BadBeat Jackpot - alternative strategy?

[Larimani]

I'm just wondering if you should change your pre-flop strategy the BBJ tables and when the jackpot is huge (like it is now = 500K+)

Basically, do the EV of pocket and suited connectors increase enough for it to have an effect on optimal pre-flop strategy (ie. should you play them more than usual?).

[hardinda]

If you are playing the bad beat jackpot tables, i'd think you would always want to play anything 8's and better. Personally, play the other tables if you don't want to change to the bad beat jackpot type play, b/c you are paying for that each hand.

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm just wondering if you should change your pre-flop strategy the BBJ tables and when the jackpot is huge (like it is now = 500K+)

Basically, do the EV of pocket and suited connectors increase enough for it to have an effect on optimal pre-flop strategy (ie. should you play them more than usual?).

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are changing your play because of the jackpot, something is wrong. Leave it alone. If it comes, it comes.

[rmarotti]

Word.

[Larimani]

I'm gonna stick to BBJ 2/4 because the jackpot is massive and it would be silly to play at the normal tables... & also because they're fool of fish.

Anyways, I usually play 88 or better anyways... what am more concerned about are suited connectors... for example is it +EV to play T9s UTG when the BBJ is 500K+?

[MyssGuy]

I agree in not changing the play, but at what point does a player switch to the BBJ tables from the non-BBJ because of the pot and feel they are not losing money to the bonus rake? Or have the games become fishy enough that they are worth playing?

Has anyone moved from 3/6 down to 2/4 just to play the fishier BBJ games because of the large jackpot?

[rmarotti]

At a loose passive table that's a +EV play anyway. But I'm a LAG.

[belloc]

[ QUOTE ]
If you are playing the bad beat jackpot tables, i'd think you would always want to play anything 8's and better. Personally, play the other tables if you don't want to change to the bad beat jackpot type play, b/c you are paying for that each hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no way you should be changing your poker play because of the jackpot. It's essentially a lottery, and you should consider your chances of winning it nil.

However, in terms of table selection, I've found (small sample size) that the jackpot tables seem to attract somewhat worse players, most likely because the lowest limit there is 2/4, so terrible players that want to gambool for the lottery, that might otherwise only play micros, will be forced to play 2/4.

I'll often play there during the daytime when the regular 2/4 tables tend to tighten up a bit. The added looseness of these players seems to overcome the extra $.50 that comes out of each pot. But at night I still play the regular 2/4 tables because they're plenty loose.

But lately I've also found (miniscule sample size) that when the jackpot is monstrous, that for whatever reason it begins to attract even the tighter players.

[Larimani]

according to BonusWhores.com the BBJ tables become +EV when the jackpot reaches 197K. I start playing BBJ when it get to about 170K because of the extreme fishyness of the tables.

[rmarotti]

[ QUOTE ]

But lately I've also found (miniscule sample size) that when the jackpot is monstrous, that for whatever reason it begins to attract even the tighter players.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? Bummer.

[cjx]

ditto and to the original poster, do not change your play style.

cjx

[Larimani]

Ok - everyone seems to agree that you shouldn't change your style.

Will stick to my TA-A then /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Wish me luck. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[colgin]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok - everyone seems to agree that you shouldn't change your style.

[/ QUOTE ]

All you crackheads advocating not making any changes at BBJ tables shoud get off the pipe already.

At the BBJ table you should bever fold Quad 8s or better even if you are 100% certain that you are beat.

At a normal table I would fold any hand on the river that I was 100% certain was beat.

I mean, duh! /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[MyssGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
All you crackheads advocating not making any changes at BBJ tables shoud get off the pipe already.

At the BBJ table you should bever fold Quad 8s or better even if you are 100% certain that you are beat.

At a normal table I would fold any hand on the river that I was 100% certain was beat.

I mean, duh!

[/ QUOTE ]

I knew there was a reason I read 2+2!

[Larimani]

mwhahaha. Good point... although I was talking about pre-flop strategy only /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
If you are changing your play because of the jackpot, something is wrong. Leave it alone. If it comes, it comes.

[/ QUOTE ]
Last night at a 2/4 jackpot table it went call-raise-3bet in front of me with 88. I coldcalled 3 bets, something I would never do at a normal table.

This looks clearly correct EV-wise. If someone has a dominating overpair I am roughly 40000-1 to be quad-under-quad at the river. With my share of the jackpot being $160K I just got my extra $4 back and am paying only 1 SB to try and score an extremely lucrative set in a huge pot.

Against two overpairs my chance to hit the jackpot doubles and my jackpot EV is $8. Of course no one may have an overpair. In that case I have the best hand and let's play poker.

At the smaller stakes you cannot fold 88 or better preflop when the jackpot becomes huge.

I haven't done my homework on suited connectors yet.

Postflop there are also rare cases where you need to make a change. Example:

{Q /images/graemlins/club.gif J /images/graemlins/club.gif 8 /images/graemlins/club.gif 7 /images/graemlins/club.gif} and you have 6 /images/graemlins/club.gif5 /images/graemlins/club.gif.

This is a pretty awful situation but with a large jackpot you have to draw for the straight flush because K /images/graemlins/club.gifT /images/graemlins/club.gif or T /images/graemlins/club.gif9 /images/graemlins/club.gif may be outstanding.

[Larimani]

You're the man! Good Job!

[belloc]

[ QUOTE ]

If someone has a dominating overpair I am roughly 40000-1 to be quad-under-quad at the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you show your work on this? I'm sure you're right, but I'm much too lazy to figure it out, and even when I do try to figure these things, I'm much too stupid to get it right the first time.

[Redeye]

[ QUOTE ]
Can you show your work on this? I'm sure you're right, but I'm much too lazy to figure it out, and even when I do try to figure these things, I'm much too stupid to get it right the first time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I went through the calculation, so I'll post it for you:

Say 88s against JJ:

Need a board of 88JJx

Since there are 4 known cards there are:

48 choose 5 = 1,712,304 total possible boards

There are 44 possible boards containing 88JJ (44 cards left after subtracting 4 8s and 4Js).

Therefore the odds on getting quad over quad in this situation by the river is 38915:1 (1712304/44 - 1)

[colgin]

[ QUOTE ]
Last night at a 2/4 jackpot table it went call-raise-3bet in front of me with 88. I coldcalled 3 bets, something I would never do at a normal table.

This looks clearly correct EV-wise.

[/ QUOTE ]

StellarWind,

I am sure that all of your calculations are correct. Query whether one should be thinking about EV when discussing things like jackpots or lotteries. While the jackpot is significantly more winnable than your average state lottery I believe, it is still remote enough to be analogized to them.

As we all know, lotteries are massively -EV. Still, it is theoretically possible (and I have been told that in some smaller ones this has happened) to be +EV. But participating in a +EV lottery still means I am lkely to never see an actual dime. In a given week, I don't play or not play NY Lotto because it is eitehr -$1 in EV or +$1 in EV. It is because I am hoping for the ridiculous contingency to happen to me.

When we are playing poker working out the EV of a flush draw, for example, makes sense because over time you will make your flsuh somewhat in proportion to what the probabilities say you should. But with a jackpot you can easily play your whole life (and I am sure many have) without winning one. Therefore, while these EV calculations can be made, as you have done, I am wondering whtether they are really useful in the choices you make as to play. Is this a situation where EV does not matter (vis a vis jackpot size)?

P.S. Which does not mean I would fold the 88 hand. I would play for the same reason that I sometimes play NY Lotto when the numbers get big.

[belloc]

[ QUOTE ]
But participating in a +EV lottery still means I am lkely to never see an actual dime. In a given week, I don't play or not play NY Lotto because it is eitehr -$1 in EV or +$1 in EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good, yes. There are lots of +EV situations that should be avoided for lots of reasons. The remoteness of the possibility is one of them.

Others are obvious, and not related to gambling at all: it might be +EV for me to 4-table party 2/4 for 12 hours a day. But because this would jeapordize my marriage, job, and relationship with my kids, so I don't.

[arkady]

i am still folding quad 7s if I feel I am beat.

[meep_42]

They'd have to flip their cards over to get me to fold quads on the river. (and I obviously wouldn't at a BBJ.)

-d

[slogger]

nm

[StellarWind]

This is largely a matter of personal taste and circumstances. If we were discussing a $1 lottery ticket for a billion dollar prize I wouldn't be interested in a small +EV situation. The value of money is not linear to me in that range. I'd rather have $1 all the time instead of a billion dollars 1/900,000,000 of the time despite the roughly $0.11 of EV that I would be passing up.

I don't view $160000 that way because I am middle-aged and have some money. It's not so much money that I wouldn't fully enjoy every dollar. Nor am I going to have to make sacrifices because I paid a few jackpot drops and got nothing in return. So I am content to go with the EV calculation.

If I were a pro with a thin bankroll or a "starving student" earning my pizza and beer money I'd have to take a different attitude. Paying extra rake and sacrificing bets would cause problems that a longshot chance at a jackpot wouldn't properly compensate.

[belloc]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd rather have $1 all the time instead of a billion dollars 1/900,000,000 of the time despite the roughly $0.11 of EV that I would be passing up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I think the old gambling books called it 'risk of ruin'; I'm not sure what they're calling it these days. It's basically what you said: expectation on a bet (or series of bets) could be positive but still undesirable because you'd blow your whole BR going after it. So in these kinds of calculations you want to throw in a risk of ruin factor, not just consider whether it's +EV.

[StellarWind]

Risk of ruin is only part of it. The basic point is simply that not all dollars have equal value. Having a billion dollars is not 1000 times better than having a million dollars to a normal person. Economists call this flexible valuation the utility of money.

The nonlinear utility of money is most important in two cases:

1. The possibility of not having enough money to buy the things you really need or badly want. This is where "risk of ruin" comes into play, along with problems paying bills and inability to afford ordinary luxuries like pizza and a movie. Someone's last few dollars are really precious.

2. The possibility of so much money you can't really benefit fully from it. Having $10M is better than having $1M but I doubt many people would find it ten times better or even twice as good.