Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Poker > Stud
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 02-26-2007, 07:37 PM
ACPlayer ACPlayer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Educating tiny minds
Posts: 4,829
Default Re: This business of adjusting to the ante structure

As you say the adjustments needed are subtle but they are there and not adjusting to the ante structure is not correct.

To take a couple of extremes. If you are playing a 1-2 game with a tight ante structure and I walk up and offer a $1000 to the winner of the next hand, you look down and see A-7-6 rainbow, I think you may well consider playing the hand.

The 1-5 games spread in places with no ante at all, I certainly am not inclined to play drawing hands of anykind.

In the middle the adjustments are as you say subtle but they are there and substantial. However, a person successful at $10-20 at Foxwoods better be willing to make adjustments when he goes to the $75-$150 game (and not just becuase the players are better). Between the reduction in the pot due to the rake and lower ante oddds playing a strategy of "fold if you have any doubt" works in 10-20 and will never work at the 75-150.

I think the arguments of Micturation Man are on point and I am generally in agreement.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-26-2007, 08:17 PM
berya berya is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: NY
Posts: 442
Default Re: This business of adjusting to the ante structure

Small pair with an overcard kicker vs a bigger pair (known bigger pair) is one scenario you might want to look at. Depending on the ante and your apponents skill this hand can become playable or unplayable. 40/80 with a $5 ante and apponent just a little better than you and you are loosing money while the same situation with a $10 ante becomes a lock to make $ per hand unless hero is a very bad.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-27-2007, 04:27 AM
PokrLikeItsProse PokrLikeItsProse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,751
Default Re: This business of adjusting to the ante structure

[ QUOTE ]

The point that the particular players in the game are important is completely self-evident. Everyone knows that. It was never in contention.

The question is what the impact of the ante is. To illustrate that point we must hold the quality of the players constant.

[/ QUOTE ]

The question as I see it is what the impact of the ante is relative to the impact of the quality of opposition. The impression that I am getting is that some people are arguing that the ante structure is of much more relative importance than is actually the case. Adjusting to opponents who are looser or tighter than average is more important than adjusting to a structure that has smaller or larger antes than average. Both are clearly non-negligible, but one seems to be much more important than the other.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-27-2007, 06:50 AM
Alex/Mugaaz Alex/Mugaaz is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: There is only The Question
Posts: 1,857
Default Re: This business of adjusting to the ante structure

There is way too much support for loosening calling standards here vs people who aren't in a steal position. Calling loose vs someone in a steal position is completely different than calling/raising with a mediocre hand in middle position vs an early completion.

There is no debate you need to steal more or defend vs steals more, but where people go wrong is taking this thinking too far. I really don't think there are that many hands you should be adding to your cold calling list.

If you were playing a tough 10 handed holdem game with double sized blinds and UTG opens, is AQo a cold calling hand UTG+1?
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-27-2007, 10:19 AM
SGspecial SGspecial is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Doctor Razz
Posts: 1,209
Default Re: This business of adjusting to the ante structure

[ QUOTE ]
I know this is probably an issue of semantics. However, I do not see it as a matter of "antes will eat you up". Instead, it is more of a matter of playing more hands because they are positive EV due to the bigger starting pot. Those same hands with a smaller pot to begin with (smaller antes) may not be positive EV in the lower limits.

Playing more hands does not necessarily solve the problem of the antes you lose on the hands you don't play. Otherwise, one would say to play every single hand, then you don't have to worry about losing any antes. So I'd like to look at it in terms of playing more hands in the higher limits because the pot is bigger and the EV is there to make it right to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately King, this whole thread seems do be an issue of "semantics". No rational player would claim that the size of the antes shouldn't change your strategy AT ALL early in hands, but most of the disagreement is on the DEGREE of difference. I like the way you look at the situation, since your pot odds (or more specifically your implied pot odds) always tell you if you're getting the right price or not. The larger the pot, the more correct it is to chase if you think you don't have the best hand, or to raise out possible chasers if you think you may have the best hand. In fact, if your skill is so far above the others at your table, then you should be willing to play a little on the loose side and take slightly the worst of it vs. the starting pot in order to stay in more hands and give your opponents more chances to make horrible mistakes against you. Otherwise, they will just end up pushing chips back and forth among themselves until they're all raked away.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-27-2007, 01:08 PM
Bartholow Bartholow is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Westeros
Posts: 1,755
Default Re: This business of adjusting to the ante structure

No, AQo would be a 3-betting hand there.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 02-27-2007, 01:46 PM
electrical electrical is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: chicago
Posts: 650
Default Re: This business of adjusting to the ante structure

[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately King, this whole thread seems do be an issue of "semantics". No rational player would claim that the size of the antes shouldn't change your strategy AT ALL early in hands, but most of the disagreement is on the DEGREE of difference. I like the way you look at the situation, since your pot odds (or more specifically your implied pot odds) always tell you if you're getting the right price or not. The larger the pot, the more correct it is to chase if you think you don't have the best hand, or to raise out possible chasers if you think you may have the best hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
The conversation I tried to start with my odds post above is not part of a semantic dispute. Third street simply plays differently in different structures. That's it.

Completing to drive out players behind you (probably the most fundamental Third-street tool) is not necessarily either effective or a good idea if you can't offer them worse odds than they need to continue, and that is the case in one of the games I described. Later in the hand bets and raises will have more of an effect (in the sense that they have the potential to create opponent mistakes), and those streets play very much the same in all common structures.

When the discussion centers exclusively on the couple of chips you have to throw in every round as antes, it misses the principle distinction between the games. Playing a hand (one you shouldn't play) as far as Fifth street in either game is a money cost that outweighs the ante cost of folding a few extra hands an hour, and the idea that one or the other game should be played more loosely than the other on all streets is a mistake.

Each street needs to be played according to the money in the pot and the effect your bets will have on your opponents. The different structures change this effect radically on third street, but after that, you have to count the money and play the man.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02-27-2007, 01:55 PM
Gitz Gitz is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 122
Default Re: This business of adjusting to the ante structure

So Andy what are your conclusions after reading all the discussions of this subject????
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-27-2007, 03:11 PM
SGspecial SGspecial is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Doctor Razz
Posts: 1,209
Default Re: This business of adjusting to the ante structure

[ QUOTE ]
The conversation I tried to start with my odds post above is not part of a semantic dispute. Third street simply plays differently in different structures. That's it.

The different structures change this effect radically on third street, but after that, you have to count the money and play the man.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. I should have excepted Steve's post and its replies from my statement about semantics. The more precise we are mathematically, the less likely it is we will confuse or mislead people with semantics.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 02-28-2007, 12:55 AM
Alex/Mugaaz Alex/Mugaaz is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: There is only The Question
Posts: 1,857
Default Re: This business of adjusting to the ante structure

[ QUOTE ]
No, AQo would be a 3-betting hand there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, horrible brain dead example on my part (I suck at coming up with these). I WAS trying to show that cold calling in these spots was worthless either because you're too big of a dog, or because if you're not you really want to knock everyone else out. It seems most people will just call in these spots all day long when they try to adjust to a bigger ante.
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 08:02 PM.


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