|
|
#21
07-30-2006, 09:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Implied Odds in NL, the Stewart Reuben Theory
Nit picking, 5/10 I believe refers to live games as PL and NL poker was certainly written before the age of online poker. In live games, stacks are sometimes shallower, except for those unlimited buy-in games, and 3-8 would have you playing almost no hands.
|
|
#22
07-30-2006, 09:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Implied Odds in NL, the Stewart Reuben Theory
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] it was interesting that matt flynn came on today and said that he thinks the 5/10 rule sucks and he uses a rule of 3-8. wonder if this will be in the SSNL book. [/ QUOTE ] Sweet, I use this. I think 10% is rubbish. [/ QUOTE ] i think not being able to call a 4xBB raise when the effective stacks are 100BB is rubbish [/ QUOTE ] Why would you not be able to do this using a 3/8 rule?
|
|
#23
07-30-2006, 10:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Implied Odds in NL, the Stewart Reuben Theory
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] it was interesting that matt flynn came on today and said that he thinks the 5/10 rule sucks and he uses a rule of 3-8. wonder if this will be in the SSNL book. [/ QUOTE ] Sweet, I use this. I think 10% is rubbish. [/ QUOTE ] i think not being able to call a 4xBB raise when the effective stacks are 100BB is rubbish [/ QUOTE ] Why would you not be able to do this using a 3/8 rule? [/ QUOTE ] that would be 4% and against an unknown u would have to muck against an unknown u would have to muck to a 3xBB raise aswell unless u had a slight read or some other ppl were going to come along. even to call a min raise it would have to be 67BB effective stacks. also r we just talking about 22-66 here? or do we think 77-88 and 99-JJ should be considered differently? obviously 99-JJ are different...bout how different?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
