Is there a way that I can be allerted when someone post in a strat thread that I start? I seem to lose them in the mix.
Thank You

72winner-


Are you saying villian has AA?

AA against KK is 82%/18%

i'm not sure where your getting your 8-9% from?


What i do is put people on ranges or hands they will show up with. So if i feel like a flush will beat them or a higher two pair then i can draw to improve knowing ill have the best hand. Im sorry if i misunderstood the question.

in that book he's referring to making trips on the flop (no good to turn or river it if you'll be folded out of the pot by a big bet). add together the probabilities you mentioned for each card on the flop (can hit our set on the first, second or third card of the flop, doesn't make a difference, so use the adding rule for probabilities)
((1/24) + (1/23.5) + (1/23)) = 1/7.8, which is about 1 in 8, or 7:1

when villain/we can improve to be ahead again even we/villain overtake/s, it's referred to as a having a redraw. you're quite right that with only 2 outs to win, as in your example KK vs AA on the flop with no straight/flush outs (you implied this by quoting the 8-9%), our chance of winning isn't equal to the probability of hitting a K (2/45 + 2/44 = 8.99%), our chance of winning will be slightly less than that as an A can still hit the river.

Our chance of winning is equal to the probability of a king coming and an ace not coming, in either order of turn and river ((2/45*42/44)+(43/45*2/44)= 8.59%). When counting their outs and thinking about the odds tho', players will ignore this redraw as it makes very little % difference, and here the simple x2 x4 type of pot odds calculation is still useful in the moment. This is the only type of situation where redraws can be safely ignored tho'.

In situations where redraws come in more often, such as having overcards and a flush draw against someone with no pair and a straight draw (you have significantly more equity than if you just had the same overcards without the FD, even though you still have the same 'hand' right now), monte carlo simulations are used, and players just memorise various situations and the rough probabilities in each (no need to be exact, play around with propokertools.com).

I've seen the thread on neva eva eva folding KK pre-flop. How about sets post-flop? Is it long-term profitable to never fold a set?

It is +EV if the other option is to always fold them, but not optimal.

The likelihood of KK hitting its two-outer AND AA hiting its two-outer is sufficiently small as to be negligible. (Stoving AA vs KK on a flop of J72 rainbow, KK has 8.384% equity. The likelihood of spiking a K on that flop is 8.788%. The difference is 0.404%)

As for AA improving to two pair, if you spike your king, the second pair will make you a full house. Pairing the board is good, because that means the non-king card is also not an ace.

FAQ: Should I fold my KK preflop? Should I fold my Set?

I think I've folded <10 ever and they are still my most profitable hand (behind FHs) but maybe there's a bit more to be squeezed out by letting go of a few more in the right circumstances.

Thanks for the link.

I would be shocked if this hasn't been asked before but I'm totally confused about what rake is. Like, how come there are guys described as "rakeback pros"? Also, how should I use the rake to make decisions about where to play etc? Everyone keeps complaining about PS micro rakes. What's wrong with them and what is an example of a good rake?

Sorry for being such a noob. I actually play quite a lot of poker. Just never got this explained to me.

Rake is the amount of money that the poker site takes out of every pot that sees a flop as their fee for running the poker site and all that other stuff.

Rakeback/VIP programs give the player back some percentage of the rake they pay as an incentive to keep that player playing on their site instead of moving to a different site.

A "rakeback pro" is a player who would win very little money or even loose money without rakeback/VIP programs, so a very large percentage of their overall profit comes from the rakeback VIP program. It's not enough to just outplay your opponents in the long run in poker. You have to outplay them to an extent that you can cover the cost of playing poker (rake) and still have a positive balance left at the end. Edges in poker tend to be a lot smaller than newbies think, so against somewhat decent opponents this can be harder than it sounds.

People complain about the rake at microstakes because it is huge relative to the pots they are playing. If you're playing $2000 all-in pots at 5/10, paying $3 in rake on a hand doesn't seem all that bad. If you're playing $20 all-in pots at 0.5/0.10, paying $3 in rake is huge (I have no idea if the rake goes that high at 10nl off the top of my head). In my opinion, there isn't anything wrong with them for complaining about the rake. Poker sites are out to make a profit though, so they are only going to drop the rake so low, regardless of the stakes being played. If you use Hold 'Em Manager or Pokertracker, find the "Rake" statistic and see how much it totals for all that hands you played. That's money that you won, and then gave to the pokersite via rake. You might be surprised at how much it is. Think about how much more you would have won if you were paying less rake, and you can see why people complain.

Using rake to make decisions is easy. Given equally soft games and other factors like quality of support, just play wherever you get charged the least rake. Rake you don't pay is just as good as money in your pocket. Why pay $10 for parking when the $5 lot across the street is just as good? In reality though, the quality of support, security, and software vary dramatically between sites, so these are factors you have to consider as well.

No need to apologize for being a noob. Everyone starts as one.

Think of it like this...

Every time you use an ATM the bank charges you $1 for the withdrawal. (Obv may be more or less I'm keeping it simple).

That's "rake".

If you take out $20 per day every day for a month, you're going to pay $30 a month in ATM fees (rake). If you cash out $140 per week instead then you will pay $4 in rake (ATM fees) per month.

Rakeback would be if the bank offered to pay you back some of those fees as part of a promotion. For example, my bank offers a VISA card linked to Air Miles that rewards you Air Miles every time you make a purchase - That's sort of like rakeback.

Rakeback pros are players who break even or win very little at the games but because they use the ATM 100 times per day they pay a ton of rake. Which results in enough rakeback to keep them viable (at higher stakes/volume rakeback can be serious money).

Stars recently raised the rake at the micro limits which obviously upset everyone in the same way banks raising their fees always pisses everyone off. Stars' micro rake is still lower than most sites, just not ridiculously lower like it used to be.

Rakeback generally works in one of two ways. On a site like Stars there's a VIP program which rewards everyone but is tiered to encourage more play (players who pay more rake are rewarded at a higher %). On other sites you need to sign up for rakeback through an affiliate (in very rare cases sites handle this directly). This generally results in everyone getting the same % rakeback (and slightly simplifies the process because you get straight cash back and don't have to deal with a rewards program) however anyone who does not sign up for rakeback from the beginning is generally screwed which means the vast majority of the players on rakeback sites aren't getting anything back and the site is actually taking way more money out of the poker economy, especially from fish who are unlikely to know about rakeback. Rakeback sites will often have a VIP program of some sort, however since most of the value they give back is through rakeback the value of their VIP program will be very small.

Deciding on the best deal for you is generally a combination of volume and game selection. It doesn't do you much good to have huge rakeback % if the site never has any games running you want to play. Or the players are much better than you and always kick your ass.

For more information, check the Affiliates/Rakeback forum and the FAQ in this forum.

Two (dumb?) questions

1. Can I ask a person in a live cash game how much they have in their stack or do I have to estimate it myself?

2. If the 1st raiser's hands are blocking my line of sight to their chip stack - can I ask to move them so I can see?

what does "nit" stand for?

Beginners Forum Frequently Asked Questions

1. You can ask, but they don't have to answer. Most people will, though.

2. Yes.

im currently going through a brutal downswing!!! I feel pretty terrible etc.

Its got to the point where i want to quit 6max cash and start HU SNGs. sadly my roll is pretty depleted (lost over 30 BI due to this DS) and i have around $100.

I play on stars and would play te 2.20 HU SNGs but the rake seems to make those games unbeatable?
Or is it a case of....if I cant beat the 2.20 HU SNGs then i dont have a chance of becoming a winner in the higher level games?

thanks

Changing games due to downswings is usually a terrible idea. Taking some time off and then reassessing your game is generally a much better idea.

I have a question for the more experienced NL players.

I'm trying to improve my hand reading (lack of) skills.

In you guys' opinions is this best done retrospectively or by paring down the amount of tables played and actually focussing on trying to hand read in real time?

Both are good, but playing less tables def. improves your game.

so on live game nobody knows exectlly how big the stacks, how big is the pot?

when there is multibeting i need to keep track to know how much to call or the dealer say it?

live game sound very difficult because beside the regular task and decision the player shoulld also try to estimate the stack the pot and everything...

I think you can always ask the dealer to do a chip count if you really want to know exactly how much they have.

People tend to get better at estimating stack sizes after a while if it's something they try to keep up with.

Good players do know about how large the pot is. You can some quick multiplication and addition to figure it out if you lose track.
Example: There was a preflop raise to 10 and 4 players saw the flop. 10 x 4 = 40.
15 was bet on the flop and one person called. 40 + (15 x 2) = 40 + 30 = 70.
Etc, etc. It's easier than it sounds.
Bad players probably don't bother keeping up with the pot size, and many low stakes live players wouldn't size their bets properly anyway if they did know, so it's not really that big of a deal to them.

The dealer can always tell you how much it costs to call. Generally, they won't count the pot for you, but they will sort it into neat piles so you can count it yourself if you ask. Like the poster above said, I believe they will also count other people's stacks if you ask.

Look at it this way, do you think all the other people at the table are keeping up with all this information? If you only do a so-so job of getting it right, you have a big advantage over someone who is doing a worse job or who isn't trying at all.

u probablly r right... but i think i would be so nervous anyway so would it would be allmost imposible to keep track on everything. i geuss it comes with practice.
i probablly should try to practice on some play mony friendlly live games.
thanks .

In the beginning, that may very well be the case, but you won't be nervous playing live forever. You might want to search the brick and mortar forum for tips from people with similar problems.

EDIT: Also, until you get over your nervousness, you can just play really weak-tight and assume people aren't bluffing you in a 1/2 game and still turn a profit. Seriously. You'll be fine. Just play really tight and don't do anything stupid.