For me, I make my money (both online and in B & M games) by being involved in big pots with the best hand. Again, my game is kind of like Action Dan Harrington's ('Action' Dan because he gives so little of it - in fact, I have studied his play and try to model my game on his because it suits my personality and skill set). However, the looser players I mentioned, the ones who have developed that kind of game, can drag a lot of smaller pots with aggression, especially against players they identify as tight, and can also participate in the big pots. In the low level games I play (1/2 and 2/5 NL) it seem to me that the big stacks are built by winning big pots. In my experience, it's the weak/loose players who most often tangle with the big stacks - the guys who are burning through a buy-in every hour or so. When it comes to making a decision about getting involved in a big pot with a guy if my own stack is big, his stack doesn't matter so much to me as his game. I have noticed that big stacks will pay you off if you are a small stack and you have a strong hand. When I have a small stack I am definitely looking to get premium hole cards and trying to double through. However, let me say that since I come from a tourney background, I am not sure that this is the right strategy at a ring game, because of the fact that you will never be forced out of the game. If you don't get to the B & M games that often, I can't stress enough the importance of knowing where you are positionally, throughout the hand. How's your pot odds theory?
I think the best bet out there are the rebuy tournaments as long as you dont rebuy yourself. These guys are nuts. Some of them rebuy a dozen times and a lot of them make stupid plays because they know they can rebuy. I love the odds they are giving me.
I know what you mean, but I also think that if you have a plan to play re-buy tourneys, you need to make sure your bankroll is bigger, because you are going to get whacked more often that you would playing freeze-outs. If you are playing $100 re-buys, I wouldn't start playing with less than $2000 as a bankroll because you can EASILY lose 3 buy-ins/tournament for three tournaments in a row before you are able to build a decent stack before the break and go into the second part of the tourney with a good chance. The same thing you mentioned has caused me to lose a lot of buy-ins before the first break, just because if you try to raise a good hand i.e. 5 bets preflop, you get 5 callers. Then you flop top set and you know there's at least one draw out there that will call you down for any bet. The most hilarious thing at these tournaments is - you go all in with a huge hand. You have one opponent. He sits there and shakes his head and gets all sorts of goofy looks on his face and then literally says out loud 'this is a bad call' and then hems and haws for another minute before (always) saying 'aw, fuck it, I call' and turns over a hand that is a 1-4 dog. He then says 'Chips!!'.
LOL, I was playing the WPT in Paris last month...$1,000 euro buy in satellite....with re-buys....2 guys at the table literally went all in every other hand, rebought, over and over.....I just waited until the rebuy time was over, and they lasted about 1 round or so... I really get what you're saying... Don
Yes. This is the downside to it but I compensate by playing ultra conservative the first hour. I must be doing something right as I make it to the money quite often. The nice thing about online play is that you can move around enough to cover your tracks.
It's pretty shaky as I just don't play enough to have my outs down by rote. I can do the routine calculations but I suppose the implied odds would be far more significant here. My question would be, do the pot odds usually hold up in decision making anyways, given that the better players may shut down if a threatening turn/river falls? Also, how does the stack size of your opponent figure into whether you call/raise or fold? Do you take more chances vs a short stack that is already all-in, and therefore your loss is limited, and conversely play more conservative vs large stacks? Or is this "gut instinct" something better players take advantage of and is to be avoided?
Nope, both my brother and I didn't cash this time around. However, Bob has made 3 final tables in the WSOP sor far. www.stocktrading.com/pokerpages.html I'm heading out today to play in the WSOP "Celebrity-Media" game...should be fun. Had a ball last night at the Full Tilt Poker "Gala" event at the PURE nightclub at Caesar's.....got home about an hour before the market opening....lot of fun. Don
I use the pot odds preflop from late position to enter post which I might not otherwise be in. If you are in the small blind and there are 4 limpers and you haven't seen the bb punishing limpers too often, you can complete with a marginal hand because you are getting 9-1 odds on your money. Flop a monster or you're easily done with the hand. Post flop, I understand what you mean with your question. In my mind, pot odds relate to what Sklansky calls the Fundamental Theorem of Poker - that is, every time you induce in your opponent a play that they would not have made if they could see your cards, you win money. Conversely, every time you call when you would have folded had you been able to see your opponent's cards, you lose. The actual result of the hand does not matter to Sklansky. So by controlling the post odds you are attempting to make money in the long run. With regard to what the player might do on later streets, I think that for now you can just be concerned about the street you're on. If you have top two pair and you suspect your opponent is on a straight draw, you can bet in such a way that his calls are a mistake, no matter what the eventual outcome of the hand, because he was not getting the odds to call. Implied odds are an important consideration, especially when playing bigger stacks. If you are drawing to the nut flush, and you are in with two guys who have been calling and betting like maniacs, you know that if your card hits you will probably make some money and that does affect your calling decisions. Stack size... even though I personally am less inclined to get involved in big pots with big stacks when I also have a big stack, I don't think seasoned players fell this way. Definitely not at cash games. At this point it is very hard for me to look at a short stack and avoid feeling more aggressive or more likely to play the hand down. In the end, though, for me, it is about the way the gu is playing, and not his stack size. One thing is for sure. You will see a big stack bullying and throwing chips around. The you will get involved in a hand with him, and you will have top pair, top kicker. And you will be betting. And he will be calling you in an offhanded manner, perhaps while carrying on a conversation with the guy beside him. And you are going to wonder - is THIS the moment where the guy is going to show you a big hand? Last... there is less pure bluffing going on than you might think. Others can weigh in here but this is what I have seen.