SMALL BALL POKER

[SHAKE]

why is it that everyone thinks you have to go over pure EV and not cash ev. If your a fav to win a pot, and you give your oppents odds to draw, you still win the pot more then not, and your effectivly putting more money in the pot that your going to win. It may lower you pure EV but it raises your cash ev. Perhaps if your a serious grinder playing thousands of hands a week going after pure ev will be more profitable for you. But for a casual live player i think cash ev is better because you probly wont play enough to recive the longtime results of going after pure ev.

Its like if you can only play poker 1 day in vegas, would you play 10 100 sngs that pay 4x 3x and 1.5x

or play 1-1,000 MTT tour that pays 45x 35x 25x..ect

in the 1st example your pure ev is better, if your a good stt player you can figure that you have a 50% chance of a 100ROI a 25 % of a 125 and a 10% of 200%roi. you figure that its almost 80 that youll at least make 1 buy in.

In the second example you figure 10 tables, and your a good player, that your about 20% to cash 15% to take a top3 and maby 5% to win.

I think is the same thing as the curent topic of giving odds.

In one sence you hurt your pure ev by giving your oppent to take away a pot thats rightfully yours. But they are drawing very thin so odds are it wont happen. Givin you play the same situation 100 times---


PLEASE IM trying to use an example that makes the MATH simple, dont pick apart the logic of how the players got to sai point its irrelivant. This isnt about the stratagy here, its about the math.

ok so with that said.

on the turn you have AK on a board of A 3 2:s K

your opp hold the 4 6

He has 3 outs as the 5 will make you a flush

the pot is 100 dollars.

Vil is roughly 12-1

TOP says bet at least 10 giving him 11-1 and making it a bad call so lest see why 1st

(if villan hits his st he will go all in and AK wil fold, if he misses he check folds)


he calls the 10 12 times (120) he wins 110 (-10$ or 1.0 per hand)

ok so this makes sence we all get it.

lets say though we bet 5 instead. Now he calls 5 12 times (60) and wins 110 (+50 or 5.0p/h)

STill easy


Now from our point of view

Betting 10 we win 110 11 times for a total of ( 1210) and lose the ten that we bet + the 100 in the middle once (-110 +1210=1100) or 91$ per hand.

if we bet 5 then we win 105 11 times (155) and lose 100 +5 once (+50 or 4.16 per hand)

OK so this is where all of you are at and i get it so far BUT what im saying is what if the opp WONT call anything but correct odds

then we bet 10 say we 100 12 times (1200) 100 per hand

but if we bet 8 say then he calls the 8 the extra 11 more times meaning when we win the pot we win 108 perhand instead of the 100. If we know he'll call the 10 the yes its the right play but we actually make more money by letting him call correctly then having him fold.

Sure in the long run it might = less, but if your just playing casualy might as well get as much money as you can when opps are drawing thin, because you wont playenough to even out the varience any way.



(hope you guys like this.)

[SHAKE]

why is it that everyone thinks you have to go over pure EV and not cash ev. If your a fav to win a pot, and you give your oppents odds to draw, you still win the pot more then not, and your effectivly putting more money in the pot that your going to win. It may lower you pure EV but it raises your cash ev. Perhaps if your a serious grinder playing thousands of hands a week going after pure ev will be more profitable for you. But for a casual live player i think cash ev is better because you probly wont play enough to recive the longtime results of going after pure ev.

Its like if you can only play poker 1 day in vegas, would you play 10 100 sngs that pay 4x 3x and 1.5x

or play 1-1,000 MTT tour that pays 45x 35x 25x..ect

in the 1st example your pure ev is better, if your a good stt player you can figure that you have a 50% chance of a 100ROI a 25 % of a 125 and a 10% of 200%roi. you figure that its almost 80 that youll at least make 1 buy in.

In the second example you figure 10 tables, and your a good player, that your about 20% to cash 15% to take a top3 and maby 5% to win.

I think is the same thing as the curent topic of giving odds.

In one sence you hurt your pure ev by giving your oppent to take away a pot thats rightfully yours. But they are drawing very thin so odds are it wont happen. Givin you play the same situation 100 times---


PLEASE IM trying to use an example that makes the MATH simple, dont pick apart the logic of how the players got to sai point its irrelivant. This isnt about the stratagy here, its about the math.

ok so with that said.

on the turn you have AK on a board of A 3 2:s K

your opp hold the 4 6

He has 3 outs as the 5 will make you a flush

the pot is 100 dollars.

Vil is roughly 12-1

TOP says bet at least 10 giving him 11-1 and making it a bad call so lest see why 1st

(if villan hits his st he will go all in and AK wil fold, if he misses he check folds)


he calls the 10 12 times (120) he wins 110 (-10$ or 1.0 per hand)

ok so this makes sence we all get it.

lets say though we bet 5 instead. Now he calls 5 12 times (60) and wins 110 (+50 or 5.0p/h)

STill easy


Now from our point of view

Betting 10 we win 110 11 times for a total of ( 1210) and lose the ten that we bet + the 100 in the middle once (-110 +1210=1100) or 91$ per hand.

if we bet 5 then we win 105 11 times (155) and lose 100 +5 once (+50 or 4.16 per hand)

OK so this is where all of you are at and i get it so far BUT what im saying is what if the opp WONT call anything but correct odds

then we bet 10 say we 100 12 times (1200) 100 per hand

but if we bet 8 say then he calls the 8 the extra 11 more times meaning when we win the pot we win 108 perhand instead of the 100. If we know he'll call the 10 the yes its the right play but we actually make more money by letting him call correctly then having him fold.

Sure in the long run it might = less, but if your just playing casualy might as well get as much money as you can when opps are drawing thin, because you wont playenough to even out the varience any way.



(hope you guys like this.)

[Chopper]

If your a fav to win a pot, and you give your oppents odds to draw, you still win the pot more then not, and your effectivly putting more money in the pot that your going to win.

again, i see your point, but i still think its bad news. yes, you are putting more money in the pot, and with an equity edge, thats important, but you seem to be forgetting the times when you get drawn out on...those LOSE all the money you were putting in...and often a little more.

the pot odds offer a mathematical (hey, spenda, i'm using math over logic here...lol) equation. meaning they balance out (except for split pots i guess). if you look from the draw chasers point of view...

he has a 33% chance to win, he calls any 3:1 odds he can get his hands on to break even...and PROFIT if you call his bets after he hits his draw. if you lay 3.5:1, he wins by calling EVERYTIME.

yes, you are flooding the pot, but he doesnt NEED to spend more money than he will gain. there is theoretically NO RISK for him...over a large sample. he will win more than he loses by chasing these situations.

Perhaps if your a serious grinder playing thousands of hands a week going after pure ev will be more profitable for you.

not just for serious "grinders." going after =ev situations is all that poker is about...nothing more...if you like winning money.

if you are a casual player, and are just in it for the entertainment value, thats fine. you need not care about odds, rake, other opponents. you need not care about the money in your pocket, either, as the ones that DO care will eventually remove it from your person.

you will have your winning streaks that variance provides...just like everyone else...but yours wont last as long, and you will not hold your winnings because the math will take them away again. that is the definition of a "fish" to me. the guy that only wins money when the poker gods want to keep him around a little longer...because he doesnt understand the math.

i am not calling you a fish...please dont misunderstand. i truly feel you understand how to calculate the math. i just am not sure you understand how wrong laying correct odds to draw against you is...and still expect to profit from it. if you lay correct odds, you need to expect to show a loss over a larger sample of hands.

its just the math.

[SHAKE]

its still better to bet into a pot giving your oppent correct odds then betting at all-TOP

I really think this falls into the same catagory, its better to put more money into a pot that you a substantial favorite to win then bet so much that you force out an oppent that is drawing slim to none.

its like this...

Lets say i pull out a deck of cards, and say ok, ill bet you 10K that after you shuffle this deck and cut it the top card will be the 8s exactly. If its not you win 10K , but if it is you have to pay me 100K.

Now this is obviously a -ev situation 51 times you win 10 K (51,000) and 1 time you lose 100K) so your -49K about 950$ negitive per shot.


Would you really refuse this bet though if someone offered it, and you could afford to lose 100K.


if you say no then i got a bet for you.

ill flip a cin 20 times. If it lands on heads every single time ill give you 300K (the ods are 256k-1) if not you give me 100. its way +ev for you.

[bjsaust]

That defence makes no sense.

Now this is obviously a -ev situation 51 times you win 10 K (51,000) and 1 time you lose 100K) so your -49K about 950$ negitive per shot.

51 * 10,000 = 510,000
1 *100,000 = 100,000

510,000 - 100,000 = 410,000.

How about we drop a zero off and I'll play this game with you for as long as you like. If you're going to offer me superior odds, I'll take them all day long and I'll win money doing so.

On the other hand, if you mean the bet was $1,000 then theres no way in hell I'm risking $100,000 to win $1,000 on a 51:1 shot. Thats just silly.

[Chopper]

SHAKE,

you are still sooooooo wrong.

jamming a pot for the sake of putting money in when you are ahead is craziness. you need to have a decent read on what your opponent is drawing to.

i think you may be thinking in terms of a limit game where you are trying you best to flood the pot...knowing you will win most times because the draw will fail. but, you still cant get a profitable draw to fold in limit because he makes money by calling...you can only hope you punish him as much as possible when he misses...knowing you cant take away the odds to draw.