3rd Video - Pokertracker, PAhud, +short 4 tables 50nl 6 max

Anything poker-related, and which doesn't fit into other forum categories

3rd Video - Pokertracker, PAhud, +short 4 tables 50nl 6 max

Postby vaevictis » Wed Feb 06, 2008 12:42 am

Hi guys, heres the link to it

http://www.filefactory.com/file/2fbe46/ (77mb)

Included is:
-short intro on functions of PT
-analysing leaks
-concepts on position, opening range
-usage of stats to exploit players tendencies
-short gameplay 4 tables to show the use of stats

Hope to hear alot of comments from you guys. I think there are certain spots that I may be wrong as well as not well explained. Hope this can help you guys with your gameplay as well.

Have fun and goodluck at the tables
vaevictis
Challenge Poker Player
 
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:46 pm

Re: 3rd Video - Pokertracker, PAhud, +short 4 tables 50nl 6 max

Postby ayasak » Sat Feb 09, 2008 3:06 pm

hi,

watched early part of the video, and would like to share something from blog by Eric "Rizen" Lynch regarding the difference between Full Ring and 6max

http://www.rizenpoker.com/rizen_poker/2 ... index.html

Quote :

" Q: A friend of mine asserts that "the only difference between full-ring and short-handed tables is the number of players, and not realising this is a roadblock to poker development". What's your view?

A: Well, like all things in poker you can't really deal with absolutes. At its most basic level, what your friend is saying is true. A short handed table is exactly the same as a full ring table where 3+ people have folded. In fact, in one of my 6 max videos on PokerXFactor I even say the best STARTING POINT (emphasis mine) for 6 max hand selection is playing like a full ring game where the first 3 people have folded.

The key is though, it's just a starting point. Everyone knows (in the online games at least) that you're supposed to play more hands (or looser) in short handed games. So what often happens is there is a bit of 'positional exaggeration' at the table. That is, people open a little tighter under the gun in a short handed game than they would after 3+ people folded in a full ring game because everyone is playing looser and more aggressive therefore opening as lightly as you might from middle position in a full ring game will often result in you playing many pots out of position and/or facing lots of pre-flop re-raises with mediocre hands. The reverse is also true, you can play more hands in late position in a short handed game than you often can in a full ring game because everyone knows the game should be looser and therefore is opening lighter.

The really easy answer is that everything is ALWAYS table dependant. You can't adopt hard and fast rules for any game at the higher levels because people will adapt and adjust to you. That being said, when I'm teaching people used to playing full ring how to play short handed games, the first thing I tell them is to imagine they're playing a full ring game and the first 3 (or however many) people have folded. It serves as an excellent starting point and also overcomes some of the psychological barriers that (especially tight) players have in those games.

-Rizen
"
ayasak
Challenge Poker Player
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 7:07 pm

Re: 3rd Video - Pokertracker, PAhud, +short 4 tables 50nl 6 max

Postby vaevictis » Sat Feb 09, 2008 9:07 pm

Its the same when you have 3 nits in a fullring 9 handed game. Its effectively 6 max.
vaevictis
Challenge Poker Player
 
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:46 pm

Re: 3rd Video - Pokertracker, PAhud, +short 4 tables 50nl 6 max

Postby felixleong » Sat Feb 09, 2008 10:17 pm

When people say that 6-max is EXACTLY the same as full ring where the 1st 3 has fold,
Logically it is right , since both has 6 players in the game.
but Mathmatically and in reality this statement is INCORRECT!!!!

There is a slight difference due to the "branching effect", but I will not explain in great detail or in elaborated maths, its a mathamatical term and u have to read up yourself on it.

Layman explanation
In full ring for example, if the 1st 6 people has folded, its down to you(button) and the two blinds

the 3 (but,BB,SB) of u guys are more likely to hold better then random hands because the 1st 6 people did not get any good hands(otherwise any of them would had opened up)

If u do an experiment, using a deck of cards.
Whenever the 1st 12 cards (6 hands) are trash(below opening raise in that position), the next 6 cards (3 hands, button SB and BB) are more likely to be better then the 1st 12 trash cards dealt.

Meaning to say, after the 1st 3 players have fold, the 4th player's hand is usually stronger on average as compared to
a UTG player in 6-max.

So if the above theory is true, 6-max you can afford to loosen your requirements more as compared to fullring in the same positions.

I hope this explains why 6-max are Gernally much looser then full ring, they are actually 2 very different games if u played them both long enough.

6-max requires a lot of postflop skills since u have to play well with less premium hands like suit connecters, AT, KJ, QT, small/mid pairs etc
fullring u can even make a profit just playing 99-QQ AK-AQ(top 5% hands only), but will definately be loser in 6-max with such hand range only.

In short 6-max requires better reads and benefits more from instinctive plays.
fullring is much more techincal and benefits more from mathmatical plays.

Its very to explain it very clearly here, but if u have played both 6-max and fullring for like over 100k hands each, you'll probably know what i'm talking about ^_^

good luck at the tables dudes ~
User avatar
felixleong
Great White Shark
 
Posts: 1386
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:02 pm
Medals: 4
Long Jie Participant (1) 1000 posts (1) Article Contributor (1) Helpful Kaki (1)

Pokerkaki Ads

Postby Pokerkaki Ads

Pokerkaki Ads
Shameless Advertising to keep this site alive

Re: 3rd Video - Pokertracker, PAhud, +short 4 tables 50nl 6 max

Postby vaevictis » Sat Feb 09, 2008 10:57 pm

I think felix argument is a misnorm because of the sole assumption made that:

the distribution of hands is generally stronger for the later players if more people folded their hands in early position.
The branching effect is actually based on an assumption that people fold weaker small value hands, such that the remaining hands left behind are stronger. This is clearly wrong as players can infact fold hands that have strong value like AJ, A10,KQ, QJ, KJ, in early position and this has no effect on the distribution of the remaining players. Branching effect is not a mathematical cause, its based on a fixed premise and assumption.

The fact is that the distribution of hands in these 2 cases:
1) remaining 6 players in fullring game when first 3 is folded
2) all 6 players in a 6 max game still present

is exactly the same. When the cards are dealt to 9 players or 6 players, the distribution is still the same, everyone gets 2 cards from the 52 card deck.

Likewise, when its folded to you on the button in:
1) fullring
2) six max

And you do wish to steal, do we assume that both the blinds in the fullring has a stronger hand distribution range than compared to the 2 blinds in 6 max? Does that mean we should adjust our stealing range? The fact is, no, because both of the cases are exactly the same, they are dealt with 2 exact random cards. The branching effect argument is clearly flawed in this sense. Any statistics major should be able to prove mathematically, the hand range distribution held by the 2 blinds (in both 6 max and fullring) has the same strength probability. (2/52 cards)

Based on this, (as well as watching several higher stakes pros who are killing the games in 6 max as well as fullring) I feel that players are losing too much value playing too tight instead of opening up their range to a typical 6 max players. Typical regulars in fullring games are actually missing out on alot of EV spots if they can open up their game more.

Fullring is not different from 6 max at all, the same fundamental concepts like hand reading, assigning ranges are always present. IMHO, fullring is a much easier game to play because people's range is too narrow. In poker, you will always want to depolarise your range so that you are not easily readable and hence exploited.
vaevictis
Challenge Poker Player
 
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:46 pm

Re: 3rd Video - Pokertracker, PAhud, +short 4 tables 50nl 6 max

Postby ayasak » Sun Feb 10, 2008 6:04 pm

i seldom play 6max, imho, i think a more layman way to look at one of the difference would be in terms of starting hands.

Positions of players in FR : SB, BB, UTG, MP1, MP2, MP3, HJ (i think its called hijack, not quite sure about the name for this postition), CO, Button
If 6max = first 3 folded in FR, we assume that UTG in 6max would be the player in MP3 and vice versa.

Now, there will difference in the starting hand requirements when you are UTG & being folded to you in MP3?

As the player moves towards a later position, the difference in starting hand requirements prolly be more or less the same.

As for the branching (or brunching ? ), Rizen did mention something on this too. You guys can read about it on this blog.
ayasak
Challenge Poker Player
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 7:07 pm

Re: 3rd Video - Pokertracker, PAhud, +short 4 tables 50nl 6 max

Postby vaevictis » Sun Feb 10, 2008 7:36 pm

yep effectively MP3 = UTG 6 max.

Effectively you should open raise the same range of hands in 6 max UTG and in fullring MP3 when its folded to you.
However many of the typical smallstakes fullring players do not open the fullrange of 22+, AK AQ AJ KQ, + some SCs to balance for reasons of:

1) not knowing how to open up their play (mainly because they are not frequently exposed to shorthanded play)
2) being too weak-tight (limp-calling pocketpairs from MP3 onwards is considered weaktight. Raising with them and taking pots down with cbets is not.)

yep the branching/bunching effect is a moot as its based on assumptions. even if the assumptions are valid (that 1st 3 players fold small cards), the first 6 cards discarded by the first 3 players in fullring does not significantly alter the strength distribution of the remaining 6 players.
vaevictis
Challenge Poker Player
 
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:46 pm


Return to General Poker Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

 

Recent Posts

Subscribe to RSS headline updates from:
Powered by FeedBurner

Site

Subscribe to RSS headline updates from:
Powered by FeedBurner