minimum buy in- post->push->leave

[MissOt]

ok im a winning player and all, but i was just wondering if it was possible or +ev to make money like this. say you would buy in at 1/2 for the min ($40) and post the blind and push the first hand then leave the table whether folded, win, or lose.

can anyone calculate how many times you would need them to fold for it to be +ev or if the whole play is a winning play or not.

since its 1/2 they are probably only calling with AA-TT(i probably fold JJ/TT and def AQ) and AK maybe AQ. everytime you push you pick up the blinds and maybe some limpers money. how many times do they have to fold or you have to pick up a hand or suck out before the play becomes +ev if it even is.

if you are properly rolled and you dont have a reputation of doing this, i think that you can win money by doing this. i dont know the math, but i was wondering if somebody could get an idea if its +ev or not

edit: what about 6 max? and posting on CO instead of BB or other spots

also if this does work, could it work at higher limits and even make a decent $/HR?

[emp1346]

i'm just gonna take a real quick stab at this... and this is for posting on the BB, and assuming an average (on a six person table) of 1.5 limpers... also assuming players will only call with the hands you specified...

i'd say (based on some real loose calculations run on my phone calculator) that you would have an EV of approximately $5-$6...

then again, i've been wrong before... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[jba]

this question is impossible to answer.

In order to calculate EV we need some idea of how much money we are winning. How much money will be in the pot, how many players, when you make this move? some tables the usual action will be one limper, one raise and then it's to you, maybe $12 in the pot. sometimes typical action is 6 limpers to you....this is dangerous obviously -- less money in the pot and more players to find a calling hand. maniac table maybe you get raise to 10 reraise to 25 and here you are all in without a real raise.

see what I mean?


and I'm pretty sure you need some more rules to make this EV+. like how to respond to raises. the concept you are after is similar to the system from sklansky's tournament book, I think, check that out.

[kyro]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm just gonna take a real quick stab at this... and this is for posting on the BB, and assuming an average (on a six person table) of 1.5 limpers... also assuming players will only call with the hands you specified...

i'd say (based on some real loose calculations run on my phone calculator) that you would have an EV of approximately $5-$6...

then again, i've been wrong before... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I highly doubt this is +EV.

[emp1346]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i'm just gonna take a real quick stab at this... and this is for posting on the BB, and assuming an average (on a six person table) of 1.5 limpers... also assuming players will only call with the hands you specified...

i'd say (based on some real loose calculations run on my phone calculator) that you would have an EV of approximately $5-$6...

then again, i've been wrong before... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I highly doubt this is +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

i highly doubt it's +EV myself... all the more reason I'd like to see this really answered... not so much so I can go do it or anything, but more so that I can learn how to solve it...

edit: as for how to respond to raises, I was going with a basic rule that even with a raise the all-in move is made... and for the sake of a bit of simplicity that the raises were only being made with the aforementioned hands...

[Pokerlogist]

Interesting. Heres's a quick and dirty analysis.

A premium hand, AA-JJ,AKs,AK is dealt about 3 times per 100 hands. So you would expect somebody to have one at about one of every three 10-player tables. So lets assume you get called about 1/3 of the time. The collective win rate of the premium hands against random hands is 75%. So in theory 2/3 of time you would win the blinds plus the bets of some limper(s) or small raisers. 1/4 of the time you lose your stack of $40, and .08 of the time you beat the premium hand, winning you stack plus the blinds plus any stray limpers, lets say that is $40+$3+$2=$45. Let EV=.67(x)+.25(-40 loss)+.08(+45)=0,where x=min. amount you need to win when all fold. Here x=$6.4. So you would need to have on average of 2 limpers ($4) in additon to the blinds ($3) when you win uncontested pots to make it a profitable strategy. That doesn’t sound too unreasonable. Things can get seriously sticky if people start calling with lesser hands. They would this do if the pot were raised enough or if they were simply looser players. Then your plan could easily become –EV /images/graemlins/blush.gif. On the other hand, you might be able to improve the plan a bit by waiting for a better hand or a good limp situation before the push. Of course, then it becomes a step closer to real poker, and you have to think a little /images/graemlins/tongue.gif. You might like to read the discussion of Miller’s short stack system posted somewhere here.

If you give it a try, let us know what happens.

[emp1346]

[ QUOTE ]
Interesting. Heres's a quick and dirty analysis.

A premium hand, AA-JJ,AKs,AK is dealt about 3 times per 100 hands. So you would expect somebody to have one at about one of every three 10-player tables. So lets assume you get called about 1/3 of the time. The collective win rate of the premium hands against random hands is 75%. So in theory 2/3 of time you would win the blinds plus the bets of some limper(s) or small raisers. 1/4 of the time you lose your stack of $40, and .08 of the time you beat the premium hand, winning you stack plus the blinds plus any stray limpers, lets say that is $40+$3+$2=$45. Let EV=.67(x)+.25(-40 loss)+.08(+45)=0,where x=min. amount you need to win when all fold. Here x=$6.4. So you would need to have on average of 2 limpers ($4) in additon to the blinds ($3) when you win uncontested pots to make it a profitable strategy. That doesn’t sound too unreasonable. Things can get seriously sticky if people start calling with lesser hands. They would this do if the pot were raised enough or if they were simply looser players. Then your plan could easily become –EV /images/graemlins/blush.gif. On the other hand, you might be able to improve the plan a bit by waiting for a better hand or a good limp situation before the push. Of course, then it becomes a step closer to real poker, and you have to think a little /images/graemlins/tongue.gif. You might like to read the discussion of Miller’s short stack system posted somewhere here.

If you give it a try, let us know what happens.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is along the lines of how i went about figuring it out, with different general numbers and probabilities (i think) but the same concept, also considering win / loss rates versus premium hands...

so... if people only call with the hands designated by the OP, then yes, this is +EV?

come on, someone has to be able to prove this is -EV given only the hands denominated above... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[TomCollins]

People will call with lesser hands.

[MissOt]

if people are calling with lesser hands, what about higher limits then?

[gonepunting]

I think this analysis is correct. This move is +EV and if you find a late position seat and only do this when there are one or more limpers this would improve the strategy further. Say this happens 80% of time, so 20% of time you end up playing your hand which should only be a loss of half a big blind on average.
It's a bit like putting in a big raise on a number of limpers out of the big blind when playing NL. This move also has a high chance of success (Harrington discusses this).
However I think there are other considerations which make it a dubious strategy.
Good players will notice that you are doing it and make notes, or you might start showing up in pokertracker with a PFR of 90%!
The fact that it is your first hand makes it a bit more likely that it is a random push as a opposed a genuine hand and you might run in to lower calling standards.

[emp1346]

[ QUOTE ]
People will call with lesser hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

look, i'm not arguing whether the strategy "in general" is a good one...

read the damn original post, will ya? i've now actually sat down with some time and run the actual calculations, and it is DEFINATELY, repeat DEFINATELY +EV based on the hands listed...

now, if you want to disuss "people noticing" what you're doing, we're assuming for the sake of the discussion that there is an endless poker room where this play can always be made at a 'new' table... recall, please, that this is the probability forum, not the "in theory it's great but will never work" forum...

and now, if you want to talk about "weaker hands" calling, please, please, define "weaker hands" and then further that statement by providing some EV associated with this, or pose it as a question that can be answered...

the strategy is +EV the way it was asked, whether you want to believe it or not...

[kmvenne]

Here is an interesting idea, although it will ruin your ability to do this again to anyone that sees it. Proceed as OP stated, but always show your bluff if you take it down uncontested. Then pay the SB and play out the free cards, and only shove AA, KK, QQ, and AK. $1 paid for the oppertunity to get your money in with likely by far the best of it against greatly reduced calling standards (people will say "does he always just wait for 94o to push or something??"). While we might have trouble quantifying the edge this adds to the play, can we all who discussed that weaker hands will call the first push perhaps agree that adding this element and some rules regarding reraises ahead of us or big raises could make this strategy +EV? I think I can see it being as such....

[TomCollins]

Even in an endless room, and if everyone has amnesia, some players will call with hands such as 88, or even some people will call with AT.

[Pokerlogist]

Okay, let’s loosen the calling range to AA-99,AK-AJ.

Those hands are expected to occur more often than the strong premium hands at a rate 6.3 times for every 100 hands. That suggests you’d be called about 63% of the time at a 10-player table, much higher than the earlier 1/3, and that you would not called 37% of the time. On the other hand, those hands have a collective win rate against random hands of 71%, a bit less than the stronger group. So this implies that 37% of the time you’d win an uncontested pot, 45% you’d lose your stack of $40, and 18% of the time you’d win a showdown. So how much must you win in an uncontested pot to break even? We assumed in showdown wins, you’d get about $45. Let EV=.37(x,$uncontested pot size) +.45(-$40 loss)+.18(+$45win)=0. Now solve for x=minimal size of contested pot won and we get x=+$26.75 /images/graemlins/shocked.gif . Compare that to the earlier +$6.4. This is too high to reasonably expect to get in a typical preflop pot at this blind level ($1/$2). To make things worse, when you open allin, say from an early position, all that you could win in an uncontested pot would be the blinds, $3. That's just not enough. It seems that when a calling range is loosened up a little it makes a dramatic negative change in the outcome of all-in bets. The implication is that the system, in its most simple form, could only work against tight calling ranges, if at all /images/graemlins/frown.gif.
Hope this helps .

BTW I used the marvelous Poker Calculator 1.1.4.1 for this.

I think that the general online poker public is much to wise to this or plain just to bitter at players who go all in on their first hands and are much more inclined to call. I definately think this would be a -EV based on the fact that people love to bust bluffers and this is known as a good bluffing situation.

[meow_meow]

[ QUOTE ]
if people are calling with lesser hands, what about higher limits then?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably broadens the range of hands that will call you, especially since you are buying short.

Also, your OP asks us to assume "you don't have a reputation for doing this". That might be the case for about the first 50-100 hands.

[That guy]

If you had a good table selection strategy with lots of players to the flop and screened for no real LAG's, this might help...

I agree that after doing this in the BB and showing it, you post the SB and see 9 hands for the cost of a SB and only move in with AA or KK or maybe AK-s...

By waiting through 1 orbit, your PT stats would revert to non-extreme nums...