http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/17...cement-355397/

1) 90 minutes is like 40 hands in these games. Tops. That's not enough time to be card dead.

2) I won't go as far as to say don't raise QTo in a loose passive game with 4 limpers in front, but caution is advisable.

3) not at all. Flop the nuts and don't stop betting and raising until you've a good reason to stop betting and raising.

90 minutes in a no-fold'em game, so basically you haven't had a playable hand/situation for 30 hands? If that tilts you, then you have issues. You're looking at the game wrong and don't understand luck, if this is the case. You could be card dead for like 4 hours. In 90 minutes, like 1 or 2 hands that you'd have normally played had a raise happen in front. This caused you to correctly fold. This should make you happy, as when you get a good hand, you'll be paid handsomely... wait, just about now.
I say entitlement tilt.
I say you've been running super hot, for about 2 hours.
That's not even possible. It is like talking about a 20BB downswing.
You've hit two pair and a boat in 3 hours, and you have won two big pots. Hotter than the sun, you run.
Is there some amount of important that is less important than not important at all? You said they don't fold. That means, they're calling. When you have a big hand and they don't fold, that's good. What are you going to do for image, play a hand differently than you know you should for them to not even notice? They're still calling.
This is bad.

jdr posted while I was typing. Like what he said, as well.

Bonus points if you actually said "finally!" out loud.

Thoughts on raising the button with QT?

Aren't AT and KQ out there among the limpers as often as Q9o and Q7s?

If they're terrible and limping tons of stuff, we dominate more than we're dominated. We have position. Tight limpers, what you're saying could be true. Loose ones, it can't be terrible. If he's only raising because he's tilted due to "poor run of cards", then it is a problem.

I remember the days when after 90 minutes I finally get Q-10 otb and it looks like a 10lb gold nugget. Still would only limp but getting excited and raising can't be terribly horrible.

And what you do in nofoldemholdem w/ a big hand is bet as many chips as you can.

I did. The whole session was an intentional experiment. I purposefully tried to make it as obvious as possible when I had a big hand and see if anybody noticed or cared.

If you announced "Finally!" with QT, what did you do when you got big hand? Maybe some tableside dabbing?

My sarcasm detector is wailing and blaring....

What were the results of your experiment?

If the results were that the other players gave a damn about the strength of his hand at 4-8 he's in the running for the Nobel.

Does this not answer your question? Not trying to be a smartass, just wondering if maybe you missed this particular post:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...6&postcount=25

A. Good lord, they were limping everything and their coldcalling standards weren't much better. I saw an overpair lose to Q6o that coldcalled pre, flopped trips and slowplayed to the river.

B. Honestly I think QTo is the absolute worst hand I would raise on the button in that situation at that type of table. I can't quantitatively explain why I'd do it with QTo but not JTo or Q9o or J9o for example (QJo, QTs and JTs are EASY raises there). All I can say is I feel like it has just enough high-card strength and benefits just enough from the possibility of seeing a four-card flop to warrant a raise. At a passive table like this one the cost of making a second-best hand is somewhat reduced.

C. I was kind of expecting that since I'd been making such a big deal of folding and verbally saying FINALLY when I raised that they'd put me on aces, kings, queens or ace-king, a range that NAILED that board. I wonder what the SB had that didn't beat my two pair - he sure wasn't afraid to bet into 6 people!

IDK what's surprising you, tbh. I think the answer to w/e your question is is 'it's 4-8.' I mean, what do you expect? My uncle visits once/yr and I take him to play a couple of hours of 3-6. I tell him 'big cards, just play big cards' which obv hits his brain as '10-6 sooted? I call!' Look: They don't care that you haven't played a hand in 90 minutes, they don't care that you raised, they don't care that they are betting into 6 people, they don't care that maybe somebody read a poker book, they don't care about anything (or hardly care) about any strategy stuff and blah, blah, blah.

At 4-8 you're looking to get paid off on your strong hands. Straight ABC play is the way to go, nothing fancy and maybe you can bluff twice a year.

For what it's worth I think people took my post a little too seriously. It was meant to support BBB's PSA post (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/17...cement-355397/).

There are STILL people who are afraid that if they raise their monster everyone will fold, or that if they wait around for big hands it will be obvious to everyone at the table that that's what they're doing. I'm certainly guilty of having felt that way in the past. In that session I went out of my way to give off tells to "test that theory" (knowing the theory would hold) just for the fun of it, and the theory was proven.

I can't count the number of times that I've seen AA limp bec 'I didn't want to lose my customers' and then get upset when they lose. The toughest thing to beat at 4-8 is the rake, not the other players. Just bet the big hands.

This is good string of words.

I'm sure there are people who post here who can actually answer this... if you're playing $5 blackjack, doing some kind of poor counting (or just raising bets on hot streaks), and goofing around, how much can you lose per hour? Not your actual loss rate, but have to split a couple hands or double down a few times -- what kind of swings does a $5-to-whatever BJ player see? I'm guessing it is a few hundred. What does someone who has a feeling from time to time in blackjack, increases his bet when he wins 2 in a row or some-such, and doesn't play perfect basic strategy lose hourly? How about an actual bad LAG BJ player?

So let's take someone who is recreational gambling and sit them in a 4/8 game. He plays too many hands, because of fun. If he's not hopeless post-flop he's losing what, $20-$30 an hour long term? Sure he has $200-$300 "downers" from time to time, but his long term loss rate is basically in the 2-3BB/HR range. Is he better or worse than a meh BJ player? I'm assuming poker is a cheaper game.

Don't know the other game well enough, but I'm guessing a poker table is a cheap way to get free drinks in the casino and kill some time with gambly fun.

If a player is playing too many hands preflop (let's say, 45%), almost never folding on the flop (not a bad approximation), only folding the turn if they have no hand and no draw and only folding the river if they fail to make a pair or catch their draw I think they're losing a lot more than $30 an hour. They're losing $15 to $20 an hour to the rake alone.

It depends on how many OTHER players at the table are doing the same thing. So let's say out of 30 hands in a given hour they play 14, call the flop with 12, call the turn with 6, call the river with 4 and win 2 pots. That's not a horrible approximation IMHO. The player has put, what, $184 in the pot in the 12 hands he played and lost? So to "only" be losing $30 an hour the two pots he wins have to total $154 AFTER THE RAKE. That's awfully optomistic even in a no-fold-'em game IMHO.

Current status: Malt liquor. Label out.

Your premise was different than mine. You came up with a different number, based on that different premise.

If there's 9 people playing the same way, and 1 guy playing better, then all 9 will lose the same.

If 9 people are losing $30/hour in a game where ~ $130 an hour is leaving the table, then sign me up for this game. .

The BJ question is interesting. I looked at the Wizard of Odds Blackjack calculator and entered the rules at Talking Stick. If we assume 100 hands/hr (I'm assuming a full table) and the player sticks to $5/bet the player should lose $30/hr over time. Players can run hot at either game but I think that the player would do a lot better running hot at 4-8 HE which is based on observation, not math. The bad players can win huge at HE but can't win huge playing $5 BJ.

There are a lot of caveats here when it comes to the HE part mainly that the bad player isn't insane, has some sense of what's going on and some self control.

What I found particularly interesting is that the switch to hitting soft 17 has increased the house edge by .15% which was about what my gut told me it was.

Best National Championship game that I've seen! Just Wow!