Terms & Conditions

Internet Magazine

Non–US new players
Get five 2+2 books


Order Books
Book Translations
Forum Login
 
 
Expand All   Collapse All

 Two Plus Two 
2+2 Magazine Forum
Special Sklansky Forum
2+2 Pokercast
About the Forums

 General Poker Discussion 
Beginners Questions
Books and Publications
Televised Poker
News, Views, and Gossip
Brick and Mortar
Home Poker
Beats, Brags, and Variance
Poker Theory
Poker Legislation

 Coaching/Training 
StoxPoker
DeucesCracked

 German Forums 
Poker Allgemein
Strategie: Holdem NL cash
Strategie: Sonstige
Internet/Online
BBV
Small Talk
German Poker News

 French Forums 
Forum francophone
Strategie
BBV (French)

 Limit Texas Hold'em 
High Stakes Limit
Medium Stakes Limit
Small Stakes Limit
Micro Stakes Limit
Mid-High Short-handed
Small Stakes Shorthanded
Limit––>NL

 PL/NL Texas Hold'em 
High Stakes
Medium Stakes
Small Stakes
Micro Stakes
Small-High Full Ring
Micro Full Ring

 Tournament Poker 
Small Stakes MTT
High Stakes MTT
MTT Community
STT Strategy
Tournament Circuit

 Other Poker 
Omaha/8
Omaha High
Stud
Heads Up Poker
Other Poker Games

 General Gambling 
Probability
Psychology
Sports Betting
Other Gambling Games
Entertainment Betting

 Internet Gambling 
Internet Gambling
Internet Bonuses
Affiliates/RakeBack
Software

 2+2 Communities 
Other Other Topics
The Lounge: Discussion+Review
El Diablo's General Discussion
BBV4Life

 Other Topics 
Golf
Sporting Events
Politics
Business, Finance, and Investing
Travel
Science, Math, and Philosophy
Health and Fitness
Student Life
Puzzles and Other Games
Video Games
Laughs or Links!
Computer Technical Help
Sponsored Support Forums
RakebackNetwork
RakeReduction.com
Other Links
Books
Authors
Abbreviations
Calendar
Order Books
Books by Others
Favorite Links
Feedback
Advertising Information
Home
Posting Hints
Privacy Notice
Forum Archives

The 2+2 Forums

Before using this Forum, please refer to the Terms and Conditions (Last modified: 2/26/2006)

Be sure to read the   Two Plus Two Internet Magazine

This is an archive. The main forums are here

These forums are read only.


 
UBB.threads™ Groupee, Inc.

Coaching/Training >> Stoxpoker.com

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | >> (show all)
Hobbs.
Ravishing


Reged: 05/23/05
Posts: 5095
Loc: Not Boston
Re: Bryce is "In the Well" [Re: The Bryce]
      #12708036 - 10/28/07 06:53 PM

Bryce, at what limits do think a solid HU LHE player can show a profit without the rake being too oppressive? I guess it comes down to estimating expected winrate versus effective rake paid, but do you have some ballpark numbers?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
The BryceModerator
Carpal \'Tunnel


Reged: 10/03/05
Posts: 3491
Loc: stoxpoker
Re: Bryce is "In the Well" [Re: Hobbs.]
      #12708322 - 10/28/07 07:12 PM

Quote:

Bryce, at what limits do think a solid HU LHE player can show a profit without the rake being too oppressive? I guess it comes down to estimating expected winrate versus effective rake paid, but do you have some ballpark numbers?




I'm not 100% sure this is the right answer to your question, but I remember that at 5/10 rake was something like 2.2BB/100 and at 10/20 it was something like 1.2BB/100. At the lower limits it exceeds 3BB/100. Where you're going to make the most money will always depend on the players at the limits and your own skill level. If you were rolled for either and 10/20 players weren't much better than 5/10 players you'd certainly want to run the higher limit, if you could beat the 5/10 players for three times as much as the 10/20 players you might want to run that instead, etc. The important thing to note is that as you move up through the lower limits, even though you may find the action gets quite a bit tougher higher up, you do get a pretty substantial rake subsidy, so you don't need to beat 10/20 as "hard" as 5/10 to show the same winrate.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
yellowjack
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 11/16/04
Posts: 2152
Loc: fighting -EV
Re: Bryce is "In the Well" [Re: The Bryce]
      #12710510 - 10/28/07 09:49 PM

Bryce,

You mentioned that you need to know opponent tendencies in order to get a good grasp of the math. Did you find that getting this information cost you money in the short-run because you were playing against tough opponents?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
StoxPokerModerator
member


Reged: 09/19/07
Posts: 120
Re: Bryce is "In the Well" [Re: yellowjack]
      #12711434 - 10/28/07 10:55 PM

Quote:

Bryce,

You mentioned that you need to know opponent tendencies in order to get a good grasp of the math. Did you find that getting this information cost you money in the short-run because you were playing against tough opponents?




I don't usually do this but . . . Really good question!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
The BryceModerator
Carpal \'Tunnel


Reged: 10/03/05
Posts: 3491
Loc: stoxpoker
Re: Bryce is "In the Well" [Re: yellowjack]
      #12714638 - 10/29/07 03:46 AM

Quote:

Bryce,

You mentioned that you need to know opponent tendencies in order to get a good grasp of the math. Did you find that getting this information cost you money in the short-run because you were playing against tough opponents?




Getting a good grasp of mathematics and finding the best line based on assumptions is something completely independently of what you assume your opponents are doing, but the thing is if your assumptions are wildly inaccurate then having the best lines based on those assumptions still won't be very valuable. The opposite is true, too, wherein if you have very accurate assumptions about what your opponents are likely to do but sub-optimal lines you'll leave a lot of money on the table.

So the math does nothing to determining what people are likely to do, but if I were to go and play a game where I could often easily find the best line based on my assumptions but my assumptions about what people would do were inaccurate due to lack of experience I wouldn't be terribly proficient at that game. For example, even if my NL game were as mathematically developed as my LHE game I still wouldn't be able to play it at as high of a level due to the lack of experience.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
kickabuck
old hand


Reged: 11/15/05
Posts: 799
Re: Bryce is "In the Well" [Re: The Bryce]
      #12714967 - 10/29/07 04:33 AM

Thank you for your reply to my queries. I must confess in my haste to post at having the good fortune of having your attention, I butchered the first question, rather than "virtually unexploitable", I should have written are you approaching "perfect poker". Although asking the question probably unnecessary, really I am convinced that you are, that it is in fact possible if one masters the math and excels at making correct assumptions to play 'perfect poker'.

I would like to ask just one more question, and will not abuse this 'well' privilege again, no worries . Grasping the math consumes me, to the point that it is what I think about when I wake up and keeps me awake at night. Unfortunately I am poorly educated, and although your insights on Stoxpoker have improved my game immeasurably and given me the wherewithal to conceptualize what needs to be done, I am at a loss as to how to proceed.

For example, your 'Open Source Notebook' thread on Stoxpoker was eye opening, yet I am at a loss as to how to make the necessary calculations given the assumptions you make(let's say your not checkraising a 569 flop when having defended the big blind, per your AIM conversation with Stox). I understand your thought processes, but am clueless as to how to derive the numbers. Being uneducated, would you recommend hiring a mathematician to crunch numbers/give me the proper equations to use/become adept with Excel/ etc? Or can we at Stoxpoker expect you to further expand on your applying math in some common situations given accurate assumptions? Thank you for your time Bryce, this subject is all consuming and quite frustrating for me, I feel as though I am on the cusp of great things yet clueless as to how to take that first step.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Abbaddabba
old hand


Reged: 07/06/05
Posts: 827
Re: Bryce is "In the Well" [Re: yellowjack]
      #12715811 - 10/29/07 07:17 AM

firstly (to settle an argument i had with another ap midstakes guy), what is your vpip on the button and in the big blind? clearly it varies, so let's say against an opponent who plays well preflop and mediocre postflop. just a rough figure will do.

second, have you ever negotiated a handicap for heads up matches? i have seen a few people do this; usually both sides are competent players. if you have, how do you gauge the competence of the other person or negotiate what the handicap should be set at ie: 5 bet payment for a 50 bet freezeout.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Acein8ter
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 07/09/06
Posts: 1754
Loc: Floating you
Re: Bryce is "In the Well" [Re: Abbaddabba]
      #12717093 - 10/29/07 10:34 AM

I find that playing AA in EP (UTG or UTG+1) can be pretty tricky.

Let say in 100nl Full ring play that you have AA UTG and raise it 3xbb. It is possible to get 4 or more callers to see a flop. (No one 3 bet) Lets say that 2 of them called with lower pairs like 44 and 77 and the other two called with hands like KQo and JTs.

There is a decent chance that your AA is not the best hand after the flop, whatever it is. What do you think about this situation? Based on the texture of the flop, do you just go ahead and fire 3/4 pot? And if you get 3 bet by a late position player, do you shut down? (Depending upon your previous reads of the player)

I know you can raise 4x, 5x+ w/AA UTG, but that starts to telegraph your hand. Most observant players will definetly put you on QQ+ or AK.

At 100nl, a lot of players will call $3 to see a flop and hope to hit 2 pair +. You see LAG's doing this w/76s (basically any suited connector over 56), one gappers, two gappers, Ax, Ax(s), Kx(s))

I've laid down AA post flop before, and it's tough to do. You would think that having AA in EP is easy, but I'm sure it's a hand that a lot of people have been stacked quite a few times with it.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
The BryceModerator
Carpal \'Tunnel


Reged: 10/03/05
Posts: 3491
Loc: stoxpoker
Re: Bryce is "In the Well" [Re: kickabuck]
      #12720087 - 10/29/07 02:43 PM

Quote:

Thank you for your reply to my queries. I must confess in my haste to post at having the good fortune of having your attention, I butchered the first question, rather than "virtually unexploitable", I should have written are you approaching "perfect poker". Although asking the question probably unnecessary, really I am convinced that you are, that it is in fact possible if one masters the math and excels at making correct assumptions to play 'perfect poker'.

I would like to ask just one more question, and will not abuse this 'well' privilege again, no worries . Grasping the math consumes me, to the point that it is what I think about when I wake up and keeps me awake at night. Unfortunately I am poorly educated, and although your insights on Stoxpoker have improved my game immeasurably and given me the wherewithal to conceptualize what needs to be done, I am at a loss as to how to proceed.

For example, your 'Open Source Notebook' thread on Stoxpoker was eye opening, yet I am at a loss as to how to make the necessary calculations given the assumptions you make(let's say your not checkraising a 569 flop when having defended the big blind, per your AIM conversation with Stox). I understand your thought processes, but am clueless as to how to derive the numbers. Being uneducated, would you recommend hiring a mathematician to crunch numbers/give me the proper equations to use/become adept with Excel/ etc? Or can we at Stoxpoker expect you to further expand on your applying math in some common situations given accurate assumptions? Thank you for your time Bryce, this subject is all consuming and quite frustrating for me, I feel as though I am on the cusp of great things yet clueless as to how to take that first step.




Again, with the math it's just something you need to start working with and eventually it becomes much easier to handle. One thing that I would note is that if you're unsure on how to solve a question you have mathematically that might be something you'd really want to get on a message board and ask other players about, and I've been saying for a while now that this sort of discussion would be much more valuable than the ones based in the typical "what do you think my opponent has here?" angle.

Quote:

firstly (to settle an argument i had with another ap midstakes guy), what is your vpip on the button and in the big blind? clearly it varies, so let's say against an opponent who plays well preflop and mediocre postflop. just a rough figure will do.

second, have you ever negotiated a handicap for heads up matches? i have seen a few people do this; usually both sides are competent players. if you have, how do you gauge the competence of the other person or negotiate what the handicap should be set at ie: 5 bet payment for a 50 bet freezeout.




Firstly, assuming that you mean for HU, I typically run around 90-100% of my hands in the SB, and typically defend about 90% of my hands in the BB, though occasionally more.

I've never done a handicapped match, though it has come to mind. Right now there's enough indiscriminate action running around the high stakes that I don't need to offer this sort of thing to get action.

Quote:

I find that playing AA in EP (UTG or UTG+1) can be pretty tricky.

Let say in 100nl Full ring play that you have AA UTG and raise it 3xbb. It is possible to get 4 or more callers to see a flop. (No one 3 bet) Lets say that 2 of them called with lower pairs like 44 and 77 and the other two called with hands like KQo and JTs.

There is a decent chance that your AA is not the best hand after the flop, whatever it is. What do you think about this situation? Based on the texture of the flop, do you just go ahead and fire 3/4 pot? And if you get 3 bet by a late position player, do you shut down? (Depending upon your previous reads of the player)

I know you can raise 4x, 5x+ w/AA UTG, but that starts to telegraph your hand. Most observant players will definetly put you on QQ+ or AK.

At 100nl, a lot of players will call $3 to see a flop and hope to hit 2 pair +. You see LAG's doing this w/76s (basically any suited connector over 56), one gappers, two gappers, Ax, Ax(s), Kx(s))

I've laid down AA post flop before, and it's tough to do. You would think that having AA in EP is easy, but I'm sure it's a hand that a lot of people have been stacked quite a few times with it.





I do play a bit of HU NL, but ring NL is certainly not my specialty. Whether or not it's correct to lay a hand down postflop will always depend on context, but if you find that a lot of people in these games are cold-calling EP raises I think you may want to consider bumping up your EP raise size.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Norrmusty
stranger


Reged: 05/21/05
Posts: 3
Re: Bryce is "In the Well" [Re: The Bryce]
      #12725402 - 10/29/07 08:42 PM

I have to queestions regarding HU limit holdem.

1. In which situations and under what circumstances do you find donking the flop after having called the preflop raise to be a good play.

2. In which situations and under what circumstances do you find checking behind on the flop after having raised preflop from the sb to be a good play.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | >> (show all)



Extra information
0 registered and 1 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Scotty_12, stoxtrader, StoxPoker, leatherass, The Bryce, Collin Moshman, Mike Haven 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 8249

Rate this topic

Jump to

contact us 2+2 Publishing

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5


Message Boards and Forums Directory

Pages provided by ConJelCo