flush to them when the board tells them differently they hang on for dear life looking for the one out to make their hand.
Gotta love them they make the game worth while.
You play better cards than they do and you are bound to take their bankroll away from them.
- Re: Loose Aggressive Raiser
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 27 July 2000, at 9:38 a.m.
What Rounder is saying is that with a maniac on your right, you can 3-bet preflop to get it heads up with any hand capable of winning a showdown on its own merits (i.e. any medium pair, even just an ace if the maniac is a complete lunatic).
With the maniac on your left, you essentially have the button everytime because on every round you'll check to the maniac who will bet, and then you get to see what the rest of the field will do before you call, check-raise, or fold.
Maniacs are fun, though I generally prefer them in 7cs to HE.
- Re: Loose Aggressive Raiser
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Thursday, 27 July 2000, at 9:41 a.m.
Yeah that what isolating weak players is all about. I don't like more thn 2 in a game and I am sure of winning if I get the right table mix.
- SEE THE TURN?
Posted by: Robert
Posted on: Wednesday, 26 July 2000, at 11:21 p.m.
If you have a piece of the flop, say second best or bottom pair, should you see the turn to see if you improve? Is it worth it to see the turn? How many callers before the flop would you need in order for you to call and see the turn? Thanks for the help!
- Re: SEE THE TURN?
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Thursday, 27 July 2000, at 6:41 a.m.
Depends on who is in the hand.
I don't usually see the turn unless I am committed to finish the hand out. It is also flop dependent.
Example - I am in bb with late position with A3s I raise and get heads up with bb who hasen't played a hand in 45 minuits. flop comes 5A5 - I bet he raises I fold.
Another example I have 88 in late position I riase and get heads up with loose aggressive playing 8 out of 10 hands. Flop T 7 5 - I bet he calls me to the river - I show 88 he mucks.
Like I said it depends.
- Re: SEE THE TURN?
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 27 July 2000, at 9:57 a.m.
Rounder is mistaken here. There are many situations where you would call the flop and fold the turn, which is the basis of the 2+2 "check 4th street" strategy that the authors talk about all the time but nobody seems to use.
Especially in low-limit games with a lot of callers pre-flop, you'll have the odds to draw to an inside straight for a single bet on the flop but have to fold on the turn.
With a big pot, you can also often take a card off with middle or bottom pair, depending on how sure you are your two pair or trips will hold up if you hit.
Basically, you figure your chances that you'll hit your hand, figure the chances that it'll be good if it hits, and then see if the size of the pot indicates a call.
Example: You have K5 in the BB, flop is 2 5 T rainbow. You check, a strong early position player bets out, and its folded to you. You think to yourself:
I know the early position player has a ten, but there are 5 cards which make my hand, and 47 left in the deck, giving me about 8.5 to 1 odds of hitting. I think my hand will be good if it hits, since I doubt the early position player called with KT. There's already 7 small bets in the pot, and it will cost me one more to call, so if I think I can squeeze a big bet out of this guy during the rest of the hand, I have a clear call.
- Re: SEE THE TURN?
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Thursday, 27 July 2000, at 10:49 a.m.
You say I'm wrong, well maybe - if you worship at the alter of 2+2 - I don't - I need a lot more than 8.5/1 to make a 7/1 draw. But if you want the 1 bb an hour thing go ahead and worship away.
The call is based on a lot more than size of the pot.
If that were the case you might as well program a computer and let it make the decisions.
I don't play poker that way.
- Re: SEE THE TURN?
Posted by: Chris Alger (algerc@idt.net)
Posted on: Monday, 31 July 2000, at 3:52 p.m.
Here's another example. You open-raise in late position with AT and are 3-bet by a tight player behind you. The big blind calls both raises and you call. The flop comes A52 rainbow. The blind checks, you bet and get raised again. The blind drops. You're more than 90% sure you're looking at AK.
The pot is laying you just over 12-1 to see the turn card and if it's a ten, you'll pick up 6 more small bets more than 90% of the time. The odds against you hitting a ten are a little better than 15-1. The 18-1 overlay should therefore be more than enough to risk getting redrawn and the rare disaster of making your hand only to be shown pocket aces.
At the other end of the spectrum, in loose passive games a lot of players automatically take off a card with any pair, thinking that an 9-1 chance of hitting on the turn must look pretty good when there are 6 or 7 bets in the pot already. The problem is that they don't consider the chance of drawing dead, of being redrawn and paying a lot when it happens, or even being raised before the turn by players yet to act. When you take these factors into account, often your only reasonable conclusion is that you don't know where you stand. If so, fold. One of your objectives should be to find the good spots for your money and avoid unecessary gambling.
- When/how to evaluate my results?
Posted by: Linc
Posted on: Thursday, 27 July 2000, at 11:25 a.m.
I've been playing at a new card room (MN) -- my first experiences playing in a card room setting. I've had 8-9 sessions, varying from 4-6 hours each, so maybe I've put in a bit less than 50 hours so far....certainly not enough to be significant.
I'm down so far, as I expected. I'm playing mostly 2/4 stud as I learn, though I did toy with HE until I decided I better learn one game at a time. I've read (and continue to re-read) the Roy West book and the 7CS for AP book, and feel like I'm making better plays than I did at first. I can understand the concepts of starting hands, of trying to get certain hands heads up, and certain hands to play cheap, etc. I can also now see that most players in my typical game are pretty bad -- playing with poor starting hands, generally passive, and so on.
My question is -- when have I put in enough play to really step back and re-evaluate my results? All this talk of "hourly rate" makes it seem so automatic, but I have to believe even good players sometimes lose a rack or two and leave down money. I've had 2 small wins, one really large win, 4-5 small/moderate losses, and one large loss. This is seems in line with what I expected, but I'd like some confirmation.
Also, as I keep playing, what can I expect in terms of session-to-session activity. Is it reasonable to be at a table of players you feel you are better than, but still lose a rack or two over the course of 4-6 hours? If I lose, am I really not better than these players? If I have 3-4 losing sessions in a row? If I don't win for a month? I have to believe on starting hands alone I'm playing at a modest advantage. I might be playing weak/tight at times, but I'm trying hard to be aggessive when I've got the goods (even if I do get drawn out on later).
Also, I understand the idea of playing just being "one long session," (I've played enough advantage blackjack to understand the variance). Maybe my question is what type of variance do I need to plan for playing poker?
Thanks for all the help.
- Re: When/how to evaluate my results?
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Thursday, 27 July 2000, at 11:45 a.m.
Far as evaluating your play 500 hours then 1000 are yard sticks I'd use. I'd also look at my weekley and monthly play results - if you are losing say 2 months in a row you are doing something really wrong and need to reevaluate your play.
- hold'em math
Posted by: Dan D.
Posted on: Thursday, 27 July 2000, at 7:30 p.m.
I've heard that there are six ways to get a pocket pair(like: Ace/heart-Ace/spade etc...). What is the math used to get six?
Also, if one card is unavailable to your opponent to have pocket-whatever, what's the math to figure his remaining chances of having that particular pair.
Thanks, Dan
- Re: hold'em math
Posted by: John Feeney (johnfeeney@home.com)
Posted on: Friday, 28 July 2000, at 3:43 a.m.
It's counting combinations of cards that can give you, say, a pair of aces. Picture the four aces in a row. The first one can combine with any of three others to create a pair. That's three combinations. The second can combine with two others, the third with one. 3+2+1=6.
See "An Essential Hold'em Concept" and "More Hold'em Essentials" in Sklansky's _Poker, Gaming, and Life_ for more detail.
- Re: hold'em math
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 28 July 2000, at 9:06 a.m.
(4!)/((2!)*(2!)) = 6
Six is simply of the number of ways to select two items out of four (order doesn't matter.) It's basic combinatorics... get an algebra or pre-calculus book from the library and skim the chapter on it. It shouldn't be more than ten pages.
You opponent's chances of having a certain pair are equal to the number of ways he could make that pair divided by the total number of hands he would have played the same way.
Ex: You opponent raises UTG, which he would only do with AA or KK. You have AQ. There are now only 3 ways for him to have AA, but 6 ways for him to have KK. He now has only a 33% chance of having AA. You still fold, but you get the idea.
P.S. If you reraise instead, and he caps, and he wouldn't do this with KK, he now has a 100% chance of having aces. You have to use all available information when making your analysis.
- Re: hold'em math
Posted by: Sparty (michstfan@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 28 July 2000, at 9:31 a.m.
Get Hold'Em's Odds Book by Mike Petriv. The best work calculating all kinds of situations. It just uses combinations as pointed out in other posts, but shows you how to really think about 'constructing' the right combinations. Sometimes it is not as obvious as you would think.
Great book.
- Hi / Lo with declare question
Posted by: Goog (elgoogo@aol.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 27 July 2000, at 10:17 p.m.
I'm in a regular home game and I can't convince ANY of the other players that when declaring low, a pair of aces is LOWER than a pair of deuces. (They're doctors and lawyers, so they remain unswayed by any logic I can use on them re: ace being the lowest card in a flush, which they readily accept.) Does anybody know of a place where I can find this specific rule in writing to convince these guys? Thanks in advance for the help.
- Re: Hi / Lo with declare question
Posted by: Scott V
Posted on: Friday, 28 July 2000, at 5:47 p.m.
I hope you never convince them a pair of aces is lower that deuces, because they are not.
- Re: Hi / Lo with declare question
Posted by: Rene Buzzey
Posted on: Thursday, 10 August 2000, at 3:16 p.m.
Of cours not!
- Re: Hi / Lo with declare question
Posted by: thecat (thecat_08021@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Friday, 28 July 2000, at 8:45 p.m.
When playing Ace to Five Low a pair of aces is lower than a Pair of deuces. See "According to Hoyle" under Low Poker or Lowball.
- Re: Hi / Lo with declare question
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 6:42 a.m.
Seems to me a problem would only come up if some one had a pair of aces as his low and declared low (which is highly unlikely). And in this case one could say well the A is bothe the highest card and the lowest card. (Doesnt' everyone at your table agree that A2 3 4 5 is the best low hand?)
Maybe this might come up if one player had A's full and the other had K's full, and the A's went bothe ways! But again I think this is unlikely.
- Questions
Posted by: Poker Amateur
Posted on: Friday, 28 July 2000, at 1:47 p.m.
I was in a casino yesterday that played different games than I am used to. I have always played structured games, 7 card stud 2/4-5/10, but they had 7 stud 2-6,6; Omaha hi/lo 4-8 round by round, and omaha hi/lo 4/8 half kill. I assume the omaha round by round is normal 4-8(am I wrong?), but what do the other limits(and the half kill) mean?
- Re: Questions
Posted by: Another Mike
Posted on: Saturday, 29 July 2000, at 6:53 p.m.
I haven't seen the term round by round before- I suspect it's a 4-8 spread limit game (you can bet anywhere from 4 to 8 each round). The half kill I can answer with a semblance of authority. When a player wins two hands in a row, the next pot is a kill pot. In a half kill games, the stakes go up by half, so the next hand would be 6-12 in your situation, with the person who killed it posting an amount equal to the small bet ($6 here). A full kill means the stakes double for the next hand. The stakes remain at this level until that player loses.
Hope this helps,
Mike
- Loose - Tight, Aggressive - Passive
Posted by: Wanting to Learn
Posted on: Saturday, 29 July 2000, at 12:52 p.m.
Although I believe I understand the difference between a loose vs tight game, I am somewhat confused about aggressive vs. passive. I often hear about "loose-passive" or "loose-aggressive" games. Could someone please provide a clear descriptio of these terms and how explain how one can judge a specific game to determine what type of game it is? What are the characteristics? What should I look for?
- Re: Loose - Tight, Aggressive - Passive
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Saturday, 29 July 2000, at 1:44 p.m.
If a high % of the hands are multi (4+) way and not raised it is probably a loose/passive if they are multi way and raised often 2-3-4 bet it is loose aggressive.
Of course if most hands are only 2 or 3 handed and not raised you can say that the table is tight passive if only 2-3 handed and often raised you can call it tight aggressive.
I hape I haven't confused you.
- Re: Loose - Tight, Aggressive - Passive
Posted by: Wanting to Learn
Posted on: Saturday, 29 July 2000, at 5:32 p.m.
Not confusing at all... I appreciate the clarification and believe I better understand. Thank you Rounder
- Re: Loose - Tight, Aggressive - Passive
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Monday, 31 July 2000, at 10:16 a.m.
I think Rounder pretty much covered it, so I'll just say the same thing. The terms are broad generalizations, and once you've sat down for a few rounds, your characterizations of your opponents hould be much more specific than if they're simply loose or tight.
loose vs. tight - describes the number of players seeing flops, cold-calling raises, etc.
passive vs. aggressive - describes how likely these players are to bet their hands, raise with drawing hands, bluff, etc.
A soft game generally means loose/passive, a tough game tight/aggressive. Fish are generally loose/passive, while maniacs are loose/aggresive. Rocks are often tight/passive. You should be tight/aggressive.
- I like to be semi-tight/semi-aggressive
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Monday, 31 July 2000, at 10:39 a.m.
Keeps the enemy on their toes.
:-)
- Getting The Best of It vs. Theory of Poker
Posted by: J. Christopher (jcr@telus.net)
Posted on: Saturday, 29 July 2000, at 11:58 p.m.
I've seen both of these books being recomended for "the math" of hold'em. Which is better and what are the differences???
thanks J.christopher
- Re: Getting The Best of It vs. Theory of Poker
Posted by: Chris Villalobos (zardoz@micron.net)
Posted on: Monday, 31 July 2000, at 2:06 p.m.
They both are a must have for a serious gambler. Getting the Best of It has more discussion on how to calculate simple Odds and Combination problems that come up a lot in Poker.
CV
- Re: Getting The Best of It vs. Theory of Poker
Posted by: B.F. Skinner
Posted on: Tuesday, 1 August 2000, at 6:13 p.m.
Is there a reason why you should be reading only one? These two books are both must reads. It shouldn't be a question of which one you should read but more of a question of which one you should read FIRST. I suggest that you buy both of them. Read chapter one of TOP first. After that, read all of ...Best of It.. Then read all of TOP. One month later, reread TOP again. And again at two month intervals. Also, be sure to read Gambling Theory and Other Topics. It's the perfect complement to Getting the Best of It.
- Re: Getting The Best of It vs. Theory of Poker
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 6:37 a.m.
I suspect TOP is much better book, I skimmed Getting the best of it, and it seemed more like poker stories and some basic combinatorial math. Maybe if this is what you are looking for this might be it.
The theory of Poker doesn't talk much about the math it talks alot about Poker theory.
I think if you get a basic book on combinatorics you could get most of your q's answered. If you post here you culd get most of your math q's answered.
- How to stay focused?
Posted by: gamblerbri (gamblerbri@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Monday, 31 July 2000, at 9:27 p.m.
I have only been playing hold'em for about a month. I play 3-6 or 4-8. Last night I had a situation arise that I need some help with. How do you stay calm when you lose a lot of money on ahand you should have won? I lost two huge pots last night within a half hour. Both were kills, and I flopped the nut straight on both, only to get beaten when the river paired the board giving an opponent full house. I totally lost it. How do you recover from a situation like this? Do you just get up and leave or what?
Thanks for your help
gamblerbri
- Re: How to stay focused?
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Tuesday, 1 August 2000, at 8:50 a.m.
I just look at it as a minor set back and money I have loaned out and will collect with interest very soon.
Bad beats are a part of the game we play. You must understand this if you are gonna be a winning player.
Smile and wait for the next hand keeping in mind that if you make less mistakes than the other guys you will be a winning player it is just that simple.
- Re: How to stay focused?
Posted by: B.F. Skinner
Posted on: Tuesday, 1 August 2000, at 5:42 p.m.
I highly recommend Rex Sikes's audio tape entitled The Attitude Activator at "idea-seminars.com/store/index.htm" (point and click on "1-2 casette programs"). It's basically a mental programming tape that will somehow program you to automatically flick away bad beats, and redirect your emotions towards states of calm, confidence, curiousity and alertness. This tape has been extremely effective for me and I very highly recommend it. I in no way will benefit financially by recommending this product. I recommend it simply because it has worked dramatically for me. I've tried a lot of systems for helping me to stay focused, calm, in the zone, and alert. I've tried self-hypnosis, practiced yoga, tai chi and the martial arts, zen, and many others. But only the Attitude Activator, along with thorough knowledge about the realities of standard deviation and mathematical expectation (read TOP and Gambling Theory...) has truly helped me. Please reserve judgement of the Attitude Activator until after you've tried it at least half a dozen times.
- Re: How to stay focused?
Posted by: Dan D.
Posted on: Tuesday, 1 August 2000, at 6:42 p.m.
B.F.,
When you say that it's "basically a mental programming tape", I'm not really sure what you mean. Is there some guy talking on the tape repeating a bunch of affirmations, or does the narrator actually discuss alternative ways of looking at situations, or maybe you hear ocean waves gently washing up against the shore with subliminal messages?
- Re: How to stay focused?
Posted by: B.F. Skinner
Posted on: Tuesday, 1 August 2000, at 6:58 p.m.
You have to use a stereo headphone. It won't work if you don't wear a headphone. There is a man and a woman talking simultaneously sending different and separate messages to your right ear and left ear. On occassions, you will hear voices from your back and from your front and all around you. These voices give you specific instructions on what to visualize, verbalize, and what to feel at any moment, and as they do, there is a background music whose beat corresponds with the emotion that the verbal instructions are trying to induce. It has nothing to do with subliminals or affirmations, two processes that have dismal records when it comes to programming the human brain to develop new thinking habits and behaviors. I have tried subliminal tapes, affirmations(mantras), self helps, and other techniques. This tape is totally unique. It is mind blowing and extremely pleasurable. Most of all, it is very effective. It is based on neurolinguistic programming, accelerated learning, design human engineering, general semantics, transformational grammar, Ericksonian hypnosis, Gestaldt, and Pavlovian psychology. Totally mind blowing!!!
- Re: How to stay focused?
Posted by: MJChicago (m7h1j5@aol.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 2 August 2000, at 10:21 a.m.
On occassions, you will hear voices from your back and from your front and all around you.
Fold!!
No Raise
No Fold
Call
No Fold
"This is a good time for a check raise" Turbo Texas Hold'em voice...lol
If it helps you then thats what counts. I would find this a big distraction.
MJ
- Re: How to stay focused?
Posted by: B.F. Skinner
Posted on: Wednesday, 2 August 2000, at 4:58 p.m.
You're not supposed to listen to it at the table. You listen to it at home, alone and undisturbed. It lasts 45 minutes. Once you've listened to it a half dozen times or so, you'll automatically respond to bad beats (or any crisis for that matter) more calmly and with a certain amount of curiousity, discipline and confidence without willing or forcing yourself to do so. I've never experienced anything like it.
- Re: How to stay focused?
Posted by: scott (sms134@columbia.edu)
Posted on: Tuesday, 1 August 2000, at 11:26 a.m.
if you can't take bad beats, by all means, end the session.
but you should love bad beats. love them. if there weren't any bad beats the fish would never win. then the fish would leave. you'd never win any money cause you'd become the fish.
scott
- Re: How to stay focused?
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 1 August 2000, at 12:00 p.m.
Ask yourself if you would have played the hand any differently from your opponent. Sounds like they flopped two pair or a set. Would you have laid that down? So you shouldn't be mad at them.
Or maybe they caught runner-runner quads to beat your flopped full house. Remind yourself how dead they were drawing. If you had seen their cards you would have wanted them to call. So complement them on their ballsy move and quietly muck your own hand face down. Then sit down, shut up, and wait for another opportunity.
Then look at your own play. Should you have been in the pot in the first place? Did you cold call an early position raise with JTo? Did they draw out on you because you tried to slowplay your straight or trips on a coordinated, suited up board? Maybe you just got what you deserved.
Or look at it another way. Suppose the fish never win a hand. They start getting bored, and decide to leave. "Wait," you say, "here's 10 bucks. Stick around for a few more hours." You'd do that, right? A $50 bad beat is just the rental rate to keep a fish who loses hundreds in your game for the rest of the evening.
- Re: How to stay focused?
Posted by: B.F. Skinner
Posted on: Tuesday, 1 August 2000, at 6:39 p.m.
You've only been playing a month? Perfect!There is no time better than NOW to train yourself to have good "responding positively to bad beats" habits and groove them permanently into your poker personality. Think of every bad beat as an opportunity to teach yourself how to play awesome poker while stuck. Listen closely to what I am about to tell you and make sure to always remember it: If you can't play well stuck, you suck!!!
- Re: How to stay focused?
Posted by: Hu Flung Poo
Posted on: Wednesday, 2 August 2000, at 1:14 a.m.
"Think of every bad beat as an opportunity..."
I know you mean well B.F., but this type of self-help shit of trying to get yourself to look at everything that sucks in life as an 'Opportunity' simply MAKES MY SKIN CRAWL!!!
- Re: How to stay focused?
Posted by: Egg Pooh Young
Posted on: Wednesday, 2 August 2000, at 5:16 p.m.
I agree with you. Everything that sucks is indeed shitty. But that doesn't mean you have to feel shitty about it. If you do, the next hand is gonna be shitty too. And so will the rest of the session and probably the remainder of the day as well. - B.F. Skinner
p.s. And yes, I do mean well. Thanks.
- Re: How to stay focused?
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 5:59 a.m.
I think if you get flustered go for a walk! Maybe a very long one until you are calm and objective again.
As many have suggested review your play, if you go to the cardroom w/some of your freinds tell them about the hand see what they think.
Maybe go watch other people play blackjack or roulette, or do something which will make you forget about the bad beat... I think playing in a bad mindset is extremely dangerous and a break can really help.
- Re: How to stay focused?
Posted by: B.F. Skinner
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 5:31 p.m.
"Flustered" and "bad mindset" are bad for your game because they tend to intrude with your observation and decision making skills. But they are only states of mind and exist entirely inside your head. And you created them thru how you represent the bad beat to yourself in you mind's eyes and ears thru inner pictures, sounds/words, and feelings. If it helps to walk away from the table to get a breather, by all means do so. But you don't have to because it is all inside your head and therefore 100% within your control. Check out the website (and their links) that I mentioned a few posts above. They teach specific skills on how to collapse feelings of flusteredness and tilt and replace those with feelings of calm, focus, and confidence in a matter of seconds, so that you can have much much more ways of controlling your emotions in addition to "taking a short or long walk".
- Re: How to stay focused?
Posted by: Chris Alger (algerc@idt.net)
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 3:18 p.m.
This is pretty important basic question. I think the answer is to begin by understanding that so-called bad beats aren't just an occasional unpleasant experience, but an integral, vital element of poker.
In the first place, they reward bad play and can make figuring out how to play well difficult. Although most players learn from experience that drawing to every gutshot draw is a mistake, the fact that some of these draws hit tends to make that experience a long one. Winning a big pot exaggerates the value of the draw in the mind of the winner. You see a variant of the same phenomenon more frequently at low limits by players that fail to bet their hands because of an exagerrated fear that they're beaten, such as when someone checks top pair on the end just because an overcard or a flush card arrived. One reason they do this is that they've been burned before by the occasional lost bet. In short, so many things can happen in poker that it's difficult to figure out what the best play is through experience, especially when so many bad plays are rewarded and good plays punished. The reason poker is so beatable is that players try to learn through experiences that are too diverse and misleading for the average mind to sort out.
The other reason bad beats are important is that they make players steam, or at least thrown them off their best game. Unless you play extremely well, even if you are a winning player your margin of advantage over most opponents is probably razor-thin. If you or your opponents are steaming, the usually modest difference in abilities can go out the window.
So what do you do about bad beats besides understanding them?
Your idea about going home isn't bad. Just as you shouldn't play when you're too tired or sick to concentrate, you shouldn't play if you're just going to wait for great hands and the rest of the table be damned. If you can't focus, you're crippled. At least go for a walk or dunk your head or do something other than steam. On the other hand, learning to play your best game after taking beats is something you need to aspire to. So take a breather, regroup your thoughts and hunker down and concentrate. Don't just wait for big cards with the idea that you'll soon teach your unfairly lucky opponents a lesson.
Recognize that this is the time of your greatest vulnerability, one where several hours of solid play can go out the window in minutes. If you tend to steam by 3-betting a tight raiser with junk because you figure it's time for you to win, figure that it will take you hours of regular play to recoup.
Draw on your level of emotional maturity here as well. Imagine a crew of fishermen bursting into tears or shaking their fists at God everytime they ran into a rain squall. A lot of players react to bad beats almost this childishly.
Quick tip: if you take a beat and your next hand is a good, play it fast. If there's a real sucker at the table, consider showing a little frustration, although most beginniners figure this one out pretty quickly. This can be a good time for your AA-TT; AK-AQ hands to be 3-bet by 77-44, AJ-AT. And don't tend to check a big pair on the river.
- OUTS
Posted by: Pyramid (pyramid@mm.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 2 August 2000, at 2:52 p.m.
Hi,
What is a good source to learn the concept of "outs"?
Thanks
- Re: OUTS
Posted by: Goat (PunkRok777@aol.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 2 August 2000, at 4:53 p.m.
Outs are easy enough to figure out by yourself. Here's a simple example: Heads up holdem. you: KQ
opponent: JJ on the turn board is 2,8,9,10 no flush draws. You win if a K or J comes. There are 3K's and 2J's left in the deck = 5outs there are 5 out of 44 cards ( 7.8to1 dog or 11.36%chance) that will win for you. Outs are simply counting up the cards that will win for you or your opponent. For a table as to the odds of these cards showing up with two cards to come, refer to the back of either Hold'Em by DS or HEFAP21.
- Re: OUTS
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 10:14 a.m.
Easy to count outs when you know the other guy has JJ but the trick is knowing how many "winning" outs make YOUR hand. So many times players count cards as outs that actually give their opponent a win.
- Re: OUTS
Posted by: Goat (PunkRok777@aol.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 8:56 p.m.
Rounder,
You are of course correct that you often don't know exactly how many outs you have but a simple example is the easiest way to illustrate the point. You point out what is ultimately important though:-)
- Pot Odds
Posted by: Pyramid (pyramid@mm.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 2 August 2000, at 5:25 p.m.
Hi,
1.In a typical LL HE game where 4 or 5 people will call and assuming a st8 open-ended draw is 5:1 dog and a flush draw is 4:1 dog, does this mean that I need 5 opponents to process with a st8 and 4 opponents to proceed with a flush?
Thanks,
- Re: Pot Odds
Posted by: Goat (PunkRok777@aol.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 8:24 a.m.
No, you just need to be getting proper odds from the pot. For example: If it is heads up with your flush draw on the turn, a call would be correct getting 5-1 from the pot. It could also be correct with less then that if you have 2 overcards that you think will also be good if they hit. Another time you can take shorter odds is when you are sure your opponent will pay off a bet (or raise) when you hit your card.
- Read Theory of Poker (n/t)
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 8:43 a.m.
It's good, despite what Rounder thinks.
- LL Hold'em
Posted by: Remoh
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 5:36 a.m.
I've been reading these posts for a while now and find them very informative. I've been playing poker for about a year now and have been playing mainly home games which I have no problem dominating. I find it very easy to adjust to these games and the players. I have begun to go to the casinos to play and have been playing 5-10 hold'em. So far after 50 hours of play I am stuck 1100. I find that there are too many people who will call on any draw to the river for any amount. Is it me or can a game like this be beaten. I play premium hands, but find myself frequently being outdrawn by longshot draws. Would I find a higher limit more playable, or does my game need adjusting.
All comments would be appreciated.
- Re: LL Hold'em
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 8:52 a.m.
This is a question you should really be able to answer yourself. If you don't know whether you're playing well, chances are you aren't. And I certainly can't tell without watching you or your game.
But 5-10 games usually aren't so far to the LL extreme. In my experience, 5-10 is the limit in which you start getting a few players who show some remote idea of what they're doing. (i.e. they show a little BTF hand selection ability, but play terribly)
1100 is a lot, but not an impossible amount to blame on bad cards. But you should really examine your play, and your opponents'. Can you identify all the mistakes they're making? Can you identify the mistakes you're making? Do you always suspect a bluff? Do you never suspect a bluff? Do you play KJo or is it an easy fold? (easy fold) What about 87s UTG? (easy call) Do you raise for value on the flop with your flush draws? Reread TOP and HPFAP, especially the loose games section. When I first started playing I'd find something new every time I read them.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 8:18 a.m.
My guess is you are playing too many marginal hands in poor position. Also, I believe you have been burned when you had top pair atthe turn by a small set. So, be more conservative in your hand selection. Don't try to over play or over think your hand. I would almost suggest never playing in the SB without a type 1 hand (see slkansky's book). I would also not play early position without a type 1 or 2. I would defend (raise or call) in the BB with any pair or suited cards >J. When you get a good hand (AA-->TT) or good suited connectors in good position, be very agressive. Make the drawing hands pay dearly.
$1100 loss in 50 hrs is terrible. You are definitely playing too many hands. Take small winnings and be thankful you are learning the game. Play with a computer simulator so you can "see" what happens. At this point it is more important to (1) learn the game (2) cut your losses to less than $5/hr while you learn (3) strive to just get onthe plus side (4) talk about HE to better players wheny ou are just sitting around (5) read Jim Brier's posts
- Re: Try This
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 9:44 a.m.
Good suggestions, except for maybe that not playing in the SB without a Group 1 hand. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, but if that's what you meant, you're giving terrible advice. In a loose passive game, you can play all sorts of crap from the SB - suited connector, suited single gaps, suited double gaps, suited kings, any pocket pair.
Your advice about early position is also poor. One of the benefits of a loose game is that you can play more hands. You just have to choose them correctly. Instead of looking at strictly delineated classes, decide whether your hand is a multiway hand or not. You say only group 1&2 in early position, but JTs is group 3 and should be played without hesitation in this game. Folding hands like AJo and KQo UTG would be better advice.
Your suggestions about minimizing losses are excellent. Perhaps moving to a lower limit or trying to find a home game with serious players would be a better short term solution.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 4:31 p.m.
Niels,
I would play a lot of hands from the SB in a loose game, but I would not play junk. Also, if you are not capable of moving people, playing the SB with crap is a waste of money. If you play less than big pair/big kicker against 7 callers with a flop of 2 suited cards, you WILL lose. Loose games do not mean you can play crappy hands. The SB is the worst position in the game. At least the BB has the option to raise pst 3 and really has an advantage with AA or a type 1 hand. Why would you play crap like low pair from the SB against 7 callers? That is suicide. If you get a small set on the flop, and it is capped to you, would you call 3 bets? How about if you get 2 pair? Now you have crappy 2 pair (most likely 2 other players do too), now do you call and throw your money away? I can see the reason to play suited connectors if there are 4 or more callers and even a raise if you think you will have company. Would you suggest runner, runner hands are better that low pair. I play conservatively in low limit no foldem games in the SB. In 10/20 and up (which I seldom play) I would be more apt to play more hands in the SB. Believe me, I DO lknow how to loose money in HE by playing too many hands. I can make about $5/hr playing 5/10. Playing SB with marginal hands has cost me. I am happy you are experienced enough to show a profit. Maybe as I get better I will too.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 5:44 p.m.
Hmm...
Your post sounds a lot like advice for calling a raise from the SB. If that is the case, I more or less agree with most of the advice you have given, and you can ignore much of the rest of this post.
However, with no raise and seven callers, it would be sheer folly to fold a small pair given 13-1 odds. And with no raise pre-flop why would you expect the flop to get capped? And yes, even if the flop got capped back around to me, I'd stay in and bet the turn.
I am not advocating playing junk. I am advocating playing good cards - suited connectors & gappers and small pairs are not trash hands. Furthermore, they are easy to play. Either the flop hits you over the head or it doesn't.
Of course the BB has an advantage over me with AA. He has an advantage over the entire table if he has AA. But why should I expect him to? In fact, even if he turned his cards face up and showed me AA and told me he was going to raise, I would still be getting odds to call.
You are right that two pair on the flop can be very tricky to play. But even if you play the suited connectors only for the straight or flush, you have odds to call half a bet.
As for your comment that in these games runner-runner hands are better than a low pair, you are correct. In fact, in some situations, runner-runner hands will be better than top pair.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: ratso222
Posted on: Sunday, 6 August 2000, at 10:11 p.m.
I can see conventional wisdom.
You note:
However, with no raise and seven callers, it would be sheer folly to fold a small pair given 13-1 odds.
Let's assume I am in the SB with 33. Now I agree I can get 13:1 for a call against 7 players. If I am getting 13:1 so is everyone else, and there has to be a better pair out there.
The opponent flopping a set is exactly the same as I have, only:
(1) If he does and I also do, he wins.
(2) If I do and he does not, I win.
(3) If neither of us flop the set, he wins.
He has 2 chances to win to my one.
In SB, I bet 1st, what happens if I am raised by anyone but the button or BB? I have to fold. The chance that someone else has a higher set is even money at that point. My conclusion is that in the SB more than anywhere else, you need high cards
This weekend I called or raised in the SB with duces and 4's. Both times I flopped a set only to be beaten by sets of 5's and J respecrtively. My position in the SB is so bad, that I virtually give away my hand. The best play in the SB is a check raise, and if you cannot do that, I think you should not play the SB.
Remember, in just 1 more hand, you will have the BEST position. Screw the SB without good cards excep to mix it up a bit.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: scott (sms134@columbia.edu)
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 12:10 a.m.
neils is right. very very right.
first of all. no one else is getting 13-1. (except the bb who is getting infinity to one)
second of all, you have to understand that if you flop a set you will win more than your share post flop action. and you are making all this money post flop for only half a small bet investment preflop. that means even if you were only getting 5-1 or so, you'd have more than enough odds because you can double the implied odds you would have calling a raise in the bb.
i would never fold any pair in the small blind facing no raise unless i had a tell on the big blind. even then, i'd almost always call, just not always.
i would fold very few hands to field of limpers. only the very worst. maybe not even them.
this is all assuming a 10-20 structure. i would usually fold unsuited unconnected (4 or more gapper) with no high card strength with a smaller sb. i would almost never fold anything in a 15-30 structure.
scott
- Re: Try This
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 2:05 a.m.
I think Niels is right, in the SB assuming he is in for 1/2 a bet you could easily call w/any pair (and are pbly losing money if you fold),(ratso' argument about winning 1 way out of 3 doesn't really apply, you pbly will only continuie if you flop a set and if an opponent flops a bigger set those are the breaks (though this is unlikely)) I suspect you can call w/any connectors (above 34o), and maybe even any 2 suited cards. But you must play well after the flop this usually means folding unless you hit the flop hard. I believe it is correct to call w/o looking if the SB is in for 2/3 of a bet even if the game is reasonable unless the BB frequently raies BTF.
And also alot of hand change value in a game like this, you might prefer to play 98s UTG while folding AJo while in an more agresive game this is not the case.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 8:52 a.m.
In SB, I bet 1st, what happens if I am raised by anyone but the button or BB? I have to fold. The chance that someone else has a higher set is even money at that point.
What are you talking about? What you have to do is re-raise! Or smooth call and checkraise the turn. Whatever gets the most money into the pot.
Even money? The chance that someone else has a set at that point is tiny. Your post sounds like you are thinking about it like this:
I have a set. Either my opponent has a set or he doesn't. Therefore I will win this pot only half the time.
You should be thinking like this:
I have a set. My opponent doesn't. I am going to reraise his ass every chance I get.
You point out that you are most likely not going to wil this pot. I agree. Aces are a dog to win this pot. But neither one of you are should fold because the odds are greatly in your favor. Scott covered the rest.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 10:56 a.m.
OK gents. I have to look at this further. I may have to conceed, but I will take these posts to a higher source and let you know what consesus I come up with. Now, I do not know Niels, but I know Scott should not be playing casino HE since he is not 21 (right?).
Your (Scott) ideas are certainly correct in principle, but there is a difference in principle and practice especially in low limit games. The behavior factor is not included in your analysis. For example (from sat. night in AC), how does a guy from early position bet 3,3; and call 2 raises from the (1) BB and (2) SB with only 3 players + himself? He then stay against a flop of A,7,6 (2 suited); he checks then cold call 2 bets. The turn shows a 10 suited. Same thing. The river is a 3. He checks and finally calls 2 raises from the SB and BB. He wins with trips, against two pair A,7 in the BB. Others did not show. Now if he thought he had the best hand, why did not he cap? Here is a case where a small pair in early position catches the set and wins, but (SCOTT) what are the cumulative chances that there could be a set of A's, 6's, 7's or 10,'s. Isn't it as good or better than our guy having a set of 3's (and he has to wait till the river). At what point is the point of no return (i.e play to the river). If I did not flop the set, I would not have played further.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 12:00 p.m.
I am confused. I am also 19. I went to high school with scott. We go to Turning-Stone together on occasion, an Indian casino with min. age 18. I mostly play 5-10 and average about $25/hr. Last time we were there I broke an entire table. Scott plays higher and makes more, but hasn't broken a table yet.
Obviously, a small pair is no good if you play them poorly. Calling a bet on the flop is really bad. Calling a raise on the flop means you're a fish. Calling a raise on the turn means your parents were probably brother and sister. Correct flop play of a pair of 3's from the SB:
1. Did I flop a set? (yes - goto 2 / no - goto 3)
2. (Flopped set) Bet. Re-raise a raiser. Cap it if you think you're getting better odds now than you will by waiting for the turn.
3. (No set) Check. Fold. Do not put anymore money in the pot. Do not pass Go.
These rules can be violated if the situation warrants it, but the point is that you take your 13-1 odds preflop and fold if the flop doesn't hit you over the head.
About your example: If people are raising it up with A7o, it is not a passive game. If people are raising it with A7s, they are very knowledgeable players and you should perhaps go elsewhere.
Also, the probability that someone has a higher set is not the same as the probability that you have a set of threes, as the probability that you have a set of threes is 100%. The reason the pocket threes did not cap the river is because they are held by a terrible player, as evidenced by his God-awful play on the flop and turn.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: ButtJingles
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 12:13 p.m.
I had pocket 4's under the gun. I folded to a table that is full of loose/passive players w/ only one solid player.
Capped before the flop w/ about 6 players.
Flop didn't have a 4.
Costs 3 bets for ppl to see the turn.
Turn was a 4.
etc etc etc...
trip 4's would have won.
however, regardless the outcome, i feel that i made the correct play to save money and maximize profits in the long run. this is how i've learned to play small pocket pairs in early position, and this is how it should be played all the time.
that idiot who hit trips on the river is one lucky bastard.
later.
-jon.
- what is going on here?
Posted by: scott (sms134@columbia.edu)
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 12:46 p.m.
that table is probably not passive. but, despite your drastic misread of the table, your play was correct.
if you can't see how calling utg at a loose aggressive table is different than calling limpers from the sb then i really don't have anything to say.
here's a hint. the important difference is not your slightly worse postflop position.
scott
- Re: Try This
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 1:49 p.m.
I was not aware you and scott went to indian casinos. anyway, i figure you are a great HE player and scott is greater; correct? if you can make $25/hr in 5-10 and i assume scott makes a lot more in higher stakes, i think you guys are wasting your time accumulating debt attending ivy league universities. you should be on the road playing the 30-60 and up games assuming you can make $300/hr. i am serious. more power to you. maybe you should somehow become 21 and try the taj in ac or one of the big rooms in la. it will be like picking leaves from a money tree. if i had the balls and/or the money, i'd even consider backing you guys. thanks for the lessons. i'll re-read them all together after this thread is complete. back to reading the old mundane sklansky and nelson and trying to make sense of it all.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 1:57 p.m.
anyway, i figure you are a great HE player and scott is greater; correct?
I refuse to address this question unless it is brought up in a "Why scott sucks at 7cs even though Niels is great" thread.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: scott (sms134@columbia.edu)
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 2:45 p.m.
i also play a little in the new york scene. i was a member of the now defunct diamond club.
i believe my staying in school has come up before on the forum, but it suffices to say that it has nothing to do with money.
furthermore, i don't play above my bankroll. i am only up to 15/30 so 30/60 will have to wait. i am going up to turning stone in about a week and i hope to win enough to move up to 20/40.
i am aware you are being fecetious with your 300 an hour estimate, but you really shouldn't have any hard feelings about this discussion.
this is not a close decision. just do the math.
typically, i try to stay out preflop questions because the answer is usually unimportant. but folding here is throwing away a significant amount of money.
scott
- Re: Try This
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 3:18 p.m.
I will rethink it and quite possibly will see the same outcome as you do. I find that while one cannot underestimate the power of math, knowledge of the players is very important. If there were no human behavior side of it we could all play against simulators or robots like on the internet. The ability to adjust to the game is important. In the AC low limit games, I see the "good" players get killed by playing the conventional way. Routinely, while waiting for a bigger game, they will play in the 2-4 game as a warm-up. they almost always lose in this game and they even joke about it. Truth is that with a $4 rake and a mix of good players and bad ones, you almost always lose a little or win a little. If you scoop $100 in 2 hrs, you were lucky.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 2:29 a.m.
Umm I think your criterion for play of pocket pairs is a bit simplistic, though maybe for new players is ok.
For example suppose 7 limp you call w/ 55 BB raises all call.
The flop comes 2 9 A rainbow. You check BB bets and 6 call, do you fold? Your getting 26-1 on your call!!! you have got to call!
Or what if 5 limp you call w/ 55, the flop comes 6 4 3, UTg bets 3 calls are you going to fold?
Maybe these examples are extreme, but the real question in these low limit games as most others when drawing ,"is the price right?"
- Re: Try This
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 1:04 p.m.
Ratso,
There is a huge difference between playing 33 with the SOLE the intention of playing on if landing a set on the flop vs. playing 33 with the suicidal intention of playing on to try to land a set by the river -- flop and turn be damned. The first, depending on position, prior action and anticipated action, can be a value-adding play. The second is poor play.
Jon I.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 2:20 a.m.
Ratso,
The logic of an argument is what should convince you of its validity not the credentials of the person who utters the argument. ANd vice versa!
In Your atlantic city example the guy w/3's didn't think he had the best hand. And he will lose alot of money playing this way. However once he caught his miracle card he couldn't (and shouldn't fold). I suspect if you deal out 5 cards and give one guy a set he will win 90% of the time the best hand isn't a flush or a straight.
"Now if he thought he had the best hand, why did not he cap? Here is a case where a small pair in early position catches the set and wins, but (SCOTT) what are the cumulative chances that there could be a set of A's, 6's, 7's or 10,'s. Isn't it as good or better than our guy having a set of 3's (and he has to wait till the river). At what point is the point of no return (i.e play to the river). If I did not flop the set, I would not have played further. "
You need to phrase your last question better. Is it given 3's make a set on the river what is the probility someone else (given the action) has a higher set? If thi is it ,I suspect it is in the 10% range, but phrase it carefully and Ill answer it.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 8:55 a.m.
Thanks, for your input. Let me ask you this
Ten hands are dealt and before anyone bets, you (in the SB) look at your hand and see a 4,4. What is the chance that anyone of the 9 players has a pair?
Is it fair to say that the chance that anyone has another pair is exactly the same as you having a pair? (I know...your chance is 100% because you see you have it). But really, in a true deck the chance of anyone having a pair is equal. Not until the betting starts does one have ANY idea of who has what except you know that the chance of someone else having 4,4 is pretty slim.
On the flop you see 3 higher cards--no 4. What do you do now? You have to speak (bet or check) first if you want to play, and you do not know how many people will stay or if there will be a raise. Do you think you are a favorite or a dog?
Same situation, only the flop contains a 4, Ac, Jc. What now? You have your trips, but 2 overcards and a 2 flush with a runner, runner straight.
One more question: You flip a true coin 7 times and it amazingly comes up heads. What is the chance it will come up tails on the 8th flip? (I know I cannot trick you). Also, before any coin is flipped, what is the chance that you would get 7 heads in a row?
- Re: Try This
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 9:15 a.m.
There was a big todo a while back about the odds of two players having a pair. Suffice to say that it was decided that it didn't really matter, but I think the probability was somewhere around 10-20%. Let's say it's 50%. Furthermore, let's say that the other pair is always higher than yours no matter what. If the chances of you flopping a set are 1/9, the chances of you flopping a set and losing to a flopped higher set are about 1/9*1/2*1/9, or about 1%. So stop worrying about it.
As for your question about what to do in the flop without a set - the answer is to almost always fold. Like I said, there are exceptions, but "no set, no bet" isn't a terrible rule for beginning players. You certainly don't see the turn. The intuitive difference between paying 1/2 bet preflop to see 3 cards, and paying 1 bet on the flop to see a single card should be obvious.
You pretty much play your sets the same way almost all the time in a low-limit game. Just keep betting and raising until someone raises you enough to make you think you're behind.
With your sample flop, this means you might have to cap it on the flop. Make the flush and straight draws pay. Your bet out of the SB means you hit the flop, first raise indicates top pair, and a reraise could mean anything from a flush draw to two pair. You should be willing to cap it. If someone cold calls 3 bets and a flush card hits on the turn, then you might want to back off. But you have to use your judgement. That's what makes it poker.
- P.S. On the odds
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 9:21 a.m.
I know my computation of set over set chances is pretty inaccurate, as both players really only have two cards to hit their sets, but it serves our purposes.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 1:42 p.m.
I am trying to understand but I am puzzled by a couple points. For the time being, let us forget about implied odds, and pot odds and look only at what physically can happens with the cards.
Before any cards are delt every player has the same chance of being dealt a pair. Agreed?
Now, let say Player 1 gets a pair of 3's. The chance of another player having any pair is independent of the 1st player having a pair. In fact it is almost exactly the same minus a factor for the 2 three's being already out. If that were not the case, then randomness has a serious flaw.
So, apriori, all players have equal chances of having pairs. When you get a pair of threes, and the flop contains 3 cards higher than a 3, you have an immediate problem which is resolved only by the betting and behavior of the players. If you flop a set and there are 2 cards in that set which are higher you still might have a problem since the chance of any other person with a pair also has the same chance that you do of having a set. High cards=good; low cards not so good. Novice players in low limit games need high cards to show a profit. I always believe HE is a game of high cards, 7CS is a game of live cards, and Omaha is a chasing game
The position of the SB in HE is critically bad because you do not know who will do what. I would stay to see the flop with a pair of 4's if I know there will be at least 5 players giving me more than 7.5:1. If I get a set, I will most likely check raise. If I miss the flop and there is a bet, I will probably check fold. Hopefully people will remember when I check raised in the SB so if I have miss the set and check, I might get a free card.
- Re: Try This
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 2:03 p.m.
I can't agree with your statement that HE is a game of high cards. For beginners at least, it should be a game of easy to play cards. The other problem with high cards is that they don't often make good multiway hands, which is generally what you need to take down a pot in LL. Small pairs and suited connectors fit these criteria because if you don't hit the flop hard, you fold.
I agree that two people have about the same chances of having a pair preflop, and if they both have a pair they have the same chances of hitting a set. But the chance that they both hit their set at the same time is very very small. Almost neglible, as you will do it to other people as many times as they do it to you. The point is that it happens, but you should be much more worried about straights and flushes coming in than the possibility of set over set. In fact, given the knowledge that you hit your set, the chance that your opponent hit his is even less than 1 in 8.5 because you know that at least one of the cards on the flop missed him.
I also agree that SB is a terrible position to be in. But as scott and I said, in certain situations this is made up for by only having to call half a bet.
The play of a set on the flop is much more debatable than the preflop call. My biggest problem with a check raise is that it's a red flag saying you've got something good. Also in a loose, passive game with no preflop raise, there's no guarantee someone will bet. I'd rather bet out, hope someone will raise, and 3-bet it if I get the chance. Since you hit sets so infrequently, no one's going to remember how you played your last one anyway. Betting right out with a set can also help you set up a steal later when you flop nothing.
If you come up to Turning Stone in NY next week I'll treat you to a non-Pepsi beverage.
- Two more ?'s
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 3:24 p.m.
You say, "I agree that two people have about the same chances of having a pair preflop, and if they both have a pair they have the same chances of hitting a set. But the chance that they both hit their set at the same time is very very small".
While I agree is principle, but that does not mean that if you have a set (i.e. you look firs tand see a set) that another person has less of a chance of having a sest as you do. He has the same.
OR could you say
"Thank God I have a set. Now, since I have a set, the chances diminish of others having a set so I do not have to worry or maybe just a little bit"
It is similar to people flipping a coin. 7 people flip a coin. 6 get heads. The chance that #7 will get a head is exactly 50%. No law of averages here. Agree?
Now, about high cards: the number of times (and most often this correlates with the amount of $) one wins with a set, a straight or a flush is miniscule compared to the wins with top pair/top kicker or two pair with a higher pair. High cards are very important. If you knew an opponent had Aces, would you chase him with duces or Kings?
- Re: Two more ?'s
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 3:59 p.m.
that does not mean that if you have a set that another person has less of a chance of having a set as you do
Actually, he has around the same chance of having a set as you did before the flop. As your chances of flopping a set were very small, the chance an opponent has a set against you is very small. The point I was trying to make in my post is that you have a 7.5:1 shot of hitting that set because you get to see three flop cards. Given that you made your set, your opponent, who happens to be sitting right next to you with a pair of his own, has even worse than a 7.5:1 shot of hitting his own set, because he only gets to use the other two cards on the flop, even though you got three.
And I'm not entirely sure about what we're arguing about anymore. I don't want to say anything about the chance of set over set except that it is unlikely enough that it should not usually factor into your decisions. Do you disagree?
And I'm not discounting high cards. AA and KK are great in LL games because they are very good multiway hands. And in most cases, I would not chase them with a pair of twos. However, I would often chase a pair of aces (postflop) with a flush or straight draw.
- Prob the end
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 4:20 p.m.
Niels, Thanks for the discourse. I have copied it to a wp for posterity. Actually, I think we are close to agreement on most things. I am pleased you would not chase known A,A with 2,2, but I can also assume you would not chase A,A with K,K? Is that correct, or could KK make you chase? There may be 1 exception. Do you know what it is (and it is not that the King can be in a straight)?
My real point is that when you are dealt a pair, there is an equal chance that someone else has a pair. Your pair does not lower the chances of someone else having a pair anymore than his having a pair decreases your chances. You need some more info (i.e. from betting, and that is one of the reasons that position is so important in HE). And, what if there is a flop of 2,6,9. It tells you nothing about odds of people having a pair since it is possible that all the 2's and 4's are in someone's hand with no one havinga pair. So, I believe it is important to have high cards.
- Fin.
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 4:57 p.m.
All else being equal, there's not a whole lot of difference between chasing AA with KK or 22 once you are sure the guy has aces. I'm not sure what your possible exception is. KK has less chance of set over set if anyone else is in the hand, but like I said, I don't worry about that. If an ace of the appropriate suit falls, KK can make the nut flush, but if an ace of the appropriate suit falls, having the flush with the two will be good enough (heads up).
If you're not talking about KK vs 22 going against AA but just any pair vs. AA, I would only do that with massive pot odds.
I see your point, as long as you are not saying that when you have a pair the chance someone else has one is 50%. I agree that the fact that you have a pair does not change the fact that someone else has a pair very much. But it does not matter because you are not expecting your pair to win unimproved.
And of course, high cards are important. When I am in a pot, I'm usually in there with high cards. But the low suited connectors and small pairs remain a very important part of my game.
- Re: Fin.
Posted by: ratso222
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 8:50 p.m.
The only significant exception to the KK playing against AA is if you can somehow convince the AA to fold. This is not insignificant in 7CS, especially when 2 aces show early. In HE, I have seen AA fold in early position when a pair like QQ or a mid pair like 8's or 9's fall and they bets like they has trips. Happens more in tournaments
- Re: Two more ?'s
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Wednesday, 9 August 2000, at 1:42 a.m.
Granted the probability person A who has pocket pair aa flops a set = the probability person B who has pocket pair bb flops a set.
However this isn't the figure you should be interested in. The one you are interested in is P(player B flops a set given that player A flops a set).
P(player B flops a set when A flps a set or quads)= P(player B flops a set when A flops quads)+ P(player B flops a set when A flops only a set)=
1/48(3/46)+ 47/48(1- (44/46)(43/45)).
"You say, "I agree that two people have about the same chances of having a pair preflop, and if they both have a pair they have the same chances of hitting a set. But the chance that they both hit their set at the same time is very very small".
While I agree is principle, but that does not mean that if you have a set (i.e. you look firs tand see a set) that another person has less of a chance of having a sest as you do. He has the same."
OH yes it does. Once you have a set he effectively has less than 2 cards to make a set w/. (see previous calculation.)
"OR could you say
"Thank God I have a set. Now, since I have a set, the chances diminish of others having a set so I do not have to worry or maybe just a little bit"
Yes! "It is similar to people flipping a coin. 7 people flip a coin. 6 get heads. The chance that #7 will get a head is exactly 50%. No law of averages here. Agree? Now, about high cards: the number of times (and most often this correlates with the amount of $) one wins with a set, a straight or a flush is miniscule compared to the wins with top pair/top kicker or two pair with a higher pair. High cards are very important. If you knew an opponent had Aces, would you chase him with duces or Kings? "
The flipping of coins are independent events, the flopping of set ISN'T!!! Think about it.
- Re: Two more ?'s
Posted by: ratso (ratso222@yahoo.ocm)
Posted on: Wednesday, 9 August 2000, at 1:46 p.m.
I appreciate everyone's patience trying to explain it to me. I am missing the point?
"The flipping of coins are independent events, the flopping of set ISN'T!!! Think about it."
Since we agree that all cards have an equal chance of being dealt, and that we have no knowledge of what cards have been dealt, why would you not consider the events independent? I agree that if we saw what cards are dealt, we can calculate the odds immediately for each successive hand dealt, and clearly then the statistic would not be binomial.
Do you have a reference for these types of calculations?
- Re: Two more ?'s
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Thursday, 10 August 2000, at 2:32 a.m.
Reread my post.
Once someone flops a set is much less likely the other does as he has less than 2 (theoretically) cards to make a set w.
No i don't have a reference for the calculation as I did it myself. I thought I explained how I got most of the numbers.
Maybe we should recall, events A and B are independent if P(A intersect B)= P(A)P(B). And here the if A is the event player 1 flops a set and B si the event player B flops a set by the calculation in the previous post it is clear that these two events aren't independent. (It shouldn't be hard to see this is true w/o the calculation).
- Re: LL Hold'em
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 9:05 a.m.
Give me some idea of the hands you are playing and in what position. How you play over cards, draws and how strongly you play your premium hands.
50 hours is not a lot of time - but you are losing over 2 bb an hour and you can't be doing that for to long. I suspect your home game spoiled you as it might have been to easy - let me know if your local casino has a good selection of games at your limit. Table selection is a key to successful poker.
- Re: LL Hold'em
Posted by: Remoh
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 1:28 p.m.
Thanks for the responses, as far as table selection, there's not much. 10 tables total and three 5-10 tops. As far as hand selection I can say that there were times when I knew I had taken it too far but ended it before it cost me more. I've also tightened up a bit to see were that would get me, but keep finding that they aren't holding up. I'll give two examples that happened too me yesterday. On the button with AJs, 4 limp to me, I raise. All call, SB & BB included. Flop comes J52 rainbow, checked too me, I bet, two callers. River 8. Checked too me, I bet. 1 caller. River card is a 4. Checked too me, I bet. I'm raised. I'm thinking this guy has A3. I match and he flips over 63s(This was the SB player).
Second example took place at the main table were there were more solid players, but one maniac that came from the other table. Much more folding going on, especially pre-flop. I'm UTG with QQ, I raise, lady beside me has her chips in quick. Rest fold except for maniac whos sitting too my right, he calls. Flop comes 228 rainbow. I have a gut feeling that maniac has a two. I check, lady bets, maniac calls, I call. Turn card is a Ace. I put the lady on AK, so I check, she bets, maniac calls, I fold. I don't remember the river but she had AK and he had 72o. The AK would have beaten me, but that didn't even hold up. Overall last night I got dealt KK once, interesting hand which lost. AJ twice, lost once. QQ three times, lost twice. AKs lost trying to catch the flush. I'd have too say that I am confident in my play, but that 1100 is really starting to make me second guess myself, which is not a good thing in poker. Sorry for the length of this and thanks again.
- Re: LL Hold'em
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 2:57 p.m.
These are fairly typical LL bad beats - happens every day. Like what I said about my terrible Orleans Open if it weren't for the good hands I'd have done better.
All I can suggest is continue to play better cards than your opposition and you will come up a winner.
It takes disipline.
I'd scout out the other games for less maniacs say 1 or 2. As I believe it is a lot more easy to beat a table with a good mix of players than a table of maniacs.
- Re: LL Hold'em
Posted by: Another Mike
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 3:34 p.m.
Yeah, sounds like you've had your share of beats in this game. But I agree with Rounder- play better cards than your opponents and you will do better than them. One thing to consider especially- everytime you call preflop in this game, think of it as if you're calling a raise, because if one hasn't come yet, one probably will. That will tighten you up and get you in the right mindset.
Preflop hand selection is absolutely key in games like this. If you make a marginal or bad decision to call preflop, often the odds will be there to chase all the way and you'll end up losing more money. Throw away those big unsuited cards, and hold onto cards that do well multiway. AJo and KQo will win some, but too often your collective odds against will drive you nuts. When you know 5 people will call all the way to the river, that top pair ain't worth a whole lot.
Keep playing, I think low limit games can be beat, and beat big (if the rake is reasonable enough).
Mike
- Re: LL Hold'em
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 2:41 a.m.
Do you have a freind you can discuss hands w/? IF you do you shoudl discuss as much as you can w/him. I have found discussion w/other players can be very helpful.
Maybe you should post some hands you were not sure about on the forum.
Review hands where you lost, decide if you played well.
FOr exmaple in the first hand all you can say is those are the breaks. IN you second hand you should bet on the flop, granted you were in troulbe but most of the time you should assume in this situation you have the best hand. If you think the lady has AK that is more reason to bet! you have the best hand and she is a considerable underdog, as for the blind well he got lucky, some peopel will defnd their blinds w/anything though they will lose alot of money this way.
- Re: LL Hold'em
Posted by: Mark (kidmoe@mail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 3:59 p.m.
I have been having the same problem. At $3-6 tables, people will pay any amount to see the flop. And some people just don't know how to fold.
Here's my theory. Imagine if you played with 8 other players, all very loose. Now, you play exactly like they would, EXCEPT fold garbage hands BEFORE the flop. In theory, you should improve your odds of winning immensely over the long run.
A more complicated case is where you play with a mix of tight and loose players. In this situation, where you sit down is almost as important as the cards that you play. I have read that relative position makes a big difference, and that you want loose players to your right and tight players to your left.
- Re: LL Hold'em
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 5:14 p.m.
Image at typical 3-6 games is really overrated - the assumption is the other players are paying attention to what you are doing.
- Re: LL Hold'em
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 3:18 a.m.
Seating position I think is important in low limit games also, maybe image ien'st that important (since most people don't pay attn to what you do and treat the game like bingo), but if there are some tight players, some very loose players and some loose aggressive players in the game you generally want the loose and agressive players on your right, you can see their raises coming, you will be able tell how many people will be in the pot (you are just guessing if the loose players are behind you), etc. The tight players belong on your right is bc they won't play many pots so their advantage over you is not taken advantage of maost of the time.
- Re: LL Hold'em
Posted by: ButtJingles
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 12:26 p.m.
I posted a very similar post in the texas holdem section a while back.
So did another guy, I think his name is Tyro...
In any case, this sort of thing happens all the time in low limit games.
I play 3-6, and tried to find a tighter table, so i went during the afternoon one weekday.
i found my marginal hands such as JT off and kingten off dominated by AK and AJs, that sort of stuff...after playing in tight-agressive games where everyone has fancy jewelry and hugh stacks of chips, i'd rather play in loose/aggressive and loose/passive games. also, the pots that u win in these games won't be so huge...
Your high cards won't be getting sucked out all that often as it may seem. Eventually, those drawing punks won't hit, and or they have a hand that you'll dominate.
Keep your head up man, and continue to play premium hands, and play 'em right according to position.
In loose agressive games, you'll experience your stacks going up, then down, but just minimize ur losses, [3-6...if you call flop, bet, bet, bet, you'll lose no more than just about 20 bucks if there's no raises...however, when your hand holds up, AND IT WILL, you'll have 4-5 callers, thus giving u 100 bux]
There will be long amounts of time where you just sit there and look like a dead log, and you'll get bored, while ur kicking urself in the bumm cuz u threw away a winner, but so what, let the other suckers throw money at each other.
eventually, trust me, eventually, you'll appreciate these games, especially when they start throwing their money at you.
later.
-jon
- Tournament question
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 12:50 p.m.
This question was sparked by "Q's Question" in the current Cardplayer issue posted on-line.
If there are four people left in a no-limit tournament, and they all have an equal amount of money, and all four go all-in, how do you determine who came in 2nd, 3rd and 4th?
Thanks,
Jon I.
- Re: Tournament question
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 2:59 p.m.
Don't have to, just add up the payouts for 2-3-4 and divide by 3 - you have a 3 way tie for 2nd that's all.
- Re: Tournament question
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 3:12 p.m.
Thanks, Rounder. I, and I'm sure other, really appreciate the attention you give to questions on the Beginners Questions Forum.
Jon I.
- Kill
Posted by: Moe Ron
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 3:41 p.m.
What do the terms kill and half-kill mean as they relate to poker? Thanks
- Re: Kill
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 5:18 p.m.
Basically the casino has a criteria for a kill and when it is met (say, two consecutive pots) the winner must post a double bb with the stakes doubled. 1/2 kill is same think but for 150% of the stakes.
4-8 with a full kill you are playing 8-16 - 1/2 kill you are playing 6/12.
- How to play at a very loose table
Posted by: Mark (kidmoe@mail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 3:52 p.m.
Hi, I am a relatively inexperienced hold'em player (only playing seriously for the last 6 months or so). I have read some good books regarding strategy (when to call/raise or fold, position etc).
Recently at a casino I played at a $3-6 table and found that most players are very loose-passive. That is 90% of the players will pay anything to see the flop. And about 50% will play to the very end regardless if they have a hand.
I on the other hand will play only about 1 in 8 hands. According to the books I read, if you have AA, you should raise to "thin" out the table. However, at the table I was at, practically everyone would call. After that, the pot was so big that everyone would stay in thus hurting my odds.
Is there a radically different approach to playing in this kind of environment? Should I stick to the traditional approach? Should I loosen up a bit myself.
Any opinions or links to good resources would be appreciated.
- Re: How to play at a very loose table
Posted by: Mojo Jojo
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 5:48 p.m.
In late position, after a lot of people have already entered the pot unraised, loosen up on small pairs (22 to 88) and suited connectors (34s to 78s, and 46s to 97s). These hands go way up in value in this kind of game. Big unsuited cards (AJo, ATo, KJo, and others) go way down in value. By all means raise and reraise with AA and KK but do it for value, not nescessarily to thin the field. AKs, AQs, JTs are great hands in this game.
- Re: How to play at a very loose table
Posted by: Mark (kidmoe@mail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 12:23 p.m.
BTW: I have read most of Winning at low limit holdem by Lee Jones. I thought it was excellent. I borrowed it from a friend for a weekend, but I think I will buy my own copy. I am now reading "Hold'em Excellence: From Beginner to Winner" by Lou Krieger.
Thanks for all the advice guys. So in summary, at a loose table:
1) high unsuited cards such as KJ, QJ loose value and suited connectors gain value.
2) Don't bluff
3) Call more often than raise.
Also, although I don't think many loose players care so much, but I tend to check in early position even if I flopped top pair with a good kicker. That way I can see what everyone else does. At these kind of tables it is very easy to check raise after seeing how everyone played their hands.
- Re: How to play at a very loose table
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 1:16 p.m.
"Call more often than raise" may be literally true, but I think you're misinterpreting it. You should be raising often, but the key idea is that you should be raising for value, not raising to knock people out. If you flop a nut flush draw with enough other players in, try and cap it.
- Re: How to play at a very loose table
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 1:17 p.m.
Raising from late position to get a free card is also very effective.
- Re: How to play at a very loose table
Posted by: MagicMan (zackd@usa.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 8:23 p.m.
Mark,
boy do I know what you are talking about. At low limit "Correct Play" doesn't always hold up. I found that out the hard way, just like you did.
What you need to do is get "Winning Low Limit Holdem" by Lee Jones. I'm in the process of studying it right now. These are some of the things I've learned. Keep in mind that I'm a beginner too, and i've jsut started stdyiung the book.
FORGET about pre-flop raises to thin out the number of hands. In Low limit, you will call much more often than you will raise (against the instincts of a tight/agressive player)
You still want tight hand selection, but different hands will hold up. You can play much weaker hands than you can in a tighter game. Top pair doesn't hold up the way it should. Suited connectors are very powerful. Because there are so many river rats in the game, flushes and straights frequently take the pot.
Again, I'm greener than the felt on the table so take this with a grain of salt, but get the book and lets talk more.
- Re: How to play at a very loose table
Posted by: ratso222
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 10:19 p.m.
I like to play tight agressive in these games which usually have 7 or more people seeing the flop. I definitely like 2 way hands like Q,J suited, but I would love AA thru JJ in any position. I find you may only win 1 in 4 hands with a starting hand like high pair but when you win and if you have played agressively with that hand, you will be paid at a rate of about 8:1. Do not get discouraged if your AA gets sucked out by a limper going to the river and catching a small set. He will pay next time as will his accomplices.
- button fee vs. rake
Posted by: MagicMan (zackd@usa.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 3 August 2000, at 9:09 p.m.
The Hollywood park casino charges a three dollar button fee at its 2-4 table. Is a button fee better or worse for the players than a rake? I would imagine that a rake would be better because that way you only pay when you win. Are there any card rooms in CA that use a rake?
- Re: button fee vs. rake
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 9:49 a.m.
Looking at the short term, a rake is clearly better than a button fee for the tight player, as he will have to pay it less often.
However, a button fee means that the loose fish will last a little longer, perhaps keeping the game better over the long term. Rocks who care will tend to end up in the casino with the lowest rake, resulting in a game full of rocks that no one really wants to play in.
So my point is that a rake is probably better for the tight player, although its not so clearcut as you'd think.
- Re: button fee vs. rake
Posted by: mississippi gambler
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 6:19 a.m.
By my understanding of the laws in california the casinos there cannot collect a rake because under california law they can have NO intrest in the game what so ever, and a rake, even if the casino does nothing to affect it is considered intrest because the bigger the pot, obviously, the better for the casino. Some of the indian casinos out there may opperate under different rules as they might be outside the states jurisdiction. of course I am on the other side of the country so I may easily be mistaken. Somebody please correct me if I am wrong.
- Re: button fee vs. rake
Posted by: Rick Nebiolo (ricknebiolo@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 11:43 p.m.
MagicMan,
I work the floor at Hollywood Park but do not speak for management.
The button fee is there for legal reasons. I think it is bad for most players and for the house. It slows down the game by making the game artificially loose since the fee is anathema to tighter players, thus driving them away. If there was a rake, the games would tighten up somewhat, the club would miss an occasional collection, but they would more than make it up in additional hands dealt per hour (when there is less action, you can get in more hands). You would also get less of the problem of the game stopping because no one wants to take the button.
Another benefit of rake is that the games would play more realistically. The smaller games would become training grounds for the bigger games. This is not so now.
That being said, there is an argument that says that the button fee is the key to keeping the games in Los Angeles so lucrative at the 6/12 level. If you look on the holdem and/or theory and strategy forum about a month or two back, you will see Badger and I spar a bit on this. I think he is about half right ;-).
Regards,
Rick
- Poker for Dummies
Posted by: Jon I.
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 2:21 p.m.
Although my ego cringes at the thought of buying a book with such a title I've heard good things about it. Any reviews/opinions?
Jon I.
- Re: Poker for Dummies
Posted by: squatchmo
Posted on: Friday, 4 August 2000, at 2:49 p.m.
I think it is an excellent beginner book, but only as a start. Before Poker for Dummies, the only real begginer book was Fundamentals of Poker by Malmuth and Loomis (I still recommend it). Most of the valuable beginner information is not in the game sections, but in describing intangible information such as what its like to play in a public casino for the first time. It makes excellent suggestions for your next book purchases also. Before playing anything but low limit poker, however, I suggest that you read a better book on the specific game you will be playing. For HE, I am not a big fan of the other Krieger books, although he should give writing lessons to most other poker authors.
- Re: Poker for Dummies
Posted by: will (sparklechicken@usa.net)
Posted on: Saturday, 5 August 2000, at 1:54 a.m.
does three of a kind beat a straight?
- Masque Casino Game Pak
Posted by: BadBeatBob (bobb108@open.org)
Posted on: Saturday, 5 August 2000, at 5:21 p.m.
I've played poker of one kind or another all of my life but just started playing serious Holdem as a specialty this last May. I've played in about 30+ tournaments and belong to a couple of card circuits in our area.
For practice, I now have a Casino Game Pak with WSOP on it. Whenever I can't get to our local Indian Casino I play the game regularly. What is your recommendation for using this as one of my training grounds? Are there other software packages any better than this one?
- Re: Masque Casino Game Pak
Posted by: mississippi gambler
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 9:39 a.m.
I wouldn't recommend it, the computer players do not adjust at all for your play and therefore can be beat quite easily with a little practice. I bought it on a cd for 10 bucks, if it wern't for the vidio poker trainer I would be upset.
while I havent tried it turbo texas holdem comes highly recomended by people who know what thier talking about.
- Re: Masque Casino Game Pak
Posted by: Andy Ward
Posted on: Thursday, 17 August 2000, at 8:33 a.m.
The software is worthwhile with one caveat. In the tournaments and satellites there is a specific, artificial style of play which beats the computer almost every time. However, playing like this (and even trying to find what this strategy is) will not teach you anything.
As with all poker software, you should be playing as you would in real-life situations rather than just trying to beat the computer. How easy it is to do this is a mark of how useful the software really is.
Andy.
- Turbo Texas Hold em
Posted by: Moe Ron
Posted on: Sunday, 6 August 2000, at 3:19 a.m.
I'm thinking about buying the software. Would this be a wise purchase for someone who plays in casinos only a few times a year?
- Re: Turbo Texas Hold em
Posted by: ratso222
Posted on: Sunday, 6 August 2000, at 9:53 p.m.
If you like playing a decent game with the ability to do some simulation, sit is worth the $80. It is solid software, well as solid as you can get. It's not perfect. It is not copy protected so that means it can load completely on your hard drive and you do not need the CD in the drive, so you can listen to music while you play. It's a good investment and if you don't like it you can sell the original on halfprice.com for....well about half.
- Profits at ll hold'em
Posted by: frank (olblueyes23@aol.com)
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 3:42 a.m.
How much money should i look to walk away with at a 2-4 or 3-6 game based on a good night. And what should i look to walk away with on a average night.
- Re: Profits at ll hold'em
Posted by: mississippi gambler
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 6:14 a.m.
A single night is simply a crapshoot when it comes to win or loose, especially at these low a limits. now I have no proof but I do believe that over the long term, with good game selection a skilled patient player can average 2 or maby even more big bets per hour because of the extreemly low amount of skill players use at these limits. however your varience is going to be incredablly high. The consensus is that good poker players can expect 1 big bet per hour over the course of several thousand hours. I know its hard to believe when most you can go up so fast and down so fast that youre actually making significantly less than 10 dollars an hour, BEFORE THE RAKE and often the low limit games are raked heavier than the higher ones. I suggest playing 6-12 or 5-10 as these games (while still small enough to play while learning) are for high enough stakes to make at least some people stop and think a little about thier hand. However you will also encounter players who are marganally better then the ones you are used to, so game selection becomes important here. remember you actually dont have to be good at poker to make money, just better than your opponents.
- Re: Profits at ll hold'em
Posted by: ratso
Posted on: Monday, 7 August 2000, at 10:32 a.m.
My experience shows that 2-4 and to a lesser extent 3-6 are games for learning HE and for tourists at casinos who wantto play a safe game. This type of thinking is not bad for someone who would ordinairly play Black Jack. You can play 2-4 HE for hrs with a hundred dollars ifyou are conservative.
For a decent player @ 2/4, you can figure $4-6/hr (around minimum wage). 3/6 goes up proportionately. Some very good "low limit" hangers on at the casinos (I call them bottom feeders) can do better (so they claim). Some claim to earn $10/15 and play 5-6 days a week; 10+ hrs a day. I only know what they say. I have my doubts.
- Re: Profits at ll hold'em
Posted by: mississippi gambler
Posted on: Tuesday, 8 August 2000, at 9:35 a.m.
I dunno, when was the last time you watched one of these 2-4 or 3-6 tables, an incredablely high percent of these players are BAD BAD BAD, yes you get drawn out on a lot, but the pots when you do make a good hand are so worth it. 4 players paying you off on the river when you hold the nuts? cant beat it with a stick.
- Re: Profits at ll hold'em
Posted by: frank
Posted on: Wednesday, 9 August 2000, at 6:59 p.m.
I actually had a 4 hour sesion last night at the trop at a 2-4 game. Won 210, so now i see there is no set profit,but thank you for the advice.
- Re: Profits at ll hold'em
Posted by: Rookie (Rookie@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 10 August 2000, at 1:26 p.m.
$210 in 4 hours at $2/$4?!?!?
Were you using spinners, or just nightcrawlers?
- Re: Profits at ll hold'em
Posted by: frank
Posted on: Thursday, 10 August 2000, at 7:37 p.m.
say waht you want,but last night i pulled in 170 at a 3-6 game in about 6 hours. And i plan to go back tonight!
- Re: Profits at ll hold'em
Posted by: clf-NY (chriscarine@webtv.net)
Posted on: Saturday, 12 August 2000, at 12:49 a.m.
I could write a hundred pages an this topic and not even break a sweat. But if i had to give a newcomer the best piece of advice available in 50 words or less, it would be: DO NO PLAY MARGINAL OR "BREAK EVEN" HANDS WHEN YOU ARE PAYING 3-4 DOLLARS PER HAND. IMAGINE PUTTING $100 IN THE MIDDLE OF THE TABLE ( $10 PER PERSON ) AND PUSHING IT FROM PLAYER TO PLAYER ALL NIGHT LONG, BUT EACH TIME IT GETS "PUSHED" $4 FALLS INTO THE DEALER'S TRAY - MORE IF YOU INCLUDE TIPS. THESE GAMES ARE BEATABLE AND ARE AN EXCELLENT PLACE TO LEARN IF YOU ARE JUST STARTING OUT BUT YOU MUST RESTICT YOURSELF TO HANDS THAT CAN BEAT THE OTHER PLAYERS AND THE RAKE. IF YOU CAN'T DO THAT THE SITUATION IS HOPELESS.
- Re: Profits at ll hold'em
Posted by: mississippi gambler
Posted on: Saturday, 12 August 2000, at 8:14 a.m.
so what hands should we not play due to this?
- Re: Profits at ll hold'em
Posted by: clf-NY (chriscarine@webtv.net)
Posted on: Saturday, 12 August 2000, at 4:30 p.m.
Typical East Coast 3/6; five or six are taking the flop, most pots are unraised pre-flop, those that are raised are raised by "legitimate" hands - I guess I could have just said loose / passive.
Consider avoiding:
Big unsuited from early position, especially "KJ" ("AJ"is no bargain either). You will have a ton of trouble betting for value on the river, but will have to make alot of crying calls if you check.
Also from early be inclined to toss suited connectors lower than "JT", for the same basic premise. When you staighten out you'll be fine, but it's not as much fun as you think to river a small flush and be first to act with 2,3 or even 4 callers ready to pounce if you're beaten. Flip-side, you check and see that at least one, maybe even two would have paid you off had you bet.
Finally you get to play your button. You look down and find pocket 7's ( or 8's ). Problem is you only have one or two limpers and the SB is not a guranteed caller. What do you do ? Raising is out of the question; you would have a hard time raising even with 9's. If you call you can't win w/out improvement - when you do improve there aren't many around to pay you off AND $4/$5 of your implied odds just fell off the table and into the tray.
None of these hands are "money eaters"; it could even be that they are all profitable holdings - I just don't think that they're profitable enough when the "tax", should you win, is almost ONE BIG BET. At 10/20 - same players, bigger chips - they are hands I would almost certainly play ( note; I don't like KJ[off] from early in any game.)
These are just a few examples to illustrate the concept; there are others, but I'm sure now that the idea is a little clearer you can see the theory behind this.
Hope i was able to help out a little.
Regards,
Chris
P.S. There is money to be made at this limit as long as you don't plan to try living off it. There are in fact a few out there who DO earn $15+/hour. IMHO the reason some of them don't move up is because at 3/6 the game is alot more social ( and friendly ) than at 10/20 or even 5/10. It's not because they're "bottom feeders". I'm pretty sure the person who called them that was just having a bad day.
- pot odds for the wierd
Posted by: mississippi gambler
Posted on: Thursday, 10 August 2000, at 4:53 a.m.
I know these things dont happen often, but when they have I have often wondered what to do, I think the right play in the past has been to call but I am not shure. these are just generalised examples as I cant remember specific conditions here.
I am holding AA in late position, loose passive 3-6 game. I raise and get somewhere between 5-7 callers (dont ya just love low limit). the flop comes down three to the suit of one of my aces. someone bets and everybody else calls or looks like thier going to call. somebody in this group has to have a made flush or something 2 pair so I am drawing now, what kind of odds do I need to call here, assuming 1 ace is not enough
what if I am holding KK or QQ, and it's still an overpair?
what if I really have no respect for the players at the table and thus can bet a set here with some confidence? or can I ever bet a set confidently with 3 suited cards on the flop?
- Re: pot odds for the wierd
Posted by: Sparty (michstfan@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 10 August 2000, at 10:06 p.m.
Could be wrong here since I'm just taking a quick shot here...
47 cards left that can be combined in 1081 two card combos. Any suited card (9 left) or two aces makes you good (ignoring possibilities of landing a full house). That makes for 9*46 = 414 good flush combos and 1 combo for aces = 415/1081 percent of good hand, or 1.6 to 1. You are in pretty good shape here.
- Re: pot odds for the wierd
Posted by: mississippi gambler
Posted on: Friday, 11 August 2000, at 8:21 a.m.
I figured I was good here, given that I always raise preflop with these holdings, so that it probably would be right to keep drawing, I just wanted to make shure
- Re: pot odds for the wierd
Posted by: G. Ed Conly (econly@poweruser.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 15 August 2000, at 12:22 a.m.
A Raise is a better play here. You know where the nuts are, don't you? (quote borrowed from Doyle's "Super System").
- rake question
Posted by: mississippi gambler
Posted on: Thursday, 10 August 2000, at 5:01 a.m.
which is worse for the player, a high percentage rake with a low maximum? or a low percentage rake with a high maximum?
- Re: rake question
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 10 August 2000, at 10:47 a.m.
Depends on the game. In a game with small pots, you would want the low percentage since you're not going to hit the max rake. This would be the sort of game where stealing blinds makes up a large part of your profits.
In a game with big pots, (i.e. your typical LL game), the max rake is going to be taken almost every hand, so you may as well take the high percentage, low max rake.
- Re: rake question
Posted by: mississippi gambler
Posted on: Thursday, 10 August 2000, at 10:58 a.m.
thats what I was thinking, however it seems that in poker the simplest answer is not always right, so I thought I would post it.
- Re: rake question
Posted by: Niels (antiveg@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 10 August 2000, at 11:27 a.m.
Well, it does depend quite a bit on exactly what the percentages are and exactly what the rake is capped at.
But if you're a decent player you won't be winning that many pots anyway, so I'd just go where the game is better.
- 134,459 hands?
Posted by: DougO (dugolson@erols.com)
Posted on: Friday, 11 August 2000, at 10:32 p.m.
I'm writing a BASIC program to compute poker probabilities. The first part of this program has calculated that there are 134,459 unique poker hands, not counting duplicates that arise from rotating suits (e.g. a Royal in clubs is the same hand as a Royal in spades). I'm using a standard 52 card deck without wilds.
Can anyone tell me if this is the right number?
- Re: 134,459 hands?
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Saturday, 12 August 2000, at 4:27 a.m.
Do you mean 5 card hands?
I suppose Ac 2c 3s 4s 6d is similar to Ac 2h 3s 4s 6d? And 4444 8c is the same as 4444 8h?
You could count how many of each hand there is,etc. but I suspect this isn't the number you are going to want to use for future calculations!
- Re: 134,459 hands?
Posted by: DougO (dugolson@erols.com)
Posted on: Saturday, 12 August 2000, at 7:42 a.m.
>I suppose Ac 2c 3s 4s 6d is similar to Ac 2h 3s 4s 6d? And 4444 8c is the same as 4444 8h?
The first two are not the same since the A and 2 are of the same suit in the first instance and different suits in the second. Ac 2c 3s 4s 6d is the same as Ah 2h 3s 4s 6d.
My database also tracks how many suit rotations there would be of each combo and the rotations do sum to 2,598,960.
- Re: 134,459 hands?
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Monday, 14 August 2000, at 1:54 a.m.
This is very tedious to verify, and I think even once you get it, it won't really be that useful.
Maybe you could just use (52C5), and go from there, and then distiguish between AcKcQcJcTc and AdKdQdJdTd, for it will mkae calculations MUCH eaiser.
- Re: 134,459 hands?
Posted by: DougO
Posted on: Monday, 14 August 2000, at 9:39 a.m.
(52c5)=2,598,960; which is a number commonly found in published references. The fact that my number is about 1/20th that big seems about right, since every hand has either 4, 12 or 24 rotations, with 4 being much rarer than the other two.
Reducing 2.6 million possibilities to 130k would reduce processing time by a factor of 20 -- that's why I care.
I posted here because I thought that in this era of computer power, a computer-literate group of poker players (like people who read this forum) might include someone who had ever caclualted this before, just so I could check my results.
- Re: 134,459 hands?
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Monday, 14 August 2000, at 10:02 p.m.
I suppose. But the number of hands aren't equally weighted and thats why I think there will be complicataions when you want to compute things. I mean there will be more than 4 (A 2 3 4 6) which isn't not a flush.
WHile some other hands a 2 3 5 6 7 flush there is only 4.
Maybe you could ask some further q's.
- Re: 134,459 hands?
Posted by: G. Ed Conly (econly@poweruser.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 15 August 2000, at 12:29 a.m.
That number sounds reasonable. There are 1326 two-card combinations and 169 when you don't include suits as unique. I'd be interested in the number of Omaha hands. 4 card hands that are unique like your program suggests. My guess is that you're looking at the right number. If you go further into your probabilities for types of hands (full houses, flushes, etc.) I will be able to confirm correct numbers for you.
- Burn cards in 7CS?
Posted by: DJ
Posted on: Monday, 14 August 2000, at 10:02 a.m.
Are burn cards used in 7CS? Presumably knowing what one person to the left of the dealer is going to be dealt has less of an impact compared to knowing what the next community card will be, as in holdem. I'm assuming though that burn cards are still used and you end up with four of them after the deal is complete?
- Re: Burn cards in 7CS?
Posted by: DjTj (tjou@caltech.edu)
Posted on: Monday, 14 August 2000, at 9:56 p.m.
Yes, at most casinos, one card is burned before each street is dealt.
- Re: Burn cards in 7CS?
Posted by: G. Ed Conly (econly@poweruser.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 15 August 2000, at 12:31 a.m.
There is a burn card used before 4th-7th streets. Four as you suggested.
- being a constant winner
Posted by: frank (olblueyes@aol.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 15 August 2000, at 11:04 a.m.
The last week or so i was up about 600 dollars playing 2-4 and 3-6 games. The other night i took such a beating i was in shock. I am wondering how to be a consistant winner and those limit games,and if it would be better after i got a bank roll to just move up to 5- or 10-20 games. I usually play against the same people at the lower stakes games anyway,woulden't it be more profitable to play against them in higher limit games. And finally what would be a proper bank roll to start with in a 5-10 and 10-20 game in hold'em.
- Re: being a constant winner
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Tuesday, 15 August 2000, at 12:32 p.m.
You need $500 for the buy in and eneough to be able to lose that and not be hurting to much. Some one is gonna tell you you need 5 to 10K for the bankroll but then again opinions are like assholes everyone has one.
- Re: being a constant winner
Posted by: Butt Jingles
Posted on: Wednesday, 16 August 2000, at 1:54 p.m.
We were getting lectured by our assistant principal in our journalism room. [high school]
the administration doesn't really like us because of our writing about how crummy things are w/ the administration and school board.
in any case, we were lagging on an issue, about 2 weeks, [it was may....almost time to graduate, so we didn't really care anymore]
anyways, we gave 'the terminator' [his nickname that he doesn't know of, but the students do] an excsue...it was some bs one, so i don't remember...
his response was memorable though, he said that 'excuses are like assholes, everyone has one, and they all stink'
the class was in a huge uproar, and he never heard the end of that one. we let our A.P. teachers know, the counselors, everyone.
we had to present a play w/ some form of irony, and our group did something on the absurdity of high school...about all the different cliques in high school that think they're all that, but aren't going anywhere because their lives ended in high school. at any rate, my friend imitated the assistant principal and it was a sight to see. even more interesting was the assistant principal was tipped by some loud mouth idiot that we were gonna make fun of him, so he dropped by the class and watched the play. we had to quickly edit out the obscene words he commonly uses due to our teacher's orders.
he had a fun time watching us make fun of him and other stuff like cheerleaders, 'nerds' [making fun of ourselves] jocks...etc...
ok, that's how bored i am right now at work. i hope u enjoyed that little story.
have a nice day. bye bye.
-jon
- Re: being a constant winner
Posted by: rockhard
Posted on: Saturday, 19 August 2000, at 12:18 a.m.
Forget about moving up until you become a consistant winner at the stakes your at. You only stand to lose more. Also, you don't need to win every outing to be a consistent winner. You just need to win a certain rate. I wouldn't move up until you are comfortable where you are act.
- looking for game in SC
Posted by: Daniel (muledad@aol.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 15 August 2000, at 12:05 p.m.
I live in Sc where there is no poker clubs. They even took our poker slot machines out If anyone in the Rockhill and Charlotte area knows of any games contact me at Muledad@aol.com
- 2 quick ?'s
Posted by: Beginner (craigsmith@okstate.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 16 August 2000, at 11:18 a.m.
After 6 months (weekly trips to Indian Casinos and 2 trips to Binions) I am pleased with my LL results....
But, I have 2 questions ....
1. my designated bankroll of $1200 has held up well at 2-5 @ the Indina casino and 1-4-8 at Binions after approx. 160 hours of play. Am I fooling myself re: 1200 being sufficient in the long run.
2. Which would you suggesst 1. Turbo Texas or Ace-Spades software for home practice?
Thanks!
- Re: 2 quick ?'s
Posted by: Al (AlTang67@aol.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 16 August 2000, at 12:57 p.m.
1) What is your definition of "long run"? My initial reaction is no, it is not sufficient
2) I prefer Turbo Texas...
- Thats what I was thinking
Posted by: Beginner (craigsmith@okstate.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 16 August 2000, at 1:32 p.m.
I will probably bump the BR to about $2,500
- Re: 2 quick ?'s
Posted by: G. Ed Conly (econly@poweruser.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 17 August 2000, at 12:51 a.m.
$2500 should work if you play well.
- Re: 2 quick ?'s
Posted by: ratso (ratso222@yahoo.ocm)
Posted on: Thursday, 17 August 2000, at 8:58 a.m.
Turbo is my choice. If you stay 2-5, then $1200 is enough assuming tou cancontinue to add to it. When your money doubles (when you have $2500) put $1500 in a short term high interest instrument. Continue till you become rich!
- Re: 2 quick ?'s
Posted by: Ray Zee
Posted on: Sunday, 20 August 2000, at 1:44 a.m.
thinking like a true champ.
- Re: 2 quick ?'s
Posted by: ratso222
Posted on: Sunday, 20 August 2000, at 5:04 p.m.
I would invest it in Bolivian currency
- "wrap-around straight" in O/8
Posted by: Meldar
Posted on: Thursday, 17 August 2000, at 11:14 p.m.
I feel like an idiot for even asking this:
I'm reading Ray's book on High-Low Split Poker, and am confused by his references to a "wrap-around straight" in O/8. I think I know what it means: a hand like QKA23 being a straight. I just didn't know that it was actually a poker hand. Do people/cardrooms play with this as a hand? If so, is it just in O/8? If so, where does it rank against other straights?
thanks,
BHM
- Re: "wrap-around straight" in O/8
Posted by: Dan Rubenstein (drubenst@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Friday, 18 August 2000, at 1:17 p.m.
QKA23 is usually called a "round-the-corner straight", and does not count as a straight in cardroom poker or in most home games.
A wrap-around straight *draw* is a draw that can make a straight in many ways on the next card. For example, if the board is K86, and you have T975 (a terrible O-8 hand), any four, five, seven, nine, or ten gives you a straight.
Contrast this to a standard straight draw, like A297 on a board of K86. Now only a five or ten gives you the straight.
- Re: "wrap-around straight" in O/8
Posted by: Ray Zee
Posted on: Sunday, 20 August 2000, at 1:42 a.m.
thx for clearing it up for him Dan. sorry Meldar but i assumed falsely that people reading the book would understand or have played and heard the term. you do have to really study the book to get the most out of it. good luck.
- Re: "wrap-around straight" in O/8
Posted by: Paul Feeney (Feen9876@aol.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 20 August 2000, at 9:09 p.m.
Don't feel bad I've read the book 50 times at least in certain sections I understand it then I forget it, then I have to go back and read it again, it takes time as Ray says, but don't be hard on yourself just keep plugging along, but if your losing with a certain hand more than your winning I would suggest you go back to that section of the book, because in my case I was playing it wrong according to the book or I shouldn't have been playing it from the start of the hand, which is the worst and most costly mistake to make in my opinion.
paul
- Re: "wrap-around straight" in O/8
Posted by: darrell dunfee (dpoker@aol.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 24 August 2000, at 11:30 a.m.
thats not a straight in anybodys book. of course you have a better idea of what a wrap around draw is, wrapping around the flop. with a flop of 56x if you have a 4 and a 7 you have the flop wrapped. in a omaha game with the extra two cards this greatly enhances your chances. better to have cards higher then the flop[ ie. 4,7,8,9 then lower, ie. 2,3,4,7. can you tell me why? i remember buying rays book years ago and not knowing what a wraparound ment.
- Protected Pot
Posted by: Mal Staples (mal@cmpsource.com)
Posted on: Saturday, 19 August 2000, at 9:56 a.m.
What is a protected pot? And is their any such thing in low limit no fol'em games?
Thanks
- Re: Protected Pot
Posted by: iammojay (iammojay@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Monday, 21 August 2000, at 6:28 a.m.
A protected pot occurs in the following situation.
Player A is a good player. Player B is a good player. Player C stinks and will call w/ crap.
Player A bets.
Player B has to believe player A has a good hand because the pot is "protected" by the bad player C. This is because player C will call too often to make a bluff by player A reasonable. Hence, the pot is "protected" from bluffs by the bad player, player C. Thus, a "protected pot" is a pot "protected" from bluffs by a weak player. Sorry if the explanation was long-winded or less than technical.
- Re: Protected Pot
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Monday, 21 August 2000, at 7:33 a.m.
Here is my protected pot thinking.
Player A raises all in pre flop player B reraises thus protecting the all in player from a lot of hands that might call the all in but not a reraise from a player who still has chips.
- Re: Protected Pot
Posted by: Mal (mal@cmpsourc.com)
Posted on: Monday, 21 August 2000, at 9:38 a.m.
Thank you. NT
- Hold'em opening hands
Posted by: Tall George
Posted on: Monday, 21 August 2000, at 6:19 a.m.
I have recently started learning to play hold'em and have absolutely no poker experience - so apologies if this is a really dumb question.
A book I read gave these as the possible starting hands in Pot Limit Hold'em for early, middle and late position.
1. AQs and above
2. AJs or ATs and above
3. KTs and above
Which starting hands would be included in each of these categories?
Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.
- Re: Hold'em opening hands
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Monday, 21 August 2000, at 7:30 a.m.
Very elementary look at starting hands.
In pot limit you can play a lot more speculative hands as the early betting is low compared to the latter betting.
You can play small pairs and coupled cards late knowing if you smack the flop you will be able to build the pot and make some real money.
- Re: Hold'em opening hands
Posted by: Chris Alger (algerc@idt.net)
Posted on: Monday, 21 August 2000, at 7:22 p.m.
Hands at or "above" AQs: AA, KK, AKs, QQ, AKo, JJ
" AJs/ATs: above + AQo, KQs, TT
" KTs: above + 99, 88, KQ, KJs, QJs
These aren't fixed in stone, but the money-making potential of the hands tends to follow their rank in the deck. The particular order is my guess about how they'd lineup in pot limit, given the framework suggested in your book.
Thats about 7% of the hands. Sounds way too tight. In any kind of decent-sized ante, short-handed PL game you'd have to play more hands to even survive.
- Re: Hold'em opening hands
Posted by: Tall George
Posted on: Tuesday, 22 August 2000, at 6:53 a.m.
Thanks for the help.
I'm looking to play in Pot-Limit tournaments rather than cash games but from what you say, even in this context, these starting requirements may be too tight.
I'll try mixing them in with Rounder's advice on small pairs and suited connectors in late position and see how I get on.
Thanks for taking the time to respond.
- Tournament Strategy Help Please
Posted by: Folding Pete (tourmalet1062@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Monday, 21 August 2000, at 8:54 a.m.
I'm a new poker player and I would like some advice on the strategy and the cards to play in low buy in tournaments. I have some poker books but nothing that deals with tournament strategy. This is a longish post which will probably require a long answer so only read on if you are feeling generous!
I have entered a few hold'em no limit tournaments and I find that the degree of luck in them to be quite high particularly in the first hour and a half.
Let me explain the last tournament scenario. Thirty players £20 buy in , unlimited rebuys. When I get my seat and I realise I have probably the worst position. To my immediate left is a a Gambling Asian. He is very amusing and makes the experience very enjoyable (and very expensive). I don't think he is a bad player but one who gambles. Basically he is in a lot of pots with either a big bet or an all in before the flop. His strategy appears to be either get lucky on the flop or to take the pot because he is the aggressor and makes it very expensive to stay in. When I saw some of the cards he was showing (small pairs, small connectors, Ax) and going all in on, I would have been happy to go all in with him heads up if I had any pair bigger than sixes (maybe any pair). Unfortunately the situation never arose. He took several rebuys but eventually accumulated a large stack and then seemed to change strategy in that he would still see the flop most of the time but with a lot less preflop raises.
Including the Gambling Asian there were probably 4/5 others players playing loose agressive. What this meant was that on 35% to 60% of the hands there would be a big bet or all in to call, there would be 3/5 players seeing the flop and it was not unknown for 2/4 players going to the river.
I threw away a lot of hands preflop because of the threat of a big bet from the player on left. You could wait all night before getting AA, KK or AKs (none of which I got) so I would like to know what are the best type of hands for different number of opponents.
Question 1
As a preflop big bet is typically 30% to 50% of the buyin what hands should I be calling for 2,3,4 & 5 players? It would seem to me that having put such a large proportion of your stack into the pot it is it is difficult to lay your hand down if one has any part of the flop or even two overcards (given that somebody will go all in on the flop). KQs would seem a preferable hand to a small or medium pair - is this correct? (My thinking is that you need to hit your set to win the pot. To go all in preflop you aren't getting pot odds to play the hand (4-6) players. If you have to call a 50% bet preflop you don't have sufficent implied odds to do it - your stack is too low).
Question 2
Same as question 1 but now what hands should I be calling an all in raise (for me) when there are 2,3,4 and 5 callers?
Question 3
When do you raise in such a tournament? I was playing ultratight and still on my last hand when I bet 40% of my buyin stack preflop with QQ I got four callers. Flop came raggedy with x6d7d I went all in and am called by the four. The hand that beats me was 6h7h (no pairs/over cards for the rest).
Thinking back later should I have gone all in with QQ preflop, would I have had less callers? Or should I have just tried to play it as cheaply as possible?
Question 4
As the blinds start off relatively small should one (at the start only) play any semblance of a hand if one can get in for the price of the big blind. This would be on the proviso that the flop has to hit you big time for you to continue with the hand?
Question 5
A bit of a psychological question. When you are betting is it more effective to announce a large bet of 'X' amount or to announce an 'all in' when you don't want somebody to call? For example preflop you are on the button with 1500 chips the same as the player to your right. It is passed to him and he raises a moderate amount. You have an okay hand (AQu or pair tens) but you think he is equal or slightly ahead. You don't want to call (is this right?). You decide to raise. Is he more lightly to fold if you say 'Raise 1200' or '1500' pause 'All In' or 'All In'? I think an 'All In' raise can either seem weak (desperation) or very strong. My thoughts are that for a fairly conservative tight player (like myself) an 'All In' announcement can seem like frustration (or going on tilt) and would attract a caller more than a very big bet. Any thoughts?
Question 6
Any other relevant tournament hints would be appreciated. There is another tournament which is no limit hold'em £15 (about 20 players) but only two rebuys. It seems to be less loose (or maybe most of the loose players finish there buyins early on). What would the difference in strategy be between the two?
Folding Pete
- Re: Tournament Strategy Help Please
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Tuesday, 22 August 2000, at 10:49 a.m.
Where are you playing - it sounds like Reading.
Get TJ Cloutiers NL PL Championship Poker.
Are you playing 7/6 handed all the time UK style - if you are it brings up the value of your hands as in America we are usually playing 9/10/ and even 11 handed early in tournaments.
I have played all over the world and in many different situations but have never seen the level of looseness and aggeressivness in the UK tournaments during the rebuy period.
Without going into all your questions - I think you just need to be playing cards just a bit better then the maniacs at your table. Of course you will have to change your style after the rebuy period.
Try loosening up just a bit the guy doing all the raising is vulnerable so I'd be trying to isolate him as much as possible. He can become a great source of chips for you. I'd be going after the weaker players for sure.
"All in" is OK to say - I am not sure if it is better than saying the size of your bet - It really isn't importand what you say it is important "how" you say it. There are a lot of hands you don't want a call with besides AQ & TT.
I believe in playing tighter in the early stages and loosening up later when players tighten up.
- Re: Turbo Hold Em Program question
Posted by: MJS (mjs_90201@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 23 August 2000, at 4:35 a.m.
To better simulate typical low-limit games, make sure you are playing against a line-up of the loosest profiles. Then, when the advisor suggests plays which conflict with your books, you can post the hands on the "small stakes" forum to elicit opinions about which strategy is best and why.
- Re: Turbo Hold Em Program question
Posted by: darrell dunfee (dpoker@aol.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 24 August 2000, at 11:17 a.m.
i think they have a line up 0. thats a average line up. do not pay any attention to the advice, its bad advice. read your books and watch the players. you will know how they think but they dont seem to be thinking about you.
- Turbo vs. reality?
Posted by: Kim Lee
Posted on: Thursday, 24 August 2000, at 2:14 p.m.
Yes the advice is bad. In Seven Card Stud the advisor recommends calling a raise with any live pair. This may work against the bad loose lineup, but definitely doesn't work against a table full of Rosetta Stone and Sherlock Holmes.
The computer players routinely call my raises with obviously worse pairs. I win the most money when they make an obvious misread and 4-bet me on every round. Are real low-limit players as clueless?
- what is a "must move" game?
Posted by: gamblerbri (gamblerbri@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 25 August 2000, at 3:38 a.m.
.
- Re: what is a "must move" game?
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Saturday, 26 August 2000, at 10:26 a.m.
Think if it as a feeder game. A card room will spread a "main" game and a "must move" game of the same limits. New players go to the must move table as players move to the main game in the order they were seated in the mm game.
- raise or call?
Posted by: frank (olblueyes@aol.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 August 2000, at 1:51 a.m.
I was wondering if that when i am in the bb or lb or even early postion should i raise a group one hand. I try to play differently from time to time but i tend not to raise with a a group one hand in early postion. Any sure way to play that?
- Re: raise or call? PS:
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 August 2000, at 11:06 a.m.
I consider AK AQ suited or not raising hands in this situation and don't consider JJ a grp 1 hand.
Take for what it's worth.
- Re: Texas Hold Em showdown rules
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Tuesday, 29 August 2000, at 9:05 p.m.
It is not usually exercised and a players mucked cards are respected however they are rarely asked to be seen by a player at the table.
- Re: Im on Tilt
Posted by: Rounder
Posted on: Wednesday, 14 February 2001, at 10:05 a.m.
Couple of things - look at the guys winning with crap as having tempory stacks of chips - look at those chips as your property as long as you play right and they are play wrong. Second thing - train your self to play "less" when aggravated or seeing red. It is natural for me to go into a shell when I get angry or annoyed probably cuz I am naturally anti-social and find going in a shell much better than losing it at the table by getting mad at my chips.
Hope this helps.
Beginners Questions
August 2000 Digest is provided by Two Plus Two Publishing and ConJelCo