To Chop or Not

I usually play 3-6 or 5-10 Hold'em. At those levels I always chop the blinds because of the rake.

When I played at the 10-20 game in A.C.,there was no rake.They took $5 every half hour. Therefore, I didn't chop. Most of the other players chopped. Is my thinking wrong?

Since I play few hands anyway, I feel I'll be missing some profit in a timed game.

If the small blind was $0 he should never chop since he can do better by playing premium hands. If the small blind was equal to the big blind then the big blind should never chops since he has position. I suppose I guess that the "fair" chops sb/bb ratio is 2/3.


But the major factor is whether or not you can outplay the opponent heads-up. This can easily overcome any sb/bb ratio or rake. Of secondary importance is keeping the peace.


If you are confident in you short-handed abilities AND confident in both your neighbor's lack, then don't chop with either. Otherwise keep the peace and chop with both.


- Louie

I always chop in raked games, because it is profitable to do so. It is a rare day when your neighbor is so weak that you can play them heads-up with +EV when the house is taking $3-4 out of the pot.


Yet, like you suggest, if it's a time game, it costs me nothing (to the house) to play the hand, and I think I'm better than most of my opponents, so I never chop in time games.


Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

I went four years as a non-chopper and started chopping a few months ago and I much much prefer it.


I don't think one way is better than the other. Louie stated the key parameters. Another to consider is your tipping policy. If you tip $1 on any pot with some action in it, then you're paying roughly fifty cents per played hand (blind vs blind). Might not sound like much, but it's likely enough to cancel whatever long-range profit you might be making by playing the blinds out.


Tommy

I agree with your chopping policy, comprehensively.


You should consider telling both of your neighbors, politely, "by the way, I don't chop" as soon as you see a pot get chopped in your time-collection game. That minimizes the chances that you'll piss 'em off just enough to get 'em playing better against you.


--JMike

"This can easily overcome any sb/bb ratio or rake."


I don't know about this. Rakes have gone up over the years and I question whether it is possible to outplay people for three or four dollars per hand. Remember you almost always make the decision to chop before you see your cards. So the question is can you outplay someone for this amount when you each hold random cards?

could be just me, but I do not think the $$ (here) is as important as the feelings of the other players--I choose to go with the flow, not make waves, etc--so if most everyone chops, I chop.

im unclear on the statement regarding almsot always deciding to chop before seeing your cards. isnt the option to chop only available after everyone has been dealt a hand, and nobody voluntarily enters the pot? you have cards at this time, why is it that you would make the choice without looking at your cards? is this some standardized rule that ive never seen before? when i played low limit in california, i never saw a hand where blinds were chopped. never ever ever. not even the option, since somebody always entered the pot voluntarily. always, without exception. i play in illinois now, and the LL games i play in the blinds can chop, but they always look at their cards before deciding.

The issue is whether you make a gentleperson's agreement (golly, I hate this Political Correct cra_ ..err.. stuff) to ALWAYS chop when everybody else folds before the flop. You thus "chop blind". Deciding to chop after you both have looked seems silly to me: "I want to chop if you sort-of want to chop but I don't want to chop if you really want to chop".


- Louie

You can certainly make it up against weak-tight players since they fold right away far too often, and contested pots will only hit the max rake when YOU have a good hand as well.


You can also make it up against weak-loose players who will let you draw cheap but give you plenty of action when you have a hand.


I think.


- Louie

I feel the same way. It is almost like an implied gentleman's agreement (for the lack of a better word) at the LL games I play at AC with very few exceptions. One time, in a 3-6 game, I got dealt JJ at SB with no callers. So I politely asked the BB,a redneck tourist, if he want to chop. The reply was a grunting "hell, no!". I called. Flop was Jxx, I checked, he bet, I called. Turn, another rag. I checked, BB bets, I called. River, another rag, I bet, he raised, I re-raised. He called and with a smirk in his face turned up his AQ and I slow rolled my JJ.

The point of the matter is that I believe to extend the courtesy of chopping if it is accepted norm of the game but the heck with the rednecks!

With no pre-arranged agreement, little blind looks at his cards and says, "chop?"...The big blind says, "No thanks, I'd rather raise".

"I think"


I think not, but I don't have to be right. It's just my opinion.


One way to see this is to suppose you are playing one of these players heads-up without a rake. (Perhaps you are playing a time charge for the table like $5 each every half hour.) If you are correct, you will beat this person for at least $200 an hour. I know some very good heads-up players and none of them make that claim even though they will say $100 per hour against a terrible player. (Note: I'm talking about a game like $20-$40 or smaller since at larger limits the charge is almost always by time instead of rake.)

Mainly i don't want to piss any player off, good or bad. i want them to think that i don't care either way. sometimes i act like i don't know what the term means. overall it is not worth making someone mad. Once i chopped with a player and then next time he didn't want to chop. fine. i look down and see AK. made him pay 8 BB. that wasn't enough. he pissed me off into playing better poker, especially against him.

i see your point. however, the only place ive played that ive seen chopped blinds, the players always look at their cards first (it doesn't make sense to me either). the thing is, unless you have an explicit verbal agreement to chop every time, if chopping is an option, you will have looked at your hand, and decided whether or not you want to play that hand heads up against the other blind before the option gets to you. i don't see how i could look down at AA in the small blind and then chop when the big blind asks me to. i personally disagree with the idea of chopping on principal, only because i have to risk my f'in blinds each round, and i don't get the option to take them back when my cards suck because somebody else always enters the pot. i don't think other players should be able to either. and i don't think there should be the unnecessary social pressure to do so either. the nature of a blind is a forced BET. one of the main things you learn about poker very early is that once you have BET, the chips are no longer yours, they belong to the POT. therefore forced BETs are not something we can choose to split, since they are in the POT, which hasn't been awarded yet. the SB should have to complete the bet or fold, and if he thinks he can steal the BB he should raise. then the BB has the decision. otherwise, too many things become lopsided in the rules. i will chop if i hate my cards and i am given the option from the other blind. otherwise, i play my hand like all the other players when forced to face a bet or a raise.

Excellent perspective.


But if you get 50 hands/hour heads-up your $200/hour figure comes down to $4/hand. But only the contested pots will get raked; the raise-and-take it hands won't get raked at all. So if you are up against overly selective players few pots are raked.


If the opponent defends only one-third of the time and lets say is a 3:1 favorite when he DOES defend and presume I always raise: out of 100 attempts I win 1 67 times and lose 2 3/4 of the remaining 33 times, and win 2 1/4 of 33: 67 - 49.5 + 16.5 = 34sb in 2 hours or 17sb in one hour or 8.5bb/hour, not counting after the flop prowess.


Wouldn't a great short-handed player beat a terrible short-handed player for 5bb/hour? That doesn't seem THAT much.


- Louie

Interesting. I have always avoided the headsup tables at Paradise (about the same situation), I find rake there unbearable, and if not the rake then the variance.


I need to think about this some more...


Angelina Fekali

Studying People Inc.

Ljubljana, Slovenia

http://www.fekali.com/angelina

"You don't know Ange. She raises you, you stay raised." - Piesang

There's a big difference between playing heads-up in the blinds and a heads up game. You are more likely to find players who will relenquish an occasional pot when you are heads up in the blind. When you are playing heads-up, no one is going to fold their blind 2/3 of the time.


Overall, you need about a 2% edge on all your action that you put into a pot to beat the 10/20 online. If you have a 4% edge on the action that you put into the pot you'll make about $60/hour at 10/20 online.


But playing heads-up online means that you have to spend a considerable amount of time jockying for the right to sit with the fish. It might be worth it at peak times, but in general the ring games are more profitable for all but the most expert heads up players.


On the other hand, the shorthanded tables tend to be more profitable than either the heads up games or the full table games.


- Andrew