How can Sklansky-Chubukov rankings help me?

[scarr]

I have really enjoyed No Limit Hold'em Theory and Practice but I don't see how the S-C numbers can help me.

The critical point in the equation, is whether or not a perfect player will fold or call your all-in if he knows your hand.

This number is based on two assumptions which are not valid at the poker table: 1) your opponent is playing perfectly, and 2) your opponent knows your cards.

How can a number based on these two assumptions allow you to make a better decision than just how well a hand will do against a random hand after all five cards are dealt.

If I want to know what chance an opponent has of folding, I would look at his stack, my stack, where we are relative to the money, and how loose/tight he is. I am not going to show him my hand and hope he plays pefectly.

So how can a number based so much on two incorrect assumptions help me?

[Knockwurst]

I have just gotten to this section in NLHTP, and I think it and the previous section on when to call an all-in have done nothing short of revolutionizing tournament poker for us who count ourselves among the great unwashed masses.

While the S-C section and the section on when to call an all in may have been information known to professionals, laying this information out for the rest of us will have a huge effect on narrowing the gap between the amateur and the professional much like Kill Phil strategy has, though the former involves much more finesse in a sense.

What S-C has done is allow a player to determine when it is strategically viable or correct to go all-in with whatever particular cards you are dealt. Yes, you don't need S-C to figure out to go all-in on the button with 99 if you are short stacked, but what about T7, 84, etc. The two assumptions you take issue with are in order to demonstrate that even if your opponent has perfect knowledge and knows you are using S-C, it will still be correct to move in when the blinds (and antes) are a certain percentage of your stack even with hands you normally wouldn't move in with. Thus, it will be correct when your opponent has less than perfect knowledge.

What I want to know -- If you're not particularly short-stacked (maybe the upper range of the S-C numbers)is S-C a useful tool for blind stealing on the button and small blind, and can it be used for restealing?

Again, I'm on my first read-through, and if I'm missing the point entirely, please disregard my comments.

The main value I found is it makes it a no-brainer to decide to shove preflop with certain cards. SNGPT has the same information, but adds in a "expected calling range" that can be very hard to figure out on the fly.

With SC numbers, their calling range doesn't matter. If SC says you shove, you shove (mostly anyway). SNGPT is better when you're a bit outside the shove range and you've got some reads.

NLTAP has killed my game in other ways though. The whole pot manipulation bit has trashed my SNG performace. I need to step back to a more conservative game. NLTAP talks about creating a pot size big enough that if you hit (say with 44 and get trips) that you'll stack your opponent. Fine for cash games were you can buy in more chips after the hand, but in a tourney, 3 or 4 misses and you've lost a decent chunk of chips.

Yea, NLTAP talks about tourny vs non-tourny, so it's my fault [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]. As usual, new concepts hurt me more than help me until I get used to them.