|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 12/1/2008 6:32:41 PM PACIFIC |
 Controversial no-limit guidelines, Mike Caro, 1. Sep 2003 22:02 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| For 20 years, I've contended that some common no-limit advice is wrong in asserting that the correct size for a typical no-limit bet is about the size of the pot. I say it's usually less than that. Also, going all-in to protect a hand is often wrong. I talk about and explain my thinking on these issues in my latest audio lecture at www.cardplayer.com (scroll down to Caro's Corner and click "more"). I'd be honored to see your comments, pro or con. Straight Flushes, Mike Caro | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Sidetrack:, URF, 1. Sep 2003 23:50 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Sidetrack: Is there any way to get these audio lessons in better quality? Soundquality-wise they are a pain to listen to... -URF | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Sidetrack:, Mike Caro, 4. Sep 2003 18:43 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 1. Sep 2003 23:50 URF wrote: > Sidetrack: > > Is there any way to get these audio lessons in better quality? Soundquality-wise > they are a pain to listen to... > > -URF Hi, URF -- I'd be interested in learning what type of software, hardware, and connection you're using to hear these. The lead-in, tagged onto each audio, has a deliberate slight echo effect, but after that, the audios sound clear to us (although they are highly compressed and lose some quality). Is anyone else finding them hard to understand? I can check with CardPlayer.com and see what can be done, if this is a widespread problem. Straight Flushes, Mike Caro > | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Sidetrack:, chasepoker, 4. Sep 2003 18:46 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Being able to download them as opposed to having them streamed would be good as if you miss a bit / want to listen to a piece again you have to start from the first word. on 4. Sep 2003 18:43 Mike Caro wrote: > on 1. Sep 2003 23:50 URF wrote: > > Sidetrack: > > > > Is there any way to get these audio lessons in better quality? Soundquality-wise > > they are a pain to listen to... > > > > -URF > > Hi, URF -- > > I'd be interested in learning what type of software, hardware, and connection you're > using to hear these. The lead-in, tagged onto each audio, has a deliberate slight echo > effect, but after that, the audios sound clear to us (although they are highly compressed > and lose some quality). > > Is anyone else finding them hard to understand? I can check with CardPlayer.com and see > what can be done, if this is a widespread problem. > > Straight Flushes, > Mike Caro > > Chasepoker | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Sidetrack:, URF, 4. Sep 2003 22:52 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| chasepoker, You can download the audio lessons using Streambox VCR Suite 2. I won't post any link to where you can get it, since Mike and Card Player probably don't want you to download them, and the software might even be illegal in some places (I don't know this, but there are all kinds of silly laws around), so you'll have to search Google or something. I hope this post doesn't break any forum rules or anything... -URF | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Simpler solution, URF, 5. Sep 2003 11:10 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Simpler soulution: replace "caro12.wax" with "CP-0012.wma" (and similarly) to get the link http://www.cardplayer.com/caro/CP-0012.wma . Voila, you can now download the audio file. -URF | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Sidetrack:, URF, 4. Sep 2003 22:45 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi Mike. I have no technical problems, it's the high compression that is annoying to my ear. It sounds bad even on my laptop... And even worse when I put the sound through my stereo system. I understand that you have to have low bandwidth streaming to make sure even those with 33k modems can listen in, but for most of us....20kbps, 22kHz WMA is just really bad quality. Maybe a second choice of stream would be possible? With 44kHz? It's no biggie - I can hear what you say - but it's a bit disturbing. I'll slap myself some on your behalf for complaining, and say thanks for the free lessons! -URF | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Controversial no-limit guidelines, chasepoker, 2. Sep 2003 07:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I have just listened to your advice and i believe it is very much true people are too willing to " bet the farm " on a nut hand when clearly the correct thing to do is to sell the hand for as best price as possible. No limit is all about selling your good hands for the right " price " this is something i have always believed and it is a point not understood by a lot of players. Too often, as you say in your lecture, people bet the pot but i would guesstimate that this can only be the correct amount maybe one in a hundred times. I also would say that the amount you bet ( not just for deception purposes ) is also a function of how much risk / varience you are willing to take. I personally will accept a high varience in payoff for a higher earn rate at No Limit as i have built a sufficient bankroll to absorb these swings. An example of this is if you flop a small flush ( you have 9h8h flop comes Jh 2h 5h and you " know " your opponent has Ah Kc ) here you can bet big to win the pot and take it down there, which results in lower swings but a lower earn rate or you can bet, for example 20% above what would be the ' correct ' amount for the player with the Ah to call with break even ( accounting for all factors ) and earn that bit extra. In response to your original question ( i got off the point a bit here ) i would say that the concept of betting differing amounts ensuring an average of what is correct is a very valid point and something i think i have always instinctively done it is only when you said the words that i realised it ! In theory this concept would be best maximised against good opponents by changing the amount you bet based on a random factor ( ie the second hand on your watch or something ) but in reality most players at NL are not aware enough to notice the changes in your betting patterns to necessitate this so an educated guess may be the best way of varying your play. I think i have rambled a bit here apologies all too much caffeine Chasepoker | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| one disagreement? pr not?, Easy E, 2. Sep 2003 07:38 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| "An example of this is if you flop a small flush ( you have 9h8h flop comes Jh 2h 5h and you " know " your opponent has Ah Kc ) here you can bet big to win the pot and take it down there, which results in lower swings but a lower earn rate or you can bet, for example 20% above what would be the ' correct ' amount for the player with the Ah to call with break even ( accounting for all factors ) and earn that bit extra. " Maybe i don't disagree after all- did you mean to say that you should bet $$ amount that makes the Ah call break-even PLUS 20%, so their call will now be incorrect on pot-odds? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Controversial no-limit guidelines, Formless, 2. Sep 2003 07:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I learned to play no limit on IRC poker. Most clients had a 'Raise Pot" button so it was far more common to just bet the pot on most made hands. I agree betting less than the pot for the hands you describe is usually enough. A mathematical breakdown is that the caller is getting 2:1 to call your pot bet. This is usually more than high enough a price to 'sell' a hand, as there are few hands behind now that will improve to beat you at a rate often enough to justify the call. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Controversial no-limit guidelines, Schuster, 2. Sep 2003 07:54 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Great piece Mike, I'm definately going to keep it under my cap for the next time I sit at a no limit table. It seems almost obvious that the correct bet would be less than the size of the pot, because there are very few hands where an opponent would be willing to fold getting 2:1 but would fold getting 3:1, at least in hold'em. A 12+ out hand would call for 3:1, but would fold for 2:1, but there are very few draws as strong. I had a thought concerning the betting average size relative to the strength of your hand. If an opponent knew you were using this technique, even if he knew you were varying your bets but maintaining the average, couldn't he take advantage of this rather easily? If, for example, you place a small bet, your hand is more likely to be weak than strong. If you place a large bet, your hand is more likely to be strong than weak. Also, what method would you use to vary your bets? Would you do it as randomly as possible, perhaps using the cards to make the decision, or would you take into account the texture of the board and the opponent at all? The other thing I wondered is how selling your hand for more than the break even point interacts with Morten's theory in multiway pots. The thought just popped into my head and I haven't really had time to take any kind of closer look, but I wonder if you have looked at it? I'd assume you have to sell it for more against multiple opponents than you would against a single opponent, but how would you decide how much more? Of course, no limit pots with big calling stations are rare, but with the influx of new players and online no limit games, it's probably more prevalent now than ever. Again, great work Mike, I'm looking forward to hearing your comments. Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Controversial no-limit guidelines, Mike Caro, 4. Sep 2003 19:00 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 2. Sep 2003 07:54 Schuster wrote: > Great piece Mike, I'm definately going to keep it under my cap for the next time I > sit at a no limit table. It seems almost obvious that the correct bet would be less > than the size of the pot, because there are very few hands where an opponent would be > willing to fold getting 2:1 but would fold getting 3:1, at least in hold'em. A 12+ > out hand would call for 3:1, but would fold for 2:1, but there are very few draws as > strong. > > I had a thought concerning the betting average size relative to the strength of your > hand. If an opponent knew you were using this technique, even if he knew you were > varying your bets but maintaining the average, couldn't he take advantage of this > rather easily? If, for example, you place a small bet, your hand is more likely to > be weak than strong. If you place a large bet, your hand is more likely to be strong > than weak. Also, what method would you use to vary your bets? Would you do it as > randomly as possible, perhaps using the cards to make the decision, or would you take > into account the texture of the board and the opponent at all? > > The other thing I wondered is how selling your hand for more than the break even > point interacts with Morten's theory in multiway pots. The thought just popped into > my head and I haven't really had time to take any kind of closer look, but I wonder > if you have looked at it? I'd assume you have to sell it for more against multiple > opponents than you would against a single opponent, but how would you decide how much > more? Of course, no limit pots with big calling stations are rare, but with the > influx of new players and online no limit games, it's probably more prevalent now > than ever. > > Again, great work Mike, I'm looking forward to hearing your comments. > > Lee Hi, Lee -- You pose a good question regarding multiway pots. It could get very complex, due to the fact that there can be an "ideal" number of opponents against which hands play most profitably. It's not always a "more is better" or "fewer is better" answer. I don't really have a good answer for you offhand. I was thinking more in terms of a single opponent, but with multiple opponents, you might have to adjust the size of the bet at which a hand can be "sold" for the most profit, because the correct buying price is different for each opponent AND the cumulative chances of success for ONE of many opponents are quite different from what you might expect, if you considered each one independently. Separate topic: I've written in detail about my opinion of Morten's Theorem. He stated that he formed it after reading something I had written that at first made sense to him and then didn't. The theorem has powerful application, but doesn't really stand in disagreement with what I'd said previous to it or have said since. He unfortunately died tragically before we could resolve the issue. But, I'm guessing, we didn't have any quarrel at all. Straight Flushes, Mike Caro | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Controversial no-limit guidelines, stdioh, 2. Sep 2003 08:45 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think there is a major difference in the typical correct bet size depending on if you're playing a tourney or a cash game. In a tourney I usually just want to fold people off so I'll pot the hand fvery often. In a cash game I want people to draw against me badly, so I'll usually taylor a bet to the player. If I'm against a coordinated board I'll usually bet such that any reasonable draw will be unable to call me based on pot odds. I want a player on a flush draw to call 1/2 of the pot or more. Then I can punish him by robbing him of his implied odds when the draw materializes. Of course I can only do this if I have a good read on my opponent. Against those I'm unfamiliar with I'll err on the side of caution by betting big. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Controversial no-limit guidelines, gary ford, 2. Sep 2003 20:51 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 1. Sep 2003 22:02 Mike Caro wrote: > For 20 years, I've contended that some common no-limit advice is wrong in > asserting that the correct size for a typical no-limit bet is about the size of > the pot. I say it's usually less than that. > > Also, going all-in to protect a hand is often wrong. I talk about and explain > my thinking on these issues in my latest audio lecture at www.cardplayer.com > (scroll down to Caro's Corner and click "more"). I'd be honored to see your > comments, pro or con. > > Straight Flushes, > Mike Caro hi Mike-----listened to the tape today-- no sound quality problems. as usual, your logic is impeccable. It seems there is more "bad" advice floating around than good advice. Like--why is that true?--because thats the way its always been. fuel the boom--Gary Ford | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Controversial no-limit guidelines, Larry Fisher, 3. Sep 2003 11:06 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Wish you wouldnt have made that tape.That's a little bit like Ray Zee's underbetting the pot. But, the extra profitability he takes is when they want to "play back" at him. This seems to be a huge benefit. I play both cash and tournament NL. Learned the concepts of NL during the California NL lowball days. This type of strategy has made me lots. I think of most benefit to me has been those medium value handsthat I know are strong and I have a solid player thats very readable behind me. I have many times made a bet and "found" the better hand. This has saved me chips to use in another hand. That's profit baby! However players in the particular game make a huge difference. I have seen games where I know this poor player is too agressive and will put way too many chips in with way the worst of it. At those times one must "bet the ranch" and take the money they call with. Here's a funny story. I was dealing the big cash game at Jack Binions WPO. $1500-3000 blinds PLO. I wont use names but will say a "live one" that has gotten some TV time lately was in the game. All told there was 6 main event WSOP bracelets between 4 players of the 6 seated. 5 players see the flop for 6k a piece as there was a 6k button straddle. On the flop, Live one bets in MP $30k cash. He gets checkraised for the max bet of 100k(game had cap on bet per hand) He calls with bottom set, suckers end str8 draw, weak flush draw. He is drawing dead to only the card needed for quads. Which he misses. So lets say it's NL and this same action player is in game. Knowing he'll call any amount dont you just checkraise all-in. Or check raise some and then push huge on turn while he still has hope? I tend to move all-in early with this type player. Thoughts? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Controversial no-limit guidelines, Angel, 4. Sep 2003 19:13 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I went to cardplayer and tried to get the audio lesson. What I got instead was this on an otherwise blank page: <ASX version="3.0"> <Entry> <Ref href="CP-0012.wma" /> </Entry> </ASX> Any suggestions as to how I can actually hear the audio? I was able to tell of the week - if that tips someone off. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Controversial no-limit guidelines, URF, 5. Sep 2003 11:06 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Simple soulution: replace "caro12.wax" with "CP-0012.wma" to get the link http://www.cardplayer.com/caro/CP-0012.wma . Voila, you can now download the audio file, at least using Opera. This would also be a simpler solution to chasepoker's question above... Silly old me! -URF | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Controversial no-limit guidelines, shorn, 5. Sep 2003 05:46 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Mike- I am interested to ask if your theories also apply to Pot Limit as well. In studying Cloutier's book, it seems he advocates betting and raising the size of the pot at all times in order to never give away your hand by betting patterns. However, after listening to your piece, I am now questioning that tactic. Any thoughts from you or the other NL guru's on this site would be appreciated. Thanks, Steve | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Controversial no-limit guidelines, Mike Caro, 5. Sep 2003 11:05 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 5. Sep 2003 05:46 shorn wrote: > Mike- > > I am interested to ask if your theories also apply to Pot Limit as well. In > studying Cloutier's book, it seems he advocates betting and raising the size of the > pot at all times in order to never give away your hand by betting patterns. However, > after listening to your piece, I am now questioning that tactic. > > Any thoughts from you or the other NL guru's on this site would be appreciated. > > Thanks, > > Steve Hi, Steve -- Yes, it applies to pot limit, as well. But T.J.'s advice of always making the same-size bet can be practical. That's because it's difficult to gauge the strength of your hand and then randomize the size of a bet in a way that means stronger hands average higher wagers. In the real world, you wouldn't necessarily be sacrificing a great deal by following the one-size advice. However, the method I described is stronger against actual opponents -- and certainly better if opponents can be manipulated through deception. Oddly, if you follow my advice to "sell" a hand for as much as you can beyond what is a fair (break-even) calling price to your opponent, then on non-final rounds you sometimes will be betting LESS with huge hands that are safe and MORE with vulnerable hands for protection. So, you won't always average bigger bets with bigger hands, but -- in general -- you will; otherwise you'd be standing poker upside down logically. And, sometimes, you won't want to bet at all with unbeatable hands until the final round, when you're last to act and can't hope for someone else to improve or to do the betting for you. Straight Flushes, Mike Caro | ||
| 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 |
|