Poker and calculating mathetmatical probabilities

[unggio]

nebody here play poker?

considering that we're probably smarter than the avg. person at calculating mathetmatical probabilities,

i'd guess if we learned a little psychological strategy, a little study of poker books and playing experience, winning a few poker tournaments wouldn't be too farfetched

 

[Kurdt]

Poker is more than just calculating probabilities of a win. Like you say a lot is down to actual playing experience and learning the signs of when others are bluffing and when they're not. Equally you have to learn how to behave in a poker match so as to not give away your position. That is if you have a strong hand and you raise too much you can frighten others out of contributing to the pot etc.

While being able to calculate odds at the table would be rather good most hardened professionals tend to know them by heart anyway and thus I doubt anybody would really have any genuine advantage over most pro players out there. You could however always turn your talents to card counting.

 

[Chi Meson]

All of us male science teachers at my school, plus some of the math dept meet about once a month for a "Texas Hold'em" tournament. This game seems to have a lot more psycological strategy than other forms of the game, and it is a blast when a bluff works.

Last month I nearly took a large pot with literally nothing in my hand. I blew it at the last minute when my voice wavered as I said "I'll raise fi-thr-five hundred." game over.

 

[JasonRox]

It's more than just bluffing with a bad hand.

I haven't met anyone in person that actually knew how to bluff properly besides just betting big. It's more than that. It's all about what position you have, the other player, what's on the table, previous hands, size of pot, how many outs the other player might have, etc... etc... etc...

Everyone I see play is still a newbie.

I played poker quite often before, but now I just watch the pros and determine how I would play and guess from my experience what the pro player would do.

Playing with beginners will get you nowhere. I met some who are "bluffing", but when it comes to showing the cards, they should lose because if you're bluffing with nothing, you basically know you're going to lose if the other player calls on the river. In the end, the "bluffer" had a flush but never knew he did! Lame.

 

[Chi Meson]

I haven't met anyone in person that actually knew how to bluff properly ...
Everyone I see play is still a newbie.

Don't meet much folk, huh?

We have the...um..."advantage" of living near two of the largest casinos in the world. I don't go there myself, but some of the others in our group play the tables very seriously. This raises the level of our game altogether. And it's like Kurdt says, you don't really sit there and calculate odds (some might, good for them) rather you recognize the odds as you see them. With "Hold'em", since everybody's hands are only slightly different, the "playing odds" becomes much more subtle, and psych-out bluffing game becomes more powerful. You throw in reverse psychology, fake "tells," trying to "act" a bluff when you really have a good hand. My heart used to pound wildly when a bluff was playing out; you could see my shirt collar vibrate, it's a huge rush. No wonder so many people have to drink to counteract all that adrenaline.

 

[unggio]

i guess I'm coming down from a semi high from a good run of cards

i was at a local casino in LA playing 2/4 limit hold em

i call and see the flop with pocket 3's, there's a 3 on the board givin me trips, but there's 5 and jack of spades giving everyone a flush draw, so i value bet by raising the raiser, then the turn comes another 5 giving me a full house, so i reraise the raiser again now everyone thinks i got trip 5's, so at this point everyone is drawing a dead flush to my fullhouse, river comes 2 ppl stay in they bet before me, i reraise again and showdown against one guy who calls me. i won a $100 pot.

it was my first time playing 2/4 i usually stick to 1/2 limit.

amazing game

 

[Chi Meson]

^
Fun.

I don't trust myself to go to a casino. The small game makes it possible to take a chance on the river coming up good for you, and it can make a single hand more fun, but our local "expert" always plays the conservative game. He wins most often too.

 

[turbo]

My dad is 80 and plays private games with a group every friday night (except summers). He is a consistent winner, and when it's his turn to deal, they're playing Texas Hold 'em - no doubt. He taught me to play poker as a kid, and when my paper machine crew used to get together (the last morning of the night shift), I averaged about $40 a session with a restrictive quarter limit for bets and a limit of two raises. His group plays with quarters, not chips, and their limits are quite generous. Dad counts his winnings not by counting, but by weighing the quarters in a coffee can on an old Fairbanks scale.

 

[lo2]

nebody here play poker?

considering that we're probably smarter than the avg. person at calculating mathetmatical probabilities,

i'd guess if we learned a little psychological strategy, a little study of poker books and playing experience, winning a few poker tournaments wouldn't be too farfetched

Always good to have a high self esteem.

 

[JasonRox]

Don't meet much folk, huh?

We have the...um..."advantage" of living near two of the largest casinos in the world. I don't go there myself, but some of the others in our group play the tables very seriously. This raises the level of our game altogether. And it's like Kurdt says, you don't really sit there and calculate odds (some might, good for them) rather you recognize the odds as you see them. With "Hold'em", since everybody's hands are only slightly different, the "playing odds" becomes much more subtle, and psych-out bluffing game becomes more powerful. You throw in reverse psychology, fake "tells," trying to "act" a bluff when you really have a good hand. My heart used to pound wildly when a bluff was playing out; you could see my shirt collar vibrate, it's a huge rush. No wonder so many people have to drink to counteract all that adrenaline.

We have a big casino here too.

We have Fallsview Casino (http://www.fallsviewcasinoresort.com/) and Casino Niagara. Fallsview is so much nicer though! The WPT is running there right now.

I don't gamble, so I wouldn't go to the Casino to play. I might join a tournament one day though.

EDIT: Here is a 360 picture of the Grand Buffet Restaurant at the Casino.
http://www.fallsviewcasinoresort.com/Default.aspx?Page=VR%20Gallery%20Dining&Image=1#Picture
I always get the window seats with the view of the Falls. Nice! I once went there with my bathing suit on and scored a window seat! Haha, some of the guests were disapointed.

 

[Mickey]

The real strategy of poker is how not to get everyone angry at you for winning. However, as someone who's tried to do that for a long time, I think it's pretty well impossible. If you play so that everyone can have fun, you play to lose.

Sore losers are never good anyway. The problem is that a LOT of sore losers play poker. That's because it's one of the few games they think they can win. It's very sad.

It's already an inferior sort of game, when people lose but have reason to think they did everything right and "should have won," when there are no cheaters or referees.

So I pay attention long enough to know when the time is right to pull a psychic moment out of thin air and take a big pot. Big deal. That doesn't make me the messenger of your personal god of bad luck. I'll never play poker with people I know ever again! Ugh, maybe I just need to know better people. ;)

There are no meritocratic winners, just people who know how to not be losers.

 

[EL]

I play about 3-4 hours/week online. Just for fun and for small amounts. At the moment I like heads-up no limit texas hold'em tournaments 10$.
Are you only playing at casinos? Here online poker is very very popular. In fact I know some people making their living out of it...

 

[Anttech]

i was at a local casino in LA playing 2/4 limit hold em

Can you gamble now in California?

 

[Chi Meson]

The real strategy of poker is how not to get everyone angry at you for winning. However, as someone who's tried to do that for a long time, I think it's pretty well impossible. If you play so that everyone can have fun, you play to lose.

Sore losers are never good anyway. The problem is that a LOT of sore losers play poker. That's because it's one of the few games they think they can win. It's very sad.

It's already an inferior sort of game, when people lose but have reason to think they did everything right and "should have won," when there are no cheaters or referees.

So I pay attention long enough to know when the time is right to pull a psychic moment out of thin air and take a big pot. Big deal. That doesn't make me the messenger of your personal god of bad luck. I'll never play poker with people I know ever again! Ugh, maybe I just need to know better people. ;)

There are no meritocratic winners, just people who know how to not be losers.

That's the nice thing about "buying in" for $10 or $20 only. If you win (or come in 2nd) you get something, but you don't ever lose the rent, and people don't get unduly mad about losing.

 

[JasonRox]

That's the nice thing about "buying in" for $10 or $20 only. If you win (or come in 2nd) you get something, but you don't ever lose the rent, and people don't get unduly mad about losing.

Agreed.

This is the way it should always be done, but then again you can't bet "the rent" in a poker game. You'd have to bring all your money first, which is flat out stupid.

 

[rocketboy]

The casino near me doesn't have hold'em... and I rarely go to the casino anyway. Last time I went was because it was my friends birthday where he turned legal, it can be fun if you know when to stop, and go there knowing (or at least being prepared) to lose money.

So my friends and I usually host hold'em games with $5 or $10 buy-ins, then we play with chips and winner takes all minus the buy-in, and second gets money back. Usually there are about 8 of us. I've never had a problem with sore losers, and despite the fact that we're all friends nobody has ever been sore about losing their money... or taking their friends either!

We don't play for the money, we play for fun, the money just makes it so that people are serious about the game. I've played hold'em with other friends before without buy-ins, just chips, and the games are never serious, because nothing is on the line, nobody cares if they lose all their chips going in on 7-2 offsuit just because they thought it would be funny. It isn't, it isn't very fun when people don't play seriously.

Lately I've been trying to improve on reading other player's body language. It isn't very easy to do, analyzing what is on the table and what they might have in their hand based on their body language and the betting characteristics. It isn't easy because different players bet different amounts in different situations, but once I got to know the players styles a bit it made reading them a bit easier. I won that game, thanks to this. I forget where I heard it, but its certainly true that in hold'em "you play the player not the cards". I think it was from the movie "Rounders" with Matt Damon. Good movie. Another quote I liked was something like "there's a sucker at every table...if you can't spot the sucker within the first 5 minutes (or rounds?).. then you are the sucker"

 

[ek]

I have played online poker for almost two years now. It is my only income and has allowed me to go to school during the year without having to get a job. I will graduate debt free in 2008 (not only debt free, but most likely with thousands still in the bank).

Here is the transcript of a nice little argument I had with a guy on another message board about poker. It illustrates some of my thoughts on the game (I'm evman150).

MrWizard: "By the way evman, how can you question my skill level when I have never played you. You also can't judge skill level by how someone plays online, because there is more to poker than just the cards.

In home games, you play the people more than you play the cards. I find it far easier to bluff in a home game than it is online. Online poker comes down to playing a numbers game, rather than a playing the people game. A truly skilled poker player can bluff an opponent that has a strong hand with 72os.

I believe online poker comes down to luck more than it comes down to skill, because you do get ridiculous callers."

evman150: "I don't need to see you play to know your skill level. Directly from what you have said and what I have quoted here I can infer that you are a terrible player.

At the level we play at, there is very little to poker but the cards. If you think poker is all about bluffing, you suck. If you think poker is about everything but the cards (for the most part), you suck. If you think you can't judge someone by how they play online, you suck. If you think being able to bluff someone off a strong hand with 72o is what makes a player skillful, you truly are a horrible player without so much as a microgram of a clue how to play the game.

If you can't beat a game with "ridiculous callers", you are a ****** player.

Luck only impacts this hand, this session, this tournament. If you take the limit as number of hands -> infinity, luck goes to zero. That's all that matters for good players. But of course you wouldn't know that. You are terrible.

It's ok. I make all my money off fish like you."

MrWizard: "Did I ever say that poker was all about bluffing? No.
Did I ever say that poker was everything but the cards? No.
In online poker, do you have to worry about people reading your reactions to the cards that come up on the board? No.
Are you able to see the way people physically handle their chips? No.
Are you able to listen to the tone of the person's voice as they call or raise? No.

Playing poker online != playing a home game. You seem to believe that poker is all about playing the cards, which, in my opinion, makes you a bad player.
Online poker and home games/tournaments are two completely different games. Online poker is based more on the cards, but the poker in it's truest form is a home game or a tournament, where it becomes more than the cards."

evman150: "You're a real piece of work. You think we're at the World Series final table or something? At the level 99.9% of players play at, it is 95% about the cards.

So you think you're Johnny Chan because you got a couple tells on the dopes that play in your home game?

Don't you ever ask yourself why you always seem to lose money? Or are you in denial? You tell yourself you "break even" when in reality you bleed money left, right and centre.

You suck bud, it's okay. Just don't act like you actually know what you're talking about because you just end up looking like a fool. Don't you realize everybody else that has posted in this thread is laughing at you?"

MrWizard: "What else is there to argue? You just kept making unsupported arguments about my skill at poker. What is the point in attempting to defend myself? You are just an ignorant little **** who thinks he owns everyone.

You can talk **** about my skill if we play, and if you beat me. Until then, shut your ****ing trap junior."

evman150: "You're the one who thinks online poker is rigged and/or cheaters run it.

Every real player knows anyone who thinks that way is a dumbass who is a terrible player.

Seriously, go post your crap on 2+2 or FTR or PSO [ek edit: noted poker/gambling forums], you'll get raked over the coals.

I have played many thousands of table hours online, I know of what I speak. I have played 34 different poker sites, including pretty much all the big ones. I have never once had an issue with collusion, "rigging", or dishonest houses. I have profited on 32 of the 34 sites. I average about $30/hr playing NL50, NL100 (mostly) and NL200.

I don't care if you don't believe me. Anybody who has played with me knows I pretty much run the show at the low limits.

My various aliases include evman150, evank15, ek15, ek, RRegehr28 and m31. Most recently I've been playing on the Action Poker Gaming Network (Tiger etc) as m31. Once exams end I will be there for a lot of the summer under some name, probably astronomy related and a location of Victoria. Look for me and play against me. I'll take your money eventually."

I am a student of the David Sklansky school of poker. I have read pretty much all of his books and I pattern the way I play and the way I think about the game after him. One of his better quotes is "it's not about knowing what to do in this or that situation, it is about knowing what to consider in each situation you encounter".

Any questions about online poker or poker in general for that matter, just ask. And don't worry, I'll be nicer than I was to this guy. He was one of those "online poker is rigged" guys. I am not nice to people like that.

 

[ek]

Here's another excerpt of a post I made on the PSO forums, this one is a little more positive. The post is concerning how to become a better player.

How have I done so well for someone starting out in poker as a teenager? Well, I've read over two dozen poker books, and I don't mean just read, I mean reading for comprehension, reading more than once, reading to learn, reading to get better. You have to want to get better. And you can't just say "I wan't to get better", you have to actually do something about it. Participating in online forums is a good way of improving your game. Just talking poker with someone knowledgeable will make you a better player. Thinking about the game, standing in the shower in the morning analyzing how you played AA last night and if you could have checked the turn to induce a bluff rather than betting big on the turn, will make you a better player.

There are also some very important singular concepts in poker that most players miss but are quite easy to correct. Don't play ace rag. Know when you're beat. Along those lines, take into account reverse implied odds when making a call with a hand before the river. Don't get committed with crap. Before you make a bet, think of what you are trying to accomplish with the bet, and think about what hands will fold to your bet and which ones will call. Sometimes you will realize the bet you were going to make has some negative expectation and no positive expectation, that is to say you will only get called if you're beat. Then realize this is a bad bet, and don't make it.

I'm no poker all star. I'm not fancy. I don't play high stakes, I play very low. But I am successful at what I do. Like I've said before, I play extremely well fundamentally, which in low stakes online poker is more than enough to win the money.

 

[rocketboy]

ek, I have a question.

You are not one of the blinds, you get your 2 cards. What kind of cards do you immediately fold, and what kind of cards do you keep to see the flop? In my home games with friends (never more than $10 on the line) I tend to see the flop quite often, rarely folding until I have seen it because I figure I never know what will come up. But I'm starting to wonder if this is a good strategy, seeing as blinds will eventually wear you down if you don't get the cards you need. Sometimes you will fold a 72os and then two 7's come up and you think "man I shouldn't have folded". But really, just because they came up once doesn't mean you should never fold those cards right?

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this.

 

[JasonRox]

ek, I have a question.

You are not one of the blinds, you get your 2 cards. What kind of cards do you immediately fold, and what kind of cards do you keep to see the flop?

Um... did someone raise the blind? Are you the first to call the blind, the second, third... etc...? Is it just the blind? If you're the 3rd last person to call the blind, how are the players who paid blinds that we potential call/check after you? How many players at the table?

You can't answer that kind of question. It's way too vague.

I'd play a 7/5 off suits if all I had to do was call the blind, and the person playing big blinds is known playing hands like A/4 (high and low) off suit cards until the end.

The reason I like to play those hand is because if I read properly, and read that he did NOT connect the high card yet, and I connect one of mine then that's great because in the end I keep a window open to "let him bluff" as if he did connect. Then you end up winning fairly well in the end if it works out of course.

If the other player connects the high pair, and you connect two pairs, you're practically in dream world. Let the other player try to force you, and hopefully the cards on the table makes the other player believe he has the best hand.

I wouldn't play that all the time. It's a chance you have to take once in awhile when you feel the time is right and the player you are playing will play. I wouldn't pull this off against a conservative player.

My advice is to not pay up to see the flops all the time. I find that I learn more and win more when I sit back and watch 50% of the hands. This is why I enjoy watching poker too. You can learn a lot, but then again, there is nothing like playing.

 

[ek]

As you get better as a player, you are able to play more hands. But as a person just learning the game, you should not be playing many hands at all. It depends on the structure of the tournament, and some home game tournaments have ridiculous structures that dictate a ridiculous strategy (I know because I've played a lot of them), but in a normal tournament you should not be playing very many hands at all. It also depends on whether there has been a raise, how many people have called before you, your position etc. But for a beginner I recommend only playing AK, AQ, AJ, KQ, high suited cards and all the pocket pairs. Even that list is pretty loose. When I play, I play all those hands plus all suited connectors and semi-connectors (67s, 64s etc.). I can play these because I know how to play them profitably. This only comes with knowledge and experience. A beginner playing these hands will do nothing but bleed money with them.

Don't play crap. Most hands are unplayable. Learn what a good hand is. 65s is a better hand than A8. 53s is a better hand than K9 and so on. Of course this is only for early on in a tournament or at any time in a cash game. Later on in a tournament when the blinds get big in proportion to the stacks, big cards become more and more powerful. When it gets down to a few people, A8 is a monster while 65s is unplayable. To be successful you must understand how hand values change throughout a tournament and why. Hands like 65s play well in multi-way pots with a chance to win a lot of money if you hit the flop hard (high implied odds). Hands like A8 play well when the blinds are high and the emphasis is on winning what is in the immediate pot as opposed to what could be in the pot in the future.

Oh, and never think "damn I would have flopped a boat if I hadn't folded my 72o". A good bet is a good bet. A bad bet is a bad bet. It's kind of related to the gambler's fallacy. Just because you've flipped a coin five times and it's come up heads all five times doesn't mean it's anything other than 50/50 for it to be heads the next flip.

 

[ek]

My advice is to not pay up to see the flops all the time. I find that I learn more and win more when I sit back and watch 50% of the hands. This is why I enjoy watching poker too. You can learn a lot, but then again, there is nothing like playing.

Good players rarely see more than 20-25% of flops in full ring. A lot see sub 20.

 

[JasonRox]

Good players rarely see more than 20-25% of flops in full ring. A lot see sub 20.

I just pulled the numbers out of the air. I have no idea how accurate they are.

 

[gravenewworld]

Most fun I had playing poker was when I went to the Borgatta in AC and was playing 1-2 no limit. Flop comes down A K K . The guy I ended up going head to head with had a big slick and was betting it hard off the bat. I just kept calling him until after the river came out and put him all in for all of his $250. He couldn't believe it when I showed him my bullets and went ballistic. That night I think I made almost a grand playing poker.

 

[Mickey]

That's the nice thing about "buying in" for $10 or $20 only. If you win (or come in 2nd) you get something, but you don't ever lose the rent, and people don't get unduly mad about losing.

We never did anything but. Actually, I think we only did five dollar games for a while. I think they had an inner belief that losing money means losing merit. That's not the way it really works.

It's probably that kind of thinking, that direct numerical association of money and merit no matter how large or small, that is the mindset of a loser.ek, do you ever play against friends?

 

[Gza]

Don't play crap. Most hands are unplayable. Learn what a good hand is. 65s is a better hand than A8. 53s is a better hand than K9 and so on. Of

just for clarification purposes

6s 5s 713259 41.65% 991898 57.93 7147 0.42 0.419
Ac 8h 991898 57.93% 713259 41.65 7147 0.42 0.581

In terms of EV, A8 is obviously ahead in this department. Although I would'nt recommend playing either of these from early to middle position, I thought i'd clear this up for the interested.

 

[ek]

Don't play crap. Most hands are unplayable. Learn what a good hand is. 65s is a better hand than A8. 53s is a better hand than K9 and so on.

just for clarification purposes

6s 5s 713259 41.65% 991898 57.93 7147 0.42 0.419
Ac 8h 991898 57.93% 713259 41.65 7147 0.42 0.581

In terms of EV, A8 is obviously ahead in this department. Although I would'nt recommend playing either of these from early to middle position, I thought i'd clear this up for the interested.

That is an ignorant analysis. Do you see why? (Borrowing DS's favourite quote there LOL!)

And I play 65s from early position. And I won't play A8 unless I get a free play from the BB or if I am the first raiser in the CO/button.

I used to play with my friends quite a bit. Now hardly ever. The game was far too polarized with me winning every time, a couple other guys winning sometimes and everybody else almost always losing. Plus the stakes we play don't interest me anymore.

 

[Gza]

That is an ignorant analysis. Do you see why? (Borrowing DS's favourite quote there LOL!)

And I play 65s from early position. And I won't play A8 unless I get a free play from the BB or if I am the first raiser in the CO/button.

I used to play with my friends quite a bit. Now hardly ever. The game was far too polarized with me winning every time, a couple other guys winning sometimes and everybody else almost always losing. Plus the stakes we play don't interest me anymore.

I've been playing for roughly 3 years now and have paid off school and living expenses with it, so when it comes to a hand like A8o, I definitely "see why" (yes, sklansky loves using that!) it should be mucked at all costs, due to domination factors by other aces. As far as 56s being played from early position, I would assume you only pull that off in extremely passive games with 50%+ people seing a flop, and very little action preflop. In a more tight, aggresive game, even opening in early position, to in effect, set the price to see the flop before a decent player behind you has a chance to set it, is simply throwing away money. You'll be out of position, heads up, with a good player capable of taking the pot away from you, and worst of all you'll be holding a measly 6-high. But the way you describe your home game, you'll probably get away with a mistake as big as playing that hand from EP since the other players are probably unaware.

 

[Gza]

btw EK, where do you play/what stakes? we should play some heads-up sometime.

 

[ek]

I don't play my home game anymore. And when I did, I surely didn't play 65s from early position. That would be an insurmountable error, because of the extreme short stacks we played with. In short stack games, big cards rule.

65s is played profitably from early position in almost all games played at the stakes I play at, when the stacks are deep. Being out of position with a hand like 65s is not that big of a deal. It is like playing pocket pairs out of position. You either hit or you don't. Now suited connectors aren't quite as black and white as PPs, but they are still pretty much flop or drop. If I have 65s on a flop of 862 I'm not about to get attached to the hand. Part of playing these hands is the ability to play them post flop, and most of playing them post flop lies in the ability to fold the hand when you flop to it marginally. And also to figure out when your pair of sixes is good because your opponent has AK or when they are smoked because your opponent has KK.

65s is a stacker (a hand that will win an opponent's stack). Stackers can be played profitably out of position, and can profitably call reasonable raises out of position, as long as stacks are deep.

I have now played 38 online poker sites, showing profit on 35 of them. Starting out at NL5 and NL10, I have progressed through NL25 and NL50, and now regularily play NL100 and NL200. I have played some NL300 and NL500, but the amount of money at stake impedes my ability to play my game, so I don't play these games. Maybe next year.