Re: A quick note about \"rareness\" of bets
 

Doesn't the "thinness" of the edge depend on the range of hands you put your opponents' on?

For example, I hold KJo. If I put my opponent on exactly KT, I have a huge edge. If I put him on "anything but a pair higher than TT," I have a smaller edge. If I put him on "any two face cards that aren't a pair", I have a very thin or non-existent edge. And if I put him on a pair, JJ or higher, he dominates me.

Aren't the accuracy of my read and the ability to narrow the range of hands I consider possible to my opponent more important than the "edge" that I calculate?

Garbage in, garbage out.

Sabre170

Re: A quick note about \"rareness\" of bets
 

What did that have to do with what I wrote?

We have several players that are acknowledged as good players that tell us they have had downswings of 400-500BB.

This means that they either a) play at a lower limit that someone with less variance can play or b) have to move down in limits more often.

This affects earn rate.

And there are tonnes of small edges you can decide to push or not that will lead to quite a substantial increase in variance.

If the answer to this question is "well they play a tougher game so it doesn't matter but for everyone else it will work" it seems like quite the evasion.

Unrelated
 

Ed-unrelated to this post, but your book has really helped my game, and I have been winning big pots I never would have been in before.

Thanks

Re: Unrelated
 

Ed-unrelated to this post, but your book has really helped my game, and I have been winning big pots I never would have been in before.

Thank you. I appreciate the positive feedback. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: A quick note about \"rareness\" of bets
 

[ QUOTE ]
the times you hit trips and so does someone else will even out the times when you win without trips

[/ QUOTE ]


Do you have anything besides your 'hunch' to back up the validity of this statement?

Just because you think it will even it out doesn't mean it really will.


Additionally, hitting trips doesn't have to be the only way to win the hand. TT unimproved will actually take it occasionally too as difficult as they that may be to believe.

Re: A quick note about \"rareness\" of bets
 

You're missing my point. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, but I claimed that poker is naturally variance rich and pushing a handful of small +EV situations isn't going to increase your variance noticably. Please show me how a handful of hands every thousand or so will make your variance measurably greater.

Re: A quick note about \"rareness\" of bets
 

You're missing my point. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, but I claimed that poker is naturally variance rich and pushing a handful of small +EV situations isn't going to increase your variance noticably.

This is essentially my claim as well. As long as you are playing a fundamentally tight game, adding proper aggression should pump up your variance only a "notch" or two. At the very least, it will improve your winrate at the same time, mitigating the effect the increased variance will have on your ability to run bad.

Now playing in aggressive GAMES will increase your variance a fair bit. Playing in these games also (depending on the quality of the aggressive players) can cut your winrate a bit, leading to the double cold streak whammy of increased std. dev. and lower winrate.

Playing shorthanded will also bump up your variance.

I guess my point is this. The style you play isn't the major determiner of the size of your swings. It's whether you choose to play in the Mirage $20-$40 (a "docile" game) or the Party $15-$30 that plays a bigger role.

Re: A quick note about \"rareness\" of bets
 

[ QUOTE ]
I guess my point is this. The style you play isn't the major determiner of the size of your swings. It's whether you choose to play in the Mirage $20-$40 (a "docile" game) or the Party $15-$30 that plays a bigger role.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or, in Diablo's case, Party 10/20 6-max.

Re: A quick note about \"rareness\" of bets
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the TT in seat 5 for 3 bets recommendation will probably win about 6% of the time in that situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

1 - math please, otherwise your entire argument is bullsh[/b]it

[/ QUOTE ]
well, the book said, flop a set or fold... that was what i was going on.

Re: A quick note about \"rareness\" of bets
 

[ QUOTE ]
I am a huge winner at 10-20 games and below. I usually play 6-12 to 10-20 in B&M and 4 tables of 5-10 at once online. I've been playing over 5 years, and now it is my sole source of income. I wrote a bot that screen-scrapes hand history data from an online poker site, and recently my win rate in big bets per hand was the highest against any other player in a 250,000 hand sample at the limits i play. I'd like to think i am getting by far the best of it at all times.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, after all that, do you really not know how often a set is flopped, or do you think they only win about half the time?