[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 4: What does "the nuts" mean?
Also, on a board of Ad 7h 6h 3c, 54 is not the nuts unless at least one card is a heart. 5h 4h is ahead of 5d 4d, and the latter would not be able to call a push correctly with insanely deep stacks.
[/ QUOTE ]
In the FAQ we're just really defining what "the nuts" means. We're not really worrying about discussing how one plays when drawing to the nuts, etc. There are plenty of books for further reading to talk about that. The nuts is, the highest possible hand based on known cards at any particular time, and that's what is described in the FAQ, I believe.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hold'em is a 7 card game, not a 6 card game. Being tied for the best hand after the turn does not make your hand the nuts. This distinction is important in Omaha and some of the time in NL.
http://twodimes.net/h/?z=774083
pokenum -h 5h 4h - 5d 4d -- ad 7h 6h 3c
cards EV
5h 4h 0.602
5d 4d 0.398
On that board, 54 with at least one heart is the nuts because it is equal to or better than any other hand. 5d 4d is not the nuts because it could be significantly behind.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 17: What are the odds of this hand winning?
[/ QUOTE ]
I answered a question, just not the question that was asked. I've fixed this by changing the question. I'm not even sure what the original question meant.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think there should be some mention of analyzers such as Two Dimes and Poker Stove. I'm a mathematician, and I don't bother to do the calculations myself. I use these excellent tools.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 19: How do you play against a maniac?
It's not always true that you should tighten up against a maniac when you can't isolate. After all, the maniac's preflop raises represent less strength than a solid player's raises would, so hands like KJo that you would fold quickly after a real raise are still playable after a maniac's raise.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you can't isolate, you're playing against other players which should cause you to tighten up some. Now, it's perfectly possible that the players you couldn't drive out are also playing marginal holdings vs. the maniac, but you're still reducing your chances against the maniac by playing against these other players.
If there is a maniac in who raises, I reraise with KJo trying to isolate, and one or more players behind me cold call or reraise, I'm not very happy. I'm in the middle between a maniac and someone who could easily have me dominated. Worse, if the player after me is a knowledgable player, he knows I'm tasty meat in a sandwich and he's counting on that.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry, but although that is common advice, it is weak-tight and wrong. A maniac is essentially posting an extra blind, and more blind money means there is more reason to get involved, not less, even if you can't steal the blinds.
If a maniac raises and there are two cold-callers and you are in the big blind, you can call with many more hands than if a tight-aggressive player raises and gets two cold-calls. That means you can play more loosely, even though you are not going to be able to isolate the maniac.
While it is true that you could still profit at a table of maniacs by playing very tightly, this does not mean it is the most profitable way to play. The idea that you should tighten up because your opponents are loose is a common fallacy that should not be endorsed by an FAQ.