Choose your seat (complex)

[sublime]

i dont buy it our house. money doesnt flow clockwise in these games

we are talking about hold em poker, right? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[B Dids]

Joe, Sublime, other smart people: Am I missing something with my FROI idea here?

[ QUOTE ]
we are talking about hold em poker, right? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
If I remember correctly......

In the card game UNO, there's a "reverse" card that makes the action go the other way.

[DMBFan23]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
are you saying you want your opponent to call when you open with, say, j10s bc you will make more than .75bb post flop?

what is the worst hand that you would open with that you want him to call?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not the correct way to look at it.

Lets say we got 2 different players in BB.

We got a loose, passive, predictable player in BB. He defends 90% and play passive and bad postflop.

We got a tighter player that folds to much preflop, lets say he defends with 45% against a stealraise from us. This guy is a little better then the other player postflop. Specially he wins more from us when he is ahead.


We can now say that:

1) Both the loose and the tight BB will defend with 45% best hands. We will then lose more against the tight one.

2) The other 45% the tight player will just fold and loose 0.5BB. The loose player will still call (with his worst 45% of hands) and will have a worse handrange the we have. He will be passive and not bet enough when he is ahead. And he will be loose, calling 2 much when behind. And he is out of position.

3) Since the loose one is defending with 90% of his hands it will profitable for us to come in with all those 90% plus a little more since we are better postflop and got position (we dont have to raise each time). But normally it will not be profitable to stealraise with any2 against tight one (of course it depends on how tight he is, but if we start to raise more beacuse he folds 2 much we also have to understand that we will have a worse handrange those times he calls us).
There will normally be a number of hands that win us money against a really loose player, hands that we cant play against the tight player.

So, when we want to know how we want to play in the blind we got three questions:

A) How big is the difference postflop between the tight and the loose when they got same hand from start?

B) How big is the difference between the tight one losing 0.5BB when he folds and the loose player calling our raise with the worst half of his hands?

C) How much will we win on those hands that we couldnt come in with against tight player?

So, its not like we have to win more then Big Blinds post (0.5BB) each time we are called by the loose player. We just have to win more then 0.5BB minus what we gained in (A) and minus what we gained in (C).

Joe Tall says that we would prefer the loose one. I think he normally is right. We want loose-passive players in every position, also in the blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kiddo,

this is a great post. do you even agree for the times we are in MP3, for example, and end up with the button on the flop against tight players when we would have been coldcalled by loose players?

[Fabian]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

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.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's this .75BB over and over? We can't think of it as SB+BB = .75, as positional advantage, postflop skill and implied odds blow this number out of estimation.

It's not both. You either have a profitable situtaion or you don't. I like the profitable situation I have defined in this thread and I'm trying to point it out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless I'm misunderstanding you, you're saying that the button raiser will make more than 0.75 big bets with most of his stealing hands when the player in the big blind calls. I suggest reading the thread someone (I think Victor) linked to earlier in this thread.

Also, here are two examples of profitable situations:

You raise on the button with hand X. The small blind folds, and the big blind folds with hand Y. Button wins 0.75 big bets, the big blind loses 0.5 big bets, and the small blind loses 0.25 big bets.

You raise on the button with hand X. The small blind folds, and the big blind calls with hand Y. Button wins 0.41 big bets, the big blind loses 0.16 big bets, and the small blind loses 0.25 big bets.

Edit: Here is the link.

[Joe Tall]

[ QUOTE ]
Joe, Sublime, other smart people: Am I missing something with my FROI idea here?


[/ QUOTE ]

Dids,

I dont' even fcking know what's going on here anymore. We have a weak-tight player who defends 90%+ of his big blind that check-calls the whole way, that you don't want to be on the button when he is in the big blind as your hand range is profitable with position and the money moves counter-clockwise in this game.

I think that sums it up but we could be in for more, I dunno.

[B Dids]

I'm even more confused that I was before. I'll try and restate my questions.

It seems like the two worst players on the table are in seats 1 and 2. If I sit in seat 3, I can isolate them with greater frequency.

You suggested the 4 seat, thus giving up FROI on the two bad players, why?

[Wynton]

Allow me to clarify all the confusion with one profound observation:

(clearing my throat)

There is no single correct answer. (Tada!) Actually, what I mean is that we do not necessarily have the same skills for taking advantages of the same players. Perhaps some of us are better at exploiting the weak/tighties than the loose/passives. Now I suppose some of you naysayers will protest that we should be able to beat all these types, and indeed we should, but that doesn't mean we don't have individualized strengths.

And isn't that what makes this wacky poker world so beautiful........ (cue violins)