|
|
#11
04-13-2007, 03:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Adding volatility to early levels of 4/180\'s
[ QUOTE ]
In all honesty, you don't want to end up coinflipping for your stack in the first orbit with a medium pair. [/ QUOTE ] I'm thinking that I actually do. The play is so bad during the first hour, that I want to get all of the chips available to me when VERY profitable situations arise. A lot of these donks get up to 4,000 in chips in the first couple orbits and then don't make it to the break. I want those chips. So if I take a couple coinflips early that will lead me to double up off of a bigger stack when I'm a bigger stack, then I think it would be hugely $ev. As a sidenote, 4/180's pop up all the time. Probably one every 10 minutes during peak hours. In additon, I am adequately bankrolled for the buy-in- always keeping 100 buyins available. So adding some volatilty will not affect my bankroll severely. 
|
|
#12
04-13-2007, 03:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Adding volatility to early levels of 4/180\'s
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] In all honesty, you don't want to end up coinflipping for your stack in the first orbit with a medium pair. [/ QUOTE ] I'm thinking that I actually do. The play is so bad during the first hour, that I want to get all of the chips available to me when VERY profitable situations arise. [/ QUOTE ] 50/50 flips are never VERY profitable without overlay. This is a fundamental concept. [ QUOTE ] A lot of these donks get up to 4,000 in chips in the first couple orbits and then don't make it to the break. I want those chips. So if I take a couple coinflips early that will lead me to double up off of a bigger stack when I'm a bigger stack, then I think it would be hugely $ev. [/ QUOTE ] Cev and $ev are so far apart at the early stage of a tournament that $ev is completely irrelevant. Generally, in the first levels a $4/180, you are talking about the difference between $5 and $5.50 worth of equity in a $720 prizepool. Doubling your stack in the first level does not double your $ equity. In addition, you say "a lot of these donks" as if you can immediately exclude yourself from that statement, yet your rationale in this thread is identical to the way they think. [ QUOTE ] As a sidenote, 4/180's pop up all the time. Probably one every 10 minutes during peak hours. In additon, I am adequately bankrolled for the buy-in- always keeping 100 buyins available. So adding some volatilty will not affect my bankroll severely. [/ QUOTE ] It will affect your ROI and ITM rates. Those have a direct effect on your bankroll in the long run.
|
|
#13
04-13-2007, 03:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Adding volatility to early levels of 4/180\'s
I think his idea is that if doubles up early on, then he will be able to get full value from a doubled up donk who stacks off to him. If he doesn't double up early on, he can only get his buy in's worth. Or put another way, He believes it's worth a 50/50 flip to double to 3,000 chips because now he can double up to 6,000 when his edge comes along, as opposed to only being able to double up to 3,000.
Is that what you are trying to say? I personally haven't found much real value in doubling up early on- you really can't push anyone around in these (they call everything). I basically take the approch of wait for a a hand, profit. Of course, when the hand doesn't come I resort to pushing over limpers who call with crappy hands. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#14
04-13-2007, 04:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Adding volatility to early levels of 4/180\'s
[ QUOTE ]
I personally haven't found much real value in doubling up early on- you really can't push anyone around in these (they call everything). I basically take the approch of wait for a a hand, profit. Of course, when the hand doesn't come I resort to pushing over limpers who call with crappy hands. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Shhh..my secret play! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
|
|
#15
04-13-2007, 04:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Adding volatility to early levels of 4/180\'s
[ QUOTE ]
50/50 flips are never VERY profitable without overlay. This is a fundamental concept [/ QUOTE ] You misunderstood. I didn't mean that 50/50 flips are profitable. I meant that when I get AA and get a call from KJ- THAT is very profitable. If I have 3,000 in chips when this happens, as does the villian, then the coinflip I took earlier has benfited in an extra $3,000 that I received in the later, VERY profitable hand. String theory. [ QUOTE ] In addition, you say "a lot of these donks" as if you can immediately exclude yourself from that statement, yet your rationale in this thread is identical to the way they think [/ QUOTE ] Although this sounds like an insult- the kind of thing that keeps newbies from posting- I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. The fact that I am at this forum proves that I do not think like them. The fact that I am a winning player proves that I do not think like them. Oh and this little fact: 7 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]7 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 55% equity A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]J [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 45% equity So when they call 72 bbs to win 76.5 bbs they need 48.5% equity and are only getting 45% on THIS specific hand. Now if I tell them that my range is 77+, AK- then they have 33% equity. So they are giving up 15% in the long run against my pushing range- which means I have induced a huge mistake. Isn't that a huge part of poker- inducing mistakes? Jeff, you summarized my thoughts exactly.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
