For all you interested in poker

[ccibball50]

Please explain your counting of the outs here. (I'm not disputing anything, but I am curious.)

You have a pair of aces and a jack. 2 aces left 3 jacks left is 5 outs. Since you have a j if you hit second pair you are likely to win. thats about 20% chance after the flop and 10% chance after the turn. However If you suspect someone could have a set that could change things a little bit. you might would want to reduce the outs by 1. However if there were no raises, then you would not suspect a set. Also if it was raised and then reraised, you would not have outs and would need to fold, but that would mean that 2 people have to be bluffing and even if it is the two losest players at the tabel the percentage of bluffing is the average bluff of the 2 divided in half.

 

[ccibball50]

There are many other factors that go into the equation as well that I did not talk about. For example. Does they player protect his blinds, at what percentage will he re-raise on the button. Should you combine the Turn and river percentages and make the bets as a whole? If so you turn bet may be a good call, but you river bet may be a bad call. If you made a good call off implied odds and you did not call ont he river, then you may have made a bad turn bet. (the turn call is only good if you see the river in some cases). You need to impliment negative implied odds as well. Also how tight is the player? what percentage of time will he raise on the flop? does he slow play? Can you see a free card?

 

[ccibball50]

If you're playing 2-4, then yeah tells don't matter in limit. If you're playing 30-60, it's different. People at this level can be bluffed. And you can always fold when you know you're beat, even at 2-4.

Say you're at a low limit game with A-J. The flop comes A-3-7 rainbow. And the early position guy sees the flop, immediately looks away at his chips, starts breathing heavily, and sheepishly bets. Middle position raises with similar tells. You pitch the hand, because one of these clowns has two pair or a set. Now, without the tell, I'm 3-betting top pair in a 2-4 game.

Sorry, I did not see the 30-60 limit you posted. You are correct even when you get to the 10-20 limit, bluffing becomes a much bigger factor. So yes you are correct that reading players is much better in this type of game.

 

[gibsonlp33stl]

Also - if you truly have a good tell on the guy I don't know if you could count all your outs. And A may not help you if he has AK or AQ...also, if he caught trips then none of your outs are helpful, and will in fact hurt you. So the chance of catching an out may be 9 to 1, but that doesn't mean you'll win the hand. But then again, he may have a A with a weak kicker meaning that you're already ahead.

 

[ccibball50]

Also - if you truly have a good tell on the guy I don't know if you could count all your outs. And A may not help you if he has AK or AQ...also, if he caught trips then none of your outs are helpful, and will in fact hurt you. So the chance of catching an out may be 9 to 1, but that doesn't mean you'll win the hand. But then again, he may have a A with a weak kicker meaning that you're already ahead.

If you look in the post, you will see that where I commented that you might lower the outs by one if you suspect he has a set. Pluss if there are no raises, then chances are they do not have AK or a set, or 2 pair, However tighter players may not bet on AK. If you were to pick every time this particular person had a set, 100% of the time, you could then reduce you outs to probably 1 at best. However you probably only get it right that he has a set a small percentage of the time which means that by lowering your outs by one, you are actually underestimating your outs. In this situation, how many times will he have a set VS 2 pair. You need to know the ratio to make an exact decision.

 

[ccibball50]

You never know exactly what someone has. Only that something is different and they are exited because they think they have a good hand, or they think they have a bad hand. This means, you can never predict their hand all the time. Based on what is on the board, and betting patterns and tells, you can only make an educated guess with percentages in your favor.

 

[gibsonlp33stl]

You make valid points...I'm mainly just messing around and playing devil's advocate. Yet there are many many different styles of poker that can be successful...but I'm mainly a NL player, so game is drastically different than the limit game. There is definitely math involved in the NL game, but not even close to the amount involved in Limit play...so i may be a bit out of my element.

 

[ccibball50]

You make valid points...I'm mainly just messing around and playing devil's advocate. Yet there are many many different styles of poker that can be successful...but I'm mainly a NL player, so game is drastically different than the limit game. There is definitely math involved in the NL game, but not even close to the amount involved in Limit play...so i may be a bit out of my element.

That is true. You can actually be winner without doing any math in NL and just playing off reads. Assumming you have experience and don't go all in every time with 2 7 off suit every hand.

 

[Canceler]

You have a pair of aces and a jack. 2 aces left 3 jacks left is 5 outs. Since you have a j if you hit second pair you are likely to win. thats about 20% chance after the flop and 10% chance after the turn. However If you suspect someone could have a set that could change things a little bit. you might would want to reduce the outs by 1. However if there were no raises, then you would not suspect a set. Also if it was raised and then reraised, you would not have outs and would need to fold, but that would mean that 2 people have to be bluffing and even if it is the two losest players at the tabel the percentage of bluffing is the average bluff of the 2 divided in half.

Thanks! Good to know I was in the ballpark.

 

[zenzan]

One of the biggest mistakes many people make is when they put a person on a specific hand. That is nearly impossible , instead you should put your opponent on a range of hands and fare that range against yours then procedde with betting, bluffing, raising based on odds, % of times he is likely to fold, call, raise, etc...factoring in his style of play : tag, lag, etc...and *texture of the board*, for example if you get checked raised in position on a rainbow, unconnected flop, you might want to reraise with a stone cold bluff because people usually slow play a big hand ecpecially on a non-dangerous flop , things like that.

Poker has been much more +Ap or +Ev or whatever you want to call it vs bj for me, and you will be surprised at how much oppertunity there is at levels all the way to 5-10 blinds. Reading books don't help that much , instead I advice you of playing loose aggressive style spewing some money off (lower limit) like a maniac for a while, and you will learn so much about patterns, styles, tendencies, etc... way more than books would

 

[gibsonlp33stl]

One of the biggest mistakes many people make is when they put a person on a specific hand. That is nearly impossible , instead you should put your opponent on a range of hands and fare that range against yours then procedde with betting, bluffing, raising based on odds, % of times he is likely to fold, call, raise, etc...factoring in his style of play : tag, lag, etc...and *texture of the board*, for example if you get checked raised in position on a rainbow, unconnected flop, you might want to reraise with a stone cold bluff because people usually slow play a big hand ecpecially on a non-dangerous flop , things like that.

Poker has been much more +Ap or +Ev or whatever you want to call it vs bj for me, and you will be surprised at how much oppertunity there is at levels all the way to 5-10 blinds. Reading books don't help that much , instead I advice you of playing loose aggressive style spewing some money off (lower limit) like a maniac for a while, and you will learn so much about patterns, styles, tendencies, etc... way more than books would

I gotta say I agree with the vast majority of what you said...especially the last paragraph. If you want to be good at poker, you need to invest a lot of time. The books can give you an idea, but you really won't learn much until you play a lot. I don't know if you necessarily have to be a maniac, but at least play lower limits where you can afford to try out some different stuff and play around a bit more without having to worry about losing more money than you're comfortable with. Whatever you do, don't try to learn poker by watching TV. They only show the exciting hands and really doesn't show you very much about the game at all. There is so much going on with the pros (like on High Stakes Poker) because most of the guys know eachother inside and out and play accordingly...I still watch b/c it's great TV, but just don't try to learn too much from it.


:joker:

 

[Canceler]

I agree, but...

The books can give you an idea, but you really won't learn much until you play a lot.

From a beginner’s perspective, I have to say they go hand in hand. Now that I have some hours of experience under my belt, I find the books are much easier to understand.

 

[standard toaster]

From a beginner’s perspective, I have to say they go hand in hand. Now that I have some hours of experience under my belt, I find the books are much easier to understand.

I did not start reading books until about 3 years into my playing. That third year being at least 25 hours a week sometimes around 60 hours. At that level books do come into play and can enhance your play greatly. It depends on what you are reading as well, are you reading books for tourneys or cash games? I find that the books for tournament play are the only ones you really need to read up on. The rest comes with expirence it takes time and effort but once you get a bunch of time under your belt it will become so easy.

I have always seen poker as a much greater +ev game if played correctly. The only problem is that it is a personal skill that some cannot fully master. The game of blackjack is skill as well but not to the extent of poker. The advantage for blackjack is simply that you know you have an advantage and over time if played correctly (which is much easier than poker) you will come out on top just.

poker= greater possability of making more money at a greater chance of losing it
blackjack= greater chance of making money much slower but a lower chance of losing it