I'll see your drugs, and call your hookers.
No, I'm just bluffing! The pot is yours . . . (but I'll check your auntie)
Poker and the Beginning Trader
- Thread starter FanOfFridays
- Start date
No, I'm just bluffing! The pot is yours . . . (but I'll check your auntie)
Hi PuffyGums
Just saw this post - is there software available which can do this? Wouldn't it be difficult to enter all the info about who is in, who is out, who raised, who folded, etc., all in real time?
I feel that internalizing the rules will be more useful than having a program make these decisions for you. I was talking to a semi-pro yesterday, found him through a friend of a friend, and he was willing to spend 1/2 hour on the phone with me... fascinating stories about winning and losing big all over the world. Anyway, he confirms that it's all about personalities and psychology at the higher levels of the game. He also said that if you are interested in the Sklansky books, you should skip his basic Hold-Em book and go straight to
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...102-0631563-8336931?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
He feels that the practical material in the basic book is now available for free on the net, and the theoretical stuff is available in the later book. He also likes Mike Caro's books because of their focus on psychological aspects of Hold-Em. Just his opinion, FWIW.
Interestingly, he basically echoed easyrider's comments - he said that
a) it's all about discipline and he sees even good to very good players lose it occasionally.
b) there are times when he just gets on a huge roll - he does press his advantage but in poker this is more about the psychological control you can establish at the table during a particular session and in the room over a number of days. Other times he gets really cold and guess what? He REDUCES HIS POSITION SIZE!
Yup, he goes to the lower limit tables and if he is still losing he goes to an even lower limit table. He also said that he has had losing streaks that have lasted for months. This is a pro with a track record of winning!
I think we all have those doubts about the legitimacy of these online games. If we can get past those fears, it would make it easier for us to simply discuss the game itself.
I think that NETeller is probably a good way to go. Most of the sites seem to use it, and it helps us to keep from giving more information (like our credit cards) to those sites than we want to give them.
NETeller should also make it easier to move money from one site to another for those of us who start looking at several casinos.
Well, last night I sat in a play money game, and I got 3 good hands in a row, which I won with my usual aggressive raising. Came in with $1,000. But I found I was making less than $200 each of those three winning hands. Which is less than I would expect. I realized I was sitting in among a group of pretty good players. I'm sure it's going to be a lot harder in the real money tables than it has been in the play money tables.
I'm going to have to be much more strict about how I play.
Here's some things I'm working out:
There's a total of 1,376 combinations of two cards you can be dealt. One fourth of those combinations (344) are the ones where both cards are the same suit.
Also, the thing that's always true is that when two hands of equal value are presented, the one with the higher top card wins. Straights, flushes, pairs, full house, and sometimes even just plain "high card" when no-one actually has anything.
So although you know there are plenty of times when you can win because you had the 2 and the 3 to add to 4,,5,6, or even just by having a pair of two's, the fact is you're more often going to get burned by someone who had a series with high card above yours. So my thinking right now, is that in real money games I do not want to play a hand with anything lower than a 7 in it. I might bend that if the other card is an Ace. But generally I just want to insist that I fold anything 6 or below. That means of the 1,376 possible combinations of two cards, I am going to fold 800 pairs. Of the remaining 576 pairs, 144 are same-suit pairs.
If you have two cards that are the same suit and no more than 3 cards between them, they can end up making a flush or a straight. If I get two cards like that, I just go right in Raising as soon as I get them. If the first 3 flop cards don't include that same suit, then there's no chance for a flush in that round, but those two cards might still make a straight. If I don't use any card below a 7, then any straight I might get with them will have at least Jack as high card. I'm tired of getting a 45678 straight, just to be beaten by someone who had a 9. They'll have to have a Queen, King, or Ace to beat my straights now.
That's the foundation of my playing. If you want to watch me on the play money tables, I'm on www.pokerroom.com, my name there is Naughty&Nice.
I think that NETeller is probably a good way to go. Most of the sites seem to use it, and it helps us to keep from giving more information (like our credit cards) to those sites than we want to give them.
NETeller should also make it easier to move money from one site to another for those of us who start looking at several casinos.
Well, last night I sat in a play money game, and I got 3 good hands in a row, which I won with my usual aggressive raising. Came in with $1,000. But I found I was making less than $200 each of those three winning hands. Which is less than I would expect. I realized I was sitting in among a group of pretty good players. I'm sure it's going to be a lot harder in the real money tables than it has been in the play money tables.
I'm going to have to be much more strict about how I play.
Here's some things I'm working out:
There's a total of 1,376 combinations of two cards you can be dealt. One fourth of those combinations (344) are the ones where both cards are the same suit.
Also, the thing that's always true is that when two hands of equal value are presented, the one with the higher top card wins. Straights, flushes, pairs, full house, and sometimes even just plain "high card" when no-one actually has anything.
So although you know there are plenty of times when you can win because you had the 2 and the 3 to add to 4,,5,6, or even just by having a pair of two's, the fact is you're more often going to get burned by someone who had a series with high card above yours. So my thinking right now, is that in real money games I do not want to play a hand with anything lower than a 7 in it. I might bend that if the other card is an Ace. But generally I just want to insist that I fold anything 6 or below. That means of the 1,376 possible combinations of two cards, I am going to fold 800 pairs. Of the remaining 576 pairs, 144 are same-suit pairs.
If you have two cards that are the same suit and no more than 3 cards between them, they can end up making a flush or a straight. If I get two cards like that, I just go right in Raising as soon as I get them. If the first 3 flop cards don't include that same suit, then there's no chance for a flush in that round, but those two cards might still make a straight. If I don't use any card below a 7, then any straight I might get with them will have at least Jack as high card. I'm tired of getting a 45678 straight, just to be beaten by someone who had a 9. They'll have to have a Queen, King, or Ace to beat my straights now.
That's the foundation of my playing. If you want to watch me on the play money tables, I'm on www.pokerroom.com, my name there is Naughty&Nice.
When I was in that table last night where the players were pretty good, I noticed that the play was a bit slower. The table statistics said there was about 30 hands per hour average. I think the tougher tables are going to be a bit slower. Part of my strategy will have to be to look for rooms that have more hands per hour average. Which is a good idea anyhow, a faster table means less impatient frustration during the hands you have to sit out. And more hands dealt per hour will give you more playable hands per hour.
I'm also working on strategy of how long I should sit at any one table before moving on to another. I think unless you're a master your edge will wear off after being at the same table for a while. I think 30 minutes or 30 hands (whichever comes first) would probably be a good maximum for each sitting.
I think if I win 3 in a row I should take that as my cue to leave that table.
I went to another online casino today, that had sent me a spam offering $10 real money to play with. It's a video-poker and slot machine type site, you're just playing against the computer.
Well it's looking to me like Roulette and Baccarat are games worth looking into. pokerroom.com also has Baccarat, although there's very few people playing it. Baccarat seems much more like trading strategies to me. Baccarat and Roulette both allow you to create your own hedging formulas, and I think those games could be ones where you could create a statistical edge that might bring consistent profits (presuming again, of course, that these games are on the level and not rigged).
It's starting to look to me like Roulette and Baccarat are where I will focus most of my gambling efforts. The psychological aspects and concerns about having to compete against more skilled players doesn't exist the way it does in the poker. It's pure mathematical strategy. And in addition, I don't even have to worry about feeling guilty about taking other people's money. It's just me against the casino. The only concern in these games is whether the game itself can be trusted to be fair and not rigged. I'm pretty sure they are. But it will take a while to be completely convinced. Maybe once I get some cash payouts I'll feel more trusting.
I'm also working on strategy of how long I should sit at any one table before moving on to another. I think unless you're a master your edge will wear off after being at the same table for a while. I think 30 minutes or 30 hands (whichever comes first) would probably be a good maximum for each sitting.
I think if I win 3 in a row I should take that as my cue to leave that table.
I went to another online casino today, that had sent me a spam offering $10 real money to play with. It's a video-poker and slot machine type site, you're just playing against the computer.
Well it's looking to me like Roulette and Baccarat are games worth looking into. pokerroom.com also has Baccarat, although there's very few people playing it. Baccarat seems much more like trading strategies to me. Baccarat and Roulette both allow you to create your own hedging formulas, and I think those games could be ones where you could create a statistical edge that might bring consistent profits (presuming again, of course, that these games are on the level and not rigged).
It's starting to look to me like Roulette and Baccarat are where I will focus most of my gambling efforts. The psychological aspects and concerns about having to compete against more skilled players doesn't exist the way it does in the poker. It's pure mathematical strategy. And in addition, I don't even have to worry about feeling guilty about taking other people's money. It's just me against the casino. The only concern in these games is whether the game itself can be trusted to be fair and not rigged. I'm pretty sure they are. But it will take a while to be completely convinced. Maybe once I get some cash payouts I'll feel more trusting.
The whole thing has been a pleasant surprise to me. I put a couple of hundred bucks in the room through Neteller so that is all I am risking. Everything seems to run pretty smoothly. No smoke. No noise. Find a game 24/7. After three days Im ahead so if theyre cheating theyre mucking up. By the way there are some Holdem simulators out there that work pretty good. The one I was using you didnt have to play the hands out that you dont call so you can move pretty fast and get a pretty good idea of what works. If you cant beat that simulator, you need to do some more study.
"If you have two cards that are the same suit and no more than 3 cards between them, they can end up making a flush or a straight. If I get two cards like that, I just go right in Raising as soon as I get them"
"I'm also working on strategy of how long I should sit at any one table before moving on to another. I think unless you're a master your edge will wear off after being at the same table for a while. I think 30 minutes or 30 hands (whichever comes first) would probably be a good maximum for each sitting. I think if I win 3 in a row I should take that as my cue to leave that table."
"Roulette allow(s) you to create your own hedging formulas...could be (a game) where you could create a statictical edge that might bring consistent profits"
"On pokerroom.com the game is the same in the real money tables and the play money tables. So there's your simulator"
hello hii_a_ooiioo _a
I don't want to discourage you from trying out these ideas, I just want to point out that they are not quite in line with standard theory. This is not to say that you can't make money implementing these ideas, maybe you can. I would encourage others who are reading this to do your own research.
Re: Roulette - I believe that the house holds the statistical edge in this game as a result of the inclusion of the 'double 0' space, since the payout for hitting any number is 36 times the bet, but the possible number of outomes is 37... probability theorists please correct me if this is wrong.
"And more hands dealt per hour will give you more playable hands per hour."
This seems reasonable
easyrider - thanks, I'll do a search for that simulator.
"I'm also working on strategy of how long I should sit at any one table before moving on to another. I think unless you're a master your edge will wear off after being at the same table for a while. I think 30 minutes or 30 hands (whichever comes first) would probably be a good maximum for each sitting. I think if I win 3 in a row I should take that as my cue to leave that table."
"Roulette allow(s) you to create your own hedging formulas...could be (a game) where you could create a statictical edge that might bring consistent profits"
"On pokerroom.com the game is the same in the real money tables and the play money tables. So there's your simulator"
hello hii_a_ooiioo _a
I don't want to discourage you from trying out these ideas, I just want to point out that they are not quite in line with standard theory. This is not to say that you can't make money implementing these ideas, maybe you can. I would encourage others who are reading this to do your own research.
Re: Roulette - I believe that the house holds the statistical edge in this game as a result of the inclusion of the 'double 0' space, since the payout for hitting any number is 36 times the bet, but the possible number of outomes is 37... probability theorists please correct me if this is wrong.
"And more hands dealt per hour will give you more playable hands per hour."
This seems reasonable
easyrider - thanks, I'll do a search for that simulator.