![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
I am a big fan of stealing blinds, but damn man, chill on 63s. [/ QUOTE ] If you are attempting to "steal" the blinds, explain to me why your hand is important. -ropey |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I am a big fan of stealing blinds, but damn man, chill on 63s. [/ QUOTE ] If you are attempting to "steal" the blinds, explain to me why your hand is important. -ropey [/ QUOTE ] Because there needs to be a limit as to what hand is going to be proftable to play with? If your opponents were folding every single time you raised, then go ahead and raise every hand you get. Sometimes they're going to call out of the blinds, and then you need a hand that is playable against that range of hands. 63s is a little low on the spectrum for my taste. Are you saying you raise any two here? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying you raise any two here? [/ QUOTE ] From the limited hands I played, the blinds seemed reasonably tight. Against tight blinds I would raise in CO/button with any two once every few orbits. Against loose blinds I'd never raise 63s in this spot |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying you raise any two here? [/ QUOTE ] I'm saying that if you are truly on a steal than your cards are irrelevant. Your opponents don't have to fold every single time to be profitable. I find I make the most out of these situations when I am against predictable players who actually call my raise preflop. Your hand becomes easy to release when you are against predictable opponents, and the pot can be easy to "steal". I would add that the conditions of the game have to be right in order to make these types of raises profitable with anything...but raising with any two is the idea of a steal...raising with a particular "limit" of hands is a semi-bluff. -ropey |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Because there needs to be a limit as to what hand is going to be proftable to play with? If your opponents were folding every single time you raised, then go ahead and raise every hand you get. Sometimes they're going to call out of the blinds, and then you need a hand that is playable against that range of hands. 63s is a little low on the spectrum for my taste. Are you saying you raise any two here? [/ QUOTE ] Absolutely raising any two unless the blind is unreasonably loose. We're risking 2 small bets to win 1.5. Therefore we only need to succeed 57.14% of the time in order for this to be profitable. Further assume that with any random piece of garbage we can find to raise, we will win 25% of the time if we see a flop. With that addendum, we only need to succeed 42.86% of the time. Therefore we can fail to steal the blinds half the time we try, and still show a profit. This assumes that we have reasonable position to steal and sufficiently tight players in all seats left to act. It's too unlikely to work to be profitable from MP3, it's marginal from CO, but it's an easy raise with any two from the button. Thoughts? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
we will win 25% of the time if we see a flop. With that addendum, we only need to succeed 42.86% of the time. [/ QUOTE ] I didn't realize stealing was such an exact science. -ropey |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] we will win 25% of the time if we see a flop. With that addendum, we only need to succeed 42.86% of the time. [/ QUOTE ] I didn't realize stealing was such an exact science. -ropey [/ QUOTE ] Well I guess I could look deep into my opponent's soul while screaming "I AM STEALING YOUR BLIND!", but as it is, I'd like to have some idea of how often something needs to happen for it to be profitable. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I know, I know...I'm only kidding Pax. I was just thinking that one decimal place would have done the job. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
-ropey |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Because there needs to be a limit as to what hand is going to be proftable to play with? If your opponents were folding every single time you raised, then go ahead and raise every hand you get. Sometimes they're going to call out of the blinds, and then you need a hand that is playable against that range of hands. 63s is a little low on the spectrum for my taste. Are you saying you raise any two here? [/ QUOTE ] Absolutely raising any two unless the blind is unreasonably loose. We're risking 2 small bets to win 1.5. Therefore we only need to succeed 57.14% of the time in order for this to be profitable. Further assume that with any random piece of garbage we can find to raise, we will win 25% of the time if we see a flop. With that addendum, we only need to succeed 42.86% of the time. Therefore we can fail to steal the blinds half the time we try, and still show a profit. This assumes that we have reasonable position to steal and sufficiently tight players in all seats left to act. It's too unlikely to work to be profitable from MP3, it's marginal from CO, but it's an easy raise with any two from the button. Thoughts? [/ QUOTE ] I didn't realize there was so much science to this, my raise seemed and seems fine to me and I don't think it's even marginal. But the math is impressive |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't realize there was so much science to this, my raise seemed and seems fine to me and I don't think it's even marginal. But the math is impressive [/ QUOTE ] Limit poker is inherently mathematical, and within certain parameters you can often calculate the highest EV decisions. The trick then, is to be good enough at handreading and psychology to fill in these probabilities and parameters. Without examining the science and math of poker, you cannot be sure that the 'intuitive' ideas are correct. |
![]() |
|
|