|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 11/23/2008 5:08:56 AM PACIFIC |
 The Edge Part of the Recurring Sum, Rick Walo Jr, 29. Oct 2003 06:37 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Here's a question for Roy, or anyone else who uses this equation (consciously, that is) to put the game in better perspective. I have read in Roy's column in CardPlayer (Real Poker) about how the product of net edge times volume equals expectation, and the sum of expectations over time equals earn. This is a simple equation to conceptualize. Especially the volume part, as it is usually easy enough to get good money in, and keep bad money out. It's the edge part of the equation that confuses me,and to no-one's surprise either. Roy acknowledges in the column that the edge part of the equation confuses many players because it CANNOT be quantified, as there are simply too many variables involved. But while edge can't be QUANTIFIED it can be ASSESSED(sp?). My question to you Roy, or any others , is how do you go about assessing your edge. To clarify, I'm not asking for odds, statistics, mathematical edge. That is easy enough to find on the internet these days. No, what I'm asking is how do you classify that non-mathematical variable that is so important to the recurring field?? If this helps, usually when I'm in a position to assess a hand's edge, my thinking usually follows along the lines of either "I'm in a great spot here, I need to be cautious, or, I'm in trouble." This is all based on a variety of factors, of course. Did I miss the boat entirely, or am I on the right track here?? I'm sorry this ended up being a long post, but it's a very important question with some seriously profitable answers. Any help would be most appreciated. Thanks Rick Walo Jr. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: The Edge Part of the Recurring Sum, Schuster, 29. Oct 2003 10:38 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Check out Roy's post in the Odds and Statistics section entitled, "Odds are not just math equations". I think that is what you are looking for, but if it doesn't fill in the entire picture, don't hesitate to post again about what you still want to know. Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: The Edge Part of the Recurring Sum, shorn, 29. Oct 2003 10:43 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I could be wrong, but I thought that a big piece of the edge equation had to do with your ability to assess your skill level relative to the other players at the table, most notable being able to outplay them after the flop. IMO, this is the biggest part of being able to determine whether or not a certain hand from a certain position has positive expectation to it or not. So, it comes down to game/table selection more than anything else. Roy- If this is way off base, please straighten me out here. Thanks, Steve | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: The Edge Part of the Recurring Sum, Phish, 29. Oct 2003 13:05 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| This is an excellent question. Often times, when I'm playing (especially when the game gets real short) I consciously try to ascertain the specific weaknesses of my individual opponents to determine whether the game is worth playing. I think this is crucial if you're to play heads-up or even three-handed, but it's also useful with more players. The biggest weakness I look for is whether my opponent has any tendencies to lay down a winner. This is a potential hugh leak that I can exploit. For example, if I notice that my opponent will very often call a bet or raise on the turn, but fold on the river. I will fire away on the river. Or if he will bet the turn but will fold to a raise when a scare card hits, then that's what I'll do. Or perhaps when he checkraises the flop, then he'll almost never fold, but if he just bets out on the flop, it's possible to play him off the hand, then that's how I'll play him. etc. Other major weaknesses that I look for are: is he too predictible (bets or raises only when he has something and almost never bluffs)? Is he too passive (doesn't push his marginals enough, doesn't get aggressive with his draws?) Some 'weaknesses' that I don't think would give me enough of an edge to continue playing: too loose pre-flop (in my opinion, in a 3 or 2 handed game, an opponent that plays too loose is not making enough of a mistake to bother playing with). too aggressive (he's simply more dangerous and unpredictible). In general, I prefer my opponents passive and predictible. But in a full game, playing too loose pre-flop and post-flop are major weaknesses and you want to play with those types of players. Of course, the ideal opponent are the clueless ones just off the bacarat table with a big score. | ||
| 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 |
|