|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 12/1/2008 3:10:10 PM PACIFIC |
 Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, David Harris, 6. Dec 2003 22:31 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| It is a given that as the button moves around the table that a winning player has to progressively tighten the requirements for starting hands. Question: Is this progression linear or parabolic? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, Blade, 6. Dec 2003 22:37 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Closer to linear but that is really missing alot. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, David Harris, 7. Dec 2003 00:01 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I have done a LOT of research on this and my surmise was that it is linear, also. Yes, that misses a lot. Wait for my book and start charts. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, Schuster, 7. Dec 2003 01:00 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I've thought for a good few minutes on what I should make of this. You could probably model it exponentially, or with a super large order polynomial, but what is the point? Starting hand values change based on the game. Using some function to "fine tune" a start chart is going to accomplish very little. Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, David Harris, 7. Dec 2003 09:20 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| It would seem that specifying "low-limit" would have limited the range of the question. After beating all the Hold'em simulations that I have so far been able to obtain and then taking the same strategy to the live game and averaging over four BB/hr. would seem to me to not be a waste of time. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, Smokey27, 7. Dec 2003 19:20 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I am curious as to your flop seen %. Mine is 18% over 3800 hands at 2 4. I avg. a mere 3 bb per hour. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, David Harris, 8. Dec 2003 13:22 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I do not have any statistics on what % of typical hands qualify for a wager. At a full table my sense is that I play an average of a little more that one hand per round. The great majority of my computer testing involved Turbo Texas Hold'em, by Wilson Software. The repeatable deals available are not typical. There are many more 'playable hands in each of his sequences. When I first started playing in live games, in Amsterdam, even though I was ahead quite nicely, I was convinced that I was having a terrible run of cards, in that I had so few hands that qualified as 'playable.' I like your "3 BB/hr." though. I would be interested in knowing where your honed your skills (computer simulations, on-line play, home games, etc.). | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, Smokey27, 8. Dec 2003 14:44 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I avg 18% of flops seen online at party poker 2-4,3-6 and using wilsons. I used wilsons extensively to determine how i play, along with reading all the books i could find. I also keep track of my 'mistakes' when i miss play a hand tha costs me bets, or even a whole pot this amount comes out to 3-4 bb an hour so I surmise that if I played perfect I could make 7 bb an hour. I am curios that if you can avg 4 bb an hour how many hours have you played and what are your starting standards, I want to compare them to mine and see where they differ. Here are my standards early limp with AQ, AK, 88-99, raise with AA and KK. I will play AJ and KQ if the game is passive if not i fold them up front. I only play suited aces, sutied connectors and low pairs if i have three limpers in fornt of me (with the blinds it equals 5 to 1). In middle late i will call with trash like K10, KJ, A10 etc. if it is not raised. I will fold these hands if it comes back two bets or more to me same as the smaller pairs and suited connectors unless it is ridiulous like 7-8 handed. I am even tighter after the flop, i do not draw to str8s or flushes with a paired board nor due i draw to str8s if a flush draw is posssible. Rarey call with middle pair or an underpair and I will fold top pair overpair on turn raises. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, LJH, 7. Dec 2003 19:26 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| DAVID, WRONG ABOUT THE GIVEN. THE LATER YOU ARE THE LOWER YOUR STARTING REQUIREMENTS. LJH | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, David Harris, 8. Dec 2003 16:33 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 7. Dec 2003 19:26 LJH wrote: > DAVID, WRONG ABOUT THE GIVEN. THE LATER YOU ARE THE LOWER YOUR STARTING REQUIREMENTS. > LJH The Big Blind offers the most card combinations with a positive expectancy (EV). Next comes the Small Blind, and then the the Button. This continues until finally, the Gun position offers the least card combinations with a positive EV. That is what I was referring to when I referred to the "given" and is my understanding of the game. My original question was: Is this line straight or is it curved? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, noiseboy, 8. Dec 2003 13:33 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Well neither, different types of hands go up or down based on different factors, especially aggression and number of opponents. There isn't really a pattern, it's a complex system based on how many opponents, what type of opponents, how much raising, how many cold callers does an EP raise get, etc... Most hand charts are fairly useless except as a tool for a beginner to get a general grasp on what type of hands to play, but shouldn't be viewed as if they were chiseled onto stone tablets and brought down by Moses. I'm becoming more and more of the opinion that you should just look at all of the hands individually, sure group them by type but still look at the individual qualities of each one within the type, and not just look at them as pre-flop entities, but with how they relate to strategy post-flop. It's easy to draw a line and say something like "don't play Ax unless it's suited in a multi-way pot" but there are exeptions to almost any rule you can come up with, for instance what if you have A6o it's folded to you at the cuttoff, you see the button ready to muck his hand and the blinds are weak defenders? Raise! Even a rule like "don't play 72o because it's the crummiest hand in holdem" will have exceptions. In an unraised pot, you are going to end up playing trash out of position whether you like it or not, and sometimes you will hit a flop to it, so you even have to have a handle on how to play 72; what's a good flop, what's a flop where you are probably best but extremely vulnerable (like flopping bottom two pair). You need to know these things and be ready for the situations that come up. The great thing about holdem is that there aren't that many unique starting hands and you actually CAN look at all of them. For instance, each of the pairs has some unique characteristics, 10s and 55s for instance make it less likely that there will be any straights that you don't have a piece of. A pair of AA doesn't care how many opponents you have, if played correctly it will win money regardless, but with a pair like 99 you generally want shorthanded or you want lots of players. With one or two opponents it plays like a big pair, with a lot of opponents it's more like a small pair. A pair of QQs is call a "big pair", but what if it's capped before it gets to you? Not so big now, is it? You might have to flop a Q to even continue past the flop, unless the capper is a known maniac. Anyway, my point is just that hands cannot really be separated from the situations in which you play them, which explains why ANY stating hands chart or system will have defects. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, David Harris, 8. Dec 2003 16:49 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Well, I certainly agree that there will be defects, but my charts work much better than my memory! For example: When the button is two places to my left, should I have to remember that, when the pot is called, I am quite sure that I can call profitably with 7-6s, but should fold 6-5s? I have enough to do without trying to remember thousands of possibilities, when estimating the EV of my hand. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, Palinya, 12. Dec 2003 16:21 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 8. Dec 2003 16:49 David Harris wrote: > Well, I certainly agree that there will be defects, but my charts work much better than my > memory! For example: When the button is two places to my left, should I have to remember > that, when the pot is called, I am quite sure that I can call profitably with 7-6s, but > should fold 6-5s? The thing is a chart can't tell you this! It totally completely depends on the texture of the game. 76s might not be okay to play at all in some games while 65s might be okay to limp in with from EP with only 1 caller. A chart can never replace judgement. You have to learn the strengths and weakness of starting hands, positions and the people at the table. Then you combine all these things with the information of how people have acted this hand and what is going on in the game (who is getting good cards, who is tilting, who is bluffing, etc) and put them all together and come out with the best decision | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, David Harris, 8. Dec 2003 17:06 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| As to your statement that a 7-2 off-suit being playable, the only time that I would want to play it is when is get to play for "free," in a called pot, in the Big Blind. Do you ever play this hand elsewhere, with the exception of an opponent, in a severely incapacitated state? (That was meant as a joke). | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, Boftx, 8. Dec 2003 17:26 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Once, as a joke, an opponent and I, after several comments about how we should have kept our trash(72o, 93o, etc), mutually agreed and declared that from then on he would play every 72 hand he got and I would play every 93. You could see the effect on the whole table every time the board had any of those cards show up and we were in the pot. It's amazing what you can bluff at after making a statement like that. Obviously this is not a winning strategy, and we had to play our butts off just to stay even, but it was a lot of fun for an hour or so. BTW, this was an online 2/4 game, after too many drinks by everyone I think. Jim | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, noiseboy, 12. Dec 2003 15:16 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Actually, I might play it once in awhile in a No Limit Game. The value of hands like 72o is that they have no value! I know that sounds weird, but you are often better off bluffing with complete garbage than something medium. Let's say you have a pair of TT's but the flop comes down real bad with overcards, suits, whatever. You may not want to bluff because you have something you can showdown and possibly win with. With total crap you are free to bluff to your hearts content, because if you are wrong and the bluff does not succeed, then you can easily get away, and you don't have to worry that maybe you threw away a winner. Another advantage trash has in NL, is that you won't trap yourself. A hand like KT for instance is dangerous to bluff with because you have to worry about ATs, AK, AA, KK, KQ, KJ, etc..., even if you flop AKK, you still could lose all your chips with trip Ks. If you have something trashy like 75o and you flop two fives with an A, you are the one who may have someone with AK or AQ trapped for all their chips. And if you get caught trying to steal, you miss the flop, you can release trash with the greatest of ease. Ok, I know I'm kind've missing your point since you are mostly talking about limit poker. In limit, you should usually only play 72o for free in the BB, unless of course you have weak players in both blinds, where you might try a button steal if you think it will succeed enough to be profitable. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Correct starting hands in low-limit Hold-'em, noiseboy, 12. Dec 2003 15:24 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Also, if the game is short handed, you need to outright bluff once in awhile. If you always bet when you have something, and check when you don't, you become too easy to read in short handed play, and you will get bluffed out of pots when you have nothing, and people won't call you when you have something unless they have something better. You might use game theory and just pick one or two trash hands that you always play, to randomize your otherwise solid play. Anyway, I guess my point is that whenever you don't think your opponent has anything, and they seem weak, you should bet no matter what your cards. Put your hand in the cookie jar whenever nobody is guarding it. This of course doesn't work in lower limit games where people call all the time. | ||
| 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 |
|