|
IED enthusiast posted:stuff Glad to see a good poker thread pop up. I occasionally read 2+2, but it's mostly for site/software news/updates. Poker is 100% a money game. In "The Theory of Poker" David Sklansky notes (correctly) that poker would be a boring game for boring/bored people comparing no-money poker to a coin flip or a dice roll (I'm paraphrasing), since you could call down or shove all day long with no risk or challenge, and it's money creates that risk and challenge. By contrast, I love playing tien len, but that's a card game that definitely doesn't need money in order for it to be challenging and fun. If newbies or the unpracticed are looking for resources, I've read the following: Crushing the Microstakes (ebook only) - Nathan "Blackrain79" Williams - Williams is the most winningest microstakes player with the most hands played. I went from a losing player, to breakeven player, to winning player with this book in a very very short time. He lays out player types, seat positions, hand ranges and betting ranges in this fairly short book. This book is very instructional, i.e., "if this, then do that' with the aim of getting the losing reader to start winning ASAP if they follow the directions and don't get out of line. It's also about microstakes onlie poker, but you can apply the principles to low stakes live if you substitute $1/$2 for $.01/$.02, etc. and learn how to internalize HUD data. His website/blog is also a great companion to his book. I don;t know about Jonathan Little's Little Green Book, but I would recommend this as the place to start. The Theory of Poker - David Sklansky - Sklansky is kind of the godfather of poker theory and while much of what he says in his books is outdated, this book is really about the, uh, theory of poker in general. He introduces concepts like pot odds, implied odds, reverse implied odds, value betting, bluffing, outs etc via the various types of poker games, so it is not Holdem specific. This is the second book I read and I've read it twice. The Elements of Poker - Tommy Angelo - This is more philosophical in how a player approaches (or should) poker. It's easy to read, thoughtful, and witty -- I personally like his section on the EV of mouse smashing (I have never smashed a mouse.....yet). The Grinder's Manual (ebook only) - Peter "Carroters" Clarke - Clarke is a young pro-turned-coach with a philosophy background, and this book is basically Crushing the Microstakes on steroids. It's massive with lots of examples and explanations and concepts. I wish this was around when I started playing, so I "re-started" and slowed my game and took my time to think about and apply the concepts he lays out. Starts out basic and gets pretty advanced to the end. This just came out last April and is slf-published, so be sure to overlook typos and other miscellaneous errors. There's a 2+2 thread about this book that the author and Mason Malmuth participate in. Clarke has a podcast and YouTube channel called "Carrot Corner." The Mental Game of Poker - Jared Tendler - Tendler is a former sports (golf, if you count that) psychologist who does poker mental game coaching now. He discusses tilt, what it is, how it manifests itself, and how to manage and overcome it in realizable ways. I recommend this for anyone serious about poker. Professional No-Limit Holdem: Vol 1 and Small Stakes No-Limit Holdem - Sunny Mehta, Matt Flynn, Ed Miller - This is a pair of, in my opinion, pretty good, but not great poker books, but I'm pretty novice of a poker player, so what do I know. The chapter on SPR is really the meat of what they talk about (I forget which book). I find a lot of the other concepts either highfalutin or filler - their examples seem a bit pie-in-the-sky. Poker Math That Matters - Owen Gaines - Gaines is a full-time online pro and family man. Simple, easy-to-read book with problems at the end of each chapter to work through. He covers counting outs, pot odds, implied odds, and other poker numbery things. Very useful. I've read several others, but these are the ones that really stick out in terms of beginner/novice usefulness. Harrington's Online Cash Games is pretty good, I guess. I read it after Theory of Poker, and it helped fill in gaps of Crushing the Micros info with 6-max play and plenty of examples and fleshing out thought-processes. Oh, and if anyone wants to hear my bad beat story (you probably don't), I just had my worst day ever yesterday - I found a nice aggro-whale and handed him ~500BBs by running my TP+ w/draws on the flop and him drawing out on me every time in under an hour. edit: Oh, for anyone interested in tournament books, Kill Everyone and The Raiser's Edge are pretty much the universally agreed-upon books to read. They talk about ICM, M-number (I think the authors call it a C-number or something different), shove ranges, etc. I'm not a big tourney player, so I mostly skimmed them. Subjunctivitis fucked around with this message at 11:24 on Jun 15, 2017 |
#
¿
Jun 15, 2017 11:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 07:54 |
|
|
twodot posted:This is real dumb, it's possible to make dumb, thoughtless moves in any game with "no risk" so long as you don't care about the outcome of the game. Other bluffing/price setting games exist, but no one blathers about how playing those games without money versus playing for quarters is a fundamental change. I'm going to go with Phil Gordon on this: I think you're confusing poker with "Whose Line is it Anyway?"
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2017 00:36
|
|
|
Indeed, and to expand on your post Imaduck, money's the reason why good winning players have higher winrates at lower stakes than at higher stakes. I (surprise, surprise) prefer to play against people who make dumb or careless plays because "it only costs $.25 or $5 to see the flop" with J4o and "anything can happen" or who frequently open shove preflop. I play $5NL online and have friends who wouldn't even touch those games because the stakes are so low they couldn't be bothered to care. One of those friends will still play about 50% of hands in home games because the blinds are often so much cheaper than in casinos. All this mentality does is make poker more profitable for someone like me (or someone better). There have been a few times where I've played in spontaneous "$0NL" home games, but I play the same as usual because I view it as a training/practice opportunity for when I DO play for money. Regarding different games for different limits, I saw a YouTube series by a mid-high stakes online pro (Felix Schneiders) who went back and started grinding his way from $2NL to a $8000 bankroll and was losing big time when he started because he was playing his GTO game at the lowest stakes where that strategy doesn't work and was leveling himself into making losing plays, so he had to adjust to a more fit-or-fold TAG style in order to beat those games.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
Sheep-Goats posted:They offer this thing where if you do I think 40 hours at the table they give you 500 bucks at the end of the week, I forget the details, but it means it just attracts some real bone dry grinders at a 1/2 table. No thanks. So sit down and basically only play a 5%-10% range and you get a "free" $500? Which Treasure Island is this? Edit: Just looked it up - Vegas. Tiered cash-in-hand for every 10 hours of play with brackets end up breaking down to $5/hr up to $9.99/hr. Subjunctivitis fucked around with this message at 04:07 on Jun 17, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2017 04:00
|
|
|
When I play live ($1/$2 and not often), I'm similar to Imaduck -- I tip $1 to every dealer no matter what (my bad variance/bad play isn't their fault) and $1 for every middling pot (~30bbs), then throw in $1-$3 on top of that if it's a big/huge pot (100bb+). It's not worth it to tip when I Cbet the flop and take down a couple standard preflop bets. Since I'm not a live grinder and only play these games for a few hours (1-4), I can typically expect my tipping budget to stick between $5-$10. Like Sheep-Goats has said, at low limits it is often tough to stay ahead of the rake especially when you add in dealer tips.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
maskenfreiheit posted:Total gambling budget for the trip is up to 500, it looks like the maximum buy in at both Flamingo and Caesar's (two spots I was eyeing) is 300 for their 1/2 NL so I think I'll give that a shot and if I bust out or do poorly will probably use the remaining two hundred on non-gambling fun. If I were you, I'd skip the tourney thing for above reasons. Find a local casino with lower entry fees/rake and play those, and the games *should* be pretty soft. One of the casinos I go to has a $30 tourney ($20+$10) w/ $10 add-ons and $5 re-buys. I can take $60 and play for a few hours (I've never won anything there myself  ).If you're in Vegas for a few days and want to make your $500 last, I'd play short-stack $1/$2 for $100 - just fold like 90-95% of hands (download Equilab to see what this looks like) from the first 4 seats, and fold all but QQ+, AQ+ in the blinds -- this means you'll be playing almost exclusively from the Button, Cutoff and Hijack. You'll be looking for spots to shove your whole stack ASAP, so you'll have to be very aggressive when you have something good (TPTK+). Otherwise, you don't want to chase draws or bluff. It's a lousy way to play if you want action, but great if you're interested in chilling with free drinks and playing a hand here and there. Tommy Angelo noted in "The Elements of Poker" (I'm paraphrasing): My wife was out with some friends and a couple guys that were there said to her, "So your husband's a poker pro, eh? You must learn some secrets from him - got any advice for us?" She said, "Fold more hands." On the topic of bankroll in general, I don't show up to a casino without at least 300BBs. I plan for the possible/inevitable bust and rebuy. I have friends who will beg me to go when I don't have proper bankroll and they say, "Dude, you can just buy in for $40. You don't have to buy in for a full stack." But I'm there to win money, and the most possible, not fart it out slowly (though that happens sometimes). A 20BB, 40BB, 60BB BR just doesn't cut it. If you're playing a SS game, you especially need to be bankrolled properly with more rebuys.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2017 01:28
|
|
|
One thing to keep in mind with preflop play is the "Gap Theory," which relates to calling. It basically says that when you call a raise preflop, you should have a stronger calling range than what your opponent raised with. How I approach this myself is to have well-defined ranges from Early Position (EP), MP, and the Cutoff (CO). If I'm playing full-ring (7-10 players), I have another range for the Hijack (HJ, one seat earlier than CO). I drill drill drill these ranges into my brain. Then, when someone opens from one of these positions, I can quickly tap into my own range for that position and think about how often this opponent opens from this position and then determine my calling range. Say my opponent (Villain/Vil.) is raising PF (preflop) about as often as I do, and Vil opens from EP. I'll put him on a 8-10% range which means that I'll call him with about 5-6% of hands, i.e., I'll only call him with the better hands in Vil's range. I will only re-raise (3Bet) Vil with only things like AAs and KKs, maayyyybe AK (I won't go into the reasons for this right now). I will NOT call him with my full 15-18% HJ range. My 15-18% HJ range is only the range I open raise with. However, if I'm on the Button, I may call with a 8-10% range that includes some worse hands than Vil has in their EP opening range. This is because there are only Blinds to act after me PF and I will have ultimate position post-flop, which I can potentially use to take down the pot. These worse hands will be things like smaller pairs (to hope to flop a set) and suited connectors (to hit a straight or flush). If my opponent plays a tighter game than I do, I'll call tighter; I'f he's looser, I'll call/3Bet wider. I also adjust my ranges based upon the effective stack - i.e., potential $ to win. I'm more likely to tighten up against smaller stacks since the weaker parts of my range want to get more money when they do hit big, and using position to float/raise/etc. with these hands could put me into a bad situation against a smaller stack if I don't hit. I generally try to make sure that I am raising much much more often than I am calling, which means that AJo on the BTN usually doesn't look so good when someone opens in EP and then someone else in MP calls. Edit: For a bit of clarification: If my opening range is 15%, when I have the opportunity to open raise, I am usuallyfolding 85% of the time, because I will only hit those cards in my range 15% of the time. If my Call vs X is 10%, every time I have the opportunity to call, I will usually be folding 90%. I say usually due to variance - I may catch hands in those ranges more or less often. The 10% is not about frequency played, it's about 10% of the 1326 possible starting hand combinations, I am playing 132 whenever I am dealt one of them. I'm not sitting there thinking, "Hmmmm, I've folded in this position 9/10 times, the next time I should open raise because I'm supposed to be playing 10% of the time." Subjunctivitis fucked around with this message at 20:50 on Jul 24, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 07:54 |
|
|
Some quick questions on hands to have in a range: How does my hand rank "absolutely"? What made hand do I want to make with this hand? How often do I expect to make that hand? If/when I don't make my hand, how often can I still win the pot? You can think about the following hands: AA, AKs, KJo, J9s, 66, ATo, A3s, 76s, 73o, Q4s
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2017 20:32
|
|