Realistic?: profit from all HE starting hands voluntarily played

[Evan]

You're contracdicting yourself.

If a hand is only a winner from the blinds, where you're getting said "insane odds", then that's the only time you'd play it. Your vpip would be >0 and so would your bb/hand.

Hold'em is a game of positional advantages. 87s UTG is not the same hand as 87s on the button.

[JasonP530]

There may be some hands that you would only call raises out of the blind with in large pots(J2s and Q4s come to mind). The expectation may be greater than folding, but it still may not be positive.

[HesseJam]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you only look at those hands that you voluntarily play (i.e., put money into the pot), is it expected / realistic / unlikely to show profit from each starting HE hand over the long term?

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't there something like a spill-over effect, where you could play marginal hands that might have a minute long-term -EV on such said hands, but by playing these at the same time provide +EV support to you better holdings? provided you are playing with opponents who notice that behaviour
Let's look at it the other way around. If you don't expect to win money by voluntarily putting chips in with those hands, why are you playing them at all?

Yes, sure, it will take many many many hands before your actual results are in the black for all hands you deem playable, but with sufficient patience and correct starting hand selection for your game (and for your postflop strategy) you'd get there.

[/ QUOTE ]

My thoughts exactly. Why would you VP$IP with ANY hand that you felt was not a winner? If your numbers are red for a hand there are four possibilities:

1) It is a junk hand
2) It is a playable hand, but you are doing something wrong
3) Your sample size is too small and variance is an issue
4) Something else I didn't think of, but someone smarter will think of.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't there something like a spill-over effect, where you could play marginal hands that might have a minute long-term -EV on such said hands, but by playing these at the same time provide +EV support to you better holdings?

I assume here higher games with better (more observant) opponents and that you see these opponents more often.

[Cerril]

I guess it was a little hard to understand the meaning of your question, so I misread it the first time.

I think if you restrict your 'starting hands' to 'hands you would play on the button' then you should expect to show a profit with every one in the long run - but the long run might be several hundred thousand hands or more.

Hands that fall under 'only playable from the SB' will probably have a range of EVs, better than the worst hands but not all of them will be better than 0.0.

[JinX11]

I agree that if you restrict your play only to the best hands in the best position, you'd likely have a profit with all hands you played. However, you'd be sacrificing a lot of profit at the same time.

My original post was geared more towards a situation where someone is playing a standard tight-aggressive game, trying to maximize profit as well as being profitable with each starting hand.

[Rudbaeck]

It's harder than that, you have to show EV for each starting hand in each seat. Quite clearly some hands are unplayable UTG but give quite decent return on the button.

[jtr]

[ QUOTE ]
Isn't there something like a spill-over effect, where you could play marginal hands that might have a minute long-term -EV on such said hands, but by playing these at the same time provide +EV support to you better holdings?

[/ QUOTE ]

I find this intriguing in theory, but I strongly suspect the effect is very weak in online games. I guess if we're talking about thousands of hours against the same guys at a B&M table...

[ojsdaman]

i found this to be one of the most helpful threads i have ever read

[JinX11]

[ QUOTE ]
It's harder than that, you have to show EV for each starting hand in each seat. Quite clearly some hands are unplayable UTG but give quite decent return on the button.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. It's a good point: position is one reason, I think, that my low pocket pairs are losing me money overall. However, profiting for all hands in all positions would be even more difficult - you'd be one helluva player if you could pull that off, I'd imagine.

[Rudbaeck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's harder than that, you have to show EV for each starting hand in each seat. Quite clearly some hands are unplayable UTG but give quite decent return on the button.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. It's a good point: position is one reason, I think, that my low pocket pairs are losing me money overall. However, profiting for all hands in all positions would be even more difficult - you'd be one helluva player if you could pull that off, I'd imagine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or you could check pokerroom, they've already done it in a manner. Off course, those EV figures won't be the same as yours as they are site total averages. Momos can lose money on 87s on the button.