| Author |
Message |
SClipse Pair
Joined: 08 Apr 2007 Posts: 25 Location: Toronto
|
Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 3:37 pm Post subject: Running bad, or playing too tight |
|
|
| I was playing in a 1.25 SNG. I was opening with 3 card eights or better ( as in lower) and I got 3 card 8's 5/64 times. I'm wondering whether I'm playing too tight, or that just wasn't my day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
live4freerolls Message Board Junkie
Joined: 23 Nov 2006 Posts: 2179 Location: Running good.
|
Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 3:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sounds like it is probably standard but post some Hand Histories and we can help you out more. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
aMurderofCrows Pair
Joined: 10 Jun 2007 Posts: 28
|
Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:38 pm Post subject: Re: Running bad, or playing too tight |
|
|
| SClipse wrote: |
| I was playing in a 1.25 SNG. I was opening with 3 card eights or better ( as in lower) and I got 3 card 8's 5/64 times. I'm wondering whether I'm playing too tight, or that just wasn't my day. |
The probability of being dealt a three-card 8 is 16.22%. You should have had six, you were right in the ballpark. Opening tight works well in cash games they tell me, but in tourny's, even SnG's, ya gotta gamble a little, try to steal and such.
Hey, it's a buck - experiment! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Flying_Kiwi Message Board Junkie
Joined: 03 Sep 2006 Posts: 5578 Location: Popping bubbles
|
Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's a good idea to stick to the 3-card eights when there are people to act after you (esp showing lower cards), but say you're 2 seats right from the bring-in and there is only one person on your left showing a card higher than your door card - then complete no matter what you have in the hole.
It's good to be tight on the 8 or lower starting selection, but when you get into spots where you can steal - take it! I think a lot of people play razz like it's a bluffless game - which is completely untrue. I probably bluff more in Razz than any other game... when my upcards permit it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
spike420211 Royal Flush
Joined: 25 Apr 2007 Posts: 822 Location: check ur car trunk... it's dark in here, i know that
|
Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 11:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Flying_Kiwi wrote: |
It's a good idea to stick to the 3-card eights when there are people to act after you (esp showing lower cards), but say you're 2 seats right from the bring-in and there is only one person on your left showing a card higher than your door card - then complete no matter what you have in the hole.
uh, kiwi, just to clarify... is this when everyone folds 2 u?
It's good to be tight on the 8 or lower starting selection, but when you get into spots where you can steal - take it! I think a lot of people play razz like it's a bluffless game - which is completely untrue. I probably bluff more in Razz than any other game... when my upcards permit it. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Flying_Kiwi Message Board Junkie
Joined: 03 Sep 2006 Posts: 5578 Location: Popping bubbles
|
Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 11:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="spike420211"]
| Flying_Kiwi wrote: |
It's a good idea to stick to the 3-card eights when there are people to act after you (esp showing lower cards), but say you're 2 seats right from the bring-in and there is only one person on your left showing a card higher than your door card - then complete no matter what you have in the hole.
uh, kiwi, just to clarify... is this when everyone folds 2 u?
|
Yes |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jbrennen Straight Flush
Joined: 16 Aug 2005 Posts: 422
|
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 6:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If you're card dead, you can do two things. Try both, see which you're comfortable with...
1. Try playing smooth 9s where the 9 is hidden, but only if you think it's reasonable that you'll end up going to 4th street heads up -- if you can be first into the pot, or if you can call someone who looks like they're going to take the pot unopposed on 3rd street. In heads up Razz, a three card 9 is certainly playable.
2. Open up your position requirements for trying to steal. Instead of stealing only in late position, try stealing in middle or early position. If you're first to act with (Q-J)-A, you could try completing. Your opponents may sometimes respect the completion a bit more from early position and fold marginal hands. The fact that you've been card dead will only help you, because you should have a tight image at this point. Generally, depending on the bet structure, the steal only needs to work about 1/3 of the time to make it worthwhile.
Both of these tips depend on the table playing a bit tight. If you're at a table where you have 4 people seeing 4th street on just about every hand, just sit back and wait for a premium hand and ram it down their throats. You'll get paid off huge and have enough time (and antes) to wait for another premium hand. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
aMurderofCrows Pair
Joined: 10 Jun 2007 Posts: 28
|
Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lotta great advice here - this thread oughta be pinned! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
SClipse Pair
Joined: 08 Apr 2007 Posts: 25 Location: Toronto
|
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Are you sure it's 16.22% times that you get a 3 card eight? Because I read somewhere else, that it's like around the 13% that you would get a 3 card eight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jbrennen Straight Flush
Joined: 16 Aug 2005 Posts: 422
|
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 10:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's 16.22%. Pretty basic calculation:
For your first card, there are 32 cards out of 52 that can lead to a 3 card 8 or better.
Second card, 28 cards out of 51.
Third card, 24 cards out of 50.
(32*28*24)/(52*51*50) = 896/5525 = 16.22% |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Frankjones Two Pair
Joined: 10 Jun 2007 Posts: 67
|
Posted: Wed Aug 08, 2007 10:01 am Post subject: bad math |
|
|
someone said that the OP should have had 6 out of 64 so he is right on the money (or close to it) by getting 5/64.
I don't know why no one pointed this out, but 16.22% of 64 is Ten, not 6. so 5 is actually half as many as he should have, on average.
I did verify the math on the 16.22% and that is correct. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
aMurderofCrows Pair
Joined: 10 Jun 2007 Posts: 28
|
Posted: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:14 pm Post subject: Re: bad math |
|
|
| Frankjones wrote: |
someone said that the OP should have had 6 out of 64 so he is right on the money (or close to it) by getting 5/64.
I don't know why no one pointed this out, but 16.22% of 64 is Ten, not 6. ... |
Absolutely right, my bad - I redid it and got 10.3808.
Sorry OP. But to see that in play you have to have large numbers of hands. I once entered a cash game and got 7 or better like 9 times in 12 deals. It was very sick. Then sometimes, I don't see it at all for over twenty - or once and it loses.
That's poker, as I have heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|