The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds

[DLizzle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please explain to me why you would want to raise more pf the deeper you are. That seems plain wrong to me as I don't see any specific correlation to you're stack size and the preflop raise. The size of the blinds are much more important to the amount you raise than your stack size, so unless the blinds are rising I see no reason to increase your raise amount.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sit down with 5 other people and play NLHE, all of you have 5k each. You decide the blinds should be $50. You decide the blinds should be 50 cents. Are you open raising to $175 in the former situation and $1.75 in the latter, or the same amount in both scenarios? I argued with a couple other 2+2ers about this at Fallsview, as we all started 800BB deep. I'm not sure what to think, but I def believe that as stacks get deeper, the blinds get less relevent, so it makes sense that you should stop using them as the main determinent of your pf raise size.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually not. If the standard raise in that game was much higher than the blinds the correct strategy would be fold 220 out of 221 hands and just move allin every time got aces. If it was already raised before the action came to you, you would probably profit more from that hand than the blinds you would have to pay for seein 221 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

no. that would be the correct strategy if you sucked compared to your opponents, which I don't think should be our assumption. What would you raise to? $1.75? What would your preflop range for raising, calling, 3betting, 4betting, 17betting, etc. With a 50 cent blind would you be comfortable raising KK to $1.75 when you and your opponents have 5k stacks?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are missing my point. If everyone was raising to 175$ preflop you wouldnt need to play KK. You could show a guaranteed profit just playing Ace Ace. If a monkey could play such a game profitably, then there is something wrong with it

[/ QUOTE ]

It certainly wouldn't be anywhere remotely close to the optimal strategy, so I don't think you have much of a point.

[DLizzle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
just read all comments and this one interested me. Raising to $175 with 5k stacks and a 50 cent blind seems pretty reasonable to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol. Can't believe anyone one think this is reasonable. Take 2 minutes to think about why it's not.

[/ QUOTE ]

2 minutes taken. I still think you're the retarded one. Since it's not rocket science I'm sure you can back up your completely unsubstantiated claim with at least a small shred of rationale.

[felson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please explain to me why you would want to raise more pf the deeper you are. That seems plain wrong to me as I don't see any specific correlation to you're stack size and the preflop raise. The size of the blinds are much more important to the amount you raise than your stack size, so unless the blinds are rising I see no reason to increase your raise amount.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sit down with 5 other people and play NLHE, all of you have 5k each. You decide the blinds should be $50. You decide the blinds should be 50 cents. Are you open raising to $175 in the former situation and $1.75 in the latter, or the same amount in both scenarios? I argued with a couple other 2+2ers about this at Fallsview, as we all started 800BB deep. I'm not sure what to think, but I def believe that as stacks get deeper, the blinds get less relevent, so it makes sense that you should stop using them as the main determinent of your pf raise size.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually not. If the standard raise in that game was much higher than the blinds the correct strategy would be fold 220 out of 221 hands and just move allin every time got aces. If it was already raised before the action came to you, you would probably profit more from that hand than the blinds you would have to pay for seein 221 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

no. that would be the correct strategy if you sucked compared to your opponents, which I don't think should be our assumption. What would you raise to? $1.75? What would your preflop range for raising, calling, 3betting, 4betting, 17betting, etc. With a 50 cent blind would you be comfortable raising KK to $1.75 when you and your opponents have 5k stacks?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are missing my point. If everyone was raising to 175$ preflop you wouldnt need to play KK. You could show a guaranteed profit just playing Ace Ace. If a monkey could play such a game profitably, then there is something wrong with it

[/ QUOTE ]

It certainly wouldn't be anywhere remotely close to the optimal strategy, so I don't think you have much of a point.

[/ QUOTE ]

wtf. somebody shows how a monkey could crush that strategy, and you think that is pointless?

sklansky covered this stuff in a thread on 'invisible antes' a few months ago.

[felson]

Your Invisible Ante

[soah]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please explain to me why you would want to raise more pf the deeper you are. That seems plain wrong to me as I don't see any specific correlation to you're stack size and the preflop raise. The size of the blinds are much more important to the amount you raise than your stack size, so unless the blinds are rising I see no reason to increase your raise amount.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sit down with 5 other people and play NLHE, all of you have 5k each. You decide the blinds should be $50. You decide the blinds should be 50 cents. Are you open raising to $175 in the former situation and $1.75 in the latter, or the same amount in both scenarios? I argued with a couple other 2+2ers about this at Fallsview, as we all started 800BB deep. I'm not sure what to think, but I def believe that as stacks get deeper, the blinds get less relevent, so it makes sense that you should stop using them as the main determinent of your pf raise size.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually not. If the standard raise in that game was much higher than the blinds the correct strategy would be fold 220 out of 221 hands and just move allin every time got aces. If it was already raised before the action came to you, you would probably profit more from that hand than the blinds you would have to pay for seein 221 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

no. that would be the correct strategy if you sucked compared to your opponents, which I don't think should be our assumption. What would you raise to? $1.75? What would your preflop range for raising, calling, 3betting, 4betting, 17betting, etc. With a 50 cent blind would you be comfortable raising KK to $1.75 when you and your opponents have 5k stacks?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are missing my point. If everyone was raising to 175$ preflop you wouldnt need to play KK. You could show a guaranteed profit just playing Ace Ace. If a monkey could play such a game profitably, then there is something wrong with it

[/ QUOTE ]

It certainly wouldn't be anywhere remotely close to the optimal strategy, so I don't think you have much of a point.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's certainly a lot closer to optimal than the people that are LOSING to it.

[Elektrik]

Unarmed's point is a valid one, which I think many of y'all are minsunderstanding. Yes, a game theorectically correct way to play against a huge raise with miniscule blinds would be to wait for AA. However, as I think we've already worked out (see "invisible antes") the games online are not being played anywhere near close to theoretically correct, for essentially the same reasons. To rehash that in this light, the main reasons are:

1) Although simply waiting for AA in a theoretical game theory since is of course correct, it would not be the most profitable as your opponent is playing according to game theory. He is making massive mistakes preflop by raising so large, and in order to profit from that mistake you should theorectically widen your range and take advantage of it.

2) If the opponent perceives tha the has a postflop edge on you, it further allows him to increase his range to take advatnage of your massive preflop mistakes. This should be self explanatory.

3) Finally, waiting for AA preflop is simply boring, and truthfully, many of us wouldn't even play the game if that was the case. So people are more inclined to make the preflop mistakes anyways.

In sum, yeah, it is obviously a theoretical mistake to be raising so huge postflop, but other players adjusting and compensating for it based on their own level of skill make it much less of a mistake such that their mistakes (particularly if their postflop skill level is below yours despite their perceptions). Also, poker simply becomes much more boring otherwise.

[jrbick]

wtf just happened in here.

[MDMA]

Some parts of this post is good, some parts are very wrong.

Edit: I am too drunk to point explain which parts are what.

[Jeff W]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
just read all comments and this one interested me. Raising to $175 with 5k stacks and a 50 cent blind seems pretty reasonable to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol. Can't believe anyone one think this is reasonable. Take 2 minutes to think about why it's not.

[/ QUOTE ]

2 minutes taken. I still think you're the retarded one. Since it's not rocket science I'm sure you can back up your completely unsubstantiated claim with at least a small shred of rationale.

[/ QUOTE ]

HAVE YOU SEEN MY BASEBALL?

[limon]

i believe youve done some thinking. and maybe this forum is where this kinda stuff is posted. but...if you read the nl forum from 1998 this stuff is covered ad nauseum.