|
Poker is one of the most popular games in the world, and one study found that 6.8% of the adult world population plays poker regularly, and the majority of people in western cultures have played some variety of poker in their lifetime. No Limit Texas Hold'em is currently the most popular variety of poker played competitively, but there are other variants, including five card draw, Stud Poker, Omaha, and many more. Many players play in small home games for fun or cash, while others play online or in casinos. Online games can be played for fun or pennies, while major tournaments are now hosting events with entries up to one million dollars, and underground and casino backroom games have been known to run for even higher stakes. Poker is an awesome hobby that combines luck, skill, wit, psychology, stats, and gambling into an awesomely enjoyable social experience. If you're good at it, you can even make money! I love poker, and I want you to love it too. Who am I? I am an American recreational poker enthusiast. I typically play poker about 3 nights a week in home games and card rooms, and take a few trips a year to binge on poker at a variety of casinos. I host a weekly low stakes poker game and a monthly mid stakes poker game. I play at a variety of stakes at cash games with $20-500 buy-in and tournaments with $20-600 buy-ins. I also play some very low stakes poker online. I am a winning player, but not absurdly so, and I do not play for a living. However, we do have some pros on these forums that I welcome to contribute to this thread. Things to ask about Basic poker playing tips Poker legality Skill vs. luck in poker Hosting and playing in home games Things you should know before playing poker in a casino The state of online poker in the US Poker in movies vs. reality How to learn poker as a new player How to become a good player Tournament versus cash poker Becoming a professional player Links The SA Poker Games Thread - The title says online poker, but it's pretty much become the main poker discussion thread on the forums, now that Poker in the Rear is gone  . A lot of the info in the OP is outdated, but it's a great place to ask specific poker questions.The Twitch channel and Youtube Channel for goon poker pro JCarver (Jason Somerville). His videos are incredibly useful for learning to play poker at a higher level. My poker channel. Imaduck fucked around with this message at 07:57 on Jan 11, 2017 |
#
¿
May 29, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 10:19 |
|
|
Initio posted:Is online poker legal again in the US? I thought it was in sort of a grey area, and you basically had to play on foreign sites, and had to send/receive cash through websites that neither visa or MasterCard would authorize. Online poker is regulated in Nevada and New Jersey, and we're probably going to see more states jump on board in the next year or so. If you're not in Nevada or NJ, your best bet for online poker is Bovada. It's not nearly as good as Poker Stars was in the glory days, but it always has games running at most stakes, and a few goons even make a living playing on there. There's also Carbon and Juicy Stakes, but they're less popular. Getting money in or out of Bovada usually isn't too bad; most banks and credit cards will allow the transaction. There's also bitcoin if you want to do it anonymously. That all being said, I would never keep a ton of money on there, as it is a foreign site and there's no guarantee that they won't just disappear. There is a growing fight for regulated online poker in the US. Hopefully it comes soon. Jeza posted:I remember watching live a goon come runner up at the 2013 ME, that was really cool. Although it was a painful heads up purely because he just got dealt pretty much total garbage while his smug opponent just got insanely lucky over and over.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
Orange Sunshine posted:When I was involved in online poker, over 10 years ago, there were people who would play at many tables at once. Like 8 or 12 or even more hands at the same time. Are people still doing this? Some very talented players can even do 24 tables or more at a time. This requires playing millions of hands until your poker play is almost reflexive. They look ljke machines while they're playing. However, many of these players will slow down if they're playing higher stakes against more difficult opponents.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
Affi posted:How many people have to suck at poker and lose money for one person to claim he can make a living wage on it? Online poker is nice in that it let's you start at incredibly low stakes (e.g. tournaments for pennies), learn the game over time, and then move up and try higher stakes when you build a good bankroll. Initially you might be a loser at the higher stakes, but you can use your lower stakes winnings to buy you in as you adjust to harder games. That being said, you're probably not one of the big donors that drive the poker economy. At every stake, there are "whales," meaning people with more money than skill that just love to gamble. I once sat at a 1/2 table at Planet Holleywood where a gentleman had $3,000 in front of him and announced that it was his goal to lose all of it. He "straddled" (bet without seeing his cards) for $25 in every pot, and basically would try to just raise you all in at every opportunity if he had remotely good cards. In New Orleans, I played against a woman who went to the ATM four times in 45 minutes to withdraw another $800 to blow each time. Whales tend to donate to all players to the table, although maybe a little more to the good players, but they keep the bad players fed as well. It's hard to say what the ratio of contributions from small time players to big fish is, but they're definitely a healthy chunk of the economy.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:Also, if one were to sit down at a SNG or low-stakes ring game, how many of the five other players should we expect to be bots? As far as I can tell, there aren't many bots. You may have heard of a group of scientists beating poker a little while back with a bot, but this was heads up limit Poker, which is a game no one plays. No limit hold 'em, especially with lots of players and a variety of stack sizes, is many, many times more complicated, and no one is close to solving it. I've read some things about bots that can maybe be profitable against bad low stakes players, but I've never heard of any that can beat even moderately competent No Limit Hold'em players. I've spotted one bot for sure on Juicy Stakes, but it just plays incredibly tight and overall is a losing player. I think it was just grinding promotion points or something. A good percentage of players will respond to chat at least some times, and legit sites try to weed out bots, so I really don't think you're going to be sitting at a table full of bots at any point. In any case, there are plenty of winning players out there, so if there are lots of bots on poker sites, apparently they're beatable.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2016 02:27
|
|
|
Cockmaster posted:I have an account on Juicy Stakes, and I've found its player base severely underwhelming. I'll have to take a look at Bovada. Which games do they offer? I've thought about trying out five-card draw or Badugi. .The other site I didn't mention is America's card room. I haven't played on it, but it's supposed to have a fairly big player base. I don't think it runs many mixed games though. Ciaphas posted:Do you recommend a particular online poker service if you do live in Nevada? (Or NJ for that matter but I'm in Vegas myself so In NJ, I can't fathom why you'd play on anything other than Pokerstars.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2016 08:08
|
|
)
|
Jmcrofts posted:I suck a lot at poker. I'm probably never going to play online or in a "real" game, but I play against my friends from time to time and just do terribly. Betting big preflop also helps protect you from random hands like 49o that are really hard to play around when they randomly spike on a 44K board. Sheep-Goats advice is solid as well; in multiway flops, fold weaker holdings and bet bet bet when you make something big. Your opponents will win little pots by randomly making pairs and two pairs with 58, and you'll win much bigger ones when you hit sets, straights, and flushes and they can't let their weaker hands go. You'll come out ahead in the long run. At the end of the day, keep in mind that the basic strategies for poker always apply, because they're based on solid math. However, when your opponents are making mistakes, you can make even more money if you adjust from an ABC play style to exploit their mistakes. You should start with the strategies you read about in books, figure out where your opponents are making mistakes, and then think about how you can adjust your play style to take advantage of them. Sheep-Goats posted:The traffic level is abysmally low on WSOP.com Imaduck, many of the lower stakes guys there still use Bovada just so they can have some games to look at. quote:Also aren't you some kinda data scientist in real life now? I wanna PM you about that some day antiga posted:What books do you recommend for a casual (1/2) casino player to improve? I've read a few other books: The Poker Blueprint is a fine start for getting your feet wet and thinking through some hands. Daniel Negreanu's Power Hold'em Strategy gives some interesting insights into his "small ball" style, which a lot of modern poker play is based off of. Jonathan Little's books have good advice, but I found them a little hard to get through. Phil Gordon's Little Green Book is a bit dated, but it's a classic and a pretty easy read. Training videos on Youtube and private sites, and Twitch Streams are becoming the new standard's for poker training. I linked goon JCarver's stream in the OP because it's absolutely fantastic to watch, both for entertainment and learning. There are a number of big streamers to learn from as well. quote:How much will playing online (in the US so potentially not real money games) help play in person? Playing for low stakes - even at penny tables - is many times better. You can play way more hands online then you can live, and your mistakes will be much, much cheaper. Imaduck fucked around with this message at 20:21 on Jun 1, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:One thing I've wondered about regarding online poker (as someone who knows very little about poker in general): Is it possible to write a program where you input stuff like your hand and what other people are doing and the program tells you the optimal play? It seems like this should be possible absent the human/psychological factor involved in real world play, but I'm assuming it's not for some reason. There is a lot of software out there to help you with your game. Pro Poker Tools has some free, online hand simulators that can tell you how much equity your hand has against other hands (like the percentages you see on TV poker). If you have a good idea about the types of hands your opponent has, you can figure out your chance of winning the hand if it goes to showdown. There are also HUDs that help you keep statistics on your opponents, like how many hands they're playing and how often they continuation bet like Poker Tracker. Poker tracking software also lets you keep track of your own hands for later analysis, and has a few built-in tools to help you with that. But no, there's no "push a button, tell me what to do" software. Most poker sites have it written in their rules that those are illegal, even if they did exist. There's a reason people pay hundreds of dollars an hour for training and hand analysis.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Keg posted:Will poker ever be popular enough amongst idiots again for people to be able to be profitable online without understanding poo poo like 3-betting with a polarized range and floating to the turn in position when up against a continuation bet? Or is it impossible to put a cap on the glut of poker knowledge that exists? faarcyde posted:Ten years ago I started lurking in PITR, watching JCarver videos. For 7-8 years I was a poker pro until last January when I decided to move onto other things. It's been a long, strange journey..
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:How hard or easy is it to make a living via poker, if you just want to make enough to live normally? I mean, where you just want to make the equivalent of $100 to $200 a day, not try and be a millionaire several times over. Do people do that, just play enough to make a basic wage? Could you make a living playing Poker? It depends on a lot of factors. Do you live somewhere where you can play poker regularly? At higher stakes? Against bad players? For many hours a week? Do you have access to good online poker? Are you good at Poker? Are you willing to put in the tens of thousands of hours of practice, study, and play it takes to become a sustainably winning player? Are you actually talented, dedicated, and interested enough to succeed? Are you able to keep your head in the game and stay interested when you're playing for 40+ hours a week, week after week? Many Poker players will tell you, anyone that is skilled and dedicated enough to succeed at playing Poker for a living could make more money doing something else. Say you check off all the boxes above boxes, how well can you handle the swings of Poker? Are you properly bankrolled so you can survive a swing of bad luck that lasts several months? Are you mentally prepared for losing money at your "job" for several months? Will you lose your confidence in your game? Are your friends / family / significant others okay with this, and willing to stay with you through it? Will you actually enjoy it when you're doing this for a living instead of for fun? Can you handle your finances well on your own? Can you budget for downswings, taxes, and insurance? Are you capable of controlling yourself so you don't take too big of risks at the table, play too big of games, play other table games, or just get drunk and blow off your winnings? Plenty of people make livings off of Poker, some meager, some extravagant. From talking to pros, one thing I've found is that for most players, it's a temporary portion of your life. Many people bust out. Many get burned out from the highs and lows, find they just don't enjoy it as much as they thought, or have difficulty maintaining relationships or a normal life. For me, I really enjoy it as a hobby that pays for itself right now. I could see myself one day, years from now, considering it as a career, but I'd need some really convincing evidence that I could be successful at it, would actually enjoy the grind, would like more than my current job, and wouldn't be holding myself back from other things I want to do with my life. I think in the old days, when Poker was easy and there was tons of online action to be had, you could definitely do it as a part time gig without altering the trajectory of your life. Nowadays it's tougher, the bar is much higher, and I think a lot of folks find that you have to give up more than it's worth. Bloody Hedgehog posted:Question for the thread: how do you stay entertained at the table when it's boring? How much attention do you pay before you stop caring? I know I should be watching the other people's actions but really there's only so much I can learn at my novice level, and it's just not interesting to me if I've already decided I'm out. You want to analyze their play, figure out where they're making mistakes, and ask yourself what the best way to take advantage of their mistakes are. For example, if you find that they're playing basically every hand and will call any bet preflop, then you should try to play better hands and bet big preflop to maximize their mistakes. On the other hand, if they're playing very scared and like to fold unless they have the nuts, you should be trying to steal the pot at every chance you get. Watch their play. Try to guess what hand they have in every pot. Were you right? Make a note. Were you wrong? Think about what mislead you, and how that should change your perception of the player's play. Then, you can start watching for tells; ways they act, ways they talk, ways they bet, how long they think, etc. If you can't keep yourself focused when thinking about these things, you're going to be limiting your ability to play at a high level. That's okay though; if you're mostly playing for fun, it's fine to not play it perfect and just find other ways to enjoy the game. Talk to people, make bets on the side, have some drinks, play some games on your phone, listen to music, whatever. You don't always have to play your A-game if you're in it for your own enjoyment. I'll also say that in live Poker, if you're one of the better players at the table, it's your job to keep folks entertained so they have a reason to keep playing. There's nothing wrong with talking with people, having some drinks, doing some straddles, blind bets, and other nonsense to keep folks in the game. If your opponents are playing for fun and they're not having a good time, they're unlikely to come back.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2016 00:08
|
|
|
Skoll posted:How realistic was the movie Rounders? I know with Hollywood anything there is always going to be some kind of artistic license, but I'm curious how true to life overall that movie is. **Very Minor Spoilers Ahead** One thing that a lot of folks don't get about Rounders is that the protagonist is not meant to be inspirational. He is a young kid who is determined to bust his bankroll and go broke time and time again. Anybody who has played Poker long enough knows players like this. The variance in Poker is too high to just risk your whole bankroll on a single game. Ideally, you should have 50+ buy-ins ready for any game you play. This kid is going to go to Vegas and lose all of his money in a week. There's a sensible character in the movie that tries to warn him about this, but he doesn't listen, and the ending is pretty bittersweet for anyone who's played long enough to know better. There are some flaws with Poker in Rounders. For starters, basically no one has tells that are as black and white, spot on as the Russian's cookie eating tell; this is pure fantasy for dramatic effect. In reality, Poker tells are typically minor things that only serve to influence your decisions over time; you almost never make a move based on one single tell. I think there's also a point in the movie where they pull the classic "I see your bet, and raise you $500." This doesn't fly in a real Poker game. You can't call and follow it up with a raise, you have to announce your raise up front. The reason for this is that you could change your action based on your opponent's response to you saying "I see your bet." If they look scared, you could then raise them, or if not, you could choose not to. Actions in Poker have to be announced all at once, so the proper thing to say would simply be "I raise to $500." In a similar vein, I think there's also a point in Rounders where the Russian "string bets," meaning when he raises, he puts his chips out a few at a time, increasing the amount of his raise gradually. This isn't allowed in a real Poker game for the same reason mentioned above. While we're on the subject of Poker movie blunders, one of the things you commonly seen messed up in movies is Table Stakes. You see this when one player goes all-in, and then the next player goes "I see your all-in," then reaches in their pocket "and raise you my new Porsche," throwing their keys on the table. The other player then gets nervous, says they can't call that, and fold. Pretty much no one plays like this. In Poker, you can only win or lose what you have on the table. If you go all-in and someone has more than you, they can't raise you over your stack, they just have to call, and you'll win whatever was in your stack if you win. You can't add on to your stack in the middle of the hand. Without this, Poker would become even more of a giant dick waving contest, where whoever had the most money in their pocket could always win because no one would be able to call them. This doesn't happen in real games.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
Oh yeah, I forgot about the bluff story. It's like the most mundane poker story in the world. "I kept putting chips in the pot without thinking about the hand, and eventually he folded; I beat the best player in the world!" This is another thing that popular culture gets wrong about Poker: bluffing. Bluffs are calculated: you look at the board, try to figure out what hands your opponent might have, try to figure out what hands you could reliably represent, and then ask yourself what percentage of the time your opponent is likely to fold. Against good players, you have to tell a convincing story about the hands you could have and you have that are better than theirs. You have to bluff in spots where you reasonably could play the exact same way with better cards. And against some weaker opponents, you can never bluff, because they call way too often. The most common bluffs - semi-bluffs - usually have some outs to improve as well; meaning even if your opponent decides to call your bluff, you still have a chance of making a better hand than them. The "I'm just going to pretend my cards are good and push you out of the pot with lots of chips" type of bluff is relatively rare in Poker, and really requires you understanding your opponents and when they're going to fold. Blindly shoving your chips in the pot to boss people around is a nice way to lose money really quick at the Poker table.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
Thanks faarcyde, that's really interesting! Are you in the US? Did you consider going overseas for better Poker action, or were you just ready to get out of it?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2016 00:08
|
|
|
Sheep-Goats posted:Here's an analysis of why it's such an absolutely terrible call: Thanks for pointing out this Youtube channel; it's great analysis! I especially enjoyed the one on that silly final hand in Casino Royale.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
Mortley posted:How do real poker players feel about video poker? Games like Video Poker and Blackjack have the statistical component of Poker, but lack the real dynamics of the game. The rules are fixed, and the reactions are always the same. On top of that, the games are solved; you can look up the solution online, play with a cheat sheet, and know that you're always playing correctly. Even if you're counting cards in Blackjack, you're usually just following the system. These types of games really don't have the same thrill or puzzle solving aspect of real Poker. And you're playing against the House in these games (as opposed to other players) meaning the House is going to make it as hard as possible for you to win. That doesn't mean Poker players won't play these games. For almost every player, part of the reason you enjoy Poker is you enjoy the gambling aspect of it, at least a little bit. There's no shortage of excellent Poker players who have blown their winnings at Craps or Blackjack or Pai Gao. It's also nice to unwind at these games because you don't have to constantly be thinking about the dynamics of the game; you can just relax, play your system, put some chips out there, and let the cards do whatever they're gonna do. Personally, I'll play Video Poker, Slots, and Craps from time to time when I'm at a casino to unwind, take a break, or come down from some bad beats so I don't go tilting off more money at the Poker table. However, I play very low stakes when I do this; I'll sit down with $200 at the Poker table, but only like $20 at Video Poker most of the time.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 15:48
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:What are the best States aside from Nevada for poker? California has quite a few casinos and card rooms, and there are many poker players there, especially in the LA area - the Commerce poker room is legendary. You're also a quick flight or drive to Las Vegas or Reno, depending where you're at. It's also likely that online poker will be legal there soon. One thing to note is that some of their casinos have weird rules about poker and buy-ins and what not, so you should read up a little before playing poker there. Maryland is quickly becoming a poker hotspot. I was amazed at the size of the poker room in the Horseshoe in Baltimore, and there are many other casinos in driving distance. New Jersey recently legalized online poker and even has PokerStars (it's for residents only though, so the action is okay but not anywhere near PokerStars international). They also have Atlantic City and other places to play poker. I've met a few pros from Northern Florida. There are a number of big poker tournaments hosted there. There are plenty of other Casinos and card rooms throughout the country; these are just the ones I hear about the most. quote:Second, aside from playing what are the best resources? Books, Videos, Twitch Channels, etc. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3778125&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=1#post460544890 http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3778125&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=1#post460553500 For free videos, I've been impressed with The Poker Guys videos that someone posted here earlier, especially for live Poker. The PokerStars Youtube channel also has some good content, although it's not as focused on training. I'm sure there are other good ones that folks can recommend. There are a number of good for pay training websites. I've heard great things about Run it Once and Crush Live Poker. The prices can be steep though. Twitch has a ton of great Poker streamers. The most prominent one is Goon JCarver's Run it Up. Elky, Vanessa Selbst, Jamie Staples, Randy Lew and many others stream often. Poker Central is a 24/7 poker channel. Daniel Negreanu and Phil Hellmuth sometimes stream. Goon Moosepoker also streams sometimes. Imaduck fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Jun 15, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
For whatever reason, tournaments with no stakes and no prizes never seem to work that way. Inevitably, people end up not feeling attached to their chips and not really attached to winning, and just start doing random things and gambling. Free poker websites are terrible for learning how to play poker correctly.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
Mind_Taker posted:I really hope poker finds a good way to implement a shot clock in every major televised/streamed tournament because it really becomes a drag watching events live when every mundane decision takes 20-30 seconds. I'm not totally convinced that live streaming live poker events is the way to go. There's just too much time wrapped up in dealing, waiting for each player, collecting cards, and doing all the other clerical business. Edited poker shows keep the action moving. I'm sure they'll find ways to make it work though. Streaming is pretty new, and a lot of effort is being put into getting it right.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
PLO cash runs pretty regularly on Bovada at a variety of stakes. I've heard that there are some other games that run on America's Card Room, but I don't play on there, so maybe someone else can confirm. Unfortunately, I don't think 8 game or stud run regularly on any of the US sites.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
JaySB posted:Hi, I'm here. Ask away. Did you find it tough to play for so many days straight, or were you pretty much just cruising? How did you prepare for the final table? How was the pressure at the final table? What made you make that sweet bluff playing heads up? Do you feel like reads were a big part of your game at the final table, or was it a lot of just playing the cards? Were you worried about giving off tells when you're that under pressure?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2016 07:18
|
|
|
Although I didn't play during that era, I still have a lot of angst towards them. Their shenanigans legitimized the shutdown of online poker in the US, and is are a big part of the reason that we don't have online poker today in the states. Of course, it's unclear how much they really knew about or were involved in, but their tight-lipped stance on the issue hasn't help alleviate anyone's discomfort with them. Personally, I think a permanent ban from mainstream live poker is more than fair, given the massive number of players that they ruined the game for.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2016 09:05
|
|
|
Everything Sheep-Goats said is gold. I'd only add step 0: If you don't know the rules at all (what hands beat what, when you bet, etc.) play a week or two of play money games to figure that out. You'll definitely want to jump into real money games as fast as possible though.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2016 09:00
|
|
|
I'm totally fine with the rule "never call preflop" for new players, since 95% of the time raising or folding are your best options. Postflop, however, I totally agree with Sheep-Goats; there are way too many spots where calling is the optimal option for you to limit yourself. In any case, the key to getting better at poker is playing the hand the way you think it should be played, then going back later and reviewing every decision you made by asking yourself what would have happened if you made a different decision. There are no substitutes for that. Armagnac posted:Also, I'm thinking of getting back into Online, and saw people recommend Bovada, is there one to recommend these days? I live in NYC.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
Terrorforge posted:As you might imagine, the issue here is that I don't have much of a read and even if I did, I'm not sure I would trust it. Apart from just being new, I have a nasty habit of assuming everyone is worse than me until they stove my face in. I'll make sure to actually say that in the future, though. How many hands have you played with this player? In general, how many hands is this player playing? Will they play hands like T3o (ten-three offsuit), or have they been playing only premium hands, like AT+ in this type of spot? How often do they 3bet preflop? If they had TT, do you think they would have re-raised preflop? How about 22 or 33? Have they been playing "fit or fold" (i.e. will only stay in a pot if they have a made hand), or have they been sticking around in the past with speculative hands and bluffs? Do they like playing drawing hands aggressively? Do they usually only play good draws (e.g. nut flush draws), or will they play anything that remotely has a chance (gut shots, over cards to the board) aggressively? How aggressive has this player been postflop? Have they been betting and raising a lot, or have they just been check/calling? Have you ever seen this player show a bluff before? Have they ever raised a pot, and then given up on later streets before? Do you think this player is likely to keep betting on the turn and river? What does this player think a "good" hand here is - a single pair? Or do they only raise when they have top pair + top kicker, or even better? Would this player raise with 3X here because they're scared of a turn, or are they more likely to raise because they have a huge hand? Have they ever overbet the pot before? What hands did they have when they overbet the pot? If they haven't overbet the pot before, what does that tell you? How many hands have you seen from him/her? Is this a rare occurrence, or is this player just crazy? These are the types of questions you need to keep asking yourself as you evaluate other players' play. If you answered these questions one way, I'd say call, and another way, I'd say fold. In the absence of information, I'd say it can never be too bad to just call here, or even shove and get it in. Sometimes we're going to be beat. If our opponent shows up with something lovely like T3o that got there, buy back in, and just wait for the opportunity to win your money back; it won't take long.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 09:00
|
|
|
Totally agree. It seems like there are far more scenarios where we have him beat.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Terrorforge posted:Actually, prior to this post I'd been paying no attention whatsoever to what anyone else was doing. I'd been so wrapped up in the mechanical aspects of play that I barely even considered the fact that other players have cards in their hands. I suppose I was getting a bit of a sense for when certain players were complete pushovers or seemed to be made of steel, and this one hadn't stuck out to me in either way. quote:So what actually happened with the AA hand is that I let the gremlin get the better of me, told myself this dude is clearly bluffing, and shoved it all in. Unfortunately, they called with what turned out to be 33 and took me to the cleaners. You should never think of any spot as an opponent "clearly bluffing" or "not bluffing." Good poker is all about understanding and playing ranges[/i. In this spot, your opponent is probably bluffing or playing a weaker hand more often than not, which makes it a good spot to get more chips in. However, they will also play this way with their very rare, really good hands. They happened to have it here, but that really doesn't tell you anything; we knew ahead of time that they could be doing this with a really good hand. The only question is, would they do this with a bad hand as well? quote:I realized almost immediately I should probably just have called, but in the end I learned two far more important lessons; don't assume that the best hand before the flop is still the best hand after the flop, and don't trust the loving gremlin. Calling If your opponent has a strong hand (e.g. 33) - They're probably going to shove the turn, and you're going to be left with a decision. You'll probably have to call and lose all your chips. If your opponent is bluffing with complete air - They might keep bluffing by shoving on the turn, which means you'll get all their chips - awesome! If your opponent has a medium hand (e.g. top pair) - They will get it in on the turn on all non-scary cards, which means you win the money. They will probably slow down on most scare cards (cards bigger than their pair, connected cards), which means you might not get any more chips from them. If they have a weak hand (e.g. second pair), they probably won't put any more chips in after the flop. Raising If your opponent has a strong hand (e.g. 33) - They're going to call and you're going to lose all your chips. If your opponent is bluffing with complete air - Your opponent will fold. [i]If your opponent has a medium hand (e.g. top pair) - Sometimes your opponent will decide that they've just got the best hand now and go with it. This is pretty common for new players to do, and you'll get their whole stack as a result. If their hand is too weak (e.g. second pair), they might fold. So you see, with your opponent's exact hand, you were probably getting your money in no matter what, which means it doesn't matter if you raise or call. What raising does is it makes your opponent stop bluffing, so if your read was that your opponent had bluffs here most of the time, raising is really bad. On the other hand, in the cases where your opponent has a hand like top pair, good kicker, they're probably likely to get the money in on the flop, but will be scared by a lot of turn and river cards. In that case, raising right now and getting the chips in is probably better. To choose what the best line is, we would need to figure out what the balance is between % hands a player is bluffing in this spot vs. % hands a player has a medium strength hand they'll call with. This will tell us what the most profitable line is over time. Of course, I'm leaving a lot of details out here, but this should give you an idea of how you should start to think about hands and choosing the right line of play.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2016 13:18
|
|
|
Terrorforge posted:Speaking of calling, when is a good time to call preflop? I'm particularly unsure what to do when I'm in late position with lukewarm hands I wouldn't mind opening with (A7, say), but someone in an early position raises before it gets to me. Calling is inherently a weak play preflop. If you're at a 10 handed table and a player raises UTG and you call on the button, you're basically saying you have a mediocre hand. If you had a good hand, like AA, KK, or AK, you would pretty much always raise, right? So by calling, you're limiting the number of strong hands you could potentially have. Your opponent, on the other hand, can have all sorts of strong hands, since all he did was raise. This lets him represent a much stronger, wider range postflop, and he knows you have a weaker range, putting you at a huge disadvantage. Also, if you call in that spot, notice that the blinds have a great price to tag along, and you're often going to end up in a multi-way pot. The more players in the pot, the tougher it is going to be to play. Our goal should be to play as many heads up pots as possible and avoid tough situations, so letting more players correctly play this hand for cheap is bad. One thing new players don't usually understand is that you need a stronger hand to call than to raise. Say you're at a 10 handed table, and everyone folds to you on the button. You can reliably open a very wide range of hands, even things like K8o, because A) You're playing against only two random hands, which you're a mathematical favorite against B) You have fold equity; the blinds might just fold, and you can win the hand with no more effort C) If the blinds call, you're in position, giving you an advantage D) Being the aggressor means you can represent a wide, strong range of hands Notice, however, if there's an UTG raiser, than only point C is true. Thus, you need to call with hands that play better postflop in order for it to be a profitable call. Also notice that, because we have advertised that our hand is weak, it's easy for the blinds to raise us preflop if we call (this play is known as a "squeeze"). Hands like A7 are way too weak to call another preflop raise, so we'll be forced to fold. Even if we know we'll make it to the flop, a hand like A7o is terrible to call with. Why? Well first of all, you're often dominated; the types of hands that a decent UTG player is going to raise with are often things like AA, AK, AQ, AJs, KK, QQ... If you both make your ace on the flop, you're going to be forced to put chips in the pot. But if your opponent has a strong ace (AK, AQ, AJ) already, you're going to lose a lot of chips. This is called reverse-implied odds; when you make your hand and you're beat, you stand to lose a significant pot. On top of that, A7o doesn't have a lot of opportunity to win big pots. If your opponent has KK, and the flop comes A95 rainbow, the UTG player knows that there's a decent chance they're beat, since people like to play aces. They might put a bet or two out there, but they're almost never going to invest a lot of money in the pot. So what hands should you call with? Well, you should be more inclined to call with hands that have good implied odds. That is, hands where if your opponent makes their hand, and you make yours, you can win a big pot. For example, a hand like 44 is great here. If your opponent has AA, and the flop comes 954 rainbow, you're very likely to win a lot of chips. Even if the pot went multiway, your trip fours are likely to be the best hand. If the flop instead comes AK9cc, it's very easy for you to get away from your fours. We like easy decisions. Similarly, hands that can make big flushes and straights both give us good implied odds and are easier to play multiway. Hands like T9s and A3s are going to be way more profitable for us in the long run, since they usually won't get us into too much trouble, and can win big pots, so they're okay to call with. However, we should also consider raising these hands sometimes, since it lets us represent bigger hands as well, lets us be the aggressor, and makes it less likely we'll get raised or called by the blinds.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2016 16:19
|
|
|
Just keep betting. If they fold too much, bluff more, you'll make money from your bluffs. Try not to slow play unless you have really big hands and your opponents will often take a stab at the board. Bet sizing is one of the trickier parts of poker. You can experiment with smaller sizes and see what it does for you against these players (bad players usually aren't paying that much attention), but make sure what you're doing make mathematical sense as well. If you bet 10% of the pot, pretty much every draw has odds to call, including things like a single over card. If your opponents are calling those bets correctly, then you might need to adjust your pricing. Conversely, if you're bluffing a lot of the time because they fold too much, then yeah, see if they'll fold to smaller bets. There's no use risking an 80% pot bet when a 50% pot bet will fold out just as many hands. We want to make our opponents make mistakes for the cheapest price possible. If they're still folding to 25% pot size bets, then just do that. Some of these really tight players will also never fold once they have what they thing is a strong hand. So if you have a big hand and they call your first bet, keep betting big and see if they'll call you down and pay you off. You can make your bet sizing bigger here, since they're often not folding to any < pot sized bet once they've called the first time. Against weak/tight players that are folding anytime they don't have a strong made hand, it's going to be a slow grind. Typically, you'll make more money from players that call too much instead of those that call too little. Still, there's money to be made by just wearing them down.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
Terrorforge posted:Yeah, it's looking like 1/2 pot is having about the same effect as 2/3. Might see if I can push it even further, but already people seem to be at least considering calling (sometimes they tank then fold rather than snap-fold) so idk how much further I can go. Would depend on individual opponents, I suppose. quote:Speaking of weak/tight, I've been struggling to find the terminology for these people. Is someone who plays loose preflop and Fit or Fold post really weak/tight? "Likes to limp in with a wide range of hands from all positions, including low non-suited connectors and Q7o type hands. Will usually call a single raise preflop with their entire range. Typically plays fit or fold postflop, but will call you down even if they only have bottom pair. Rarely raises preflop or bets postflop unless they have a strong made hand." Along with some example hand histories. Avoid simplistic labels; the more hands you have with someone, the more you should be able to describe their play. (EDIT: You might hear the player you're talking about called a "loose nit," meaning they play lots of hands preflop, but fold pretty easily when put under pressure. You really should try to get more descriptive as you play with the player) Imaduck fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Oct 5, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
quote:It is my understanding that the "wetness" of a board is how conducive it to someone having a huge hand, or at least to be drawing to a huge hand, usually a straight or flush. Does it apply to other hands, though? Is a paired board or one that just has some high cards (say AQ9 rainbow) considered wet? 1. How often does my opponent connect with this board? 2. When they connect with this board, do they often have a made hand, or a drawing hand? 3. When they connect with this board, how often is their hand (or the hand they're drawing to) the best hand? How long will it remain the best hand on a turn or river? I just grabbed it randomly, but this article seems like a decent introduction to flop texture.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
Yeah, it's up to you if you're grinding to make money or just to play and prove you can, but if you are winning 5 or 6 small pots an hour and tipping a dealer every time, it's pretty hard to be profitable in a raked 1/2 NL or low stakes limit game. If you don't want to tip as much as other folks, don't feel obligated to. At the same time, don't feel like you have to maximize EV either if you're just there to have a good time.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 07:48
|
|
|
Terrorforge posted:But on the other hand I'm worried that a check-raise would fold out all his bluffs, weak pairs and maybe even TPTK. A) Has a huge hand that beats us (JJ, 99) B) Has a big hand that doesn't beat us (e.g. QQ+, AJ, KJ, J9s) C) Has a big drawing hand (e.g. AcTc+, QTs, etc) D) Has a weaker hand, weak draw, or drawing/combo hand (e.g. 8c9c) E) Has nothing Having a huge hand is rare. If he does, we got unlucky, lose a big pot, and move on with our lives. Against some players we could maybe get away from a ton of aggression on the flop (3bet+), but I'm typically not in the business of folding a flopped set on a wet board. For big hands, do you really think he's folding top pair, top kicker (AJ) here to a check raise? If you were check-raised in this spot, would you fold TPTK? I think if you check raise here, your opponent has to figure that at least some of the time you have flush draws, straight draws, combo draws, and some jacks. If your opponent thinks you have some of those hands in your range when you check raise, then he or she should be able to call you at least on the flop most of the time with AJ, and probably with hands like QQ+, KJ, J9s, flush draws with overs, and straight draws as well. The fact that this flop is wet makes your check raising range bigger, therefore your opponent should be able to put you on more bluffs and draws here. At the same time, if they do have AJ and make it past the flop, they're probably going to slow down on later streets if any scare cards (straight or flush cards) come on the turn or river. So if we want to extract value from AJ, we need to do it now. If your opponent truly is folding AJ to a check raise, then you should be check raising this opponent all the time with basically any two cards that remotely connect to the board. They're putting themselves in a very exploitable spot if they're folding big made hands to a small amount of aggression on a wet board. If your opponent does have a big draw, you need to start charging them to see more cards now. We're out of position, so if we just call the flop and check turn, there's a decent chance that our opponent checks back and gets both a free turn and river card! We need to bet now to give our opponent a bad price to draw out on us. If your opponent has air, yeah, he or she will probably fold here. That's probably okay; if you just flat call, if a straight card or a flush card comes on the turn, your opponent is probably going to stop bluffing. Even if a straight or flush card doesn't come, there's a decent chance your opponent is going to stop bluffing on the turn once you call. Unless you think your opponent is very aggressive post-flop and will basically 3 barrel bluff with any two cards on this board, you can't really can't on making money with a bunch of big bluffs here. You have a very strong hand, not just a bluff catcher. You're going to make money from some of your opponent's value betting range, not just their bluffs! Therefore, you want to get more chips in the pot here. One other way to think about it is this: you have the 3rd strongest hand possible on the flop. If you're not check raising for value with this hand, what hands are you check raising for value with? None of them? Are you only check raising with bluffs and draws? If that's the case, you're putting yourself in a very exploitable spot; your opponents can always go over the top whenever you check raise, and you'll have to fold. We have to have some value and some bluffs here to keep things balanced and keep our opponents guessing. I could go on and on here, but the point is, this is a textbook spot to check-raise the flop. Do it. quote:And of course, did I make a mistake getting here? Should i have donked after all? Should I even have taken this setmine? You could argue that we donk here to not give our opponent a free card, but most players will bet their drawing hands here, so we're going to get paid by them anyway, and we get to check raise them. So we don't have to worry about giving our opponent a free card; they're either going to bet their draw, or they don't have a draw and they're only drawing to hands that don't beat us. In the latter case, we'd rather give them a free card so they can maybe hit and feel like they've caught up (e.g. AK catches a K on the turn). I'd only donk bet against a very specific type of opponent here: basically super weak players that will never bluff, won't bet draws, and won't even bet most made hands here, but is willing to call if I bet. These players are pretty rare though, but are good money if you're at a table with one since they're very exploitable and probably going to make a lot of mistakes. It's okay to mix in weird moves like donks every once in awhile, but the standard play here should be check raise, or check and bet turn if it checks through on the flop.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
wide stance posted:Got knocked out in my tournament today by going up against AA and KK in consecutive hands in a table of four. Had AK for the former and was a gnat's rear end out of the money to add insult to injury.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
Sure, but keep in mind that "the good side of variance" might mean you're cashing like, 30% of the time, which means you're still losing 70% of the tournaments you play. Or it might mean that you just get 1st in one really big tournament, and then go lose 20 other ones, and still come out ahead. And it's always hard to know if you won because you were playing well, or just running hot, because winning a tournament really requires both. A tournament player's life is tough.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
I've started up making weekly poker videos again. If you want to see me grind some online sit and goes, do tournament reviews, and talk about beer, check out my youtube channel.
Imaduck fucked around with this message at 07:34 on Jan 11, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 06:17
|
|
|
Ack, thanks, fixed.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 07:34
|
|
|
I LIKE COOKIE posted:so I play poker, but I'm really impatient and tend to over-bluff when I don't get cards. I'm a pro bluffer(in my head), but the people I play with all the time have come to learn that I'm typically full of poo poo. so my question is Also, you have to be careful to not do it too often, and look for just the best opportunities, instead of firing at every single one of them. As Terrorforge points out, it's pretty easy to spot a player who's representing too many big hands too often and is just bluffing too much. I love playing against these types of players, because they typically pay out and lose money a lot faster than any other type of player. The most common bluffs that happen in good poker fall into two categories: 1. Bluffs where you have a relatively low risk and high chance of success, like the continuation bets Terrorforge pointed out. 2. Bluffs where you're representing a strong made hand, but also have a lot of outs in case you do get called (semi-bluffs). These are things like betting aggressively with a flush draw, or a flush draw + straight draw, or overcards or whatever. Mathematically these are great, because they'll get a fold some of the time, and the other chunk of the time you have a shot at making your hand. You also have a chance at bluffing again if you don't make your draw, or you can just get away from it sometimes if you don't think another bluff will work. Focus on these types of bluffs when you're starting out. Then, read some books, watch some videos, and learn about what to look for in the rare spots where you can get away with making bigger bluffs.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
On the bots: There are a ton of caveats with this challenge. The bots play very slowly; probably much slower than you could play online. The human players are putting in tons and tons of long sessions, which is a huge disadvantage since humans get fatigued, but bots don't. This is a deep stacked variant of the game, which most of the players are less familiar with, and the bots are only trained on how to play in this specific, deep stacked scenario. This is heads-up only; building a bot for multiplayer variants of the game using this methodology is basically impossible at this point. And even if the bots win this challenge, it doesn't mean they wouldn't get exploited like crazy online, once people figured out what exactly they were doing. We're still a long way off from "solving" Heads Up NLHE entirely - that's a very, very high bar that means the bots effectively make the best decision in every situation. But, what this challenge proves is that bots are certainly capable of being competitive against some of the best players in the world. On top of that, the bots are getting better and better every year. As computing hardware and machine learning advance, it's hard to imagine a future where bots aren't dominating the game. We're entering a different era of mental games. Chess has been played for over a millennia, where humans have been besting each other and incrementing strategy over time, generation after generation. Savants would come and go, and the game could be considered a true battle of wits. Today, we have chess bots that are unbeatable by humans, along with dozens of other games. The computer scientist in me is excited about this, but the mental game player in me feels a little bit wounded. People still play chess and Go, but do the games feel cheapened now that bots can win? Should they? I don't know. Does running feel cheapened now that we have vehicles that can move much faster than humans? I suppose it's not as valued a skill anymore, but we still host huge running competitions all the time, and marvel at the humans that break world records. One interesting thing to come out of this will be how training changes as these bots get better. Blackjack is a long solved game, and you can play with a bot that will tell you whenever you make an incorrect move. Soon, poker will be like this; we're already using poker simulations to improve our game, but soon the best players train against bots instead of humans to find the weaknesses in their game. This is kind of neat on one hand, but I do feel a little sad about it. One thing I really loved about poker was that there was still debate to be had about strategy. There are many different play styles out there, and while certain actions are certainly wrong, it's often to know what the absolute best move is in any given situation. You can debate these things endlessly with different players. A decade from now, however, we'll simply have an answer from a machine for every single situation, and that will be that. Practice will be learning a few basic rules, and then just memorizing what the computer tells you to do.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
Doug Polk participated in the challenge last year and has been interviewing the players this year. He's put up a couple videos about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gz9FJfe2YGE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crgmYTMfrSc I don't remember off the top of my head, but he mentions the compensation in the first video. I think it was something like $50k, which isn't too bad for a few weeks of (very hard) work.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2017 09:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 10:19 |
|
|
I'm with Sheep-Goats on this one - keeping games fun and talkative should be a priority no matter what type of player you are. Players that are chatting, joking, and having a good time are more likely to stick around and attract more players to your table. Even if they lose, they're likely to remember having a good time and wanting to come back for more, and you're going to enjoy the experience more as well. Hoodies, headphones, and sunglasses create a less welcoming environment that's going to kill the game in the long run. Do those things work at preventing people from picking up tells on you? Maybe, sometimes. But I really think you're going to get more value by keeping people at the table instead of the 1 in 10,000 hands where someone picks up a tell on you that would have been hidden by sunglasses and it actually matters for the hand. If you're at the final table of some major poker tournament and playing against a bunch of live pros, maybe you get a pass. Otherwise, I definitely err on the side of keeping the game fun. Groundskeeper Silly posted:Like is it seen as useless or unsportsmanlike or as a sign of weakness or anything like that? Sunglasses and hoodies are pretty common sights at the table. I tend to see two classes of people that wear sunglasses: skilled players that are trying to intimidate people, and people who watch a lot of poker and think they're way better than they actually are. As far as I can tell from the old WSOP footage, I think sunglasses and hoodies are becoming less popular, but I'm seeing a lot more scarves. Imaduck fucked around with this message at 07:14 on Jan 31, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2017 07:06
|
|