|
|
#31
03-18-2007, 02:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: the stinkypete rathole theorem
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] im not sure a/b other HS guys, but i dont even know my acct balances down to the nearest thousand. 10$ doesnt matter [/ QUOTE ] eh, I don't think that follows from not knowing. If a ten spot fell out of your pocket would you pick it up? [/ QUOTE ] online$ =! real$ by a long shot [/ QUOTE ] that so, huh? btw it's '!=' 
|
|
#32
03-18-2007, 03:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: the stinkypete rathole theorem
I'm gonna use my stars database and research this tommorow. The main problem is that I only know of 1-2 good short stackers on stars hsnl games, but the results should still be relevant over so many hands.
Hopefully anyone with a big database of FTP or PP hands will do the same. I find this to be a very interesting subject.
|
|
#33
03-18-2007, 04:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: the stinkypete rathole theorem
[ QUOTE ]
I'm gonna use my stars database and research this tommorow. The main problem is that I only know of 1-2 good short stackers on stars hsnl games, but the results should still be relevant over so many hands. Hopefully anyone with a big database of FTP or PP hands will do the same. I find this to be a very interesting subject. [/ QUOTE ] fwiw i'm running -.25bb/100 in the BB and -.09bb/100 in the SB at 25/50
|
|
#34
03-18-2007, 05:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: the stinkypete rathole theorem
[ QUOTE ]
If i'm the best player at the table (or at least one of the top 2, and I should be if i'm game-selecting well) then I want as much money as possible in my stack at all times. [/ QUOTE ] I'm surprised that so many people would advocate this strategy as well. There's something I must be missing here... I always want a big stack to work with. It gives you more room to maneuver, and how else can you get paid off? Must be some kind of difference between live and internet play here...
|
|
#35
03-18-2007, 09:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: the stinkypete rathole theorem
Well I really appreciate this advise but I have no clue what EV this gives us.. If I sit down at a table with very weak opposition then I think buying in for max is better. Same counts for a table full of players you know and feel comfortable with. The theorem works best against players you feel uncomfortable with or against opposition you have no read on. You're giving yourself an easy time OOP against this field, making +EV pf decisions and not getting into trouble postflop.
I assume this rathole theorem has more equity in fulltable than 6max. I assume it's a good idea for 6max but in 9-10 max buying in on Button/CO without additional fee is better longterm unless you've got a super good blind game against the field on the specific table. Plus where is good information on ratrolling in a good way? I've seen ppl playing their shortstacks very loose/agressive, reraising AI against CO/BU raises with a very wide range squeezing a lot.. others advocate a very tight style only reraising very strong hands. ActionJeff how many hands do you have on those good rats and what's their winrate/playstyle? Plus how do they perform OOP ? Seems like a nice idea, thanks for sharing Pete. Gotta think about.. so 20bb > 25bb > 30bb ? Will you rebuy to 20bb before you're in sb or trying to make the stack even smaller and not rebuying until on button? I think this could expand the theorem. Hope for a few highstakers contributing.
|
|
#36
03-18-2007, 10:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: the stinkypete rathole theorem
lol. i got high stakes talking about rathole strategy. hahahaha.
|
|
#37
03-18-2007, 01:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: the stinkypete rathole theorem
Well it's very common these days and the more you know about it the better you can fight it. Plus if it's really a advantage in new/unknown/tough games then it might give me an edge and I am willing to discuss everything that boosts my game the tinniest bit [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#38
03-18-2007, 01:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: the stinkypete rathole theorem
If you get the theorem title can I get a hyphen on it?...I posted this idea a couple weeks ago in uNL and it didn't receive much of a welcome. Many just didn't understand the concept though. Buy in for minimum
|
|
#40
03-19-2007, 07:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: the stinkypete rathole theorem
[ QUOTE ]
If i'm the best player at the table (or at least one of the top 2, and I should be if i'm game-selecting well) then I want as much money as possible in my stack at all times. [/ QUOTE ] This doesn't follow logically. Believing you are the best player is different than believing you are better than everyone even out of position.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
