Do you guys ALWAYS wait for the big blind before playing?

[Scary_Tiger]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I should but I rarely wait.

[/ QUOTE ]

[OrigamiSensei]

Here is some more data although it's based on a small sample size. While posting in the CO shows a net loss for me at .25/.50 (-0.05BB/hand) it's a super small loss and much lower in magnitude than my losses in the blinds (around -.25BB/hand in the big blind and -0.09/hand in the small blind). It's insufficient data but certainly enough to make me question the DavidC hypothesis. in any case the overall effect is so small either way I don't think it matters much.

[00Snitch]

[ QUOTE ]

the overall effect is so small either way I don't think it matters much


[/ QUOTE ]

That was my first thought, but lets say your overall winrate is 1bb/100 and your winrate is -0.1bb/hand when you post in the CO. Doesn't that mean it takes you 10 hands to get that back, in which case you should just wait your 7 hands or whatever til the BB comes around.

I don't know if my maths is correct. I don't do maths goot.

[NIX]

Full ring, I'll post in the CO or the seat in front of that. 6-max, I always wait.

[Allday Everyday]

In very good games I think the better players in a game would like to get in that game as soon as possible to outplay the others and profit. But of course I think there would be a point/seat where posting would just have negative expectation.

But I think the idea of posting from late goes beyond having positive expectation for very good players in very good games. I believe that for a standard winning player in a ten (or greater) handed game, posting a big blind from the C/O at the beginning of the session actually has slightly greater positive expectation than posting from BB (then posting in the SB, then getting the button). I think this is mainly due to the difficulty in playing OOP, and having to pay an additional small blind when you post in BB. I think you might also get a very small metagame image benefit in posting, especially if it is a live game.

IMO the EV of posting in the BB (then posting in the SB, then getting the button) and the EV of posting from C/O (the single big blind, not both) in full games are so close that I am happy to do either.

[DavidC]

Depends why I'm playing. Generally yes, because although it's more $/hr to play the hands, it's more BB/100 to wait for the BB, and waiting to max the bb/100 reduces my apparent negative swings.

[OrigamiSensei]

[ QUOTE ]
That was my first thought, but lets say your overall winrate is 1bb/100 and your winrate is -0.1bb/hand when you post in the CO. Doesn't that mean it takes you 10 hands to get that back, in which case you should just wait your 7 hands or whatever til the BB comes around.

I don't know if my maths is correct. I don't do maths goot.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's not that your math abilities are bad, it's just that I don't think anyone has shown the appropriate way to calculate the effect yet. Here is my thought on how one would do the calculations:

1) The proper way to do the comparison is for one "orbit" of play, defined as the position where you posted and rotating through to UTG, ending there. Thus one would calculate an "orbit" that is shorter due to posting in the CO as follows:

WR(posting in CO) + WR(UTG through MP3)

2) Then for a regular orbit it would be the summation of winrate across all positions (and not counting hands where we have posted in the CO), or:

WR(BB) + WR(SB) + WR(Button) + WR(CO when NOT posting) + WR(UTG throughMP3)

Then you have a good apples to apples comparison of the expected effects of posting. By modifying the formula appropriately one can calculate the effects of posting in any position given enough data.

For me the actual values in my .25/.50 database work out as follows:

WR(posting in CO) + WR(UTG through MP3) = -.06BB/hand + .35BB/hand = .29BB/hand

WR(BB) + WR(SB) + WR(Button) + WR(not posting in CO) + WR(UTG through MP3)
= -.28BB/hand - .09BB/hand + .01BB/hand + .03BB/hand +.35BB/hand = .02BB/hand

In other words my winrates in the button and cutoff don't even come close to making up for the negative effect of the blinds. In fact if I were to assume the data had enough hands in it to make it statistically valid the conclusion would be that I should wait to post in CO each and every time I sit down at the table. In any case I don't have enough hands to make the analysis statistically valid and I'm not entirely sure I manipulated the PT database correctly for the actual numbers. However I feel very comfortable with the formulae I have outlined to do the comparison in a setting where we do have a large number of hands and can correctly extract the numbers from the database.

LATE EDIT: I see Allday has already made some of the same points - hopefully my content can provide a solid analytical underpinning to the discussion.

[Aaron W.]

I think the whole question is far too complex to be answered clearly.

1) The discussion so far has revolved around BB/100, but not BB/hour. If you have to wait 10-15 minutes before you play a hand, then you lose money. This is especially true when you have a substantial advantage.

2a) When you post, you sometimes get yourself into situations that you cannot otherwise be in. Suppose you post and pick up 72o from the CO. The action is folded to you. You are in a unique position to raise and wager 1 SB to win 2.5. Any other time with this hand in this position, your steal raise would be wagering 2 to win 1.5 (which is likely to be unprofitable).

2b) Similarly, sometimes you have a random junk hand like 93o and you get to check your option and flop a decent hand. There is no equivalent to this free play that you can look up in PT or measure in any way.

3) There are some metagame ideas to consider. I think Mike Caro spoke once about posting UTG (planning to play a long session) so that people's first impression of you would be that you don't know what you're doing. This would cause players to play differently against you and (theoretically) give you an advantage because they start with a poor read on you. Ed Miller talks about this (I think) in SSH where he says to just sit down and start playing -- if I could find my copy, I'd look it up.

I don't think there's any real difference between posting in the CO and waiting in a full ring game. If I find myself in MP, I prefer to just wait (if it's live, I take a quick walk or something -- online I open up a different table or just sit patiently for a couple minutes). I don't ever post in a 6-max game. That's just how I do things.

[whoshotfirst]

I think Ed Miller wrote, that if you intend to wait for the bb, you shouldn't sit around obsering your opponents, because you will seem like a serious player, something you would like to avoid.

[halpgr]

[ QUOTE ]
FR I will post in CO, MP3, 2 and 1.

Figure it doesnt really matter, plus everyone will think I am a donkey for posting.

T

[/ QUOTE ]
MP1 or later is fine. You need to be in the game to make any money. Sure you expect to lose a bit posting blind. That will happen where ever you post from. However your loss is offset a bit by being in late position.

Also if the opponents are bad players, you can give them a good first impression of you. You may seem like a friendly, fun person by sitting down and posting. That gives you an edge if they think you're just another donk and they may not respect your raises. If you pass on posting in the CO and wait for the BB then they may size you up as a nit, and be more careful about getting involved in hands against you.