Jump to content

harvey

Members
  • Content Count

    104
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by harvey

  1. The link you gave is dead, so I don't know what its telling you to do but:ROI% = PROFIT/INVESTMENT....or (WINNINGS - INVESTMETNT)/ INVESTMENT.....oror WINNINGS/INVESTMENT - 1so for your question :(72 - 110)/110 = - 34.5 %have fun.
  2. The only thing flawed, is you ability to type my name! j/k lolI would call because thats what I normally do, and when I ask my database if its a good idea it says yes (I show a positive EV for A2s+ for calling a raise against one opponent in the BB).You're getting 3.5:1 odds, and since players usually have a trouble getting rid of their big hands you get paid off pretty good when you hit straights, flushes, or even when you pair your 4s or A high against any unpaired big paint hand.... KQ, KJ, AK(not with Ace high obviously)...etc. Sure, alot of times you are dominated, but alot of times you
  3. OH, and since I never really addressed the actual arguement,I would call the raise.But, I still disagree with the cost of folding part.
  4. That is where the complexity of calculating pot equity preflop comes in. You can't just say that your chance of winning is 1/3,. which isn't accurate at all (if you see Jayson's poker stove results) because the hand has to go to the river. The hand going to the river depends on a number of factors that cannot be determined easily without seeing the cards. If you read akishore's posts he explains it much better. When you do game theory problems and try to come up with a cost of folding preflop, I've have only seen those methods used that I listed. You can say whatever you want, I just don't th
  5. How does the post show that? He just said he assumes....When money goes into a pot, you can't just claim ownership of it based on your contribution to determine how much you lose by folding. That money is gone. If things worked that way, then everytime you figured out your pot equity you would just add up how much money you've contributed to the pot with no consideration for how likely you are to win the hand and how much money is in the pot. Its extremely complicated to determine pot equity preflop, with so many (some undetermined) factors including the actual board cards, and how playable t
  6. When you model poker hands mathematically, its sometimes helps to equate folding with a zero cost (current pot belongs to no-one) which can simplify the equations, without losing the intent of analysing the hand.. This is probably what akishore is talking about.In actuality, there is a cost to folding but it isn't .5 BB, you should spread the cost of the blinds out of each of the 10 hands, so -.075 Big bets for each hand folded in a 10 handed game. This more accurately describes the effect of the blinds on the game....In any event, equating the fold with -.5 BB is usually not the way to go..t
  7. Well thinning the field is directly related to pot size. I felt like you were saying with your post: If there were some magic where I could exploit my preflop edge, yet not severely diminish my post-flop edge, I might raise with AJo. For instance, lets say there is on average 60 % of the players seeing the flop with a preflop raise in our game. We have AJo in early position and we are deciding whether to raise it up. We guess based on the average that 5 other players will likely call if we raise. That'll give approx. 12:1 odds on the flop thus making the pot large enough to severely diminish t
  8. Its interesting that your arguement is for loose games--Implying that if you had the ability to thin the field a bit, you might raise with these hands like AJo, KQo. That would mean as a function of tightness, there would be some inflection point point where raising preflop gives you most preflop + postflop expectation. As a table increases in looseness from this point your expectation of postflop goes down thus reducing your profits, and as the table increases tightness from this point your preflop expectation of raising goes down because of the increasingly better hands calling the raise.It
  9. It would be common in a short handed game to bet the four on the flop. Especially if you had any type of read on his aggression, I would discount the possibilty of a four slightly. If you planned on staying at this table for awhile, I'd make the call. I know clicking-tells are somewhat unreliable, but in a short handed game knowing what a fast-click usually means from a player can be useful in future tough decisions.. I have found that most players don't vary much, they either fast click with a strong hand or fast click trying to represent the card that just hit.Little bits of information can
  10. One of the biggest parts of positional playing, is having an accurate dipiction of the pot and implied odds. This DOES apply preflop. One reason a hand chart would normally put 87s as a late position call, is to ensure that you have the neccessary information about how big the pot is going to be. What Miller is saying is that you should consider other aspects of the game, like I have 87s with only 2 limpers in LP, but these guys will cap the flop turn and river with nothing so if I hit a straight or flush it'll more than make up for not having another player or 2. This is all about implied odd
  11. I was referring to the 12 k9 combinations. Sorry if that wasn't explained well. Oh, sorry I misread it as A2s vs A6s. In my database, A5s does better. In pokerroom's database it does better as wellhttp://www.pokerroom.com/games/evstats/positionStats.php?players=10 ://http://www.pokerroom.com/games/evst...php?players=10 Hey, you and rise were qouting miller, so I thought I'd bring it up. They aren't rigid, but the prevailing conditions of the hand would make it less desireable, not more desireable. I agree something I tend to do at 5 in the morning for whatever reason....I guess we will agre
  12. Its just one extra thing... combined with the other things I listed. It does count for something though. Look at the difference in your PT database between A5s and A6s; it better shows how the straight possibility makes a difference. I have it memorized (j/k). Anyway, SSHE says k8s is a late position only call. heck, you could raise with it sometimes. yes I agree which is why it would only take a couple up front limpers to convince me...
  13. yes, but A2s makes a straight. And A2s makes the highest pair rather than the second, and the nut flush rather than the second nut. It has alot more going for it in terms of holding up multiway.. I'd call with it UTG. As for kickers, having one card lower kicker gives 12 more hands combinations that dominate you. And just in general, flopping a pair of eights will hold up less than nines...statisically speaking. Its not that big of a difference, but combined with losing the straight possibility it all adds up, which is why its usually played differently than K9s. But, like I said, with 1 or 2
  14. A loose aggressive player often would raise a flush draw even with so few players in the pot... I think folding is out of the question. I'd raise on the strength of my kicker. He could be betting on a one card K high flush draw/A something if he's aggressiveI'd be more concerned with either of the passive categories betting into an aggressor on the turn would usually mean a pretty big hand. And they would have less propencity to bet a flush draw..
  15. actually, thats a big difference, and the kicker is lower for when you hit a king and eights don't hold up as often as nines when you hit them.. Small Stakes holdem put K8s-K2s as a call in late position only. You already have 3 folders reducing the chance for the neccessary odds. If you had a couple limpers already, I might call in mp1 at a really loose/passive table.Anyway, its not a bad enough play to matter too much. I definately agree for 22 or A2s or other good multiway hands, thats very good advice from akishore, alot of people miss out on those hands in loose games.
  16. I agree with thebolb.I'd also consider a check-raise on the river, if I had a read.
  17. . First, I am a mathematics researcher. I use low limit games to take large amounts of data to analyse the effects of the slightest changes in strategy, and am writing software exploiting this research. I have read most poker books on the market to compare and contrast with my research. So your impression of a kid on "training wheels" or a robot applying hand charts without thinking is a little skewed since the mathematics and theory behind poker is the only reason why I play poker to begin with. The reason that short handed games have different starting requirements is due to the cost of f
  18. Every source on low limit holdem that I know of would disagree with you. First you are trying to thin the field in a Party Poker 1/2 game with 6 players left to act. Second, you are trying to thin the field with POCKET 8s. The sole reason you play pocket 8s in MP in a low limit game is to have a very large field and a very large pot. Also, you could raise often in late position to try and steal or get a heads up flop. Its equity edge without a doubt not large enough to warrent a raise from this postion regardless. Low limit holdem, Small Stakes Holdem, Hutchison point system, all disagree wit
  19. Its really easy to DO, just very very hard to justify at a typical 1/2 table..... Well lets see... its not a stone cold bluff, you got better than middle pair and a small one-card flush draw. A semi-bluff? Hmm, I think we would like to have a chance at a very good hand if that were the case. Are we betting our pocket 8s into a field of 5 players for value on this flop? Well, that felt silly just typing it.I guess we are facing a field of 5 players at a Party Poker 1/2 game with 1 bet for the monsterous fold-equity for anyone holding a K, flush draw higher than 8 high, or a set. Actually, tha
  20. folding seems like the"obvious answer" to me. Since this is a "fun post", I'd imagine there is some interesting logic behind the real answer.But, since I can't think of any, put me down for fold.
  21. I agree with your answer, and disagree with your logic behind your answer. The whole idea about stealing the blinds is: you don't have a great hand but the probability of everyone folding is dramatically increased since there are so few players left, and you have a good chance to end up with position with your mediocre hand if you do happen to get called. If they players would statistically have worse hands you would be rooting for calls not "steals." Betting AK on the river is rarely the right thing to do. Stealing the blinds is more similar to a semi-bluff.
  22. In my opinion,Raising 8s from MP1 in a low limit game is a bad idea. What part of seeing a large pot with the least cost to hit a set, or taking the blinds, or going heads up with position does this play satisfy? Very expensive bad idea.Betting that flop is a bad idea. Checking/folding with a strong possibility of check-raising, depending on the action after you would be the play.Betting into the raiser on the turn is a bad idea. Sets have turned into full houses, Top pair have turned into trips, there are already 3 to a flush on the board. Since you've managed to make to the pot so large, c
  23. The $20 dollar sit n goes I have played have been quite loose. So I am not seeing the everybody- plays-tight-early scenarios that you are describing. Most people watch tv, they don't read about strategy.That being said,In an early-tight sit n go, loosening your starting requirements seems kind of silly. You are either going to pick up a very small pot on the flop, or you are going to be up against a hand much stronger than yours. Against tight opponents, you should still start with quality hands and make more 'plays' to push opponents off a better hand when you miss. There isn't much time to
  24. The reporter that will be handling daniels challenge matches posted the other day. So, I would guess yes, he will be filming all the matches at some point...
×
×
  • Create New...