Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > General Poker Discussion > Poker Theory
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 10-20-2006, 02:30 PM
wedgeporter wedgeporter is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 14
Default Re: Deep Stack NL Hold\'em Theory

Actually I was speaking of a few specific examples. Sorry that I was not clear about that. I will play the hand when raised only if I have a comfortable stack of chips.
In tournament play, if the raiser is short, he will push the last of his chips when the flop brings 3-3 or 5-5, or even 3-5-x.

I was not trying to say that it is a hand that I want to run hot and cold.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-20-2006, 02:54 PM
gull gull is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 981
Default Re: Deep Stack NL Hold\'em Theory

IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF IMPLIED ODDS. Sure, implied odds increase the value of hands like 53s, but they don't make them winners. No matter how deep the stacks are, T9s will always lose to AK. People who play these hands think they have an edge against the rest of table. Daniel Negreanu said he played 90% of his hands against the fish at the WSOP. But in his last blog, he said he really tightened up on HSP III because his opposition was so tough.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-20-2006, 03:14 PM
Yads Yads is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 2,516
Default Re: Deep Stack NL Hold\'em Theory

It's because they play deeper than the average online game and the fact that the pot starts off with a lot more money in it than a standard cash game due to the ante.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-20-2006, 03:16 PM
RAHZero RAHZero is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Spewtown
Posts: 1,351
Default Re: Deep Stack NL Hold\'em Theory

[ QUOTE ]
IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF IMPLIED ODDS. Sure, implied odds increase the value of hands like 53s, but they don't make them winners. No matter how deep the stacks are, T9s will always lose to AK. People who play these hands think they have an edge against the rest of table. Daniel Negreanu said he played 90% of his hands against the fish at the WSOP. But in his last blog, he said he really tightened up on HSP III because his opposition was so tough.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh dude, that is implied odds. Your implied odds are better against weaker opposition, because they're more likely to pay you off when you hit a monster.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-20-2006, 03:17 PM
Yads Yads is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 2,516
Default Re: Deep Stack NL Hold\'em Theory

[ QUOTE ]
No matter how deep the stacks are, T9s will always lose to AK.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're wrong. If you get 1/20th of your stack in as a 2:1 dog, but then get your opponent to put 19/20ths of his stack in as 4:1 dog or worse, then you win. It's all about trading small mistakes for large mistakes. Making a small mistake against your opponent if he in turn will make a huge mistake against you later in the hand is how you win money in deep stacked cash games.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-20-2006, 04:17 PM
Kimbell175113 Kimbell175113 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The art of losing isn\'t hard to master.
Posts: 2,464
Default Re: Deep Stack NL Hold\'em Theory

There's a $100 ante in that game, too, which is a huge factor in making more hands playable. The initial pot is bigger, related to the big blind, so you're getting significantly better odds both to steal (unlikely at this table, but still) and to limp and/or call small raises.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 -4. The time now is 10:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.