Low limit studplayers: is the best play in poker costing you $$

[MRBAA]

Yes, it's true. You may be folding too much. Since the 2-4 games started at Party, I've made some crazy calls. Often I've felt like a fool, when I click in my final bet and am shown a huge hand. But far more than often enough, I see pots coming my way that it seemed sure I couldn't win.

I'm not talking about head up play here. I'm talking about games with from 5-8 players. I was struck by this after winning large multiway pots this morning with a pair of fives. Yes that's right. Now in that one, no one had much, three were left on the river, one bet, one fold and I called getting 11-1 odds, against a known lag. But still....

Then, sitting at a table with Roland, I started out strong with split aces, got three callers, on fifth there are two three flushes and one paired door. It's bet on fifth by the paired door, called, I call, the three flush behind me pops it, we all call. Sixth I catch my second pair, the three flush bets, we all call. River same way. I'm crushed here, probably shouldn't have called the raise on fifth. Nope, MHIG and I win a 20bb pot.

Of course you still want to get out early in small pots with negative implied odds. Of course you want to make folds where you are sure you're beat.

But when you're not sure, there's money to be made in calling.

[blumpkin22]

You should have added "Low Content" to the title of this post.

[MRBAA]

First, why would you bother to post this?

Second, it's titled for low limit players, not higher limit players who are more advanced like you. For the intended audience, I think this is content that could be very valuable.

But thanks anyway for your excellent contribution.

[blumpkin22]

[ QUOTE ]
First, why would you bother to post this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because it's true?

[ QUOTE ]
Second, it's titled for low limit players, not higher limit players who are more advanced like you. For the intended audience, I think this is content that could be very valuable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whether low or high limit, I think the concept of calling "because the pot is large" is very overrated. Of course you should call with a good hand when the pot is very big even though you are fairly sure you are beaten. But giving some anecdote about how this one time in band camp you made a call with ace high and it was good and yada yada yada...like I said, low content.

[ QUOTE ]
But thanks anyway for your excellent contribution.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're welcome.



[/ QUOTE ]

[MRBAA]

You are not reading this post carefully. It's NOT because the pot is large. It's because at low limits there are now many, many loose clueless players against whom basic hand-reading skills will often suggest a fold when in fact a call will be not just marginally profitable, but hugely so.

Many newer players who are trying to play well get frustrated because they can't beat loose, bad low limit players. Or can't win much. This can be one reason.

And "because it's true" is just your opinion. I don't see how posting it adds value. I think many of your cute little hand posts are pretty low value, so I ignore them. May I suggest you do the same in future?

[blumpkin22]

Are you saying that the majority of low limit players are crazy, wild, and aggressive in addition to being extrememly loose? That has not been my experience, but perhaps that is the case now.

[MRBAA]

I think it's possibe that some of the aggression it takes to play n/l hold'em is bleeding over into the low limit stud play of newer players, many of whom don't know how to be selectively aggressive (or play well).

I wouldn't say there are alot of wild or crazy players -- although the occaisonal maniac does turn up. But there are alot who combine an aggressive style with very poor hand-reading skills, so they often represent much stronger hands than they actually have, in multiway situations where you might think they would realize bluffing is futile and they do not have value.

If you fold too often, you make their poor play more correct.

[SA125]

I respect your opinion but find this to be some of the worst advice you could give. The low limit games with numerous multi-way pots are crap shoot, pot luck lotto poker. It comes down to who's running good that day. The suckouts never end. The winner is the guy who hits the biggest pots. Understanding that means the drawing hands have good shots at big pots and the big pairs will get runned down repeatedly.

Part of your solution to beating these games is to stay in the hand with little and call with practically nothing. I think all the fools who believe poker is all luck and chase to the end with every one of their hands would see the sense in it and agree.

[greenage]

MRBAA, I believe there is truth in what you are saying even if my reasons are anecdotal.

You mentioned players that represent much stronger hands than they have, which is something that came to me as I read your original post. I think the flip side is those who underplay/slow play their hands. As always, knowing who’s who makes a big difference.

Although some may say “so what” I wish you would post some of these hands.

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]
You mentioned players that represent much stronger hands than they have, which is something that came to me as I read your original post. I think the flip side is those who underplay/slow play their hands. As always, knowing who’s who makes a big difference.

[/ QUOTE ]


Exactly.

[greenage]

I respectfully disagree and think you may be taking his advice out of context or perhaps too far. I don’t think he is implying that you call down every hand, but that there are spots (more than we think) where doing so will show a long-term profit.

I would not characterize 2-4 as quite as loose as you do. Admittedly, I play mostly at these stakes so I could be a little defensive. 8-) Somebody else yesterday inferred that at 1/2 (I think) you see everybody call down. This is just not so.

A quick look at the stud tab in Pokerstars' main lobby shows quite clearly that 4th st rates diminish significantly per level, from the lowest to the highest stakes.

Admitting that as the stakes go up, play becomes better, and estimating that the total number of players playing 2-4 and above accounts for about 15% of all players, one would have to consider this a strong indicator that you are playing with players who are somewhere in the top 15% and they play significantly differently from those in the lower 15%. Now, I'm not trying to say play is great, I'm just trying to point out that the data indicates that the players on average play significantly different (better?) than those one could more easily characterize as loose.

Also, in my experience, there aren't that many 5-way pots at these levels. But hey, what would you call a high rate of 5-way pots?

Obviously, an extremely strong player might be able to read/manoeuver his/her way easily through a 2-4 table. But, except for some really interesting circumstances, you will rarely win large mutli-way pots at 2-4 with a pair of 5s. Maybe you could show some of the hands.

BTW, I think you might have picked a singularly soft table. (Is this Roland guy that easy to play against?)

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]
(Is this Roland guy that easy to play against?)

[/ QUOTE ]

I admitt that I was one of the biggest fish at that table. /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[Andy B]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this Roland guy that easy to play against?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Anyway, MRBAA has basically hit on the reason I pay off so much.

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's possibe that some of the aggression it takes to play n/l hold'em is bleeding over into the low limit stud play of newer players, many of whom don't know how to be selectively aggressive (or play well).


[/ QUOTE ]

word

[ QUOTE ]
But giving some anecdote about how this one time in band camp you made a call with ace high and it was good and yada yada yada...like I said, low content.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yesterday, I called out Emery for making a post (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Number=4232387&an=0&page=1# Post4232387) I thought was worthless. I in turn was (correctly) told to chill out.

What may be worthless to you might mean a lot to someone else, and vice versa. Emery's post has more relevance to mid-stakes, and MRBAA's is for low-stakes. They both have their place.

Alright everyone. Group hug.

/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /images/graemlins/heart.gif /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[SA125]

I was probably too harsh but my point is that you'll save way more money in the long run by folding those weak/marginal hands in 5-8 way pots than you'll make by winning a few.

[MrBlueNose]

[ QUOTE ]
I respect your opinion but find this to be some of the worst advice you could give. The low limit games with numerous multi-way pots are crap shoot, pot luck lotto poker. It comes down to who's running good that day. The suckouts never end.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. That's one of the worst things I've ever seen written on here.

[SA125]

Brown noses are for the suck up's. Red noses are for the stew bum's. What's the Blue Nose for?

[MrBlueNose]

[ QUOTE ]
Brown noses are for the suck up's. Red noses are for the stew bum's. What's the Blue Nose for?

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that a riddle? I'd answer it but I'm too busy 4-tabling that crap shoot, pot luck lotto poker for another 5 figure month. Sorry!

[preiserone]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, MRBAA has basically hit on the reason I pay off so much.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup, you can probably make some of the more marginal folds at the higher limits but for the 2/4 range you want to be calling a majority of the time you make it to the river unless you have a busted draw or something.

[preiserone]

[ QUOTE ]
You should have added "Low Content" to the title of this post.

[/ QUOTE ]

I sort of have to agree with this one, this is more common knowledge info than anything else, sort of a brag post with a lesson.

Still valuable information though, and the debates going on have got to help someone.

[PoorLawyer]

[ QUOTE ]
I respect your opinion but find this to be some of the worst advice you could give. The low limit games with numerous multi-way pots are crap shoot, pot luck lotto poker. It comes down to who's running good that day. The suckouts never end. The winner is the guy who hits the biggest pots. Understanding that means the drawing hands have good shots at big pots and the big pairs will get runned down repeatedly.

Part of your solution to beating these games is to stay in the hand with little and call with practically nothing. I think all the fools who believe poker is all luck and chase to the end with every one of their hands would see the sense in it and agree.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think a lot of what the OP is saying is true to the extent that you know your opponents. There are certain ones you have to respect and others where you almost know they are full of it. When you are in a grey area with an unknown player at a low limit, I find that calling is often correct even when you think you are beat. There are some real donkeys out there.

[SA125]

[ QUOTE ]
Is that a riddle? I'd answer it but I'm too busy 4-tabling that crap shoot, pot luck lotto poker for another 5 figure month. Sorry!

[/ QUOTE ]

10K a month multi-tabling $2-4 stud. Doubtful but, if true, impressive.

[MrBlueNose]

[ QUOTE ]
10K a month multi-tabling $2-4 stud. Doubtful but, if true, impressive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Averaged 7BB/100 over 82,000 hands last month. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

The games there are definetely not a crap shoot. Play adjustment is obviously required, but they're easily beatable.

However, changing from 2/4 Stars Full Ring to 6-max Party? Now that's dificult /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[preiserone]

[ QUOTE ]
...over 82,000 hands last month...

[/ QUOTE ]

That is a [censored] ton of hands, when do you sleep?!?

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...over 82,000 hands last month...

[/ QUOTE ]

That is a [censored] ton of hands, when do you sleep?!?

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously. Wtf.

[MrBlueNose]

I 4 to 8 table, and a lot of shorthanded or 6-max, so that churns the hands away faster. I'm taking things easier this month, but last month was 8 hours at least on weekdays, and on weekends....eh, my wife didn't like me too much. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Roland]

Hilarious.

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
[

Doubtful but, if true, impressive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Should it be: Doubtful, but if true, impressive?

[MRBAA]

I wrote my original post as a narrative in an attempt to make it more interesting, but that also meant I took some stuff for granted. Your response about low limit being a crap shoot and who is running good is just wrong, and for some players one reason why is that they give their opponents too much credit and make folds that seem obvious but aren't.

To clarify, I'm not advocating getting in there with nothing and hoping it's your day to hit the lotto. Nor am I saying that against two known decent players who are jamming you should hang in with a low pair. But against players you don't know well, or players you note to be loose and somewhat aggressive, I do advocate adjusting your hand reading significantly.

The hand with fives was a total aberration, but it was against a pretty nutty player, the pot was big, the other guy in the pot had folded on the river and it was just one of those "I'm probably going to feel like an idiot and waste one bet, but my hand will be good here more than 1 in 11 times" situations.

Against this player, my chances of being good in this situation may have been 1 in 3, so folding regularly in this situation would be a huge error, one that could greatly affect my earn.

The aces hand is more typical of what can heppen to solid players. I started with aces, got three callers and things got sticky on fifth. Against players with decent starting standards, decent hand reading skills and low aggression, my pair of aces should be drawing very thin against a bet and raise on fifth with two three flush boads and a paired door. The raiser then bet into three players on sixth and the river. But my aces up were still good. This was a 20BB pot.

The key to this is that you feel like a genius when you win with a call like this and just as much of an idiot when you lose. But the dollar results aren't the same. You can feel like an idiot five times and only be a genius once, yet be making a huge profit on those calls. This, combined with the fact that you would never play the way these players do, makes it hard psychologically to adjust. But failing to do so can lead newer players (as it does in he) to become very frustrated when they feel they're playing good cards, reading hands, making good folds and somehow not crushing the idiots. I know the more advanced posters know this stuff, but for the low stakes players who visit here, I think it's good to think about. I know I've found it striking how many times players are on total smoke.

I'm a new player and I play mostly 2/4. I have wondered about many of the things that have come out in this thread. Good thread, I learned a lot here.

[MRBAA]

Thanks for the reply. I made this post for newer players and also to note the fact that the general aggression and cluelessness of the games is going up. It's definitely a change for the better.