having no luck in other forums

[WSOPwinner10]

we play the following -
a 10$ buy in with a 25 cent "hitman" (basically only a small blind posts). This is 6-8 handed.

a 20$ buy in with a 25 cent "hitman"

a 50$ buy in with a 50 cent "hitman"


how many Big Blinds would you say each original buy in is?

thanks

[SheridanCat]

My guess is you're not getting responses because we don't understand the question.

You know the blind and you know the buy-in. What is your quesetion, exactly?

Regards,

T

[WSOPwinner10]

does this "post a small blind" format have a large impact on stack play? How big of a difference is .10/.25 blinds from just a .25 post?

Sorry if it's a bad question - it may very well be.

thanks in advanced.

[Niediam]

It would probably help if you first said what form of poker you are playing (Hold'em, Omaha, etc) and if you are playing limit, no limit, or pot limit.

[SheridanCat]

Ah, I see what you're getting at, I think.

Sklansky talks about how ante/blind size should affect play in The Theory Of Poker. I can't remember exactly what he says, but I'll look it up when I get home.

With the blind so small, it seems silly to even bother to try to steal it. I think you would play looser and more passively preflop, trying to see as many flops as possible. Since this is a no-limit game, you're really fishing for implied odds on these hands. You want to see a lot of flops cheaply - which is no problem with the little blinds - and then punish the other players when you hit.

I'm not sure it would ever be correct to open-raise such a tiny blind. Even if you have AA, what's the point of winning twenty-five cents?

As for a single .25 blind versus a .10/.25 structure, it's not just the amount of money in the pot preflop, it's also that the small blind has already "invested" in the pot. He now has more reason to play, so if you limp or make a small raise you will more likely find yourself with that extra player in the hand.

Regards,

T

Edit: Sorry, I made the assumption this is no-limit. I think the analysis changes a little bit if this is limit. I assumed no-limit since that's what everyone seems to be playing today with these little buyins. The form of poker doesn't really matter though, antes is antes.

[Pov]

Assuming limit, this pathetic blind means you've got no reason to play anything but monsters - you have ample time to wait for a very strong hand. The smaller the blinds and antes the tighter you should play since the game of poker is really just a contest for the blinds.

In no-limit with weak opponents, particularly those who can't let go of their hands in the face of obvious strength (which is a lot of them I would guess) you will probably show a big profit by doing quite a bit of limping assuming the game is not aggressive pre-flop but does have some decent betting post-flop. You're just playing for implied odds. The stacks are relatively deep compared to the blinds in both your $20 and $50 games. Your implied odds are best in the $50 game. Once again, if your opponents are good and won't pay you off then you are better off waiting for your powerhouse hands. Folding every hand you can play 100 rounds without busting in the $50 game - you are under no pressure to play a weak hand.

The implied odds also applies to limit play if you are far superior to your opponents. If you know you'll be paid off when you hit then you can play more speculative hands. If your opponents show much semblance of being good then you'd have to go with just the big hands.

In summary, the general concept in operation here is: the smaller the blinds and antes, the tighter you play. This can, however, be overruled by large implied odds that frequently exist in this type of low buy-in game with weak opponents that cannot fold, especially in no limit.

[SheridanCat]

[ QUOTE ]
In summary, the general concept in operation here is: the smaller the blinds and antes, the tighter you play.

[/ QUOTE ]

While this is true, and I think this is essentially what Sklansky says in TOP, I'd have a hard time sitting there with such a dinky ante and not take shots at flops. Assuming the game is very loose/passive.

That's probably a leak and why I don't play NL with very low blinds. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Regards,

T

[Student]

I've done a quick review, comparing the Book Forum with our Beginners Forum. I call what I came up with the "Shame Factor."

Starting with the Book Forum, I found and listed all posts from the last 2 weeks that had zero (0) responses, and I listed how many views resulted. Here's what I came up with: 93, 75, 118, 71, 97, 149, 73, 102, 152, 80, 138 and 91. That's a total of 1,239 views with 0 responses. That's a Shame Factor of 1,239.

The same done for our Beginners Forum came up with 81 and 25. That's a Shame Factor of 106. Though not strictly true (and that's an enormous understatement), it's 12 times as likely you'll get a response on the Beginners Forum than on the Book Forum.

Shame Factor implies placing blame. To place blame it's required one place it appropriately. Shame Factor measures corporate responsibility, not personal. Fortunately the Beginners Forum has certain individuals, who have taken it to heart that beginners are entitled to an answer to their questions relating to poker. That's wonderful!

Since the Book Forum has no such kind person, it often happens that a perfectly worthy subject isn't dignified with even a single response. Well, that failure can result in a quenching of enthusiasm from contributors, and can terminate what would have been a powerful set of new insights.

So what can you and I do about it? Let's say we read 10 great posts to 2+2, and in all forums. Why not contribute one great post, somewhere on 2+2? How can you presume to write a "great" post? Well, no matter where you are in your trajectory concerning poker, you have something to say! You come back and say you have trouble putting your ideas on paper?

Notice the post I'm answering is very difficult to follow, but also notice there have been several you have tried to guess what the inquiry was about. Obviously the poster went thru quite a bit of trouble to post his contribution, deficient though it might be in terms of comprehensibility, and a number of folks have attempted to help. So it was a useful and educational post, net after the responses.

I'm not encouraging you to be one of those contributors who have posted 3,000 messages to 2+2, and only 2 that were positive and/or useful! I'm encouraging you to be the person who answers one of those posts on the Book Forum that have warrented not a single response; gee, if you answer the fellow who had 152 views and 0 responses, the Shame Factor for the Book Forum drops from 1,239 to 1,087 right then and there! Thanks in advance!!! (TIA)

Dave

[WSOPwinner10]

Once every 5 or 6 sessions will will play some PL Omaha

my bad for forgetting to state this

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
we play the following -
a 10$ buy in with a 25 cent "hitman" (basically only a small blind posts). This is 6-8 handed.

a 20$ buy in with a 25 cent "hitman"

a 50$ buy in with a 50 cent "hitman"


how many Big Blinds would you say each original buy in is?

thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like the "hitman" as you say is like the old style games with only 1 blind. In that case, it IS the big blind.