Chopping (again)

[Vehn]

From mike l.'s recent post (http://www.twoplustwo.com/forums/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=mediumholdem&Number=195595 &page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=14&fpart=1) in the mid stakes forum:

he (opponent in hand) doesnt chop of course (i do and i love tommy's policy of chopping all the way down to 3 players, that's my policy too now).

I'm wondering on if proponents of this style of chopping could expand a bit. In my current $8/$16 I will chop down to 5 players as the rake is pretty brutal, but will (hopefully) be playing $15/$30 soon. I have not decided yet whether I will chop at all. Any thoughts?

[KSU78]

Just look at your cards and then make the decision to chop or not. /forums/images/icons/tongue.gif

There are so many goofballs at Canterbury with regards to chopping. It really irks me that there are idiots there that say six players is short-handed. For that matter, 9 is short-handed to me! I go with what I played in Las Vegas. Chop down to 6 players and play it when it is 5 or less. If you can't buy into that, then just simply say that you don't chop. And for the most part, I have an inclination that very few players there have a handle on heads-up play. I might raise with 72os in that situation.

[JTG51]

I really don't care. I think it'll make so little difference in your bankroll in the long run that it hardly matters. So, I always do what the guys on either side of me want.

If the guy to my left always chops and the guy to my right never does, fine. I'll chop my SBs and play my BBs.

When one of them says there's too few players left to chop, then I stop chopping.

My only exception is when a player looks before deciding. I'll never chop with someone like that.

[Andy B]

Speaking as a Canterbury nit who doesn't chop at six-handed....

I wouldn't classify a 5% rake as "brutal." What frosts me is that if you take the flop heads-up with no raise, a buck comes out for the damned jackpot.

I always thought that when I started playing $15/30 or higher, I wouldn't chop. Well, I started playing those games a little over a year ago, and I found myself chopping. Not chopping is going to add to your fluctuations, and it may and may not add much to your EV. If you're on a small bankroll, you might keep on chopping. If I had a bigger bankroll, I probably wouldn't chop. If we paid time, I probably wouldn't chop.

Most of those guys chop. The few that don't tend to be either very good or very bad. And it's not like it comes up that much at $15/30, either.

[balt999]

in my opinion....As long as your consistent....either you chop all the time or not at all...

[Dr.Kimble]

I would never chop, most players tend to play shorthanded very bad /forums/images/icons/grin.gif

[KSU78]

You're right. Most play short-handed games very badly. The most significant factor to their poor play is that they are not used to playing the normal hands dealt in a short-handed game. I would venture to say their hands on an average are better than most hands in short-handed game. With that said, why do you think they play poorly in a "short-handed" situation at a full table?

[Vehn]

I think understand now. Last night I played in a 5 and then 3 handed 8/16 game for some time. The one decent (aggressive) was to my immediate left and essentially him and I carved up the other 3 players while we consistently got to chop our blinds or play for free/cheap from them. Hilarious.