I'm playing too many hands..

[BeerMoney]

From what I understand, the best players on party are playing 14-15% of hands, and I play around 19%.

My starting hands:
Big Pairs
Totally live small pairs with good kickers.
Live 3 flushes
sometimes live 3 straights.
I fold rolled up hands cause they always lose.

Now, hands i'll play to a completion:
3 frushes.
Huge pairs, assuming my pair beats their door.
pairs when my kicker beats their door.

Anyway, I'm playing 30% more hands then the tightasses on party, what do I need to eliminate? I play 10/20 and 5/10.

[Bartholow]

Personally I wouldn't cut out too much of that, but you may want to fold more of the pairs that are smaller than their door with overcard kickers. Fold them anytime it won't get headsup or if you think there is particular reason to think that they could have something better than they are representing. You could also just always fold these hands if the raiser is any good and you'd do fine.

[greenage]

[ QUOTE ]
Totally live small pairs with good kickers.
Live 3 flushes

[/ QUOTE ]

Maye some of these, like smaller 3 flushes.

[beta1607]

Given the tight structure at party you are not giving much up folding hands like (A3)3 on 3rd for a bring-in and def. fold it for a completion against most opponents. I think it is important to note the difference between (33)A and (3A)3 in terms of your ability to get paid off when you make three of a kind. Also - I like little pairs big kicker a little more when they are two of a suit.

[lstream]

"Sometimes live 3 straights" - I have some pretty strict conditions about playing these. If there is no solid overcard, or a live two flush, then I throw away almost all of these. Reason being, that if I brick on fourth, then I have some other kind of out as well. Maybe these are your rules too.

On the other hand, my playing percentage is very close to yours, assuming that the number includes bring-ins that force you to play fourth when you would otherwise fold.

I was chatting with Roland about this and he is so tight he squeaks - 13 to 15% I think. I believe that he avoids certain types of hands that I play. On certain tables, I will lower my standards by limping in on third, and maybe even fourth if I am last to act and don't have to worry about being re-raised. This will drive my % played up by a few points, and in my case likely explains the difference between my 20% and the 15% or so that some people end up with.

I saw a post from Sara a while back where she mentioned a target of 20%, so your 19% does not sound so bad. From what I can tell, she could end up buying a yacht from her poker winnings, so maybe you don't want to be at 15% after all /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]
I saw a post from Sara a while back where she mentioned a target of 20%, so your 19% does not sound so bad. From what I can tell, she could end up buying a yacht from her poker winnings, so maybe you don't want to be at 15% after all /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


Yeah, but Sara is clearly an expert – and I’m not. So while she might end up buying a yacht, I might end up blowing my bankroll.
Just keep in mind that it’s almost impossible to play too tight, especially in this tight structure.

[bigredlemon]

100/8=12.5
Either you're at a super aggressive table or those players are only playing the top 5% of hands!??

Aren't tight players the easiest to play since you know exactly what they have?

[Bartholow]

Are you suggesting (3A)3 is worse than (33)A? I think this is at least an "it depends" question. When your doorcard is really low, people are often less likely to put you on trips when you pair it, but more importantly aces up is also a hand that generally likes to be paid off. And you'll hit that 50% more often, assuming all your cards are likely. But perhaps most importantly, the A doorcard will give you the worst position throughout the hand. On the plus side you'll have an easier time stealing with an A up. But your post talked about getting paid off when you hit, and for that I'd prefer 3A3.

[beta1607]

Also - I forgot to mention that in your and my usual games, I think there is more value in being a little too loose then a little too tight considering the ability to out play opponents on later streets and get paid off when you hit.

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
100/8=12.5
Either you're at a super aggressive table or those players are only playing the top 5% of hands!??

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhmm........ what are you talking about? I will assume you're talking about the fact that if everybody went to showdown, you expect to win 12.5%? I'm talking %age of time I see 4th street.

[lstream]

[ QUOTE ]
100/8=12.5

[/ QUOTE ]
Not quite, since this assumes all of your bring-ins are played until fourth. Point taken though - when you factor in the bring-ins that go to fourth, 15% or so is mondo tight.

[bigredlemon]

you bring in about 12.5% of the time. You'll see 4th with that hand so long as no one raises. That's what I'm talking about. I don't have exact stats but i'd ballpark half to 1/3rd of my to-fourth % as a free ride.

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
Just keep in mind that it’s almost impossible to play too tight, especially in this tight structure.

[/ QUOTE ]

A very good thing to keep in mind.

It also lets you 6 table /images/graemlins/grin.gif which lets you play 6 times as many hands 1/6th as good /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[beta1607]

I understand what you are saying - and either way it is close. I just think that an A on 4th 5th or 6th either way will slow down the action against a big pair whereas a 3 will allow you to trap your opponent for multiple bets. Also - It is easier to out play an opponent later on when you are showing an A. I think that you only make less with (33)A when you pair your A on 4th or 5th and the opponent doesn't have two pair yet.

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
you bring in about 12.5% of the time. You'll see 4th with that hand so long as no one raises. That's what I'm talking about. I don't have exact stats but i'd ballpark half to 1/3rd of my to-fourth % as a free ride.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, I realize what you meant as soon as lstream posted. And I agree, its a good point.

At 10/20 in particular, u don't really get too many free rides from the bring in.

Oh, and you're 12.5% BI is way off, i'm the bring in 75% of hands today.

[beta1607]

[ QUOTE ]
Just keep in mind that it’s almost impossible to play too tight, especially in this tight structure.


[/ QUOTE ]

Remember the double edge sword - the tighter you play the easier it is to slip into predictability...

Also to quote Mike McD "you can't win what you don't put in the middle"

[Bartholow]

I would agree with what you are saying about outplaying people later, except that position helps you outplay a lot too. Overall I think that is a wash.

[ QUOTE ]
I think that you only make less with (33)A when you pair your A on 4th or 5th and the opponent doesn't have two pair yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you mean that you get called down when you pair your A doorcard by two pair a lot??? If that's what you are saying, I guess our difference is just that we play in different games maybe. If that's not what you are saying, then I'm not sure what you ARE saying.

Again though, I think they both have advantages depending on the situation. Honestly I play (33)A more, but only because I often open raise with it as a semi-steal. If I'm playing against an open raising Q (and if I play at all here it's because they don't have to have queens), and I don't think there's a decent chance that I can re-steal or something, I'd generally much rather have (3A)3.

[beta1607]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you mean that you get called down when you pair your A doorcard by two pair a lot???

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes - its hard to say exactly how often since I never know when they folded two pair and of course it is better to catch the A later in terms of getting paid off but it is not uncommon by any means to be called down on 4th with hands like K7K7 against my 33AA.

Since I didn't put in a 3rd bet preflop they dont think I have three of a kind and have no way of knowing I have a pair in the hole instead of three suited or three straight etc.

[Doctavian]

Dear Beer,

If you play the hands that you say you’re playing, you should be playing approximately one in seven to one in eight hands. Not the one in five hands you calculate.

But your not!

What could be wrong!

The most common errors come in evaluating our straight draws. Let's say you start with three cards to a max connector. How many of your primary cards are live? How many of your secondary ones?

ie: You start with a 789 How many 5s, 6s, 10s, and jacks are out? Is your hand really live? How live are your 7s,8s, and 9s. Remember mathematical provability tells us that we are more likely to hit 2 pair with 3 max connectors than we are our straight! (See Constantine Otmer's Book on Stud Also Mohamed Mohammad's work on the mathematical science of Poker.

What are your requirements for starting with a dead primary or two dead secondary cards.?


( Straight draws are the most common starting hand error and it may be a problem in your case, then again it may not)


Are your starting cards really live? I think C Otmer and R West’s books, give the best explanations of connected starting cards.
SFAP is also a good work.


Considering your pairs: Are both your pair cards and your kickers live?

What is your definition of a live flush? What are your parameters for differentiating the calling requirement between a nut flush draw and a medium flush draw?

How do you alter your starting hand requirements depending on your position in the hand?

Gifted players can relax their starting hand requirements a little. IF they can play fourth street near perfectly.

Here is a recommendation. I think that Sklansky et all’s work on Stud is the best overall. But I prefer West’s and Otmer’s books on the description of starting hands.

It would cost you less to buy all three of those books, and master them that, what you loose in one bad night at the tables.

When I was starting out, I bought all three of those books.


I read them onto a tape recorder and listened to each of them on my walkman or car radio 7 times.

I know that you may think that I am nuts. But what I did do was to start winning at stud the first month I played. And have been successful for the last 15 years.

I feel that the key to winning is WHAT WE DO AWAY from the table not necessarily what we do at the table.

Get the books I mentioned, and get a home computer stud simulator (that corrects your mistakes)

About 8 years ago I asked a friend (who at the time was ranked fourth in the world, as far as money’s he’d won in stud tournaments the previous year) what he thought strengthened his game the most. And he told me that a computer simulator had.

He said that he still used his stud simulator, about an hour each night.

Good luck and God bless.

Your friend,

Doc AZ

[BeerMoney]

Doc, thanks for the response.

To answer your questions.

As far as the 3-straights go, I really look for a reason to fold these hands, although I will sneak in for the BI if I think I can sometimes.

Pairs: I play my big pairs almost always.

Flush draws: I only play if one or fewer of my suit is out. The ranks of my cards don't usually change whether or not I play the hand, rather how I play them.

Small pairs with good kickers.. I only play if all of my cards are live.

One thing I've learned in the year i've been playing this game is the value of live cards. They often give me the extra suck-out potential I like to have in a hand.

Please realize that the 19-20% that I am playing is a figure given from stats on PartyPoker, and also includes hands where I am forced to be the bring in.

[beset7]

Nice post. Nice to know I'm not the only one to have benefited greatly from the R. Wests sections on starting hands. I might print out that list of questions you asked Beer so I can ask them of myself next time I run bad.

[peritonlogon]

[ QUOTE ]

Please realize that the 19-20% that I am playing is a figure given from stats on PartyPoker, and also includes hands where I am forced to be the bring in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't trust party's stats... one sesion I saw 0% of 4th and won 75% of show downs....Still trying to figure out how it happened.

[vintage_sara]

Hey lstream. I looked back to where I gave a recommendation for 20 percent. Just to be clear, I was recommending to someone who was playing 30 percent plus to try to get their percentage down to about 20 percent. I said my percentage is usually lower that 20 percent.

However, I do creep up higher sometimes, but is it my fault if the poker gods hit me with the deck?