Overs buttons

[Stu Pidasso]

I have been offered overs buttons before but never accepted them. Last night was the exception. I was hot right out of the gate and built a nice stack of chips. I figured "what the hell" and asked for an over button.

For anyone who doesn't know what playing "overs" means heres a definition:
A side betting arrangement where when the only players left in a hand are those involved in the overs, they are able to bet at a higher limit against each other than normally allowed

In our case at the beginning of a street if the only players left in the hand had overs buttons, all the bets are then doubled(i.e. 5-10 becomes 10-20 for the rest of the hand) The game I was in was 10 handed and about 5 of us had overs buttons. I started to think about what adjustments I should make to my game.

Usually we did not go to overs until the river. Never on the flop and seldom on the turn. With the bets being substantially higher on the river, the increased implied odds would dictate that I could play more speculative hands provided there were already a couple of people with overs buttons already in the hand. It also means some fish types would be making correct calls on earlier streets which would otherwise be incorrect if we weren't playing with overs buttons.

What do you folks think of overs buttons? Can a good player use it to a substantial advantage? Does it help the fish types more?

Stu

[jba]

one question:

if the only players left are players with overs, is the rule that they *can* bet double or they *must*? Is it like when fourth street pairs in stud?

[what23]

do u hafta play "overs" if all of the holders r the only ones left or can u decide each hand? i wouldn't mind playing if the competition was soft although i don't see the fish wanting to use them.

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
if the only players left are players with overs, is the rule that they *can* bet double or they *must*? Is it like when fourth street pairs in stud?

[/ QUOTE ]

If the street starts with just players who have overs buttons the bets must be doubled; there is no choice. If the street starts with at least one player who does not have an overs button the bets are the normal size for that entire street(even if the non overs player folds at the first bet or checks out).

Stu

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
do u hafta play "overs" if all of the holders r the only ones left or can u decide each hand? i wouldn't mind playing if the competition was soft although i don't see the fish wanting to use them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its my understanding that if you have an overs button in front of you and the only other players involved in the hand(at the beginning of the street) also have overs buttons in front of them, then you "hafta" play overs.

In that game I found myself sometimes calling a flop bet instead of raising. I did not want to risk knocking out the only player with out an overs button on the flop.

Stu

[*TT*]

Stu:

The problem with playing overs is that the size of the pot is now cut in 1/2 compared to the size of your bet or raise. I generally wouldn't recommend playing overs because its usually not to the players advantage - unless you feel like gambling.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[DeathDonkey]

[ QUOTE ]
I generally wouldn't recommend playing overs because its usually not to the players advantage - unless you feel like gambling.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is way way way untrue. You get to make decisions for larger amounts of money than normal against players whom you supposedly make better decisions than.

OP: tend to go further with drawing hands - for instance a gutshot on the turn when you are only getting 9:1 would be a fold, except if you can get a double sized bet in on the river your implied odds might turn it into a call. Basically it makes the game a bit more like NL.

-DeathDonkey

[jba]

[ QUOTE ]
Stu:

The problem with playing overs is that the size of the pot is now cut in 1/2 compared to the size of your bet or raise. I generally wouldn't recommend playing overs because its usually not to the players advantage - unless you feel like gambling.


[/ QUOTE ]

say what? It's just like any other poker dude.

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I generally wouldn't recommend playing overs because its usually not to the players advantage - unless you feel like gambling.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is way way way untrue. You get to make decisions for larger amounts of money than normal against players whom you supposedly make better decisions than.

OP: tend to go further with drawing hands - for instance a gutshot on the turn when you are only getting 9:1

[/ QUOTE ]

I used to feel the same as you Donkey, but the more brain power I put into this the less I like the idea of playing overs (I have never been in a situation where overs button is permitted so I admit I have no real world application). Standard situation hero raises preflop, 2 callers one of whom has an overs button. 7.5 SB to the flop. Hero bets, middle player folds and now the overs kick in. If the stakes were 5/10 and the agreement was to double the stakes the effective pot size is now 4.5/1. You now are restricted in some of your actions. Its even more magnifided when the overs are HU and there was no pre-flop raise, it might be in the neighborhood of a 1.5:1 pot size at most.

Please show some applied examples where playing overs allows additional advantages, I could be thinking incorrectly and I'm open minded.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[SplawnDarts]

While I've never played in a game with said buttons, I have to agree with the crowd saying it can be used to your advantage. Off the top of my head, here are the ways I can see that happening & adjustments I would make:

1) Implied odds go up when there few non-button players in a hand. Increase calling rate with drawing hands accordingly.

2) Oftentimes with a lock in limit you avoid raising to get additional players in the pot. Such plays are usually very marginal ie. the edge they give you is small because at the same time you're getting more ways of action you're missing a bet. The presence or absence of buttons on various players will change that thinking. If the people who will have to call your raise cold don't have buttons, and the people who are already in for a bet do, you would now more frequently prefer to raise and play the next street at higher limits. If the opposite is true, your decision making would be no different from a normal game or possibly even favor calling.

3) Following on 2, position relative to the buttons now matters. Buttons on your right, no buttons on your left gives you the maximal ability to decide the stakes the next street is played for. Consider a strategic seat change (taking other positional factors into account) if needed. Since buttons usually probably imply aggressive, it's likely you'll want them on your right anyways.

4) Buttons will help you determine how much gamble your opponents have, which may be informative for hand reading purposes. The presence or absence of a button will likely tell you whether a tight player is a nit or a shark, for example. Obviously, this is only a first estimate and subsequent play overrides it.

5) Your button or lack thereof will affect your image. I think under most circumstances your image with a button would be more profitable.

6) Having a button makes it easier to bluff into 3 person fields where the person last to act also has a button but the guy in the middle does not, especially on the flop since if you get the first one out, you get to hit the 2nd one with a 4x bet on the turn, which is almost NL-like. The fear of this may inspire even lose players into a "if he folds, I fold" policy. For once you get to wield the hammer of future bets in a limit game [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

7) Assuming an appropriate roll, bigger stakes are superior to small stakes against opponents you can beat. Since it'll be the same guys button or no, have a button unless you just can't afford it (assuming you're a winning player). On the other hand, if you're the 2nd best player at the table, and the only guy with a button is first best, obviously don't take one.

Anyways, that's my initial thoughts...