|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 8/28/2008 12:58:04 AM PACIFIC |
 +ev negative results, Don Hayes, 14. Aug 2003 07:55 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I was playing .50/1.00 on paradise and had two AA and QKs cracked in an hour. Playing with 8 calling stations four or five would go to the river with nothing. One of the guys that beat my AA had Q5 offsuit had a queen on the flop and of course hit one on the river. I am playing 30% or less of the flops playing premium hands and gotten my butt kicked. Do I need to play even tighter or is this statistical variation at work? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: +ev negative results, MozMan, 14. Aug 2003 08:02 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Don- While statistical variation is at work here (as it ALWAYS is), you absolutely must tighten up in a game like this. Under normal circumstances, you should only be seeing about 25% or less of the flops. In a game like this one, you should be playing only premium hands, but really charging a high fee to see every card when you do (rasie every chance you get, no calling); because you want them to pay for the times they will suck you out with a Q5o against your KK or AA. It's really, really boring to play this way, becuase you hardly play at all. But if you can't make yourself buckle down and do it, then your swings will be much bigger and you will win less or lose outright. -Moz "Your destiny chooses you." | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: +ev negative results, pt_Gatsby, 14. Aug 2003 08:48 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| This is one reason I dislike playing holdem now... at least, long handed. The problem isn't with EV, but with variance. Let me put it this way: Over any significant number of hands, you should theoretically have these results: With AA vs Random: vs 1: 0.85 win rate vs 2: 0.73 win rate vs 3: 0.64 win rate vs 4: 0.56 win rate vs 5: 0.49 win rate vs 6: 0.44 win rate. Instead, what is happening is that your 'EV' is being adjusted by the money they are putting in (ie: with 1v1, you are earning 100% of your investment back 85% of the time, while with 6 people, you are earning 600% of your investment back 44% of the time. Which one is better...?). In other words, your likelyhood of being broken 2 or 3 times in a row over 10 hands at 44% is quite probable, while unlikely at 85%. It doesn't change the value of the hand, it just means you will win less often but win more. You just have to be able to handle the variance. Worse, for AA, is that people DON'T play premium hands. AA is actually worse against sub-premium hands (ie: KQ will win slighly less often than say, 78, just because the chances of two pair are identical, as are trips - but there are more straights available for 78...). You should win a massive amount of times against Ax, for example... (90.54% of the time, roughly), while 67s defeats AA 22.94% of the time. I read an article about these hands... In short, it seems to make sense not to drive people out of AA, KK or QQ. The return is estimated to be higher by having many people in - its a matter of variance that makes it questionable. Even if you assume 4 other people have the worst possible hands for you (each have suited connectors, don't match each other suits, don't depend on A's for a straight), you still win 34.9% of the time, which is way above the 20% your natural amount is. Against 4 other sets of pairs, you win 43% of the time (doubling+ your 20% natural amount). As far as I can tell, there is no basis for driving people out of AA (or KK or QQ). Over the long haul, you just want as much money as possible in the pot. If this involves raising and having half the table stay in (or not raising and having the entire table in...) is up to how the table plays. The goal is not to drive them out, but to get as much of their money into the pot as possible. Though you won't get delt AA all that often, its just one more step towards getting as much positive EV as you can... (This does not apply to AK or similar, but KK and QQ actually play very similar, except against another overpair). -- I have to point out, however, that this is only half the equation... You can win by calling with ~bad hands on the flop. If you can limp in, while they will stay to the river, you can play hands with less than typically optimal EV, and then cash in when the flop matches your hand. That is not a winning strategy for a great deal of tables and has very high variance, but... that is what they are doing to you! | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: +ev negative results, Mark, 14. Aug 2003 09:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| the Psychology of Poker by Alan Shoonmanker has a great section on loose passive players and games. I think it deals with these games much better than Lee Jones's Low Limit Hold'em. I will give the short version of his chapter on loose passive players and games. In the actual book he does into detail on each of the following: "reading their cards is almost impossible" How to adjust your stradegy 1. Be nice 2.Don't make plays that humiliate them 3. Bet or raise for value with weak or questionable hands Accept that the rules are different 1. You will lose with many hands that will normally win 2. The increased size of your winning pots will more than compensate for your unexpected loses. 3. Pots quickly become so big that the LPP (loose passive player)'s mindless calling is almost justified. 4. You will usually need a better hand to win 5. High cards and unimproved pairs go way down in value, while drawing hands become much more valuable. Adjust your Stradegy 1. Make winning the pot your 1st priority (e.g.no slow play or check-raise) 2. Play more hands than you would if the players were better 3. Put greater value on drawing hands 4. Frequently bet or raise to get more money in the pot 5. Raise with strong draws 6. Resist certain raises (e.g. AJ offsuit pre-flop and other raises that are meant to limit the field) 7. Minimize bluffing 8. minimize moves 9. Minimize Check-raises 10. Don't slowplay The greatest assest i've found to the very loose-passive games is to only bet/raise to get more money in the pot. Betting or raising to eliminate player from the pot is very hard to do. Hope this helps mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: +ev negative results, MozMan, 14. Aug 2003 09:28 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 14. Aug 2003 09:03 Mark wrote: > The greatest assest i've found to the very loose-passive games is to only bet/raise > to get more money in the pot. Betting or raising to eliminate player from the pot is > very hard to do. Of all the responses to this thread, the above is probably the single best piece of advice here. It is fundamental to game of this nature. -Moz "Your destiny chooses you." | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: +ev negative results, shorn, 14. Aug 2003 09:30 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| All of the above posts have very sound advice. I would offer only 1 note of caution on your original post...KQs doesn't get "cracked" as it is a drawing hand, pure and simple...i.e., you NEED to hit to win 95% of the time, especially against 6 or 7 players. So, keep that in mind when you are playing (same thing applies to AK with this many people in the hand). Only AA, KK, and to a lesser degree, QQ get "cracked" (IMO) in LLHE games wher 5+ people are seeing the flop for multiple bets. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: +ev negative results, Risky Business, 14. Aug 2003 10:16 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| My quick answer would be..........observe more of their patterns before you get into any battles, meaning you could leave this table when you realize it doesn't fit your playing style. on 14. Aug 2003 07:55 Don Hayes wrote: > I was playing .50/1.00 on paradise and had two AA and QKs cracked in an hour. > Playing with 8 calling stations four or five would go to the river with nothing. > One of the guys that beat my AA had Q5 offsuit had a queen on the flop and of > course hit one on the river. I am playing 30% or less of the flops playing > premium hands and gotten my butt kicked. Do I need to play even tighter or is > this statistical variation at work? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|