A good theoretical question

[Clarkmeister]

You have AKo.

Which type of structure would you rather be playing in and why? Ignore the differences in limits and focus on structure type.

3-3-6-6
3-3-6-9
6-6-6-6

[Homer]

Which structure -- 6-6-6-6

Why -- Lower implied odds in this game...AK don't need no stinkin implied odds...the hands it will be up against do, however.

-- Homer

[Schmed]

I would think I would want to be able to bet the most early with a hand like this. Obviously a great hand to start but it is behind a pair. If I can raise it up to 12 preflop and make small pairs fold I think it would be the best way to have it. So I would have to say the structure that allows me to bet the most early would be the correct answer. So 6-6-6-6.

If it were suited then I would think that there is more merit to having the big pop late.

[Huh]

I think it depends on the game type, but I vote for
3-3-6-6

I recently played in a 5-5-5-5 game that was miserable. It was very loose passive and people usually had correct odds to draw to second pairs and gutshots on the turn.

I don't think AK likes the big bet on the end, since it's giving implied odds to drawing hands.

In a 3-3-6-6 game you have all types of options. The bet on the turn is big enough to force people to make bigger mistakes on the turn...I dunno maybe I just like the structure, but I think this is the best for being able to protect your hand vs. Not giving away too much implied odds.

-Huh

[ML4L]

Hey Clark,

A VERY good question for beginners... To experienced players, I think it would probably be clear that the 6-6-6-6 structure is most beneficial because you're wrecking the implied odds of drawing hands.

Boy, I'll look like a jackass if for some reason I'm not thinking about this correctly... /forums/images/icons/grin.gif

ML4L

[Nottom]

Yeah ... what homer said.

Implied odds are for hands that want to make something better than TPTK.

Would the answer be different with AKs ... hmmm

[mrbaseball]

3-3-6-6 is the structure I would rather be playing it in.

Why? I assume 6-6-6-6 would be a better mathematical choice but I would never play in that structure. I play 3-3-6-6 structure all the time. It is the structure I prefer, am familiar with and have studied extensively. I actively seek out this structure and try to avoid any other structure at all costs.

I have played other structures and to be honest I just don't feel as comfortable at them. My regular internet games are 3-3-6-6 structure as are the games I play in when I travel to LV. It is the structure I have studied extensively with all of my 2+2 books as well as the rest of my extensive poker library. It is the structure I used when learning the game and playing 1000's upon 1000's of hands on Texas Turbo Holdem software.

Why would I want this hand in a game I wouldn't be playing in /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

[Schmed]

I like the 1-4-8-8 structure. Especially a soft 1-4-8-8 game. That has got to be my favorite and most profitable structure by far.

You see more flops in that structure. I mean suited connectors, anything, Kxs, you're hoping to flop big and hit it hard.

The rub is it's hard to protect your top hands.

[Inthacup]

How about 6 6 6 3? Seriously, the one I want the least is 3-3-6-9. AK is usually the strongest preflop, thus I want to put in as much money as I can early, charge the draws as much as I can on the flop and turn, and get charged the least if they get there. Out of these options presented, 6-6-6-6 most closely resembles this style. Mmmmm, yeah, I'll have that.

[J.R.]

I like the 3-3-6-6 structure, but I haven't put in much deep thought on this. I think it is clear the big river bet structure is less preferable with a made hand and cards to come.

The straight 6 structure wrecks implied odds, but AK is still a drawing hand. You only connect TP/TK 1 out of 3 times, and flop a gutshot or other draw about 5% of the time. The $3 flop bet permits you to often correctly call with overcards in a pot that was raised pre-flop and yet also permits you to charge the draws on the turn if you hit, especially if you can raise a turn bet. In the straight 6 structure you are less correct to chase overcards on the flop, and if you do and connect the lack of a larger turn bet makes it harder to confront the draws with the incorrect pot odds to continue with their hands. The 3 on the flop also lets you occasionally puchase a look at the river for half price when you airball the flop, which cannot be done in the straight 6 game.

I think its clear that big pairs like the straight 6 game, but I am not so sure about AK because it is a drawing hand, although there are many who will probably flame me for this. Don't be suprised if my thinking evolves with reflection and/or persuassive refutation, but this is my story for now.

[J.R.]

I recently played in a 5-5-5-5 game that was miserable.

The Colorado 5-5 games are more profitable than you think, but they are mind-numbing and extremely frustrating. There's too much dead money out there not to be a winner. Its just not though provoking/challenging poker, its just 1) good starting hand selection, 2) the ability to calculate pot odds and 3) gamblooooorrr opponents.

[biggambler]

The 6-6-6-6 level has the same limit on all stages, so there is no advantage for the good player. Therefore, that one is out. Betting 9 on the last level will only help thoses that have drawing hands, so we dont want that. Which leaves only the 3-3-6-6 level.

[Homer]

The 6-6-6-6 level has the same limit on all stages, so there is no advantage for the good player. Therefore, that one is out.

I've read this a couple times, and I don't understand what you mean. Can you please elaborate?

-- Homer

[biggambler]

The more variables you have the harder the game is. therfore, the more chances of the worst player making a mistake. If someone were drawing to a straigh or a flush Wouldn't you like to charge them more then they have paid up to this point? How many raises can they stand and still make it worth while? A poor player wouldn't know this. If you had aces with a king kicker you would love to be able to bet $60 to see the last card so that the person going for the straight or flush has poor odds. But even so SOME poor player would still call you.

[J.R.]

You said this.

there is no advantage for the good player.

But you are arguing in support of the notion that a straight limit structure minimizes a good player's edge or advantage. But just because an edge or advantage is minimized does not make it non-existent. Although you are correct in saying a big bet structure more clearly favors the more skilled player, it does not mean that the good player has no advantage absent a big bet structure. (sorry about the double negative).

[Lost Wages]

The more variables you have the harder the game is.

Having the limit change from 3 to 6 on the turn isn't a variable. 3-3-6-6 and 6-6-6-6 are both fixed limit. Everyone has played 3-3-6-6 but few have played 6-6-6-6. A good player should be able to adapt to an unusual structure better than a poor one.

Lost Wages

[biggambler]

Indecently I was born in the Bronx, my accent is even worse then my English. A good player will of course have an advantage over a poor player. However, as far as the betting limits are concerned,and thats the topic of conversation, we are taking one of his advantages away by making all of the limits the same.

[J.R.]

But is that true, since by making the betting limit the same on each round, the loosey who likes to call with small suited connectors is making a bigger mistake preflop than he would be making in a structured limit game, and a good player, who would be more leery of playing small suited connectors in a structured limit game, will be even less inclined to do so, making his pre-flop edge bigger.

Similar logic applies to drawing on the flop, as there is no big bet to reap on the turn and the river, so one should (in general) be less inclined to plays draws than in a structured game, but would the bad player make this adjustment?

[biggambler]

You are right, it isn't a variable its a different level of betting. However, the question wasn't "could a better player adjust to a new game or new betting limit faster." The question was, "If you had AK which level would you rather have and why."

[Bob T.]

6666, because the costs to draw are the highest, and the rewards of getting there are the smallest.

[bernie]

6-6-6-6

because there are less implied odds for drawing hands.

b

[bernie]

the advantage would be for the better player by far with all the limits the same. the chasers arent going to be able to collect enough bets later on to make chasing correct. a graduating, 2 bet structure, 3-3-6-6, actually helps the lesser players against better players. it makes many of their postflop calls correct where on a flat bet structure it isnt.

in one of masons essay books he talks about these defferences and why some cardrooms should use some over others.

b

[Huh]

I actually made a good deal of money in colorado, I just hated the games. There were so many times that it was "correct" to call, it was sickening. I kept thinking to myself, "when I see these players catching their shitty 2nd pair, they probably had odds to do it". I liked the 2-5 spread limit game a bit better. I was the only player who even contemplated raising pre-flop, and the enourmous implied odds let me see about 35% of the flops.

-Huh

[bugstud]

what about a 6-6-6-6 with miniblinds

[JTG51]

I'll take 6-6-6-6. The worse the implied odds for my opponents, the better for my AK.

[SossMan]

you said:
If someone were drawing to a straigh or a flush Wouldn't you like to charge them more then they have paid up to this point?

Isn't this what a six dollar bet vs. a 3 dollar bet accomplishes??

You said:
A poor player wouldn't know this. If you had aces with a king kicker you would love to be able to bet $60 to see the last card so that the person going for the straight or flush has poor odds.

So, you are saying that you want to be able to bet more to charge them to draw to their st8s and flushes, right? Isn't that everyone's point about charging $6 preflop and on the flop rather than $3? This structure allows the bad players to make the most mistakes, hence making you $$ due to the Fundemental Theorem of Poker.

[Dynasty]

6666, because the costs to draw are the highest, and the rewards of getting there are the smallest.

This, of course, is basically the right answer.

However, a key reason hasn't been mentioned yet. I don't even think Clarkmeister realized it when he posed the question. In a 6-6-6-6 structure, you can bet $24 (one bet per stret) with your premium AKo hand. You can only bet $18 or $21 in the other two structures.

A better question may have been. Which of these three structures do you think is best for AKo. All three structures allow you to bet a total of $84.

1. 14-14-28-28
2. 21-21-21-21
3. 12-12-24-36

The answer is option #2.

[Clarkmeister]

As most of you posted, the correct answer is 6-6-6-6. I won't belabor why, its been posted many times. You shatter your opponents implied odds. 78s is going to pay a ton for the privelidge to check-fold on most flops. AK and a good player would destroy this structure. The Colorado structure is outstanding for the good players and terrible for the fish.

I thought this was particularly relevant in light of the recent spat of "should I raise reverse-implied odds hand X in Y position preflop". Its critical to understand which hands thrive on implied odds and which hands make money up front. Make sure you are making your opponents play 6-3-6-6 rather than 3-3-6-6 with hands that make their money early, particularly when your opponents are not tight limpers. Also avoid getting into situations where you have to pay the big upfront cost with your hands that need that big balloon bet on the end in order to be profitable.

gl

[Clarkmeister]

I actually did think about it, but decided to post it as I did, with the disclaimer to just focus on the structure. Good catch though, 6-6-6-6 is definitely a much bigger game than the other structures.

When I was posting it, my initial problem was going to be between the following structures:
4-4-8-8
3-3-6-12
6-6-6-6

But I didn't want the different bet sizes to confuse the issue, so I kept it simple for the sake of the discussion.

[Michael Davis]

3-3-6-6

I know that 6-6-6-6 is the correct answer here, because you can make them pay premium when you have the best hand, and they can't collect a double bet if they hit their draws. But, what would happen in a game like this?

Everyone would play a lot tighter preflop; the only hands that would play would come a lot closer to competing with AKo than what is played in the 3-3-6-6 game. I think this offsets the other advantages. Additionally, the larger bets going in preflop would make it closer to correct for them to draw with weaker hands on the flop.

I want 3-3-6-6 because I want people coming in with junk.

Given the same players who make the same exact decisions in my current 5-5-10-10 game, I would much rather play 10-10-10-10, but I think they would begin to make better decisions and the game would dry up sooner (with the $$ in my wallet, though). So while the correct answer is the 6-6-6-6, I'd rather give back some of my advantage for long term profits.

-Mike

[Dynasty]

Everyone would play a lot tighter preflop

What fantasy world do your opponents come from?

I've played the 6-6-6-6 game at the Excalibur and they limp with garbage all the time. They also call raises with garbage. Based on the posts here, the 5-5-5-5 games in Colorado are ridiculously loose.

[Dynasty]

Sorry. I completely missed the disclaimer.

[Peter]

Good thread. I recently learned some of my friends how to play poker and to not get them totally confused, we started playing with the 1-1-1-1 structure. Last time we played, I suggested we started playing 1-1-2-2 like "normal" people play holdem, but now I guess we shouldn't change to that, because 1-1-1-1 is probably more profitable for me. Or does the fact that 1-1-2-2 basically is a bigger game offsets this?

[Al_Capone_Junior]

definitely straight $6 limit, perhaps the best real life example is the 2-6 at excalibur.

The reason is obvious, you can raise more BTF, better narrowing the field, and charging more to see a flop, thus hurting the implied odds of hands that like to play against unsuited high cards, like 76s and 22. Also, if you flop top pair, you can protect it to a greater extent by bettiing twice as much on the flop as you can with the other structures.

The worst choice is 3 3 6 9. Here, the hands drawing to beat you are in the best possible situation, with you only getting small bets on the first two rounds, and them being able to bet big on the end after they hit, after having drawn at you cheaply.

al

[Al_Capone_Junior]

I have also played in excal 2-6, and unless you go during the day when all the rocks are there, it's loose as can be. At night, $8 = $2 for many, many MANY players there. Same thing in the 2-5 game in tahoe. There might be some validity to the "long term health of the game" theory with the standard split limit structure, but in practice I think it will make very little difference, they will come anyway.

al

[bernie]

except in a 6-3-6-6 a single flop bet really doesnt do much in terms of hand protectionor punishment for chasers except help give players odds to see the river from the turn.

6-3-6-6 is alot different than 6-6-6-6 though it looks closer than it is.

b

[oddjob]

this is absolutely correct. in fact, in some cases, the more aggressive the table gets pre-flop, the looser the entire table gets.

you wouldn't believe some of the garbage that is played here in colorado.

[Michael Davis]

Well, I stand corrected.

I have never played in a game with these limits. I think I need to move.

[AceHigh]

"In a 6-6-6-6 structure, you can bet $24 (one bet per stret) with your premium AKo hand"

Actually $30, because your first bet is a raise. Another reason you want the first bet to be large compared to the rest of the bets.

[Dynasty]

That's not alows going to be true. For example, in the Excalibur game in Las Vegas, players can limp for $2. You can raise another $6 to a total of $8.