Micro Stakes Holdem

Definition :

Suited connectors (or sc) are cards of the same suite and connected. Example : 78 Read the rest of this entry »

Table of Contents.

1. What’s a valuebet? And what isn’t?
2. What’s a bluff? And what isn’t?
3. What is “showdown value”? And how can I tell I have any?
4. Piecing the puzzle together.
5. General rules at the microstakes.
Read the rest of this entry »

Below is an essay I’ve written for my Carpal Tunnel post. It’s long (> 2500 words for a 2500th post, I guess). I’m posting it in MTT, where I spent most of my time since joining 2p2, and in MSNL, where I have spent more time lately.

Introduction

Recently I have put some thought into strategies for studying poker, in particular NLHE. It is frequently said that there are too many variables involved in the play of a hand for anything resembling a formulaic, component-by-component analysis to be practical. I agree with this, and agree that in even the simplest cases (short-stack push/fold calculations, for example), there is a significant margin for error in the final result which is due to necessarily imprecise assumptions about an opponent’s ranges.

So even if a poker hand is one giant math problem, complete with game theoretic opponents who do a, b, and c x%, y%, and z% of the time, it’s an unsolvable problem. That said, I think a lot can be learned from thinking about poker hands in terms of their component variables, from thinking about the structure of that giant math problem and how it could be solved if it were solvable. This essay is my attempt to categorize and analyze those components. I call it a framework for poker study, because I think that one good approach to getting better is to spend time away from the table focused on these component variables one at a time, in order to be better prepared to think through all of the relevant information when faced with decisions at the table.

Core Ideas

There are three core ideas with which I assume everyone is familiar – the concepts of pot equity and Expected Value (EV), Sklansky’s Fundamental Theorem of Poker, and what I will call “hand range calculus.”

Pot equity and EV are functions of basic probability and govern every action in a poker game. Your hand has some % chance of winning the pot, the pot contains some amount of money, so you have a claim of some part of the pot. Every bet you make is an investment; you should bet when your expected return from the bet is larger than the cost of the bet. The FTOP formalizes how to maximize your return in the special case of complete information; every time you make a bet that maximizes expectation versus your opponent’s actual hand, you win, every time your opponent fails to maximize his expectation given your actual hand, you win. “Hand range calculus”, which is the form most analyses take on these forums, acknowledges that poker is actually a game of incomplete information, and attempts to define best actions in terms of maximizing expectation versus the range of possible hands your opponent could have, in light of the range of hands it is likely he thinks you have.

Because in every case, both you and your opponent have a specific hand, the FTOP is still the final theoretical measure of what is profitable or unprofitable action. In practice, however, we work with incomplete information; thus poker skill is a combination of the ability to make best decisions within the context of “hand range calculus” and the ability to read your opponents’ ranges better than they read yours. Read the rest of this entry »

Unlike blind stealing, you don’t HAVE to do this to play optimal poker. I know that a lot of good players/respected posters do this already and some don’t like it at all.

OK, what you have to realise is quite how +EV blind stealing is. Check you BB/100 when blind stealing in PT. I’m sure that for most of you it’s bigger than 60 PTBB/100, now that a hell of a lot of $$$$!!!! The reason for this is in a way, NLTH is a badly structured game in the way that when you play without antes, the blinds are at such a disadvantage, they have to post their blind without even seeing their hand. Now considering that a good TAG player will normally only play about 20% of their hands, this means that on the BB , they’re losing 4BB every 5 hands, that they normally wouldn’t put in.

Read the rest of this entry »

I’m just trying to grow beyond basic TAG strategy and need a little help.

Not to be discouraging, but what you suggest isn’t beyond basic TAG strategy; it’s part of basic TAG strategy. As Ed Miller brilliantly put it in his recent 2+2 magazine article:

Total all the dollars you’ve ever bet playing poker. The large majority of those dollars should have been bet from late position. Only a small percentage of your total handle should have been bet from up front.

To implement this idea, you should be:

1. Playing more hands from LP.
2. Raising more hands from LP.

Read the rest of this entry »

By NewUser2006:

In the SSNL FAQ, Skeme has a section that recommends raising 3-4BBs + 1 per limper in order to "protect your hand" and some other mumbo jumbo.

It seems to me that raise size only works optimally when there are a ton of limpers already in the pot, or you have a hand that it is hard to get stacked with.

For other hands, like AK,AA,KK,and QQ, it seems to me like opening for 4BBs is a HORRIBLE opening size. Not only does it not get _much_ value out of the hands that call, but it also chases out hands that you WANT in the pot with you (other aces or hands like K8o) and encourages hands like 55 or 76s to try to stack you.

Read the rest of this entry »

This is a how-to post, but it doesn’t belong in the software forum; it’s to teach people how they can use the Poker Tracker data to find flaws in their game.

Not a week goes by that someone doesn’t ask if they are playing the game right. In that post, they include a dozen numbers from Poker Tracker and hope that the old-timers on SSNL can fix all their holes. While it’s true that Poker Tracker can help find problems, this is not the way to approach it.

I’m going to try to give you a rough guide for the things you can do to check on your game. These are all just my opinion; they’re all subject to interpretation, and other people may disagree with me strongly. The best way to play is usually player-specific, but these strike me as some things you can check on that are frequent flaws in the small-stakes player’s game.

Read the rest of this entry »

There are only a half-dozen reasons why we bet:

Value - Villain will call with worse hands.
Protection - To make it incorrect for villain to chase draws.
Bluff - Villain will fold hands that beat us.
Semi-Bluff - Our hand has equity, however we’d be happy just to win the pot now.
Information - Villain’s reaction tells us where we are.
Deception - Merge your range, yo. Shania loves you.

VPBSID - Say it with me, VPBSID. Rolls right off the tongue, doesn’t it? Now that you have an easy, memorable acronym, you’ll never forget!

The post will deal primarily with betting for value. This is a key component of play in the micros. Being effective with your value bets is incredibly important against loose passive players (calling stations). The kinds of players that are very common in micro stakes. Read the rest of this entry »

Here’s a list of common terms and abbreviations used in the NL forums. Read the rest of this entry »

Chomp asked me to post about counting combos, so I have some time now.

For some (or most, I don’t know) this post might be obvious and second nature. But maybe for a few it will be helpful. While reading this, keep in mind that I have an IQ of about 20 or 30 in the mornings and that I’m not a coach or anything, so if there are errors, please tear into me all you want. I like to learn. Read the rest of this entry »