All Forums | Poker

Mr. Glue

Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 2731
Posts: 29
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2006
Posts: 28221
Posted: #1
QUOTE Originally Posted by MrGlue:



I used Poker Stove. With that program you can assign your opponents ranges instead of specific hands. If our opponents ONLY limp with the three hands you mentioned then we're going to have a different amount of equity against different opponents who limp with the RANGE of hands I suggested.

I'm not going to put up much of a fight in favor of limping... BUT, with 2+ limpers in a hand I'm going to see a cheap flop with odds and position, some times. When I do, I'm looking to: flop a monster in a multi way pot, flop a monster draw against a weak made hand, or look hard for fold equity/dead money.



 



Ok. Hand ranges makes sense then. 

Given the play at 1/2 tables, I'd be willing to suggest your pot odds to limp would be as low as 2.5 - 1 or even 2 - 1 (but, as you insinuated, you refined your read on the limpers to be holding more quality hands than not). 

An issue about Poker Stove... 

Are these, specifically 'hand-range' pot odds pre-flop, really useful in live games? Online, it's obvious why it's useful. The calculation is instantaneous. 

In a live game, aren't we reverting back to intuition/feel about a players holding rather than the strictly profitable, actual pot odds to make a limp?

How many players, even top pros correctly calculate pot odds in the scenario we are debating? Even if you put 2 players on ranges simultaneously (hard enough to do in itself), a pot odds calculator is necessary to justify your limp with 3/5. And what if your reads are incorrect to begin with?

This is the problem I've always had with implied odds. They are completely subjective and players always justify bad calls by saying, "Well if my inside straight hit, I would have felted him so that's why I called with 11-1 odds on the turn" 

Most of the time, good players know you hit the nuts when you shove given their experience at the table (and conversely, your perception of them). Hence, the argument is flawed well before the river card is dealt.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 250
Posted: #2

"Are these, specifically 'hand-range' pot odds pre-flop, really useful in live games? Online, it's obvious why it's useful. The calculation is instantaneous. 

In a live game, aren't we reverting back to intuition/feel about a players holding..."

Putting opponents on a range of hands is not only just as useful in a live game... it is the game. We don't profit (long term) from our intuitions/feelings being right/wrong. We profit from understanding that sometimes we will be right, sometimes we will be wrong AND learning to maximize our wins when we ARE right and minimize our losses when we ARE wrong.

When we are right/wrong... it's mostly attributable to luck. The magnitude of how that affects us is mostly attributable to skillz.

We're still getting (rough) EV equations done at the live table because we've worked the math out at home...


"How many players, even top pros correctly calculate pot odds in the scenario we are debating? Even if you put 2 players on ranges simultaneously (hard enough to do in itself), a pot odds calculator is necessary to justify your limp with 3/5. And what if your reads are incorrect to begin with?"

Anyone who wants to be a long term winner is going to have to learn to create fairly accurate assessments of their equity and odds in EVERY poker scenario that they encounter. That's the whole game...

We develop ranges for ourselves (and our opponents) away from the table. We adjust those ranges based upon what we observe at the table. AND, we adjust THOSE ADJUSTMENTS based upon our accumulated results.

We can navigate lots of different terrain by intuition but we can get to our goal (profit) a hell of a lot more efficiently by using a compass and an accurate map. Putting our opponents on ranges, adjusted by table conditions, gives us a general idea of "the best way to proceed".

Ship it...


 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2006
Posts: 28221
Posted: #3
Quote Originally Posted by MrGlue:


"Are these, specifically 'hand-range' pot odds pre-flop, really useful in live games? Online, it's obvious why it's useful. The calculation is instantaneous. 

In a live game, aren't we reverting back to intuition/feel about a players holding..."

Putting opponents on a range of hands is not only just as useful in a live game... it is the game. We don't profit (long term) from our intuitions/feelings being right/wrong. We profit from understanding that sometimes we will be right, sometimes we will be wrong AND learning to maximize our wins when we ARE right and minimize our losses when we ARE wrong.

When we are right/wrong... it's mostly attributable to luck. The magnitude of how that affects us is mostly attributable to skillz.

We're still getting (rough) EV equations done at the live table because we've worked the math out at home...


"How many players, even top pros correctly calculate pot odds in the scenario we are debating? Even if you put 2 players on ranges simultaneously (hard enough to do in itself), a pot odds calculator is necessary to justify your limp with 3/5. And what if your reads are incorrect to begin with?"

Anyone who wants to be a long term winner is going to have to learn to create fairly accurate assessments of their equity and odds in EVERY poker scenario that they encounter. That's the whole game...

We develop ranges for ourselves (and our opponents) away from the table. We adjust those ranges based upon what we observe at the table. AND, we adjust THOSE ADJUSTMENTS based upon our accumulated results.

We can navigate lots of different terrain by intuition but we can get to our goal (profit) a hell of a lot more efficiently by using a compass and an accurate map. Putting our opponents on ranges, adjusted by table conditions, gives us a general idea of "the best way to proceed".

Ship it...




1) How can we say it is 'the game'? Isn't hand ranges a relatively new concept? This is only a 7 year old concept (and maybe not even that old). Maybe I'm wrong, but is this just attributable to the evolution of poker, that is, the influx of tens of millions of players who became very good, very fast with the number of hands online, and who were whittled down to an elite few (elite being a relative terms since it's in the thousands) at higher stakes that you must compete with to move up.

I don't remember hand ranges being mentioned 10 years ago, or even conceptualized. I know people said "put your opponent on A HAND or some hands" but not a relative range of hands which you calculate pot odds with.

Is this just a result of how we must adapt in an exploding online poker world that yields so many newer, younger players with access?

2) Do you really use a 3.5-1 range for the scenario proposed (2 limpers) when playing and call based on those odds? It just seems to be too much work in too little time when the dealer gets to your turn and you have to act so quickly pre-flop since no real money is in the pot yet.

If we are doing what you say we have to: a) put player A on a range of hands b) put player B on a range of hands c) correctly recall the pot odds associated with those ranges d) decide to call/fold. All this could occur with 10/15 seconds. Think about how much more complicated it gets with 3/4 callers and then a squeeze-play raise to you which others might fold to. Do you do this kind of thing pre-flop? 

Honestly, I do this only heads up...and I haven't come even close to the skill level I want to be doing it at. And even at that, it gets ridiculously complicated when players change gears. It looks like a lot of top pros just go with "He's weak" or "He's strong" and do nothing in terms of the pot odds analysis we are talking about. Agree/Disagree? 

3) Lastly how much time do you spend perfecting these skills? Or have you already and how long did it take you? (i.e.Anyone who wants to be a long term winner is going to have to learn to create fairly accurate assessments of their equity and odds in EVERY poker scenario that they encounter. That's the whole game...)
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 58493
Posted: #4
I like being in the same room as both of you
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2006
Posts: 28221
Posted: #5
Quote Originally Posted by Iw1nBets:

I like being in the same room as both of you
 join the party..there's still 7 seats available...
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 250
Posted: #6
"1) How can we say it is 'the game'? Isn't hand ranges a relatively new concept?

Is this just a result of how we must adapt in an exploding online poker world that yields so many newer, younger players with access?"

Mostly, yes...

At a live table we're dealt what... 20-40 hands per hour? Online it's closer to 100... And we can play 4, 8, maybe even 20 tables at a time? Plus, we have tons of statistical reference for online play...

The result is someone like Dwan, who plays more hands in a few years than Doyle has played in his entire career.

But, I think the "legends of poker" were still putting people on ranges anyway... it's the terminology that's new.




 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 250
Posted: #7
"2) Do you really use a 3.5-1 range for the scenario proposed (2 limpers) when playing and call based on those odds? It just seems to be too much work in too little time when the dealer gets to your turn and you have to act so quickly pre-flop since no real money is in the pot yet.

If we are doing what you say we have to: a) put player A on a range of hands b) put player B on a range of hands c) correctly recall the pot odds associated with those ranges d) decide to call/fold. All this could occur with 10/15 seconds. Think about how much more complicated it gets with 3/4 callers and then a squeeze-play raise to you which others might fold to. Do you do this kind of thing pre-flop?"

You do most of the work away from the table... poker is a golf swing... you work on your swing at the range, not on the course. On the course, you just play...

I've got a fold range: any two suited (non broad way) cards with more than two gaps, and any two unsuited (non broad way) cards with more than one gap.

I'm folding those hands (almost) 100% of the time. Anything else, if I'm getting 3.5/1... I'm playing.

I have another range that I raise with "no matter what" and another range that I attack limpers with...

If it goes limp, limp, to me then I'm getting 3.5/1... if my hand is in my fold range, I fold. If my hand is in my raise/attack limpers range, I raise. If it isn't in any of those ranges, I'm calling.

All of the work is done away from the table against average ranges from your average player... it only takes a few seconds to make our decision at the table.

Once there's two limpers, we don't have to recalculate for 3-4-5 limpers... we're simply getting "better than" 3.5/1

Also, without reads, limpers #1 and #2 will have the same range...
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 250
Posted: #8
"Honestly, I do this only heads up...and I haven't come even close to the skill level I want to be doing it at. And even at that, it gets ridiculously complicated when players change gears. It looks like a lot of top pros just go with "He's weak" or "He's strong" and do nothing in terms of the pot odds analysis we are talking about. Agree/Disagree? 

3) Lastly how much time do you spend perfecting these skills? Or have you already and how long did it take you?"

At the risk of giving advice, don't worry about what pros are doing. They don't play in your games and they certainly don't play with your money. You know what's up with your game, focus on that.

That being said, there seem to be some successful "he's weak/strong" pros out there... but I think there are even more of the "at this point, I'm putting him on something like a weak made hand or a flush draw" type of pros.

Putting him "on something like..." IS putting him on a range.

Ivey excluded, there are no perfect players. The rest of us can hope for continual progress...

But, we don't have to be perfect. We just have to find players that play worse than we do.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2008
Posts: 2643
Posted: #9
if you guys ever need poker help email me onlinechamp@hotmail.com


and drop me your aim name or something

I am a poker pro and have been for YEARS didnt read the entire post but I myself can put people on range of hands
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 250
Posted: #10
"It looks like a lot of top pros just go with "He's weak" or "He's strong" and do nothing in terms of the pot odds analysis we are talking about. Agree/Disagree?"

One more thing...

Once we start playing poker for money, we ARE pros. We may not be winning pros but we're still pro poker players.

How much sense does the following sentence make, "I do something for money, non-professionally"?

Once we screw for money, we're hookers...

The same thing goes for pot/implied odds analysis... Unless we're flipping a coin to determine our decisions at the table, we're analyzing equity/odds.

"He's weak/stong" is just weak form equity analysis.



 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2006
Posts: 28221
Posted: #11
Quote Originally Posted by MrGlue:

"It looks like a lot of top pros just go with "He's weak" or "He's strong" and do nothing in terms of the pot odds analysis we are talking about. Agree/Disagree?"

One more thing...

Once we start playing poker for money, we ARE pros. We may not be winning pros but we're still pro poker players.

How much sense does the following sentence make, "I do something for money, non-professionally"?

Once we screw for money, we're hookers...

The same thing goes for pot/implied odds analysis... Unless we're flipping a coin to determine our decisions at the table, we're analyzing equity/odds.

"He's weak/stong" is just weak form equity analysis.




Got that right...

Clearly, you've been around the game for quite some time. Thanks for the responses. Greatly appreciated.

How long have you been playing and assuming you live in Vegas, how many hours do you put in a week live/online? Where do you recommend playing 2/5 (i.e. weakest/loosest games if there is such a pattern at certain casinos)

Also, I have always been perplexed by the play at the end of this video and this it might be one of the worst plays in the history of televised poker. I'm no pro, but how in the world does Hastings make that play there (and do you agree that this is horrendous poker???)! I can't ask a regular joe this! I'd appreciate it if you took a minute or two to walk me through the psychology of the final play in this vid. Just trying to get into the minds of experienced players...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpqZqesgs3M
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 10988
Posted: #12

Scalabrine and Glue

I enjoy reading the back and forth between you two

Scal, ill give my opinion.

I think that was a horrible call there with QJ. Horrible.

You value bet QJ there on the river after Antonius checks....horrible.

You called Patriks check raise with just one pair, [NOT EVEN TOP!] iffy kicker. horrible.

Honestly scal, before the check-raise on the river I thought that Patrik would of played hands like 34 hearts and 78 hearts the same exact way [limp, call flop, call turn] but then that check-raise looked very strong and I pretty much eliminated 34 of hearts. Had I not known his holdings I would of guessed 555 666 OR 45678 for Patrick. Then again I would of snap-checked the river after Patrick checked.

 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 10988
Posted: #13

This guy really dicked himself with QJ. Alot more trouble than he ever should of had.

 

And I would of guessed 3 5'S..... 3 6'S or the 4-8 straight AFTER his check raise on the river.

 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 10988
Posted: #14

Also Im not in love with the 20k bet on the turn, but against Patrik, I think he had to bet again. 

Also, that 20k bet by Townsend on the turn got Patrik to check the river. Had Townsend [like he should of, and like I would of 2billion times in a row] checked behind, that 20k bet would of saved him 130k.

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 250
Posted: #15
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:


Got that right...

Clearly, you've been around the game for quite some time. Thanks for the responses. Greatly appreciated.

How long have you been playing and assuming you live in Vegas, how many hours do you put in a week live/online? Where do you recommend playing 2/5 (i.e. weakest/loosest games if there is such a pattern at certain casinos)

Also, I have always been perplexed by the play at the end of this video and this it might be one of the worst plays in the history of televised poker. I'm no pro, but how in the world does Hastings make that play there (and do you agree that this is horrendous poker???)! I can't ask a regular joe this! I'd appreciate it if you took a minute or two to walk me through the psychology of the final play in this vid. Just trying to get into the minds of experienced players...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpqZqesgs3M


-I've been playing since 2000 and right now I'm playing 3 hours per day either live or online.

-My advice for finding "good" games in town is: play between 5p-3a, play on the strip, and follow the club scene. "Club Night" equals lots of drunk 20 somethings with ATM cards who will eventually wind up at the table...

-Townsend/Antonius: I'll have to watch the video again... but I certainly don't understand Townsend's play on the river.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 250
Posted: #16
Quote Originally Posted by samuelsosa:

Also Im not in love with the 20k bet on the turn, but against Patrik, I think he had to bet again. 

Also, that 20k bet by Townsend on the turn got Patrik to check the river. Had Townsend [like he should of, and like I would of 2billion times in a row] checked behind, that 20k bet would of saved him 130k.



Yeah, I'm not sure about the turn bet either and I definitely check back the river.

Antonius does over bet the pot on the end... Townsend might have read this as a bluff; thinking Antonius would've bet smaller if he wanted a call...

There's obviously some history leading up to this pot that we aren't aware of.




 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2006
Posts: 28221
Posted: #17
Quote Originally Posted by samuelsosa:

Also Im not in love with the 20k bet on the turn, but against Patrik, I think he had to bet again. 

Also, that 20k bet by Townsend on the turn got Patrik to check the river. Had Townsend [like he should of, and like I would of 2billion times in a row] checked behind, that 20k bet would of saved him 130k.


Any way you look at it (the 20k the 130k at the end), any way you want to dissect it, it is maybe  the single worst play I've ever seen a true pro play with stacks that deep...(and that includes Jaime Gold and Sam Farha on High Stakes Poker)...

At least two people here unanimously agree it was a bad call...

I think the announcer said it best, "What hand can he beat?" Antonious called the flop and the turn and raised the river....and Hastings still called with a bluff-catcher for a total of 180k...


 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2006
Posts: 28221
Posted: #18
Quote Originally Posted by MrGlue:



-I've been playing since 2000 and right now I'm playing 3 hours per day either live or online.

-My advice for finding "good" games in town is: play between 5p-3a, play on the strip, and follow the club scene. "Club Night" equals lots of drunk 20 somethings with ATM cards who will eventually wind up at the table...

-Townsend/Antonius: I'll have to watch the video again... but I certainly don't understand Townsend's play on the river.

Club Night...I will remember that...problem is, does club night end in the poker room at 2 3 4 5 am for these guys? I don't want to START playing them at 4 am...


I guess one other questions I have are, "What should I do in multi-way pots when I raise?"

1) I only raise with AQ suited or better and pairs >1010. I'm tight-aggressive most of the time. Should I expand this range at 2/5 tables?

2) If I raise pre-flop with AK off (typical holding), and miss completely, should I be betting on the flop if I have 2 callers preflop and I'm in position?

3) If there is a flush/straight on board, should I double-barrel with air if I get one caller on the turn?

4) How often do you triple-barrel with air? I know that is situation specific but is it more than most would think?

I'm so sick and tired of missing completely with AK all the time and not defending it...
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 250
Posted: #19

"Club Night...I will remember that...problem is, does club night end in the poker room at 2 3 4 5 am for these guys? I don't want to START playing them at 4 am..."

I'm super drunk here, so I will show a little of my ass... My Uncle Roy gave me the best advice I have ever received concerning: hunting, poker, and women...

Where ever you don't want to go, that's where they are.


 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 250
Posted: #20
"1) I only raise with AQ suited or better and pairs >1010. I'm tight-aggressive most of the time. Should I expand this range at 2/5 tables?"

I only play this tight UTG.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 250
Posted: #21
"2) If I raise pre-flop with AK off (typical holding), and miss completely, should I be betting on the flop if I have 2 callers preflop and I'm in position?"

I don't like cbetting multiple opponents.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 250
Posted: #22

"3) If there is a flush/straight on board, should I double-barrel with air if I get one caller on the turn?"

No.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 250
Posted: #23

"4) How often do you triple-barrel with air? I know that is situation specific but is it more than most would think?"

Almost never. No.

I only bluff when I can answer the following questions positively/assertively:

- Is he ever folding?
- What hands am I about to represent that are ahead of his range?
- Is he smart enough to understand that the hand I am representing is ahead of his range?

Note that each example requires one, and only one opponent.




 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 250
Posted: #24

"I'm so sick and tired of missing completely with AK all the time and not defending it..."

The following is the smartest thing you will ever hear me say... If I miss the flop, against one opponent, I will bet exactly 50% of the time... I know this is true because... if the left most card on the flop is the same color as the left card in my hand... I bet. If it's not, I check.

If I don't know when I'm going to "defend" my AK, then you won't either.

Just hit the guy in the face. If you knock him out, you win. If he's still there, run away.






 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2006
Posts: 28221
Posted: #25
Quote Originally Posted by MrGlue:


"I'm so sick and tired of missing completely with AK all the time and not defending it..."

The following is the smartest thing you will ever hear me say... If I miss the flop, against one opponent, I will bet exactly 50% of the time... I know this is true because... if the left most card on the flop is the same color as the left card in my hand... I bet. If it's not, I check.

If I don't know when I'm going to "defend" my AK, then you won't either.

Just hit the guy in the face. If you knock him out, you win. If he's still there, run away.







Sounds like it's as good a system as any 
All Forums | Poker
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.