THE FORUMS


German ForumsGeneral DiscussionStrategyFrench Forum

Go Back   PokerTips.org Forums > Strategy > No-Limit Hold'em Ring Games

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Feb 17, 2007, 4:26am   #11
the_fox31
Resident Fox
 
the_fox31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,314
Reputation: 1002
the_fox31 has much to be proud ofthe_fox31 has much to be proud ofthe_fox31 has much to be proud ofthe_fox31 has much to be proud ofthe_fox31 has much to be proud ofthe_fox31 has much to be proud ofthe_fox31 has much to be proud ofthe_fox31 has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik View Post
You raise big pre flop, 2 callers. Flop comes J-9-2 rainbow. Of course you bet the flop big, 1 caller. A 5 on turn and you have to bet strong here too. But now you are re raised all-in. Since you know the raiser is bluffing and semi bluffing frequency you have to call and he win with his J-9. This is not good. Even if your preflop raise where relatively big your opponent ends up winning a pot big enough to justify his loose preflop call.
Not quite. I almost bought this, but it isn't right. For this to make sense, you'll have to conveniently leave out some information in hindsight. If you know he is bluffing and semi bluffing enough, then he doesn't have the odds to call preflop, since he'll be putting his chips in with with nothing/a draw more often than with two pair. If he isn't a LAG (doesn't make crazy bluffs/semibluffs here), then he would have odds if he knew you couldn't lay down AA to him, but you would lay it down since he'd be a TAG.

I didn't explain that well, but suffice to say that if it is +EV to make the call in the first place when you were estimating the chances of bluffing etc then it remains a good call even when you find out whether or not he was bluffing etc.

In the end, as the rest of team ptips has pointed out, you're killing both profit and variance. Variance isn't that dangerous, especially if you have a large win rate. To buy in short, I'd have to know that my opponents will play all the more poorly, since I know that I can do better with a big stack.

Regards
the_fox31 est déconnecté   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Don't like this ad? Register to make it go away!

Old Feb 17, 2007, 4:48am   #12
rickey
Doyle Look-alike
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UTG
Posts: 488
Reputation: 0
rickey
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaggle View Post
This is essentially how Chris ferguson turned that $1 into $20,000 and this short stack style is being used reportedly at the higher buy in levels more and more.One gets a lot more action when one is a short stack and doubling and tribling up is much more common.It would make multi tabling much easier too;but if one goes to Erik's web page it looks like he's making only 2-3 BB/hour/table.When I tried this it was easier to make money;but one was missing out on all the profits from hitting great hands that could destack someone.
Jesus did it purely for BR management, not as a way to reduce a loose players implied odds.

It goes both ways, you know. If you play with a short stack you not only reduce your opponents implied odds, but you reduce your own implied odds as well. And who doesn't like to play a small pair for set value? That's based on implied odds. If you're a short stack you need to muck small-medium pocket pairs because you don't have the implied to play them. So yeah, being a super nit with a short stack can win you money, but this strategy will only get you so far. At some point you'll need to learn how to play poker.
rickey est déconnecté   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 17, 2007, 10:35pm   #13
Petroz
Doyle Look-alike
 
Petroz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 493
Reputation: 10
Petroz is on a distinguished road
Default

I think we're i agreement, this might be profitable but ultimately it's not a good way to learn the game and i think that's what everyone is here for.
__________________
Happiness is found in your kindness.
Petroz est déconnecté   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2007, 2:21pm   #14
Ultima
Flop Artist
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 66
Reputation: 10
Ultima is on a distinguished road
Default

I agree that buyin in with short stacks seems to decrease variance and implied odds.

Recently I busted out of PokerStars playing 25c/50c limit (I posted about this in another thread... how I was having a good roll at Pacific but PokerStars killed me ), but I had already deposited $50 into it and I didn't want to make another $50 deposit, so I played a 10FPP $250 MTT, made about 20 cents, turned that into 75 cents at 2c/4c limit, then a friend lent me $2 so I could play 1c/2c NL.

My strategy right now is to buy in for $1, and play the table until I double/triple up or go bust. I'm not a great NL player esp. postflop, yet, and I sometimes end up donking a large part of my chips away when I really shouldn't have. Then I'll go on tilt and lose the rest of my buy-in. Buying in for $1 instead of $2 or $3 (or $5 the max) reduces my implied odds when I get a nice hand like a set... which actually happened today... but it also prevents me from losing all my chips when I only have a couple of bucks in my bankroll. So far I've been doing good and i'm now at $6.81 after transferring the $2 back to my friend. My first goal is recovering all the money I lost from my deposit


Eventually yes when I have the bankroll to do it, I will want to learn how to play with a big stack. For now, the small stack approach seems like a safer way to get to that bankroll.
Ultima est déconnecté   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2007, 3:13pm   #15
Doza
<=Wannabe maniac=>
 
Doza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Romania
Posts: 1,418
Reputation: 44
Doza is on a distinguished road
Default

Tehnically, 1$ at the 1c/2c tables is still a decent (medium) stack. A regular big stack is 100bb, you're playing with 50, so you still have plenty of room to manouver postflop.

Try playing with 20c-40c and see if you get anywhere.
__________________
blog
Doza est déconnecté   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2007, 9:59pm   #16
Petroz
Doyle Look-alike
 
Petroz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 493
Reputation: 10
Petroz is on a distinguished road
Default

"I agree that buyin in with short stacks seems to decrease variance and implied odds."
I cannot understand how it decreases variance at all. Getting your money in as a 60 40 favourite on the flop you're still going to lose alot of pots. To me this seems a high variance way of avoiding post flop play.

-Petroz
__________________
Happiness is found in your kindness.
Petroz est déconnecté   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2007, 11:02pm   #17
Hustlr
║▌║█║▌║▌││║▌║
 
Hustlr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 3,642
Reputation: 878
Hustlr is a splendid one to beholdHustlr is a splendid one to beholdHustlr is a splendid one to beholdHustlr is a splendid one to beholdHustlr is a splendid one to beholdHustlr is a splendid one to beholdHustlr is a splendid one to behold
Send a message via ICQ to Hustlr Send a message via AIM to Hustlr
Default

My vote for worst spam attempt ever.

I cant even bring myself to delete the post. Well played Erik.
Hustlr est déconnecté   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2007, 2:25am   #18
Snaggle
Professional
 
Snaggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: from the land of the "free"
Posts: 2,853
Reputation: 979
Snaggle is a splendid one to beholdSnaggle is a splendid one to beholdSnaggle is a splendid one to beholdSnaggle is a splendid one to beholdSnaggle is a splendid one to beholdSnaggle is a splendid one to beholdSnaggle is a splendid one to beholdSnaggle is a splendid one to behold
This member received this PokerTips Exclamation Mark for one of a number of reasons: blogging, winning a contest, contributing great content, etc. Keep an eye out for chances to receive one of these by your profile! This member received this PokerTips Exclamation Mark for one of a number of reasons: blogging, winning a contest, contributing great content, etc. Keep an eye out for chances to receive one of these by your profile! This member received this PokerTips Exclamation Mark for one of a number of reasons: blogging, winning a contest, contributing great content, etc. Keep an eye out for chances to receive one of these by your profile! This member received this PokerTips Exclamation Mark for one of a number of reasons: blogging, winning a contest, contributing great content, etc. Keep an eye out for chances to receive one of these by your profile!
Default

Quote:
My vote for worst spam attempt ever.

I cant even bring myself to delete the post. Well played Erik.
Hardly the worse and maybe not a spam attack,as other posters have been allowed to post urls to their poker blogs,this case clearly seems borderline.Has he been banned?


As for the strat Erik at his starting hands guide recommends for SHNL in early position raising:

AA-TT;AKs-AJs;KQs and sometimes 99;ATs;KJs;QJs;JTs and AQ.

For late position he wants one to add:88;KTs;QTs;J9s;98s;AJ and KQ.

He also advises to call raises with all these.Lol,he's one of the players busting someones AA with J9-tell me he's calling with stuff like that with a short stack!
__________________
__________________________________________

Why do people keep typing "GG" when I go AI in the short stack with 72o?
Snaggle est déconnecté   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2007, 3:20am   #19
Lord Mushroom
The Dark Knight
 
Lord Mushroom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 3,568
Reputation: 42
Lord Mushroom is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Petroz View Post
"I agree that buyin in with short stacks seems to decrease variance and implied odds."
I cannot understand how it decreases variance at all. Getting your money in as a 60 40 favourite on the flop you're still going to lose alot of pots. To me this seems a high variance way of avoiding post flop play.
When you play with a shortstack you no longer play for huge pots. Playing only for small pots limits how much you can win or lose per hour, ergo variance is decreased.

When you have AA or KK and another guy has KK/AA you are likely to lose or win your buy-in no matter how big your buy-in is. If your buy-in is small, you will win or lose less, thus variance is decreased.

It is the same thing with other situations where the pot would have been bigger if you had a larger stack.
__________________
(00:42-03:27)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TibA0sQQZw8

The bot has spoken.
Lord Mushroom est déconnecté   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2007, 4:51am   #20
Petroz
Doyle Look-alike
 
Petroz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 493
Reputation: 10
Petroz is on a distinguished road
Default

"My vote for worst spam attempt ever."
Yeh, clearly not his own words, but it became a lively discussion, so there is a silver lining.

There is a thread Notjitsu started about variance:
"And variance isn't about winning and losing, its about the seperation from the expect earn"
http://www.pokertips.org/forums/showthread.php?t=41884

Variance has nothing to do with reducing the amount you stand to lose. Variance is not how much your bankroll ' varies' but how much the outcomes vary. Whether or not you lose big or small if you put your money in as a favourite this will increase your expected earn.

The only way this method will save you money is if you lack post flop ability then this will reduce the edge the opponents who can handle post flop have over you.

With a strategy like this you can easily find your self getting 2:1 odds on a call with a flush draw on the flop which would be +EV but you're going to lose this more often than when you win. With a bigger stack you can lay down and pick a better spot but when short you are forced to call or surrender 1/3 of your stack.

Overall i think this method would find yourself in alot more coinflip type situations which would mean higher variance. In addition you don't get alot of fold equity as a short stack, and you're probably only getting free cards if
A) the player missed and will fold to any bet.
B) you're drawing dead.

I think most players will push with any hand they're willing to invest more money with. Not alot of players will check/call with any pair, they're likely to bet a decent pair and check/fold any rubish pair IMO.

-Petroz
__________________
Happiness is found in your kindness.

Last edited by Petroz; Feb 20, 2007 at 5:20am.
Petroz est déconnecté   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT. The time now is 2:06am. vBulletin 3.7.4 Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.