#51
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Choose your seat (complex)
How often do players fold their blinds to steal raises really? Bad players play bad because they play too many hands so they almost never fold their blinds. Most 'tight' players find all kinds of reasons to defend their big blind, especially in 6-max games, especially against a chronic stealer. 2+2ers are blind defenders and are aggressive about it to boot. I am widely known for being a big blind folder and I only fold my big blind to a steal raise about 55% of the time. So where are all these people handing over their .75 BB to you coming from? I wonder how often you are actually stealing the blinds as opposed to winning the pot somehow after the flop.
In a heads up match the best kind of player to play against is someone who folds too much preflop. 3-way, the game is different because you have to play tighter on the button due to the presence of the small blind. You can't raise 90% of your hands because two people have to not have a legit hand for you to play. So you have to tighten up. Since you have to tighten up, the big blind can tighten up against your steal range so you lose some of your advantage against the tight players. As your steal range moves away from 100% you should more and more care about the big blinds postflop play than their preflop tightness because as you move away from 100% they are correct to play more tight. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Re: defense of Joe Tall (since no1 seems to get his point)
Sorry, although my original post was a reply to yours, it was really just a general trying to support my point. It is difficult for me to argue specifically against what you say, because this situation is far more complicated than any of us are giving it credit for.
I will try to respond directly to you soon, but for now I still donīt have a good enough grasp on it myself. Another thing to think about... Taking the example of a tight player who calls top 45%, and loose player who calls the top 90%. Against the loose player, for the hands between 45-70, we lose out on the instant folds, and are instead forced to play against hands that we donīt have all that much edge against. Once we reach the 70-90 hands, we probably start to make back the equity that we lost by him not folding, but only barely. Another benefit about playing against the tight player is that when we do see a flop, we have a much better idea of his range, so are able to play better postflop with our superior hand reading. Against the loose player, he could have literally anything, so it will be hard to figure out where we stand. Obviously we will have some idea, but it will be harder. In the 45% of hands that both players are playing, I would rather be up against the tight player because: A) he is tight, so we may win the flop immediately more often B) his hand range is better defined, so we will know how to play better Sorry for just posting out random things, but I need to think about this more before I fully try to refute you or come up with a full argument for wanting the tight player. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Re: defense of Joe Tall (since no1 seems to get his point)
[ QUOTE ]
Against the loose player, for the hands between 45-70, we lose out on the instant folds, and are instead forced to play against hands that we donīt have all that much edge against. [/ QUOTE ] 100% agree. [ QUOTE ] Another benefit about playing against the tight player is that when we do see a flop, we have a much better idea of his range, so are able to play better postflop with our superior hand reading. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, we never know what a loose-passive player got so handreading is worthless, but we also know his average hand is pretty worthless and that he calls to much and this normally wins us more $ then we lose not knowing what he got. And I agree, this is really complicated. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Choose your seat (complex)
good points rory. I sat between 4 and 5 cause I relished the idea of stealign this guys blinds. But you are right in a real-world scenario not many people jsut give us their blinds every time...
where would you sit at this table as described? |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Choose your seat (complex)
I'm at the table already, in seat 1 [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
|
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Choose your seat (complex)
[ QUOTE ]
Which is it? [ QUOTE ] you dont want a passive player who defends liberally in the BB because defending liberally is correct against my steal range which is probably 43% ATTSB [/ QUOTE ] or [ QUOTE ] even the bottom range of those hands is profitable with position imo. [/ QUOTE ] ???? [/ QUOTE ] Hi Joe, It's both. Many hands that a 43% ASB will steal with will show a profit > 0 big bets but < 0.75 big bets if the person in the big blind defends. Similarly, many hands that the person in the big blind defends with will show a loss of < 0.5 big bets, meaning we (the button stealer) prefer he folds those hands, but even if he calls we make more than 0 big bets. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Re: defense of Joe Tall (since no1 seems to get his point)
hi kiddo. great post.
for those that are confused about what kiddo is trying to say i think i can sum it up well: against a bad player you have postflop implied odds because of your skill advantage. its hard to quantify your advantage so the only way to do so is to use experience to just. also, i want to clarify the players here because there is some confusion. even though the 5 seat is tight passive and doesnt bluff, he is still fairly hard to play against. hes not a fishy idiot. its hard for me to explain why hes fairly hard to play against since my description of him is so juicy: predictable and passive. that said i still have an advantage over him in position postflop but its not as much as you guys are making it out to be i dont think. i also never meant to imply that there are players at the table that will fold their blinds to my steal raises. some players are more likely to fold with higher frequency than others but they are all going to defend pretty liberally. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Choose your seat (complex)
We should sit between 3-4. The guy in seat 5 is going to feel like he got drunk in the bar and wound up knifed, robbed, violated and left for dead by the dumpster in the back alley at the end of the session. Tight passive guy who never bluffs in the big blind when we are the button? He will talk about the session in therapy. And seat 2's ultra aggression when he is the button and I am the big blind doesn't scare me really, just have to figure out where he is going to dump the chips, on the flop or on the turn.
|
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Choose your seat (complex)
[ QUOTE ]
We should sit between 3-4. The guy in seat 5 is going to feel like he got drunk in the bar and wound up knifed, robbed, violated and left for dead by the dumpster in the back alley at the end of the session. Tight passive guy who never bluffs in the big blind when we are the button? He will talk about the session in therapy. And seat 2's ultra aggression when he is the button and I am the big blind doesn't scare me really, just have to figure out where he is going to dump the chips, on the flop or on the turn. [/ QUOTE ] Tstone gave us a table with a terrible player, an aggro-LAG and a likely 42 VPIP. And you're eyeballing the tight-passive guy for his chips?? |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Choose your seat (complex)
I am heartened that my quick choice -- between 4 and 5 -- is supported by at least a few here (at least before those players were described further by OP). To me, the most important considerations are: player 2 is very agg, and player 4 is very loose passive. I really hate being to the right of a VLP.
|
|
|