Quote:
Originally Posted by sixfour
If he's bet, say, half the pot and the pot is sized x, you're needing to call 0.5x to win 1.5x, so you need to work out what percentage of the time you have to win the hand so that you break even, i.e. you're trying to work out the percentage y so that:
1.5x*y = 0.5x*(1-y)
Divide each side by 0.5x to get 3y = 1-y, add a y to each side to get 4y = 1, and you get y to be 25%, which is exactly what you would expect. The same principle applies to any sized bet
I am aware of these kind of calculatons. I might be posting only for 3-4 weeks now, but I've been reading the forums for quite a long time (started over a year ago).
I will rephrase my question. Is it possible to play against so bad players at these low limits that they totally misunderstand the role of blind play? I have a strong feeling that the average player at this level only knows that he/she should open from the blind more often but then all of his/her knowledge is doomed.
I see people opening from the button, I call with J9o cause he's opening with 78% of his hands, why not. And then I totally miss the flop, yet, I still call his cbet, than he checks OTR, I bet and he folds. Another common spot is where I spot villain uses a bet size/timing that he only uses when he's got a hand but I raise anyway OTF, he calls and I donk bet OTR, he folds, "waiting for a better spot".
So once more, I'm not asking whether is it profitable against good opponets at NL 100-1k. I know there is only a small edge at those limits, if any, where position plays a significant role. My question is, should I really take it as low sample size where I've been lucky, or are people actually this bad at these stakes?
Thank you for your answers by the way .)