PDA

View Full Version : bluffing at no limit holdem



booboobear
11-24-2006, 11:19 AM
I played limit holem last 2 weeks thinking of trying no limit this weekend , I was wondering if it's good to bluff pre flop with nothing or maybe A Q OR A 8 what are odds of bluff working , of course the pot wont be high.

ALSO WHAT ABOUT LARGE BETS IN B JACK THEN WIN 1 HAND AND LEAVE .

Ranger68
11-24-2006, 12:03 PM
The odds of a bluff working depend entirely upon how you play it, how you've played beforehand, and the rest of the table.
There's very little way to quantify it.

As far as large bets in blackjack - it's the best strategy when the house is against you - one big bet, then leaving. ..... Of course, that's just another way of saying you shouldn't gamble as much. ;)

jeeperz
11-24-2006, 10:50 PM
Betting pre-flop is NOT a bluff. You are bluffing when the cards you are holding haven't hit with what's on the board.

MarkII
11-24-2006, 11:08 PM
As for blackjack, guys at the table will be pissed at you, if you only play one hand, but to each his own, in the end it is all about making money, but you jumping in can screw up the whole "shoe", especially if it has been going well, real players will absolutely "hate" you.

I'm not much of a card player at all. But I have a friend who does this for a living. Can't play in Vegas, Reno or Atlantic City any more but he hits the regional casinos every day. (Why the regionals are easier I don't know as they all seem to be run by very few gambling companies.)

But he taught me this plus minus system for BJ..he had it down to an art. It wasn't card counting per say but simply keeping track of whats left in the shoe. 10's and over were a plus, below that was a minus. Therefore as the shoe came to mid point he had a better than average idea of what was left and bet accordingly.

He told me he often stood back and entered a game late knowing the shoe had a certain percentage of cards left. Bet and then left right away.

I wonder if these guys you're speaking about are following a similar system?

I only gamble in the tropics...I pretend I'm James Bond..lose my 200 bucks stumble back to my cabana and snore all night!

A gambler I'm not!

M2

danmand
11-24-2006, 11:35 PM
Bluffing is much overrated in poker, or maybe I should say that it is generally used too much. You will be called most of the time, especially at the low denomination tables which you are likely to frequent as a beginner or depending on your stomach even as a more experienced player.

For a bluf to be effective, it has to be a large enough bet to hurt both you and the opponent.

jeeperz
11-25-2006, 07:15 AM
Bluffing works best when you are in position. By that I mean when you have the button or are close to the last to act. The check raise is usually pretty effective too. It also helps if a scare card hits, e.g. The third card of a particular suite. Bluffing also works better if you raised pre-flop because your opponents may put you on a big hand like a pocket pair.

Ranger68
11-25-2006, 07:57 AM
I'm not much of a card player at all. But I have a friend who does this for a living. Can't play in Vegas, Reno or Atlantic City any more but he hits the regional casinos every day. (Why the regionals are easier I don't know as they all seem to be run by very few gambling companies.)

But he taught me this plus minus system for BJ..he had it down to an art. It wasn't card counting per say but simply keeping track of whats left in the shoe. 10's and over were a plus, below that was a minus. Therefore as the shoe came to mid point he had a better than average idea of what was left and bet accordingly.

He told me he often stood back and entered a game late knowing the shoe had a certain percentage of cards left. Bet and then left right away.

I wonder if these guys you're speaking about are following a similar system?

I only gamble in the tropics...I pretend I'm James Bond..lose my 200 bucks stumble back to my cabana and snore all night!

A gambler I'm not!

M2
This is card counting.
And it's not as effective as you might think.

homonger
11-25-2006, 11:56 AM
Bluffing is much overrated in poker, or maybe I should say that it is generally used too much. You will be called most of the time, especially at the low denomination tables which you are likely to frequent as a beginner or depending on your stomach even as a more experienced player.

For a bluf to be effective, it has to be a large enough bet to hurt both you and the opponent.

I would generally concur with danmand. A lot of times, when you see guys bluffing on TV, it looks cool, but because the televised tournaments are so heavily edited, you really don't see the context surrounding the bluff. Bluffing is definitely part of the game, and any savvy player will make it a part of his/her repertoire. It is possible to both bluff too much, and to bluff too little.

But I also think it depends on what you consider bluffing. There are a lot of situations in NLHE, where you may be betting with the worst hand, but because of your previous actions, your stack, your table image, or your position, you can win a pot. A simple example would be the so-called continuation bet, where if you have raised pre-flop, you generally bet again after the flop, regardless of whether the flop has hit you or not. Another example is raising on the button to steal the blinds (this is really more of a tournament play). I don't consider these bluffs, I consider this simply playing the game.

In short, there is no cut and dried simple answer to your question. There are too many situational factors at play. But in general, I would say that any good player has to be capable of bluffing on occasion.

MarkII
11-25-2006, 08:02 PM
This is card counting.
And it's not as effective as you might think.

Ranger...I am only telling you what he told me. I have tried it with very limited success while in Nassau. The free drinks made me lose track!

But this guy I knew..made a living off it. Flew in First class for a Ontario casino opening...I think they call it the "candy store" period?

I hear from him once and a while...he's still renting huge boats and living the good life. It could all be bullshit..I have no idea.

But the idea of keeping track of the plus minus in the shoe does seem like a possibiiitly. Can't imagine the concentration that would be needed.

M2

homonger
11-26-2006, 01:19 AM
Card counting does work, but it takes a lot of concentration and a lot of patience. A deep bankroll helps too.

Oil Please
11-26-2006, 03:32 AM
Card counting does not help in nlhe.

Ranger68
11-26-2006, 08:24 AM
Ranger...I am only telling you what he told me. I have tried it with very limited success while in Nassau. The free drinks made me lose track!

But this guy I knew..made a living off it. Flew in First class for a Ontario casino opening...I think they call it the "candy store" period?

I hear from him once and a while...he's still renting huge boats and living the good life. It could all be bullshit..I have no idea.

But the idea of keeping track of the plus minus in the shoe does seem like a possibiiitly. Can't imagine the concentration that would be needed.

M2
He's bullshitting you. This is BASIC CARD-COUNTING, and it won't make you money in the long-run UNLESS you limit yourself to places where it can work reliably - single or double-deck shoes - AND you use this strategy to alter your play, not just your bets. You CANNOT "make a living off it".

Hell, *I* use this method. It's fine for what it is, but is UNABLE to swing the balance in your favour more than five or ten percent of the time.

Sorry.

homonger
11-26-2006, 12:38 PM
The simple hi/lo method of card counting can work--the MIT blackjack team from the 90's used this method, and they used in on multi-deck shoes. But as stated, even the best counters encounter no more than an advantage of a few percentage points, which means you have to bet large amounts of money during those times when you do have an advantage to make it work.

Ranger68
11-26-2006, 01:38 PM
They did it by working *in teams*. And they were all banned from Vegas as a result.
A single guy just can't do it on his own.

homonger
11-26-2006, 03:34 PM
They did it by working *in teams*. And they were all banned from Vegas as a result.
A single guy just can't do it on his own.

Yes, their team concept was highly effective for awhile, but they got greedy.

I will grant you that is a lot more difficult for an individual to "beat" the game, but it is possible. There are professional blackjack players out there. But the problem is, these guys are finding it harder and harder to find a place to play, which is why, overall, I prefer poker. No one ever asks any of those guys to leave.


I was wondering if it's good to bluff pre flop with nothing or maybe A Q OR A 8 what are odds of bluff working , of course the pot wont be high.

Getting back to the original poster's question, there is a big difference between AQ vs. A8, and it also depends on the level of action to you and your position. If it is an unopened pot to you in late position, your AQ or even A8 figures to be favored over most random hands in the blinds, and so, a raise could likely take the pot. If there are a series of limpers to you in late position, a raise with AQ might win the pot, but be reminded that the more limpers there are in a pot, the more attractive the pot odds are for any of them to want to stay. You also have to beware that some guys like to limp in early position with big hands like AA, KK, or AK, just waiting for a guy like you to raise, so they can re-raise. I recently was playing in AC and made a modest raise at a loose table with KK in early position. I got 2 or 3 callers and then the big blind went all-in, trying to scoop the "dead money" in the pot. I wasn't trying to trap anyone, but I was happy to call with my Kings and everyone else folded. He had AQ and I won a big pot.

In general, these pre-flop raises work better in tournaments than in cash games, because in the tournaments, the blinds escalate, and therefore it can be worth your while to win them. In cash games, I don't tend to try to win pots pre-flop, unless there is a fair amount of "dead money" already in them, and I think I can get my opponents to fold.

PHNINE
11-26-2006, 03:48 PM
I prefer poker as well, espesherry when playing with Homonger. ;)

danmand
11-26-2006, 05:59 PM
same here.

VERYBADBOY
11-26-2006, 07:14 PM
When bluffing you are playing the person rather than the cards, although they will come into play as that is how the mind works.


10's and over were a plus, below that was a minus. Therefore as the shoe came to mid point he had a better than average idea of what was left and bet accordingly.

Actually you got the first part correct:

10s to Aces = -1
7s, 8s and 9s = 0
2s to 6s = +1

The odds are in your favour maybe 1% over the house, which always has a slight edge.

They work in groups because you bet low when the count is not in your favour, when it is you bet high ... it is a giveaway to casinos that you are a card counter that is why you need the extra manpower.

Working solo still has its advantages but the risk of getting caught are higher.

Remember though that you are usually counting on 5 or 6 decks ... thats where the counting, well really the math, has to kick in for it to work.

VBB :D

Ranger68
11-26-2006, 07:42 PM
Actually you got the first part correct:

10s to Aces = -1
7s, 8s and 9s = 0
2s to 6s = +1

There are MANY different systems. This is just one of them.


The odds are in your favour maybe 1% over the house, which always has a slight edge.
Do you mean you have a 1% edge? Or the house does? Just counting cards gives you NO edge, unless you play it right. Even if you alter your strategy perfectly, the house maintains the edge in a five or six-deck shoe practically all the time.


They work in groups because you bet low when the count is not in your favour, when it is you bet high ... it is a giveaway to casinos that you are a card counter that is why you need the extra manpower.
Yup.


Working solo still has its advantages but the risk of getting caught are higher.
There are EXCEEDINGLY FEW blackjack players who make money doing this solo. Most professional players are tournament players.


Remember though that you are usually counting on 5 or 6 decks ... thats where the counting, well really the math, has to kick in for it to work.
VBB :D
Not just the counting or the math. It's VERY RARE for the edge to swing *even marginally* in your favour in this situation. You are, the rest of the time, shaving the house edge by altering your play style when the shoe is not in your favour. If you have *lots of money*, *lots of time*, and *lots of skill*, you *may* be able to make money at it occasionally.

I know it's not sexy, and it's not the myth.
But it's the truth.
The casinos would LOVE for everyone to think that just by using the above counting system that they can swing the edge in their favour. It's bollocks.

booboobear
11-27-2006, 11:52 AM
If you are playing at Casino Niagara or Fallsview Casino you may get called quite a bit, games at these casinos are very loose, especially at Casino Niagara because they have a $1-$2 NL game, very cheap to buy in, and $100 is maximum buy in, guys will call all the time, especially to see what your hand is. As for blackjack, guys at the table will be pissed at you, if you only play one hand, but to each his own, in the end it is all about making money, but you jumping in can screw up the whole "shoe", especially if it has been going well, real players will absolutely "hate" you.

I understand what you are saying about B jack but I think a lot of amateur players a t bj ack don't realize if it is a constant shuffle shoe which most are now at niagara you can't screw up a shoe after each hand it is a new game . I actually prefer to play 1 on 1 against a dealer so far always better luck. Personally I don't care if someome plays 1 hand or 50 or hits when the " theory " says you don't . for the average time people spend at a table it makes no difference . The cards don't know what they are supposed to do.

booboobear
11-27-2006, 11:57 AM
Bluffing is much overrated in poker, or maybe I should say that it is generally used too much. You will be called most of the time, especially at the low denomination tables which you are likely to frequent as a beginner or depending on your stomach even as a more experienced player.

For a bluf to be effective, it has to be a large enough bet to hurt both you and the opponent.


I was talking only about going all in pre flop with at least a K . Yes I am talking about low limit tables but do you think you would be called all in pre flop if your all in is $ 60 . So far I have only played limit tables. But of course if no one calls you don't win much pre flop .

homonger
11-27-2006, 12:21 PM
I was talking only about going all in pre flop with at least a K . Yes I am talking about low limit tables but do you think you would be called all in pre flop if your all in is $ 60 . So far I have only played limit tables. But of course if no one calls you don't win much pre flop .

Such a move has a high risk/low reward ratio. You are only going to win the blinds, but if you get called, you are risking your whole stack. I don't recommend this play at all in a low stakes cash game.

danmand
11-27-2006, 12:47 PM
Such a move has a high risk/low reward ratio. You are only going to win the blinds, but if you get called, you are risking your whole stack. I don't recommend this play at all in a low stakes cash game.

Homonger is right again. Your gain is very low, and you will only be called if someone can beat you. It is a play you see by inexperienced players, betting big to winn the blinds. You need to somehow calculate pot-odds, which simply stated is pot/bet, reflecting the potential gain of the bet in relation to the bet.

VERYBADBOY
11-27-2006, 01:30 PM
I know it's not sexy, and it's not the myth. But it's the truth.

Love the extra info that you provided and glad you took the extra time, but ... I forgot to tell you that I don't like Blackjack, haven't played it in years and prefer Poker instead. I guess I bluffed when I didn't want to or you read me wrong. LOL.

I know that there are many believers and many proponents, there are also many who swear by other methods ... bring a lucky charm, keep a picture of their loved ones, wear their fav article of clothing or consult astrology as to the best day to play ... whatever angle they have going for them I say power to them all and may lady luck shine on you.

To myself it's just a game of cards ... some days you win and some days you don't.

VBB :D

jockeee
11-27-2006, 02:30 PM
To myself it's just a game of cards ... some days you win and some days you don't.

VBB :D


Thats just gambling then. the pro's will tell you that they can sit at a table and only play the hands they know they will win . Its all about the pot odds and %'s.

Ranger68
11-27-2006, 02:44 PM
No, most pros play THE TABLE not just pot odds and percentages - that's amateur shit. All poker pros got where they were by learning how to play the people sitting at the table around them.

danmand
11-27-2006, 02:53 PM
No, most pros play THE TABLE not just pot odds and percentages - that's amateur shit. All poker pros got where they were by learning how to play the people sitting at the table around them.

Maybe, but first they get proficient in calculating the pot odds and percentages.

Ranger68
11-27-2006, 02:54 PM
Sure, but that's the kind of thing that anyone who plays should get to know. That's NOT the hard part, and it's not what separates the amateurs from the professionals.

danmand
11-27-2006, 02:58 PM
Are there any professional poker players on Terb. I am for sure not.

homonger
11-27-2006, 03:08 PM
Are there any professional poker players on Terb. I am for sure not.

There's gotta be, although I heartily admit I am not one either. If anything, I know just enough to do damage to myself.

Getting back to the whole math/percentages thing vs. the playing the people thing, I believe most pros out there are primarily one or the other. I agree somewhat with ranger that the pot odds and math are learnable by most, but some just have a better knack for it than others. Similarly, I believe there are some pros who are just very good at reading people and situations, and rely less on the math, although they know it. In any case, I do agree with danmand that for most poker players, learning the math should be considered a fundamental.

VERYBADBOY
11-27-2006, 03:16 PM
All I know is that you can keep all those percentages in your head, been there done that and my brain continues to do that whether I want it to or not, but when I look up from my cards and look at the faces and body movements of the other players then my brain starts working in another manner.

Over and over again I am making decision after decision based on both those two factors ... cards and people ... I can't stop that brain process.

Everybody has their own system ... if it works for you ... then once again all the power to you.

VBB :D

jockeee
11-27-2006, 03:52 PM
All I know is that you can keep all those percentages in your head, been there done that and my brain continues to do that whether I want it to or not, but when I look up from my cards and look at the faces and body movements of the other players then my brain starts working in another manner.

Over and over again I am making decision after decision based on both those two factors ... cards and people ... I can't stop that brain process.

Everybody has their own system ... if it works for you ... then once again all the power to you.

VBB :D

well then we wont count on seeing you in the championships then. as long as you have fun thata all that counts. sometimes you need to remember to get that brain doing what it needs to do...not what it wants to do.

VERYBADBOY
11-27-2006, 04:25 PM
sometimes you need to remember to get that brain doing what it needs to do...not what it wants to do.

Thank you Deepak but my brains not buying it and he controls my wallet when my wife and "little" VBB isn't. I do fine at the tables so I give my brain the props for doing a good job and I rewards him later by smoking a blunt.

BTW ... my brain is telling me that you aren't going to be here for long, well at least under this handle.

VBB :D

booboobear
11-28-2006, 08:46 AM
Such a move has a high risk/low reward ratio. You are only going to win the blinds, but if you get called, you are risking your whole stack. I don't recommend this play at all in a low stakes cash game.

You are right about that I was thinking more about going all in only if you are last to act and some bets have been placed making the pot a litle bigger than just blinds . However if some body has bet they may have pocket aces and if you bluff with KJ then will they call ? I just thought if you bluff early no one gets to see the flop unless they go all in.
When is a good time to bluff by going all in ?

Ranger68
11-28-2006, 09:15 AM
In general, it's VERY hard to bluff at limit tables, ESPECIALLY low-limit ones. There's almost always someone to call you, often more than one.

booboobear
11-28-2006, 11:53 AM
In general, it's VERY hard to bluff at limit tables, ESPECIALLY low-limit ones. There's almost always someone to call you, often more than one.



I am talking only about bluffing by going all in which you can only do at no limit tables.

Ranger68
11-28-2006, 11:56 AM
It depends on the table.
Which was my first reply.
:)

homonger
11-28-2006, 12:06 PM
You are right about that I was thinking more about going all in only if you are last to act and some bets have been placed making the pot a litle bigger than just blinds . However if some body has bet they may have pocket aces and if you bluff with KJ then will they call ? I just thought if you bluff early no one gets to see the flop unless they go all in.
When is a good time to bluff by going all in ?

My guess is, if you really have your heart set on making a big positional raise in order to steal the blinds and the bit of dead money in the pot, that you would probably be successful with it most of the time.

But let's run the scenario... let's say you are at a $1/2 NLHE table and have $150 in front of you and are in the BB. There are 3 limpers to you in the BB, so there is $9 in the pot. If you push in your stack, you are risking $150 to win $9. If you won with this move 16 times in a row, but lost on the 17th try, you'd show a net loss of -$6.

As such, it's really not a bad play. But keep in mind also, it is a move that would probably piss off a number of the other players. If I saw you make such a move, I would slowplay a big hand and hope to trap you trying to do it again. You probably couldn't use it more than once or twice at any given session.

booboobear
11-28-2006, 12:22 PM
My guess is, if you really have your heart set on making a big positional raise in order to steal the blinds and the bit of dead money in the pot, that you would probably be successful with it most of the time.

But let's run the scenario... let's say you are at a $1/2 NLHE table and have $150 in front of you and are in the BB. There are 3 limpers to you in the BB, so there is $9 in the pot. If you push in your stack, you are risking $150 to win $9. If you won with this move 16 times in a row, but lost on the 17th try, you'd show a net loss of -$6.

As such, it's really not a bad play. But keep in mind also, it is a move that would probably piss off a number of the other players. If I saw you make such a move, I would slowplay a big hand and hope to trap you trying to do it again. You probably couldn't use it more than once or twice at any given session.


I see your point it would be a poor move hte only good time would be if say 5 or 6 guys had bet $ 5 and you had few chips left say $ 40 otherwise like you said to risk $ 150 for $ 10 is kind of dumb. I guess you have to look at each table differently .

danmand
11-28-2006, 12:37 PM
I see your point it would be a poor move hte only good time would be if say 5 or 6 guys had bet $ 5 and you had few chips left say $ 40 otherwise like you said to risk $ 150 for $ 10 is kind of dumb. I guess you have to look at each table differently .

No, no and no.

Homonger has explained why it is not a good idea to go all in when you only hope to get steal the blinds. By the way, to steal the blinds you only have to make a small bet. (reverse psychology: other players may think you want them to call, of course, some are smarter, and understands reverse reverse psychology)

If 5 or 6 guys have gone in with bets 3 times the big blind, you can be assured that someone has a good hand, and you are not going to want to bluff.

If you are short stacked and have a decent hand, go all in before the blinds will force you.

jockeee
11-28-2006, 12:41 PM
Sure, but that's the kind of thing that anyone who plays should get to know. That's NOT the hard part, and it's not what separates the amateurs from the professionals.


you obviously dont hit vegas or atlantic city to play very often. its all about the pot odds and %. who you are playing with will come into it at a final table or final few tables when the real pros are left.

homonger
11-28-2006, 12:48 PM
you obviously dont hit vegas or atlantic city to play very often. its all about the pot odds and %. who you are playing with will come into it at a final table or final few tables when the real pros are left.

I didn't want to get involved in this part of the discussion, because as VBB stated, everyone has their 'system', and if it works for you, then that's all that needs to be said.

A friend of mine who is a very good poker player is fond of saying, "There is winning poker, and there is losing poker", and that's it. I believe there are any number of approaches that can be a winning style, the trick is to find the one that works to your natural strengths. Howard Lederer is never going to be a great reader of situations, yet he is a successful pro because he knows the math cold. Gus Hansen is fantastic at post-flop play, and at sniffing out weakness in his opponents--he is not a math whiz. I'm not saying Lederer sucks at reading situations or that Hansen sucks at the math, what I am saying is that they each have a natural tendency which they use to be successful.

My feeling about the math and pot odds is that it is necessary but not sufficient. If you have a good understanding of starting hand requirements, pot odds and outs, and rudimentary betting strategies, you will probably be better than 75% of the schlubs you meet at your average poker table. You will make money. But to be really good at the game, you have to learn how to read people and situations as well.

danmand
11-28-2006, 01:02 PM
Never one to disagree with Homonger, I would like to add another requirement besides the math and the reading of people:

You have to be able to handle losing, because you will lose in around half of the plays. You need the mental toughness and confidence to not be affected by large losses, which are inevitable. If you don't lose some big pots you are not playing agressively enough. Personally, I will never be a great poker player because I hate to lose.

homonger
11-28-2006, 01:06 PM
Never one to disagree with Homonger, I would like to add another requirement besides the math and the reading of people:

You have to be able to handle losing, because you will lose in around half of the plays. You need the mental toughness and confidence to not be affected by large losses, which are inevitable. If you don't lose some big pots you are not playing agressively enough. Personally, I will never be a great poker player because I hate to lose.

That is a great point, and while I am not a pro, it is even something I struggle with. When you are winning, you feel you are a genius, but when the converse inevitably happens, you wonder if you are just an idiot all in a sudden. Of course, you aren't, but you have to have the confidence to continue believing in yourself.

I once read an article about Scott Fischman, a successful young pro. He was cited as having made 20 final tables one year, an impressive accomplishment. But it also said he played in over 200 tournaments, which means 90% of the time, he lost! You have to have a tough skin to play this game.

Hating to lose is not a bad quality in a person. I would say how one responds to losing, that's the key.

Ranger68
11-28-2006, 01:12 PM
you obviously dont hit vegas or atlantic city to play very often. its all about the pot odds and %. who you are playing with will come into it at a final table or final few tables when the real pros are left.
What about my thread didn't you understand?
Let me reiterate - EVERYONE knows pot odds and hand percentages.
What separates the pros from the amateurs is being able to play the people.
Clear now?

Ranger68
11-28-2006, 01:14 PM
Gus Hansen is fantastic at post-flop play, and at sniffing out weakness in his opponents--he is not a math whiz.
Sorry, but you couldn't be more wrong.
If you don't think GUS HANSEN knows the pot odds INSIDE AND OUT on EVERY HAND, PRACTICALLY WITHOUT THINKING ABOUT IT you're totally out to lunch.

danmand
11-28-2006, 01:24 PM
Sorry, but you couldn't be more wrong.
If you don't think GUS HANSEN knows the pot odds INSIDE AND OUT on EVERY HAND, PRACTICALLY WITHOUT THINKING ABOUT IT you're totally out to lunch.

You are right of course, all players at a high professional level understands the pot odds and statistics without having to think much about it. And I did not think Homonger thought differently.

But you are wrong in assuming that EVERYONE understands the statistics. This thread is about advice to a novice, and when playing at low stakes tables in Ontario, most players do not understand or care about pot odds.
So understanding the statistics likely will give you enough of an edge to do well at these tables.

jockeee
11-28-2006, 01:30 PM
Sorry, but you couldn't be more wrong.
If you don't think GUS HANSEN knows the pot odds INSIDE AND OUT on EVERY HAND, PRACTICALLY WITHOUT THINKING ABOUT IT you're totally out to lunch.


exactly. thats what lets a guy like gus hanson play his 8 4 unsuited like he does more often then not.

talk about out to lunch.

Ranger68
11-28-2006, 01:32 PM
But you are wrong in assuming that EVERYONE understands the statistics. This thread is about advice to a novice, and when playing at low stakes tables in Ontario, most players do not understand or care about pot odds.
So understanding the statistics likely will give you enough of an edge to do well at these tables.
I agree, and never assumed (or stated that I did) that everyone does. But, to become a reasonable player, you need to learn these things. That's where it starts. If you go to a table without understanding them, you're just asking to lose.

Ranger68
11-28-2006, 01:33 PM
exactly. thats what lets a guy like gus hanson play his 8 4 unsuited like he does more often then not.

talk about out to lunch.

You think Gus Hansen is playing these hands BECAUSE HE DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE MATH?!?!

ROTFLMFAO

Oh, my. *wiping a tear from my eye*
Thanks, jock. I needed that.
:D

jockeee
11-28-2006, 01:35 PM
You think Gus Hansen is playing these hands BECAUSE HE DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE MATH?!?!

ROTFLMFAO

Oh, my. *wiping a tear from my eye*
Thanks, jock. I needed that.
:D


no. he is playing those hands BECAUSE he understands the math. like i said .. its all about the %'s and the pot odds. he knows what they are from every position he plays. he knows the %'s and ODDS.

homonger
11-28-2006, 01:38 PM
Sorry, but you couldn't be more wrong.
If you don't think GUS HANSEN knows the pot odds INSIDE AND OUT on EVERY HAND, PRACTICALLY WITHOUT THINKING ABOUT IT you're totally out to lunch.

Sigh. I wish I had never gotten involved in this part of the discussion.

Anyway, you missed my point. I didn't say Gus Hansen didn't know the math. My point was that it is not the focal point of his style.
And my overall point was that different styles can be successful.

I once again find myself agreeing with danmand. I agree it is an overstatement to say EVERYONE understands pot odds and math, but it is all a matter of your vantage point. Once you get to a certain skill level and game, I do agree that is a given that everyone does. So you're both right.

All this talk has gotten me wondering... anyone here registered at PokerStars? We can continue the discussion on the virtual felt.

jockeee
11-28-2006, 01:39 PM
Anyway, you missed my point..

it seems he misses all points. maybe he needs to stop wiping those tears from his eyes a little and pay attention.

booboobear
11-28-2006, 02:21 PM
That is a great point, and while I am not a pro, it is even something I struggle with. When you are winning, you feel you are a genius, but when the converse inevitably happens, you wonder if you are just an idiot all in a sudden. Of course, you aren't, but you have to have the confidence to continue believing in yourself.

I once read an article about Scott Fischman, a successful young pro. He was cited as having made 20 final tables one year, an impressive accomplishment. But it also said he played in over 200 tournaments, which means 90% of the time, he lost! You have to have a tough skin to play this game.

Hating to lose is not a bad quality in a person. I would say how one responds to losing, that's the key.

This is why I find THE interesting because there are so many variables one being the people you play against . Odds are another thing and betting a third thing and then the amount of the blinds changes peoples thinking. What you say about losing is also interesting , I was at Niagara on Sunday and a guy was walking around cursing out loud to himself , obviously he lost big and also should probably not be going to a casino. I appreciate all the input from everyone on this board. What I find real interesting is how some of the pros bluff with a fairly weak hand. I don't think there is any real way of telling how strong a hand someone else has if you are bluffing with a poor hand.

Ranger68
11-28-2006, 02:21 PM
it seems he misses all points. maybe he needs to stop wiping those tears from his eyes a little and pay attention.
Maybe you should reread the thread and see where you totally went off the rails.

When homonger said that Gus Hansen was "not a math wiz", I pointed out that it means NOTHING in the context of what we're talking about, and that he is, CERTAINLY, a math "wiz" when it comes to poker. (The fact that he possibly doesn't understand partial differential equations being moot, I hope we agree.)

Next?

lol Reading lessons for anyone who needs them .......

If you play tables ANYWHERE, you will find that most of those who sit down understand pot odds enough to get along. But, feel free to sit down without that knowledge. ...... It'd be like playing blackjack and not knowing whether to hit or stick with a hard 18. ;)
lol

Ranger68
11-28-2006, 02:23 PM
no. he is playing those hands BECAUSE he understands the math. like i said .. its all about the %'s and the pot odds. he knows what they are from every position he plays. he knows the %'s and ODDS.
BTW, when Gus Hansen plays unsuited 8 4, it has NOTHING to do with hand percentages and pot odds.
ROTFL
Seriously.
At least learn SOMETHING about what you're talking about. lol

jockeee
11-28-2006, 02:28 PM
BTW, when Gus Hansen plays unsuited 8 4, it has NOTHING to do with hand percentages and pot odds.
ROTFL
Seriously.
At least learn SOMETHING about what you're talking about. lol


yes he does. you should take your advice.

jockeee
11-28-2006, 02:31 PM
If you play tables ANYWHERE, you will find that most of those who sit down understand pot odds enough to get along. But, feel free to sit down without that knowledge. ...... It'd be like playing blackjack and not knowing whether to hit or stick with a hard 18. ;)
lol


and like i said. you obviously havent played in vegas or atlantic city with all those wonderfull fish. pot odds and %'s baby.

i do notice from reading some of your other posts that you seem to be the only knowlegable one(well, self professed) here from a whole gammut of things from sports to recreational activities. how did this site get so lucky and find the one know-it -all in the world?

Ranger68
11-28-2006, 02:31 PM
Yeah, okay. Sure.
lol
Enjoy losing money at poker, dude.
:)
(Nice comeback, btw. lol)

jockeee
11-28-2006, 02:34 PM
Yeah, okay. Sure.
lol
Enjoy losing money at poker, dude.
:)
(Nice comeback, btw. lol)


if i lost i wouldnt be playing in vegas . couldnt afford to fly there. i would have to stick to niagra and their 2700 buy ins. by the way i didnt notice you there. with all your smarts shouldnt you have been a lock?

Ranger68
11-28-2006, 02:42 PM
Yeah, right. Suuuuuure you were.
LOL
Good luck with that, Sparky. ;)

jockeee
11-28-2006, 02:43 PM
sure i was what?

danmand
11-28-2006, 02:44 PM
Are any of you professional or semi-professional players?

jockeee
11-28-2006, 02:46 PM
nope. but i do like tourneys.

and $5-$10 no limit.

homonger
11-28-2006, 04:52 PM
This is why I find THE interesting because there are so many variables one being the people you play against . Odds are another thing and betting a third thing and then the amount of the blinds changes peoples thinking. What you say about losing is also interesting , I was at Niagara on Sunday and a guy was walking around cursing out loud to himself , obviously he lost big and also should probably not be going to a casino. I appreciate all the input from everyone on this board. What I find real interesting is how some of the pros bluff with a fairly weak hand. I don't think there is any real way of telling how strong a hand someone else has if you are bluffing with a poor hand.

I don't know what jockee and ranger are fighting about, so I am glad booboo, the original poster, has come back again.

As I mentioned earlier, a lot of TV poker is misleading, because it is so heavily edited, and you don't see how the players played their hands prior to making their bluff. If a guy has a real tight table image, he probably can pull off a bluff. Similarly, you'll see some guys get paid off on their big hands and you're thinking at home that there is no way you would have called that bet but they didn't show you the same guy bluff earlier or play junk.

Of course, you never know for sure what your opponent may be holding, but there are clues. That's why it is important to pay attention, even if you are not in a hand. Most players bet and act a certain way when they are strong vs. when they are weak. I also believe most bets are rational, and if you can figure out what the bet means, it gives you some insight into what he might be holding. But this is all very theoretical, because as I admitted earlier, I know just enough about this game to get myself into trouble sometimes.

To be any good at this game, you have to be able to win the occasional pot without having the best cards, but don't assume that stone cold bluffs happen as often as you would believe by watching poker on TV.

Ranger68
11-28-2006, 05:34 PM
sure i was what?
I'm sure everyone you played with enjoyed the dead money.
:)

MarkII
11-28-2006, 05:55 PM
I gotta tell ya, guys this has been an eye opener for me. Never been much of a card player but always stayed a away from the "friendly" games at work. In my earlier post I spoke about a friend who had this "system" and on face value I just believed him.

There's a good reason why I've never been a card player. This fool and his money would soon be parted!

Interesting thread, thanks

M2

twobigo
11-28-2006, 08:34 PM
Sigh. I wish I had never gotten involved in this part of the discussion.

Anyway, you missed my point. I didn't say Gus Hansen didn't know the math. My point was that it is not the focal point of his style.
And my overall point was that different styles can be successful.

I once again find myself agreeing with danmand. I agree it is an overstatement to say EVERYONE understands pot odds and math, but it is all a matter of your vantage point. Once you get to a certain skill level and game, I do agree that is a given that everyone does. So you're both right.

All this talk has gotten me wondering... anyone here registered at PokerStars? We can continue the discussion on the virtual felt.
i,m on Poker stars..pm me if you want to know my table name

twobigo
11-28-2006, 08:39 PM
Are any of you professional or semi-professional players?
not a pro but i,ve played at Blue Heron cash games,played in 60$ buy ins at local "charity" events...my most exciting experience was a 500$ buy in tournament in Brantford in Sept...almost made the final table.

homonger
11-28-2006, 08:47 PM
i,m on Poker stars..pm me if you want to know my table name

Okay, that's two... Anyone else?

VERYBADBOY
11-28-2006, 11:07 PM
I don't call myself a Pro or even Semi ... would prefer the title of "recreational" myself as many other players do.

I have been to a few tourneys, the last one being Mansion House back in the summer. Lots of UK, US, CDA and European players showed up as the satelites were pratically given away ... it was the worst mob scene I have ever witnessed but I loved every minute of it.

The real fun for most happens at the impromptu games set up for those that are eliminated and have the cash to blow. Some serious coin can be made in the after hours. CAUTION: Some private games/tables involve collusion, that is two or more players working together with/out the dealer involved, whose only concern is separating you from your $$$.

Also the sponsors sometimes set up learning sessions with the pros that are helpful but always overcrowded. Some very well known names from the TV shows are available to answer questions and promote the advertisers.

Las Vegas and Atlantic City tourneys are Mad Houses ... I found that tourneys in the lesser known states (eg. Minnesota) with Indian Gambling reserves at least give you the chance to play ... and enjoy yourself as well.

VBB :cool:

Blake659
11-28-2006, 11:16 PM
But at the right time and smartly....

Position and cards are important....But also have a feeel for what you expect others will do.

BOTTOM LINE....IF YOU BET....BLUFF....RAISE.......KNOW WHAT OTHERS MAY/MIGHT/WILL DO........IF YOU THINK THEY WILL RE-RAISE...THEN ASK YOURSELF...WILL I CALL A RE-RAISE.

IF YOU EXPECT THAT..BUT YOUR HAND IS SHIT- FOLD AWAY..DON'T EVEN BET OR BLUFF IF YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE FIRE OF A RE-RAISE

AND THE ONE TIME NOT TO BLUFF.............................IS WHEN I AM AT THE TABLE......I'LL EAT YOUR BLUFF FOR BREAKFAST AND SMILE AS YOUR CHIPS SLIDE MY WAY AND YOUR SORRY ASS WALKS OUT THE DOOR :)

Blake659
11-29-2006, 12:10 AM
Never ever Bluff when I am at the table.....

And never ever ever bluff when I am deep in the hand!!!

Your tears will bore me :)

RemyMartin
11-29-2006, 01:12 AM
how about we get together and play, each person at least bring five dimes.

booboobear
11-29-2006, 10:10 AM
I don't know what jockee and ranger are fighting about, so I am glad booboo, the original poster, has come back again.

As I mentioned earlier, a lot of TV poker is misleading, because it is so heavily edited, and you don't see how the players played their hands prior to making their bluff. If a guy has a real tight table image, he probably can pull off a bluff. Similarly, you'll see some guys get paid off on their big hands and you're thinking at home that there is no way you would have called that bet but they didn't show you the same guy bluff earlier or play junk.

Of course, you never know for sure what your opponent may be holding, but there are clues. .

I think a JOCKEE AND RANGER ARE BLUFFING . I am just trying to learn , the truth I think is that it definitely not a science and even the best pros get fooled by bluffs . I know I have a lot to learn , right now I am trying to curb my tendency to bet with nothing , sure doesn't work in limit games , sometimes I don't have the patience to wait for a goood hand.

Ranger68
11-29-2006, 11:21 AM
;)
Yes, bluffing's efficacy is seriously reduced in limit games. Of course, pros get fooled by bluffs all the time.
It's very hard to win when you don't get the cards all night, that's for sure.

homonger
11-29-2006, 12:18 PM
I am just trying to learn, the truth I think is that it definitely not a science and even the best pros get fooled by bluffs . I know I have a lot to learn , right now I am trying to curb my tendency to bet with nothing , sure doesn't work in limit games , sometimes I don't have the patience to wait for a goood hand.

I think it is good that you are trying to learn the game, although I think this is kind of an odd place to do that. That said, I have always found that there is someone here to knows the answer to your question, no matter what it is.

One of the cliches about poker is that good players can get bluffed, because they are more likely to be thinking about what you might possibly have. Bad players see nothing but their own cards, and won't even think about what it is you are representing. IMO, there is no shame in getting bluffed out of a pot, as long as you can do it yourself to the other guy on occasion.

Hold 'em can definitely be a boring game, and as I have mentioned before, it is frequently described as 57 minutes of boredom, followed by 3 minutes of terror. It is most definitely a game that rewards patience, and remember, it is not the number of pots you play and win, it is how many chips you win overall.

Have you ever considered playing tournaments? If you like action, you might find tournaments more your speed. I think bluffing works a little better in tournaments because unlike a cash game, once you are out of chips you are out of the game, so usually guys are less likely to want to risk a lot of chips if you make a big bluff. The original play you asked about, making a big raise in late position, makes more sense in a tournament, especially when the blinds have gone up.

booboobear
11-29-2006, 12:28 PM
I think it is good that you are trying to learn the game, although I think this is kind of an odd place to do that. That said, I have always found that there is someone here to knows the answer to your question, no matter what it is.



Hold 'em can definitely be a boring game, and as I have mentioned before, it is frequently described as 57 minutes of boredom, followed by 3 minutes of terror. It is most definitely a game that rewards patience, and remember, it is not the number of pots you play and win, it is how many chips you win overall.

Have you ever considered playing tournaments? .


Good comments , yes terb does seem to have experts or people who think they are on every subject .. good old terb. ACtually I am trying to learn by playing as most people say thats the real way to learn I also read notes . I would consider tournaments but it's to early for me I just started at limit games I think I will move up to a no limit this weekend .
Still lots to learn and like I said I need to control my tendency to bet with shitty hands just to be part of the action. I UNDERSTAND NO LIMIT IS TOTALLY DIFFERENT and again DIFFERENT AGAIN DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THE BLINDS. From my limited experience in limit too many guys bet with small hands because the stakes are low, something similar to me.

homonger
11-29-2006, 12:42 PM
Still lots to learn and like I said I need to control my tendency to bet with shitty hands just to be part of the action. I UNDERSTAND NO LIMIT IS TOTALLY DIFFERENT and again DIFFERENT AGAIN DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THE BLINDS. From my limited experience in limit too many guys bet with small hands because the stakes are low, something similar to me.

One of the things I notice about low limit NLHE cash games is that pre-flop raises mean almost nothing, unless it is a really big raise. I see guys routinely calling 3x or 4x raises in a $1/2 game, because it is only $6 and $8 respectively. And of course, once one guy calls your raise, it becomes more and more attractive from a pot odds standpoint for other guys to call too. These guys are looking to play the odds, flop big and win a big pot. If they flop any kind of draw, a lot of these guys will stay with you, because of the implied odds.

In general, I think that if you bet enough to deny your opponents the proper odds to chase their draws, then you shouldn't care if they want to chase you. You will win money more often than not in that scenario. But I have learned the hard way that once in a while you will get chased down in that situation, and will lose a big pot.

danmand
11-29-2006, 01:22 PM
One of the things I notice about low limit NLHE cash games is that pre-flop raises mean almost nothing, unless it is a really big raise. I see guys routinely calling 3x or 4x raises in a $1/2 game, because it is only $6 and $8 respectively. And of course, once one guy calls your raise, it becomes more and more attractive from a pot odds standpoint for other guys to call too. These guys are looking to play the odds, flop big and win a big pot. If they flop any kind of draw, a lot of these guys will stay with you, because of the implied odds.

In general, I think that if you bet enough to deny your opponents the proper odds to chase their draws, then you shouldn't care if they want to chase you. You will win money more often than not in that scenario. But I have learned the hard way that once in a while you will get chased down in that situation, and will lose a big pot.

This points to one of the pitfalls in "reading" opponents. When playing at a low stake table, many of the players will not care to calculate the odds, and therefore may behave as if they have a good hand when they don't. And if 6 players are chasing, one of them are likely to get lucky. Allthough in the long run, you may have an advantage against mad chasers, if there are enough of them, it can hard to see hand after hand being lost to impossible odds.

booboobear
11-29-2006, 02:02 PM
One of the things I notice about low limit NLHE cash games is that pre-flop raises mean almost nothing, unless it is a really big raise. I see guys routinely calling 3x or 4x raises in a $1/2 game, because it is only $6 and $8 respectively. And of course, once one guy calls your raise, it becomes more and more attractive from a pot odds standpoint for other guys to call too. These guys are looking to play the odds, flop big and win a big pot. If they flop any kind of draw, a lot of these guys will stay with you, because of the implied odds.

In general, I think that if you bet enough to deny your opponents the proper odds to chase their draws, then you shouldn't care if they want to chase you. You will win money more often than not in that scenario. But I have learned the hard way that once in a while you will get chased down in that situation, and will lose a big pot.


Good points A decent raise would probably scare away good players who really know they don't have a good hand so I guess the trick is to make it big enough . I suppose poorer players like me would probably want to gamble and call a raise unless they were short money. Maybe that's another tip to count your opponents stack before betting , gee so much to remember.

homonger
11-29-2006, 02:22 PM
Good points A decent raise would probably scare away good players who really know they don't have a good hand so I guess the trick is to make it big enough . I suppose poorer players like me would probably want to gamble and call a raise unless they were short money. Maybe that's another tip to count your opponents stack before betting , gee so much to remember.

That's the cliche about this game--a minute to learn, a lifetime to master.

But that's one of the funny things about this game... when you want action, you don't get it, and when you don't, you do. But yeah, that is another good thing to always be aware of--who's got chips and who doesn't.

Haywood
11-29-2006, 08:50 PM
. IMO, there is no shame in getting bluffed out of a pot, as long as you can do it yourself to the other guy on occasion.


Agreed. If you play enough you should expect to lay down a winning hand once in a while. Otherwise you are likley playing too many hands.

This is a good thread. Alot of good points.
I play alot of no-limit cash games in the Detroit and Windsor Casinos so I thought I would throw in my 2cents.

1. In my experince there are alot of people who don't know odds well. Weekend warriors, drunks, and people who see it on TV and think its cool. This is more common on the 100 and 200 max buy in games. Not so much on no limit buy in. In long run they are dead money but sometimes they kill you with thier "bad" calls. How many times have you heard "how did you call $50 with a gut shot straight" when the pot is only 50 or 100

2. As siad by others, sometimes you can bluff better players more than weaker players.

3. It is important to know your table image as well as others. I assumed i was a somewhat loose player but I have realized that most people have me as tight. This allows me to bluff a little more. My raises are respected especially by players who play with me alot. (I definitely am tighter the more I play)

4. The good players I know don't bluff too often. It is definitly a needed skill but over used.

5. Better to bluff when you have a big stack. Even if you bet all in $60 at a $10 pot you may get a caller with mediocre hand because all they can lose is $60. The caller may have small pair and put you on AK or AQ.If you bet $60 when you have 250 in front of you then the caller has a tough decsion with small of medium pocket pair and should fold.

6. Good luck

ispank
11-29-2006, 10:29 PM
The ability to "count" at Black Jack for managing bets and hit/no hit, like following the standard hit/no hit Basic System, are the minimum for requirements to "sit in" in my opinion. The house assumes you are following these basic pricipals, you can even ask the dealer "What doe the book say" before taking the hit.

The guys that get into trouble are the ones that cheat. My favorite is tip a corner (scratch or bend it) and look at the series of cards behind me. Even with continuous shuffles cards cluster so I have a good feel for what is coming next on the next show. The real counters can track the show with corner marking ... but I only play the $10 tables.

Standard Counting works best in 2 deck hand shuffle where you are mano on mano with the dealer.

Good luck helps too!