We're splitting hairs on how we are defining "implied odds". You're defining it as the maximum we can possibly win; I'm defining it as more likely what we'll win on average if we hit our hand (the more common usage, imo, but that's irrelevant).

If you're HU against Phil Ivey / etc., your optimum play against him with virtually any hand is to fold preflop. Thinking you have IO against him with a speculative hand, even in position, regardless of his stack size, is pretty lol unless you think you're remotely in the same league as him.

And where do you get a 15x ratio as one that will satisfy setmining, or even 20x for that matter? They mean nothing in itself without considering the other factors. If it ends up HU, we need to get in 3 bets postflop to make money; unlikely to happen against all but the worst opponents, especially on a bunch of boards (A high boards vs KK, whiffed AK where we woulda folded to a cbet, etc.). What about the times we put in money postflop UI and lose (such as he slowplays a postflop street or two enticing a bluff or a one weak call)? Or the times we flop a set and lose (this is *massively* underrated since we mostly always lose our stack here; I'm currently just 3 sessions / 18 hours into my set tabling project, so lol sample size obviously, but so far 3 of 14 tabled sets = 21% have lost)? Or the times we throw in $10 and have to fold to the reraise behind us? If you're sitting at a great table where 99% your call will invite a lotta fish in behind you and you'll stack someone with lol TP every time, then I have zero problems with preflop. Is that the table you're at?

And since when did "boring" become an argument for or against winning poker?

ETA: Again, not saying the preflop call here is beyond horrible or anything. Just clarifying IO (which are mostly vastly overestimated, and the effective stacksize is only a cap to it and not remotely indicative of what they actually should be estimated at, imo).

GcluelessIOnoobG

Lol +1 Sailboats. This is just flat out a comedyshow at this point, and i dont know if i shall laugh or cry really.

wall of garbage, didn’t and won’t read



it’s highly unlikely you’ll get something like this for free.

GG, I'm not sure what else I can say at this point. Again literally every argument you're making is not about what implied odds actually means or how it's calculated. That is a specific phrase with a specific, definite meaning. If Phil Ivey has 1 million behind him and I'm calling a $10 preflop bet, then I have the opportunity to win up to 100,000x my preflop wager. That's 100,000: 1 implied odds. It's math and cannot be modified.

Everything you're talking about is what amount of implied odds we need to call a speculative hand preflop. 15:1 implied for setmining is generally accepted by the poker community, mathed out by players better than you or me.

If we're calling $10 preflop, we only need to win $85 on average the times we flop a set for that call to be correct. That's because the true odds of flopping a set are 8.5:1. But if a player has only $85 behind after his $10 preflop bet, we can't setmine profitably. This is because, as you noted, we don't always win when we flop a set, and we don't always get his full $85 when we do flop a set and have it hold up.

You're essentially arguing that someone has to have way way way way way more than $300 behind them to justify us calling $10 pre to win an average of $85 post. I do not think the numbers justify your position.

"Boring" poker is playing like 15-20% of hands

You're not willing to put money in the pot with a pocket pair when stacks are 30x the call. What are you even playing then? That's not "boring", it's nitty to super nitty

It's becoming very obvious that the reason why your WR is probably decreasing is because you are getting more and more nitty, which makes it easier to hand read you.

That's not what I'm saying at all.

I just said Phil Ivey could literally have $1M sitting in front of him and you should fold 22. What, I think it makes a difference if he has $2M in front of him?

It's actually a pretty big mistake on this forum I see all the time. Someone calls a raise to setmine against a like $300 stack or whatever and someone says "I'd rather he have $600 or $900". *If* you are very unlikely to get the $300 in (cuz your opponent is a good player or whatever), then the fact he has 2 or 3 times that doesn't make any difference (if anything, it puts you in a worse spot due to RIO).

GcluelessIOnoobG

You keep going back to 30x as if that is the only deciding factor. As I've stated above, there are simply way more factors to consider.

6 years ago this would be a *trivial* call at my table (almost always very multiway with no 3betting preflop, multiple opponents putting in huge chunks of money over multiple streets postflop when we hit, etc.). Nowadays, I doubt it's a profitable call first in to the raise in MP and I'd typically lean to a fold at most tables (although not all). Stack sizes are almost irrelevant with the lone exception being that trivially shortstacks obviously make this an obvious fold.

ETA: I'm currently 3 sessions / 18 hours into my set tabling tracking experiment. So far, I've seen 1 (ONE) tabled set which profitably setmined preflop. It is my guess that my experiment will prove that flat out setmining at my tables is unprofitable except in very rigid conditions (in position after multiple callers and with hopefully a donk or two in the mix).

GcluelessIOnoobG

Thank goodness I checked out of the WR thread so I don't have to read nonsense.

Oh, wait...

You're using that example to argue your position that you should fold 22 for $10 pre with $300 effective stacks. Regardless of whether you think it's what you're saying, your position is that the chance to win $300 (mind you, it's not like we have to get his whole stack every time we hit to justify the call - we have to win $85 on average) if we hit a set and stack the villain is not enough to justify the risk of calling $10 pre to play set-or-fold the flop.

And that, no matter how you try to spin it, is saying that 30:1 implied odds is not enough to setmine.

I keep repeating myself, but you are confusing maximum implied odds with expected implied odds (or whatever terms you feel like using).

In fact, using your reasoning, we actually don't have 30:1 implied odds. Assuming 5 people still to act behind us with $300 stacks, are you saying our implied odds are 6 * $300 = $1800 = 180:1? They're not.

GcluelessIOnoobG

There is no such thing as "expected implied odds." Using a IO figure such as 15:1 to setmine profitably already takes into account the expectation that we will not always win V's entire stack when we hit. If it didn't, we'd only really need about 12:1 to setmine, to account for the % of times our flopped set doesn't win by the river.

I googled implied odds definition and got this: the amount of money expected to be in the pot by the end of the round/hand.

If you expect your opponents whole stack to be in the pot at the end when you are calling pre, you play in some sick games.

GG is right. You have to consider your opponents likelihood of a stackoff when considering calling pre, not just what their stack is. If you are playing against good opponents that will sniff out your set and fold when u hit, u cannot set mine profitably.

I will say a nit who raises UTG has a range tilted to AA/KK and may pay you off, so calling is ok. But defending your bb against a solid button open with 22 is probably a bad idea.

Good Lord. So if Google says it, it must be so?

Of course we must consider the likelihood of the stackoff. But that's EXACTLY why we raise the amount of implied odds necessary beyond that of just hitting our set and having it hold.

If we didn't take into account the possibility of losing by showdown, we would only need 8.5:1 implied to setmine (true odds of flopping a set).

If we didn't take into account the times we hit and win but don't stack the opponent, we would only need the true odds of flopping a set multiplied by the % of time that set loses at showdown (this equates to about 12:1).

But we DO take into account that we won't always stack V when we flop a set and win. The downside of that risk is weighed against the POSSIBILITY of winning the whole stack a percentage of the time. So the stack size DOES matter, because the CHANCE at winning $300 instead of capping at $130 means we can accept much much much more risk of not winning the whole stack. This is why the generally accepted figure is around 15:1.

This all goes into the bottom line, which is if on average we win $85 every time we pay $10 to setmine, we've made a profitable set mine. Stack sizes, propensity of V to stack off, chance of losing--all that gets wrapped into the bow of how much we win on AVERAGE when we hit. The bigger the stack size, the less often we need to stack V to hit that average.

Ok cool. You get the concept. Im not sure where this "generally accepted" figure came from, but its not terrible. But if you are deciding whether or not to call, if you are only using a 15:1 call vs stack ratio, you are likely making some mistakes

Other factors to consider are skills of the V, range strength, and position. If you are out of position vs a good opponent who plays a wide range, you are never making your $85 back often enough on a 10 dollar call to play, regardless of depth.

But a nit who I know has a big pair and is never folding postflop? I only need 10:1 to call him.

Unless I'm quoting out important information, this is clearly not true. I mean, we don't just get handed 8.5x or 12x our initial bet when we flop a set and don't get beat. We're being handed 8.5x our initial bet against KK on a A2x high flop / etc.?

Also, increasing stack sizes quickly have no relevance if against a solid player (against a moron, ok, whatever, his whole stack may be in play). For example, let's say we're up against a solid raiser here who has AA with his $300 stack, we setmine with our 22 for $10, we end up HU in position. Board runs out 9825Kr. A solid player could easily check/call this flop (would be my default, course I suck, obviously), so you're betting, what, $15 into $20? Pot is now $50 on the turn, Villain could easily check/call, what, $35? Now comes the river. Maybe a solid player puts out a bet/fold of $65 into $120, or maybe he check/calls your $80, heck maybe he even manages a fold (but we'll ignore those times for now because they are irrelevant to this point) for an average loss on the river of about $75 (or whatever). Anyhoo, worst case scenario for him (non scary runout and his overpair remains an UI overpair) is he likely loses $125 (or whatever) of his remaining $290 stack postflop. So what difference would it have made had he been sitting on $600? Or $1200? Or $1Million? None at all.

GcluelessIOnoobG

Lol low stress thread.

I'd explain this ****, but what would be the point, with mr. No Logic in the house?

Would've wagered on Thread Crusher as best bet to reduce the LLSNL forum to rubble. Lol me. Clearly the puckhead from Saskatoon Sasquatchian is gonna do the job in short order. wp gg GG

In terms of pure setmining (i.e. not thinking of stealing the pot otherwise postflop), this is also way too thin given how often KK will fold A high flops / QQ will fold A/K flops / etc. (ETA: ok, I realize you stated *never* folding postflop but obviously this is not realistic on these boards), AK will whiff, plus how often he will overset you (keeping in mind that his overpair on the flop will overset you ~8% of the time by the river), plus the times he sets-over-sets you on the flop, plus the time he runner/runners a straight/flush.

GcluelessIOnoobG

Maybe you'd like to chime in with some logical / constructive comments of your own?

Like, seriously, show me where I'm wrong.

Gyou'renotcontributinganything,imoG

How have GG and Koss been members of this forum for like a combined 25 years and never heard of the 15:1 set mining concept?

It was popularize by Bart Hanson, I believe, like a decade ago. I'm not gonna assume everyone knows who that is because honestly who ****ing cares, but I continually read HH threads where it comes up. How you both missed it with 4K posts and 25k posts, I have no idea...

My responses in red.

Thanks for your contributions to the discussion.

It's actually quite astonishing how this forum has degraded.

I mean, honestly, this is basic poker 101 don't-pass-go stuff. I simply try to maybe help out a guy who doesn't have as good as grasp on it as he should, and this is your response? Is it helpful in any way?

Lame.

GlameG

Jfc, no.

You're completely ignoring math. Do you know how often an overcard will flop when someone has KK? QQ?

You need to take that into account when you're making these ridiculous statements.

Here's our read on Villain. "Solid on the nitty side".

If you think that means he blowing off $300 / $600 or whatever stacks thanks to a $10 preflop raise in a $20 HU pot, I don't know what to tell you (not in regards to how much we're going to win on average against him, but with regards to how effective stacks make no difference beyond a particular point).

GcluelessIOnoobG

Is this really in response to the statement that 10:1 IO are sufficient when knowing we are going against a likely a big range from a nitty opponent?

It's not remotely close. Heck, *rake* alone in most HU pots makes this clearly too thin, let alone every other point I made above.

Gisthewholeforumtrollingme?G