|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 11/23/2008 4:16:15 AM PACIFIC |
 Raked games vs time charge, Snorbolus, 9. Nov 2003 17:20 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I wonder about differences in the optimal strategy for playing raked games compared to time charge games. It seems to me that in raked games one needs to play very much tighter and weaker than in games with a time charge but no rake. Indeed, I suspect that it is essential to do so, because when the pot is raked each bet saved is more valuable than each bet won. In time charge games however, it seems to me, that missed opportunities become more costly than in raked games. How big do others think this difference is? Snorbolus | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Raked games vs time charge, timmer, 9. Nov 2003 18:30 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think you got it right on the money. One more thing is that you need a edge over your opponent of more than 2x the rake amount in heads up on pots that average less than that of a pot that goes over the amount needed to reach the max rake. Anyway you should encourage multi way pots even if it means mucking hands like 88 and 678os. Or limping or check calling with KK or QQ. You would much rather take on a large number of bad opponents than the house rake heads up. A Simplistic Example: say you are playing 7CSHi with a 10% to $4.00 rake and you have K's and I show you that I have Q,s . We both have 2's as our kickers. considering your lack of improvement you should be quite reluctant to bet if I wont fold. Why you might ask because heads up , K's vs Q's, the K's have an advantage of somewhere around 10%. However if you bet 5 and I call 5 there is now $4 in appreciatable profit in the pot. The house gets $1.00. So you bet again and I call now there is 20 in the pot. The house gets $2 of that (Super Mega Awesome Jackpot, you know, and aren't you excited ?)so now there is $7 of appreciable profit in the pot. But the hand is only worth 1.10% of the action but the house has snatched all of your profit plus some of your stake. So now you 10% winner is a big loser. in these games you need about a 30% edge to BREAK EVEN heads up. In other words you are f00ked if the maximum rake is something close to a maximum bet. Hold em aint so bad if the rake is 5% but if it is 10% and the average pot is less that which maxes the rake you need to play very tightly and encourage multiway pots. And people wonder why I don't play the casino LL card rooms much any more. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Raked games vs time charge/ sorry GIGO, timmer, 11. Nov 2003 10:58 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Sorry I made a mistake with the simulator a bad one at that. KdKhs2c vs QdQh2s the kings are a almost a 2: 1 favorite. below is the results of the run. pokenum -mc 500000 -7s kd kh 2c - qd qh 2s 7-card Stud Hi: 500000 sampled outcomes cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV 2c Kd Kh 326367 65.27 173631 34.73 2 0.00 0.653 2s Qd Qh 173631 34.73 326367 65.27 2 0.00 0.347 as we see the KK is 1.8794:1 fav over the Q's with an apparent 30% rake you will still manage a profit per dollar you put in. Now I must see haw bad Ithis mistake cost me . on 9. Nov 2003 18:30 timmer wrote: > I think you got it right on the money. One more thing is that you need a edge over > your opponent of more than 2x the rake amount in heads up on pots that average less > than that of a pot that goes over the amount needed to reach the max rake. Anyway you > should encourage multi way pots even if it means mucking hands like 88 and 678os. Or > limping or check calling with some hands. You would much rather take on a large number > of bad opponents than the house rake heads up. > > A Simplistic Example: > > say you are playing 7CSHi with a 10% to $4.00 rake and you have K's and I show you > that I have Q,s . We both have 2's as our kickers. considering your lack of > improvement you should be quite reluctant to bet if I wont fold. Why you might ask > because heads up , K's vs Q's, the K's have an advantage of somewhere around 10%. > > However if you bet 5 and I call 5 there is now $4 in appreciatable profit in the > pot. The house gets $1.00. So you bet again and I call now there is 20 in the pot. > The house gets $2 of that (Super Mega Awesome Jackpot, you know, and aren't you > excited ?)so now there is $7 of appreciable profit in the pot. But the hand is only > worth 1.10% of the action but the house has snatched all of your profit plus some of > your stake. So now you 10% winner is a big loser. in these games you need about a 30% > edge to BREAK EVEN heads up. > > In other words you are f00ked > > if the maximum rake is something close to a maximum bet. > > Hold em aint so bad if the rake is 5% but if it is 10% and the average pot is less > that which maxes the rake you need to play very tightly and encourage multiway > pots. > > And people wonder why I don't play the casino LL card rooms much any more. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Raked games vs time charge, Mark Gregorich, 9. Nov 2003 22:49 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| In lower limit rake games, you must play very tight (but not weak - play aggressively when you get involved) to beat the rake. I also think its in both players best interest to "chop" the blinds - not an option online, so I would recommend playing much tighter than normal in a blind vs blind situation. I would recommend either raising or folding from the small blind, if its just you and the big blind. Time games are done one of two ways - either everyone pays individually, or there is a "time pot," a designated hand often occurring when a new dealer sits down, in which the winner of the pot pays all the time for the table for the next half hour. In games where everyone pays individually, tight players pay the same amount of rake as loose players (this cuts into the win rates of the winning players). In time pot games, typical of the higher limits, it can dramatically affect the play of a hand or two until time is taken. For example, I will fold AQ in the big blind if I was raised by a decent player in early or middle position, as a big chunk of the pot will go down the hole anyways. Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Raked games vs time charge, Snorbolus, 10. Nov 2003 05:59 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Mark and Timmer, Thanks for your replys. Mark wrote: >..you must play very tight (but not weak - play aggressively when you get >involved.... I am convinced that I need to play both tight and aggressively. However I am less and less convinced that "not weak" is a good strategy. I am not sure about this - that is why I am posting. By weak I mean folding when it is likely, although not certain, that my hand is second best. Perehaps, on the flop, I estimate that I will have the best hand a little under 50% of the time and there is no chance that my opponent will fold a better hand. By not weak (I often say tenatious in my posts), I mean calling in these situations. I feel as if this is currently a major leak in my game. Snorbolus on 9. Nov 2003 22:49 Mark Gregorich wrote: > In lower limit rake games, you must play very tight (but not weak - play aggressively > when you get involved) to beat the rake. I also think its in both players best > interest to "chop" the blinds - not an option online, so I would recommend playing > much tighter than normal in a blind vs blind situation. I would recommend either > raising or folding from the small blind, if its just you and the big blind. > > Time games are done one of two ways - either everyone pays individually, or there is > a "time pot," a designated hand often occurring when a new dealer sits down, in which > the winner of the pot pays all the time for the table for the next half hour. > > In games where everyone pays individually, tight players pay the same amount of rake > as loose players (this cuts into the win rates of the winning players). > > In time pot games, typical of the higher limits, it can dramatically affect the play > of a hand or two until time is taken. For example, I will fold AQ in the big blind > if I was raised by a decent player in early or middle position, as a big chunk of the > pot will go down the hole anyways. > > Mark > | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Raked games vs time charge, Mark Gregorich, 10. Nov 2003 10:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Folding when you have the worst hand is smart, not weak. Sometimes you aren't sure, or you are drawing to the best hand, and in these cases, you must weigh the price the pot is laying you against your chances of either having or making the best hand. There are few sure things. Mark | ||
| 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 |
|