Mason's Essay Book, an observation

[ACPlayer]

Leafing thru my copy of the book I saw, again, the note that poor players go broke faster in the 15-30 structure than in the 20-40 and good players will make more for less fluctuations.

WHile I dont know exactly what he was thinking, I do have an observation based on the another note in the back of the book, where the live one explains to the odds technician than he (the live one) calls when the pot is big and folds when the pot is small.

I suspect that if the 20-40 game at the Mirage or in LA is spread with $5 chips (as we do in Foxwoods and NJ) instead of the $10 chips I believe are presently in use, the games would be even juicier. This is because the pot appears to be bigger to the live ones eyeballing the pot rather than counting it as some of us do.

[stripsqueez]

havent read the book but given that the only difference betwwen 20/40 and 15/30 is usually the structure of the blinds i would assume that this is what is being refered to

i may be completely wrong about my asumption - because - i would assume that a good player would have a lower BB per hour win rate at a 15/30 game with 10/15 blind structure than at a 20/40 game with a 10/20 blind structure - simply because you are putting more money into the pot without seeing any cards

i would suggest that with the blind structures refered to a winning player would win more (ie BB's per hour) and have less fluctuations at 20/40

[ACPlayer]

i would suggest that with the blind structures refered to a winning player would win more (ie BB's per hour) and have less fluctuations at 20/40

That is the opposite of Mason's thesis. While he does not offer a backup for this position (at least as far as I have read), I offer the following observations:

1. Bad players will find more reasons to play trap hands in the SB in the 15-30 structure, get trapped and not know how to get out.

2. Good players will realize that it is important to Open raise most pots so that there are not two players getting excellent odds to see the flop.

3. Good players will realize that if there is one limper to them, they should be more often raising or folding for the same reasons as item 1.

There may be others he had in mind.

There are probably others, but those have been my takeaways from the notes.

[stripsqueez]

1. Bad players will find more reasons to play trap hands in the SB in the 15-30 structure, get trapped and not know how to get out.

2. Good players will realize that it is important to Open raise most pots so that there are not two players getting excellent odds to see the flop.

3. Good players will realize that if there is one limper to them, they should be more often raising or folding for the same reasons as item 1.


these are all things a good player might do to ameliorate the disadvantage of the blind structure or as per 1) stating that bad players are bad, but are not in my view arguments that change what i said before - putting more money in the blinds (relative to the size of the game) seems a poor alternative for a good player to me

[ACPlayer]

Well you will have to take that up with him. He advocates that card rooms consider not spreading 15-30 just because it will cause bad players to go broke faster. He also explicitly statees that in this 2chip/3chip structure good players will do better with smaller fluctuation.

I think he is correct. Because if poor play in the blinds, for example, is causing bad players to loose money faster, means the good players are making money faster (its got to go somewhere), even though the blinds are more propotionally per round.

I suspect that the play of the blinds is the biggest downfall of the poor players in this structure.

As, a further example, when Foxwoods decided to get rid of their 10/20 with half kill, i argued, with other winning players, that this was a bad idea for us, even though when I win a pot, I pay a 15 dollar "tax" - which the "tight" players hated. This is because the poor player is now often putting 30 dollars in to see the flop with a terrible hand - and may now be tied to the pot for more bets . THat game was even more juicy as the blinds were now 5 and 10 for what on weekends was a 15-30 game and the action players had one more reason to be in the pot. So, it is not just the cost of one hand or one blind, but the totality of the money flow that makes the structure an important element in ev and fluctuation.

[gunboat]

There seems to be a big difference between 2 chip and 3 chip games. I have played 2-4 (2 chips), 3-6 and 6-12 (3 chips) and 10-20 (2 chips). The 3 chip games are always looser. While the 1-3 blind structure may have somthing to do with it, it can't be the whole story. Actually, I would think that would actually make it tighter as the SB would complete less often.

Personally, I think that for the action players, its fun to bet. And its more fun to bet 6 chips than 4. And raises are a whole handful of chips!

[Vehn]

Since no one else has said it yet, vegas (mirage) $20/$40 is spread with $5 chips not $10 chips. I'm 95% sure southern cal is $5 chips as well.

[J.R.]

It would seem calling loosely from the sb is more correct in 15-30 than 20-40, and since a salient trait of poor play is pre-flop looseness, one would think the 15-30 structure punishes them less for their indiscretion in the sb.

[Jeffage]

But you're missing the fact that the 2 chip, 3 chip structure causes them to call too many raises out of the SB where they would fold without thinking in the normal 20-40 structure. The SB will see more flops in raised pots than in other limits, making more mistakes...and getting trapped out of position more.

Jeff

[ACPlayer]

Oops my mistake.:o

Havenot been there in a long time and thought they had 10 dollar chips. So much for that observation.

[stripsqueez]

i'm told frank zappa was the guy who said if your in dispute with the rest of the world then your probably wrong

obstinence is not a usual characteristic of mine but after replying to this thread and chatting to a couple of players, with no-one agreeing with me, i cant let it go - at least not without recieving a credible lashing that i understand...

a 2/3 blind structure (as opposed to 1/2) means that each player puts more money in to the blinds - in very simple terms that means that you are "gambling" more money without being able to exert any skill over how you do so - therefore it is a bigger gamble - therefore it would lead to bigger variance

when i play 5 max hold'em in a full school and i win 17% of the hands dealt i usually clean up - of-course if i won an equal share of the hands it would be 20% - this is how nearly all winning players win - if i have to pay more in the blinds then given i win less hands than "my share" it must be to my disadvantage to do so

all the arguments about chooks (AKA fish) not being able to play from the blinds and experts being able to adjust to the blinds are fine but they dont explain away the logical arguments

i dont know about what happens in practice in various cardrooms and wouldnt wish to dispute those facts - i could accept it as true (ie that the 2/3 structure destroys the chooks quicker) and as being proof of the fact that the chooks are mostly chooks because they have no clue about playing out of the blinds - that would interest me - the chooks i play against cant play out of any posistion

[Bozeman]

But for coherence you would need to compare 10/15 blinds to 8.33/16.67 blinds. The act of putting in more money does not decrease your edge, 'cause everyone does it. The fact is that good players make money not despite the necessity of putting some involuntarily in the pot, but because everyone does; blinds or antes are the catalyst for the game.

[J.R.]

I guess I was assuming they would call raises with the same frequency in either structure, so they were being punished less in 15-30. But I don't get to play enough 15-30 and have yet to play 2-40, so I'll defer.

[stripsqueez]

[ QUOTE ]
But for coherence you would need to compare 10/15 blinds to 8.33/16.67 blinds. The act of putting in more money does not decrease your edge, 'cause everyone does it. The fact is that good players make money not despite the necessity of putting some involuntarily in the pot, but because everyone does; blinds or antes are the catalyst for the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm happy with the first bit but i would assume that means you agree with me as given that a players "edge" is best described as BB's per hour your edge is worse in a 2/3 blind structure than a 1.5/3 blind structure

i agree with the second bit but i fail to understand how it addresses the issue that a good player wins less blinds than a bad player and therefore having to pay more to post the blinds must be bad for the good player

[ACPlayer]

My observations.

1. You are exercising greater skill over the money in the pot. Just because you are putting it in (or someone else is putting it in) does not mean you are not exercising skill over how that money is protected or chased.
2. If, you are agree that the bad player looses faster in this structure, then you must agree that the good player will win more quickly than the other player.
3. If your edge over the other players increases due to the structure, your variance must come down. Variance increases when you have smaller edges.

In summary, I believe the Mason's observations may well be correct (though i have never seen them explained anywhere) bscause I do believe that the good player has a bigger edge in the 2/3 structure games.

Incidentally, I also think that the good player has a bigger edge in a 1/3 structure game but for different reasons.

[Bozeman]

No, a good player should make more in a 10/15 blind game than a 7.5/15 blind game because the stakes are (marginally) bigger. Depending on how opponents play, he may have additional edges. Your point about wins being measured in BB's is non-sensical here.

Though the good player wins less of the blind money (usually), the money that he wins still comes about because of the existence and size of the blinds, since this is the reason there is any money to play for.

Craig

[andyfox]

[Gabe]

[ QUOTE ]
I suspect that if the 20-40 game at the Mirage or in LA is spread with $5 chips (as we do in Foxwoods and NJ) instead of the $10 chips I believe are presently in use, the games would be even juicier. This is because the pot appears to be bigger to the live ones eyeballing the pot rather than counting it as some of us do.

[/ QUOTE ]

In Los Angeles and the Mirage the 20/40 are $5 chip games. I have not played a 20/40 with $10 chips anywhere.