implied odds/reverse implied odds much greater in no-limit - Page 3

JJNJustin · #21 10-04-2005, 06:19 AM

I'm probably a much better limit player. But I have played some no-limit. The main point I wanted to stress in the post, is that implied odds, and reverse implied odds, as they affect different situations get magnified in no-limit poker. I listed two situations, one is taking up a junk hand against a bad player with a big pair, another is laying down a decent hand because it may get costly. I was asking other no-limit players, all of which I assume are more experienced than me, if they can concur with the idea that implied odds and reverse implied odds are much greater in no-limit (this is a no brainer, they obviously are) and any other situations that arise from their own experience pertaining to implied odds or reverse implied odds.

-J

Ulysses · #22 10-04-2005, 06:21 AM

[ QUOTE ]
is this the level you are referring to or does it not really take effect

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd say it starts to become significant at about 10-20 and the higher you go, the more significant it becomes.

riverboatking · #23 10-04-2005, 06:24 AM

[ QUOTE ]
and any other situations that arise from their own experience pertaining to implied odds or reverse implied odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

here's a real quick basic one for you.

AA and KK have very small implied odds and huge reverse implied odds when slowplaying preflop with deep stacks.

which is why its important for begining players with deep stacks to try and build big pots preflop with those hands.

riverboatking · #24 10-04-2005, 06:26 AM

thanks.
on a completely seperate note, do you ever pass through commerce? the 20-40NL is unreal, and the 50-100NL although sporadic has been juicy.

daryn · #25 10-04-2005, 06:33 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm probably a much better limit player. But I have played some no-limit. The main point I wanted to stress in the post, is that implied odds, and reverse implied odds, as they affect different situations get magnified in no-limit poker. I listed two situations, one is taking up a junk hand against a bad player with a big pair, another is laying down a decent hand because it may get costly. I was asking other no-limit players, all of which I assume are more experienced than me, if they can concur with the idea that implied odds and reverse implied odds are much greater in no-limit (this is a no brainer, they obviously are) and any other situations that arise from their own experience pertaining to implied odds or reverse implied odds.

-J

[/ QUOTE ]

limit's your game, eh?

so you believe JJ should be check folded on a 678 flop? how about if you decide to be a bit bold and lead out, if he raises do you instamuck it? or call and check fold most turn cards?

Ulysses · #26 10-04-2005, 06:38 AM

[ QUOTE ]
thanks.
on a completely seperate note, do you ever pass through commerce? the 20-40NL is unreal, and the 50-100NL although sporadic has been juicy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have been commuting between SF and NYC the last few months, so no time or real desire for a trip to LA in my free time. What I hear from people who play down there makes me sick, though. Once I'm sticking around here more regularly, I'll need to start making some trips down to LA.

JJNJustin · #27 10-04-2005, 06:40 AM

The JJ was an example mostly from limit. In no limit it is different because you can knock out more players before and on the flop.

The person who posted about AA and KK is basically saying that giving up the pre-flop quity by limping in with these hands in try to catch huge later on and try to trap an opponent for his whole stack is not worth the chance of getting outdrawn and losing a lot of chips to a hand you let in cheaply. I cant say one way or another, but I think this is a debate that will continue to frustrate even the best no limit players.

riverboatking · #28 10-04-2005, 06:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]
What I hear from people who play down there makes me sick, though. Once I'm sticking around here more regularly, I'll need to start making some trips down to LA.

[/ QUOTE ]

and they're not exaggerating.
you can win upwards of $30K on any given night in a 20-40NL game. and that is playing probably half the amount of hands per hour as you would online.

the games are just sick.
i'll be sitting with bobby hoff, stan goldstein, billy duarte, gabe thaler, and there is still enough dead money on the table to make the game profitable.

riverboatking · #29 10-04-2005, 06:44 AM

[ QUOTE ]
The person who posted about AA and KK is basically saying that limping in with these hands in try to catch a huge flop is not worth getting outdrawn and stuck for a lot of chips with these hands when they dont improve. I cant say one way or another, but I think this is a debate that will continue to frustrate even the best no limit players.

[/ QUOTE ]

actually thats not what i was saying.

mikech · #30 10-04-2005, 06:51 AM

[ QUOTE ]
and they're not exaggerating.
you can win upwards of $30K on any given night in a 20-40NL game. and that is playing probably half the amount of hands per hour as you would online.

the games are just sick.

[/ QUOTE ]
upwards of 30k on any given night? jesus. are most ppl buying into this game with 2, 3, 400 bb's or more? and on a decent night one might build a 1,000+ bb stack? i need to make a pilgrimage to the mecca.