Live Play...Is chopping +EV or -EV?

[BigSkiRace]

Live Play...Is chopping +EV or -EV?

[TheDelChop]

Well, I don't know if chopping can ever be +EV, however, if you would win a majority of the hands that you would play out then chopping can definetly make you miss out on some EV.

[The Dude]

I would wager to guess that if you have to ask this question, it's probably better that you chop - at least for now. You probably should learn to play SH or HU better for future play, but this hand specifically, probably chop.

[pokerjo22]

Chopping can be +EV if you consider the player you're chopping with, the rake, the toke and the opportunity cost of not getting on with the next hand.

[lostinthought]

Most players live at 20/40 holdem and below don't know how to play heads up very well. So in an isolated sense, if you do (know how to plays heads up well), then it is negative ev.

However, you are fighting the high rake, and the opportunity cost of playing another hand with more players..

Also, there is the -ev of being seen as a chump, as most players chop at 20/40 and below.

I'll chop in a full game, but once it gets down to 6 people, I won't chop, because it gets folded to the blinds to often.

[elmo]

With the ts rake of $3 on every hand, chopping is mandatory in 3/6 and below, and likely worth doing at 5/10 to stay friendly and keep the game moving. At 10/20 and up, I think I would make more not chopping, but do it for image purposes unless the game is short.

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
Live Play...Is chopping +EV or -EV?

[/ QUOTE ]

depends imo entirely on rake structure.

i dont chop in time charge games. i chop 20/40 games b/c of rake. i dont think i have an edge over and above the rake and toke.

the less the relative rake is the more likely i and everyone else is to play it out.

-Barron

[NMcNasty]

Technically chopping is always +EV and never -EV. You are wagering nothing for a 100% chance to win back your blind, so your expected value is just the value of your blind.

From the big blind I would say that chopping is almost always better than not except when the small blind is a very weak player and you think you can average more than one small bet per hand against him. From the small blind chopping is probably bad, but of course its very rude to chop with the player on your right and not chop with the player on your left.

Against players better than you you obviously want to chop. Against players of equal skill you should also probably chop because chopped pots don't get raked. Against worse players you should play if you think your advantage is enough to make up for the rake and the extra time it takes to play the hand. Even though if I play at a table I'm assumming most of the players are worse than me, I'll still probably chop just to be polite and I think playing at a table full of choppers is slightly better EV than playing at a table where everyone plays through, since there is less dead time waiting for hands to be completed.

[BigSkiRace]

[ QUOTE ]
From the big blind I would say that chopping is almost always better than not except when the small blind is a very weak player and you think you can average more than one small bet per hand against him. From the small blind chopping is probably bad, but of course its very rude to chop with the player on your right and not chop with the player on your left.

Against players better than you you obviously want to chop. Against players of equal skill you should also probably chop because chopped pots don't get raked. Against worse players you should play if you think your advantage is enough to make up for the rake and the extra time it takes to play the hand. Even though if I play at a table I'm assumming most of the players are worse than me, I'll still probably chop just to be polite and I think playing at a table full of choppers is slightly better EV than playing at a table where everyone plays through, since there is less dead time waiting for hands to be completed.

[/ QUOTE ]

The way I understand it you either chop or dont chop no matter the skill of the players to the left and your right

[ShawnHoo]

I often notice that players who don't chop (in a raked game) think they're better than average, but aren't.

[BigSkiRace]

Another thing Is theres a couple guys in the 20/40 at Turning Stone that do not chop, they are the older guys like over 50, alot of them have been playing of a living off and on there whole life, theres also a guy from NYC area that has been playing a whole lot up there b/c its a soft game, and he does not chop....What about pros like ivey, and chan, do they chop in limit games?

[lil feller]

[ QUOTE ]
Chopping can be +EV if you consider the player you're chopping with, the rake, the toke and the opportunity cost of not getting on with the next hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is probably just lame semantics on my part, but wouldn't chopping have an EV of Zero, and not chopping (if it places you at a disadvantage, or the rake is too high, or whatever) is -EV?

lf

[jdock99]

I do not ever chop (I play live 20-40 HE and up, but for reasons a little more complicated than direct EV). I am admittedly not the best player in the world, although I am no slouch either, but if you count the rake, not chopping is probably a break even proposal at best. However, when I did used to chop I used to have too many shots taken at me by unscrupulous players. The most obvious example of this is the player who normally chops who finds a good hand and decides they do not want to chop. Normally they do this when the table gets 5-6 handed so they can use this as an excuse, but many times I was 100% sure the player would have chopped if they had nothing. Also, whenever there is a blind on the button, or a blind post behind the button (which happens very often), I always see players taking advantage of this situation (asking for chop if horrible hand, but if decent or good hand wanting to play it out). Finally, many players will chop with you every time if they are out of position (small blind), but if they are in position (big blind)they will not chop with you if the player to their left does not chop. And finally there are the truly clueless players, who treat the situation like they are playing war, and want both blinds to call, inducing the full rake, and then check it down and see who wins. If one takes into consideration all the $$ lost by players enacting these shenanigans, plus the potential $$ lost from the tilt often induced by such situations, I find it is definitely + EV to never chop.

[pokerjo22]

[ QUOTE ]
lame semantics

[/ QUOTE ]

but also true

[andyfox]

In many of the Southern California games, if there's no flop, they only take $1 drop. If there is a flop, they take either $4 or $5. So when you consider that, plus the good feelings engendered by the friendliness of chopping, it's probably +EV for most players to chop.

[jdock99]

Andy,

I am just curious. What do you do when you have a blind and there is a 2nd small blind on the button or a post behind the button (more usual) and a chopping situation arrises?


Normally what happens is the poster looks at his hand because it is his turn, and then either checks because he has a bad hand or is a weak palyer, then the button folds, then one of the blind players (normally one w/ a garbage hand) will ask "3 way chop?," to which the player posting behind the button will say yes or no depending on the quality of his hand. I guess I am trying to say I am willing to sacrifice a little EV for consistency and to protect myself against angle shooting. I also get a little annoyed by a player who who will raise on the button w/ 82o on your small blind when he has position, and then want to chop the next hand when he is in small blind. I dont mind a good natured war over the blinds, especially in a tight game, but I dont like the idea of giving someone to the right of me an advantage like that.

[JoshuaD]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
lame semantics

[/ QUOTE ]

but also true

[/ QUOTE ]

No it's not. Do you discount money you put in the pot when you're looking at the EV of chasing a draw?

[jayheaps]

are we looking at it from the SB or BB perspective? I think it is much more +EV from the SB perspective since you are playing the hand out of position.