Sklansky article on PLO in 2+2 internet magazine - Page 4

Rolf Slotboom · #31 08-14-2006, 06:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Rolf,

I am going to respond in this thread again later, however right now I just want to point out that it has steered toward the example of a shallow stack situation, and away from the example given in the article which my comments mostly addresss. And the consideration of showing half your hand is highly relevant in deeper situtations

[/ QUOTE ]

It should be quite obvious that I agree. However, even in this case it is important to get the math / percentages correct, Bluff. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

BTW, don't think that the *only* thing I am interested in is math. However, the math *is* important when analyzing proper plays. And in this case, both Sklansky & you were off in the calculations / percentages - which is why I focused on first correcting what I viewed to be errors before turning to proper play. However, the example that Sklansky gives is actually quite good, even with this calculation error. And some of the points YOU made when it comes to the Sklansky situation were quite good too. It was only your comments regarding the shortstack situations that I had problems with, because they were clearly wrong. Also the fact that you said the difference between the Sklansky calculations & the REAL situation was not all that big or substanial. (Because it was.)

But that's about it. I'm not going to disagree on everything... [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

RoundTower · #32 08-14-2006, 07:42 PM

Rolf,
I am now interested in buying your book. Having read what you wrote for Cardplayer I thought it would be crap. But your posts here and on your website come across well. I hope you continue to post here.
David.

Troll_Inc · #33 08-14-2006, 08:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]
An interesting way to cut across the issue is to focus on how often you will go allin, headsup, when you have put in 25% of your stack preflop. If that figure is 100% then playing aces that fast is simply bad play. (Because you are laying him better than 4 to 1 on his preflop call). And if it isn't 100% then how do you decide? Playing poker of course. But this is the root of the problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the root of my problem, how to play Aces correctly. I've learned a ton in the 4-5 months of reading PLO 2+2 about how not to play aces and new and different ways on how to "take them down". But I never see much about how to win with them.

How to play them poorly.

1. Only raise preflop when you have AAxx
2. Blindly pushing them on the flop (irregardless of how many people see the flop, how deep you are, what the flop is, etc)

How to take them down beyond flopping the nuts.
1. Preflop all in with something like 5678ds
2. Preflop never call with more than 20% of your or opponents stack.
3. Call and get heads up on the flop, push with two pair, or even top pair plus a good straight or flush draw.

But how to play them correctly, I'm kind of lost. Maybe someone could write an article about that; or it will be in Rolf's book.

1. Disguise them with your preflop betting patterns.
2. I guess just play good poker. If you think you are winning on the flop, play them strongly using position and being able to put opponent on a hand.
3-20. ?????

youdidwhat · #34 08-14-2006, 08:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
...learned a ton about how not to play aces and new and different ways on how to "take them down". But I never see much about how to win with them.

[/ QUOTE ]

QOTD.

pete fabrizio · #35 08-14-2006, 11:38 PM

I would only fold here if I were scared of my opponents. There are two considerations here that people aren't discussing much: one is the likelihood that I may be able to steal the pot from the probable aces, and the other is the likelihood that the guy doesn't have aces, but will continue trying to represent them if an ace comes (though this may be a bit more important when stacks are deeper). If I'm optimistic about my ability vis a vis my opps, I'm thinking I'm going to win the pot if he has aces, and I may win a bigger pot if he doesn't.

BriMc · #36 08-14-2006, 11:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Dave,

As to the people who ask about the book: I will discuss *everything*. Not just the nice & in-depth analysis that everyone likes to read, of how you can outplay the opponents because of good reads. No, I will also discuss those boring percentage / odds things that most of you hate - but that are simply imperative to know if you want to perform at the highest possible level. At that level, you just cannot afford to be wrong about the math - this despite the fact that after moving up / getting better, your play will probably be more & more based on reads, moves & exploiting weaknesses & leaks. But they can *only* succeed if the mathematical basis behind your play is in order. If it's not, the players who DO know the math & the percentages to perfection will exploit it & may even beat you - even when YOU play at an expert level, and they may only be marginally good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds good to me. Wish I didn't have to wait till October. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

w_alloy · #37 08-15-2006, 10:05 AM

Rolf,
I had never heard of you before today, and I hardly ever play omaha. I just prordered your book based on your posts in this thread and a little reading on your site. I hope you continue to post here.

BluffTHIS! · #38 08-15-2006, 04:29 PM

Hi Rolf,

OK so let's go back to the original situation and your first reply to my post and the math aspect of it, regarding David's mistake in giving stack sizes which I think are not sigificant to the situation.

You said:

[ QUOTE ]
Quite clearly, I disagree. The difference between 1200 in / 6800 left is quite substantial from 1600 in / 6400 left. It is the difference between putting 15% and putting 20% of your stack in preflop - a HUGE difference when it comes to playing aces.

[/ QUOTE ]

So the question I put to you is how is that 5% difference a "huge" difference that would affect how you should play either this particular AA hand or even a better one perhaps?

Naturally I think the proportion of your stack in and the amount left to bet does indeed matter in a situation, but just not that 5% does, regardless of the obvious multiplicative effect of any bet or portion of same in a pot limit game when deeper stacks are in play. Either playing with or against a very short stack, then I would agree that 5% will indeed make a difference in how one should play, but not with the stack sizes in question.

Silent A · #39 08-15-2006, 05:13 PM

It's not that 20% minus 15% is 5%. It's that 20 is 33% bigger than 15.

Or, to look it another way, if we consider the ratio of remaining stack to bet size:

6400:1600 ---> 4:1
6800:1200 ---> 5.7:1

these are not small differences

BluffTHIS! · #40 08-15-2006, 05:28 PM

Silent,

That is very true as to 4-1 vs. 5.7-1. My contention is that such doesn't matter much to how a hand should be played postflop, as in either case the amount of the remaining stack held by the AA83 hand is not going to offer much implied odds after a flop bet, i.e. for an opponent to call with a pure draw only and be able to get called by another hand trying to redraw on the turn.