MJU
01-31-2005, 10:31 AM
Firstly, as I am new to the forums a little about me :-
Whilst I have been playing poker for a little over a year it is only over the last couple of months that I found 2+2 and started to take the game a little more seriously. Previously I was only a STT and MTT player but I was lured at the end of the year by the Gaming Club bonus which set me out to pursue the ring games.
I’ve invested some money in Pokertracker and most importantly I’ve invested my time in reading some books (SSHE, TOP, HEFAP) as well as 2+2, and applying the theory in practice. I also spend time to analyse my play in pokertracker. My next step is to post hands on the micro limit forum.
January was my first full month in this new current mindset and the month is just about to pass with mixed results. I am only playing at 0.5/1 and won’t think of moving up until I feel I have the fundamentals in place, bankroll is not an issue, consistent successful play is.
To some extent I actually think I didn’t do as well from a BB/100 perspective applying the new techniques as I would have done in my old pre PT and 2+2 days. However, this is most likely due to variance, but most importantly, I feel much more confident in my play and I know I am setting the foundations for future solid ring game play.
I also feel that when I started applying some of the material I had read on 2+2 it was clear that I had become too preoccupied with statistics and the thinking that my VPIP, PFR etc had to be within the ranges highlighted on the forums. I want to move away from this in February as I feel the stats should occur as a result of my play and not drive it. I think I moved into a case of the ‘tail wagging the dog’ with the PT statistics. Sure, if my results drop I will use the stats to identify leaks but my guess is that you can take 50 people with exactly the same VPIP & PFR stats over 10k hands and the quality of their play (and BB results) could differ significantly.
Now onto the main reason for my post. I have two queries that I am sure have been answered many times before but whilst I can use the ‘search’ function I rarely find it to be of any use.
Counting Outs on a Flush Draw and OESD
When it comes to playing flush draws I feel that I am always overstating the odds relative to the guidance in poker texts and/or the 2+2 forums. If I have suited hole cards and flop 4 to a flush the guidance seems to be that I have 9 outs when calculating the odds that the pot needs to be laying me in order to get value from my flush draw.
However, if I am playing 10 handed should I not assumed that on average 5 of the 20 hole cards will be of my suit, I have 2 of the 5, therefore there would be, on average, 3 more of my suit in other players hole cards. Consequently the number of outs I should be counting is actually 6 rather than 9?
The same would also apply to OESD’s and say for example I should discount 3 of the 8 as they would, on average, be in the hole cards of the others sat at the table. [38% (20/52) of the cards are hole cards, therefore on average, 38% of my OESD cards will already be out there 38% x 8 = 3.04, therefore I really only have 5 to an OESD?
[I think the math needs to be refined slightly as in the flush example there are 9 of my required suit available out of 47 unseen cards. 18 of these are hole cards therefore the 9 of the suit I require are split on average 3.44 in the 18 unseen hole cards and 5.55 in the unseen 29 cards remaining in the deck. I am confusing myself with this now – Have I really only got 5.55 outs to a flush on average?]
Whilst I don’t expect this to have a material impact on the results I just wanted to understand it from a theoretical perspective. Although what I am suggesting above is lowering the value of a flush draw by 38.3%. Is there a reason that I am not aware of as to why you should count 9 outs in the case of a flush draw and 8 in the case of an OESD? Should you ever discount your outs as highlighted above. Over 10k flush draws my guess is that this could make some small difference? I think I am missing something here and would welcome the obvious to be pointed out to me.
Raising in late position with a premium hand with many earlier callers
Playing 10 handed at the micro level of 0.5/1 I often find myself in the situation of having a premium hand but I have many ‘limpers’ before me. Lets say I am in the SB or BB and I find AA and I have 5 limpers before me and I know that they are all going to call for 1 extra bet.
I understand from the post by Ed Miller and SSHE that I should raise when I have the best of it, and there is no doubt I have the best of it with AA. Of all the players involved, I will on average, be getting the majority of each $ entering the pot. However, all the other players added together will be getting more than my, say 20% (not sure if AA would get this much share of the value 6 handed), of the value.
Including my bet, there will be another $3.00 entering the pot and as I am getting 20% of that (which equals $0.6) it is positive EV for me as I am getting a greater share of what goes into the pot than what I put in.
However, the +EV benefit is marginal, as is the –EV that would be experienced by some of the other players in the hand and therefore they will stay in even though it is only marginally negative. Is this slight +EV offset by being out of position for the remainder of the hand? Also, from a Psychological point of view is there any value in not raising. My thinking being, I would get less distressed losing with bullets if I hadn’t raised them than I would be if I had raised and I get beat by what is considered an inferior hand. As I am only going to win this scenario about 20% of the time is it worth going through the psychological impact of losing with raised bullets 4 times out of 5? I think I know the answer to this one but I thought I’d ask anyway.
Would I play this scenario any different if I was on the button because I would always have position on people?
I am sure I will have many more queries as my poker journey continues and again, apologies if these topics have been covered numerous times before.
Many thanks.
M
Whilst I have been playing poker for a little over a year it is only over the last couple of months that I found 2+2 and started to take the game a little more seriously. Previously I was only a STT and MTT player but I was lured at the end of the year by the Gaming Club bonus which set me out to pursue the ring games.
I’ve invested some money in Pokertracker and most importantly I’ve invested my time in reading some books (SSHE, TOP, HEFAP) as well as 2+2, and applying the theory in practice. I also spend time to analyse my play in pokertracker. My next step is to post hands on the micro limit forum.
January was my first full month in this new current mindset and the month is just about to pass with mixed results. I am only playing at 0.5/1 and won’t think of moving up until I feel I have the fundamentals in place, bankroll is not an issue, consistent successful play is.
To some extent I actually think I didn’t do as well from a BB/100 perspective applying the new techniques as I would have done in my old pre PT and 2+2 days. However, this is most likely due to variance, but most importantly, I feel much more confident in my play and I know I am setting the foundations for future solid ring game play.
I also feel that when I started applying some of the material I had read on 2+2 it was clear that I had become too preoccupied with statistics and the thinking that my VPIP, PFR etc had to be within the ranges highlighted on the forums. I want to move away from this in February as I feel the stats should occur as a result of my play and not drive it. I think I moved into a case of the ‘tail wagging the dog’ with the PT statistics. Sure, if my results drop I will use the stats to identify leaks but my guess is that you can take 50 people with exactly the same VPIP & PFR stats over 10k hands and the quality of their play (and BB results) could differ significantly.
Now onto the main reason for my post. I have two queries that I am sure have been answered many times before but whilst I can use the ‘search’ function I rarely find it to be of any use.
Counting Outs on a Flush Draw and OESD
When it comes to playing flush draws I feel that I am always overstating the odds relative to the guidance in poker texts and/or the 2+2 forums. If I have suited hole cards and flop 4 to a flush the guidance seems to be that I have 9 outs when calculating the odds that the pot needs to be laying me in order to get value from my flush draw.
However, if I am playing 10 handed should I not assumed that on average 5 of the 20 hole cards will be of my suit, I have 2 of the 5, therefore there would be, on average, 3 more of my suit in other players hole cards. Consequently the number of outs I should be counting is actually 6 rather than 9?
The same would also apply to OESD’s and say for example I should discount 3 of the 8 as they would, on average, be in the hole cards of the others sat at the table. [38% (20/52) of the cards are hole cards, therefore on average, 38% of my OESD cards will already be out there 38% x 8 = 3.04, therefore I really only have 5 to an OESD?
[I think the math needs to be refined slightly as in the flush example there are 9 of my required suit available out of 47 unseen cards. 18 of these are hole cards therefore the 9 of the suit I require are split on average 3.44 in the 18 unseen hole cards and 5.55 in the unseen 29 cards remaining in the deck. I am confusing myself with this now – Have I really only got 5.55 outs to a flush on average?]
Whilst I don’t expect this to have a material impact on the results I just wanted to understand it from a theoretical perspective. Although what I am suggesting above is lowering the value of a flush draw by 38.3%. Is there a reason that I am not aware of as to why you should count 9 outs in the case of a flush draw and 8 in the case of an OESD? Should you ever discount your outs as highlighted above. Over 10k flush draws my guess is that this could make some small difference? I think I am missing something here and would welcome the obvious to be pointed out to me.
Raising in late position with a premium hand with many earlier callers
Playing 10 handed at the micro level of 0.5/1 I often find myself in the situation of having a premium hand but I have many ‘limpers’ before me. Lets say I am in the SB or BB and I find AA and I have 5 limpers before me and I know that they are all going to call for 1 extra bet.
I understand from the post by Ed Miller and SSHE that I should raise when I have the best of it, and there is no doubt I have the best of it with AA. Of all the players involved, I will on average, be getting the majority of each $ entering the pot. However, all the other players added together will be getting more than my, say 20% (not sure if AA would get this much share of the value 6 handed), of the value.
Including my bet, there will be another $3.00 entering the pot and as I am getting 20% of that (which equals $0.6) it is positive EV for me as I am getting a greater share of what goes into the pot than what I put in.
However, the +EV benefit is marginal, as is the –EV that would be experienced by some of the other players in the hand and therefore they will stay in even though it is only marginally negative. Is this slight +EV offset by being out of position for the remainder of the hand? Also, from a Psychological point of view is there any value in not raising. My thinking being, I would get less distressed losing with bullets if I hadn’t raised them than I would be if I had raised and I get beat by what is considered an inferior hand. As I am only going to win this scenario about 20% of the time is it worth going through the psychological impact of losing with raised bullets 4 times out of 5? I think I know the answer to this one but I thought I’d ask anyway.
Would I play this scenario any different if I was on the button because I would always have position on people?
I am sure I will have many more queries as my poker journey continues and again, apologies if these topics have been covered numerous times before.
Many thanks.
M