Poker Forum

Good point but...

Posted By: Warren
Date: 5 Jun 03, 11:12 am

In Response To: Luck (James)

I would think that the amount of luck getting to the final table would depend upon how many preliminary tables had to be hurdled along the way. The more tables, the more skill and less luck in getting to the final table. Last night, Jerry Buss made it to the final table and Anthony Bloch did not; must not have been enough preliminary tables!

As to going all-in with the best hand, I understand that to be a top strategy in Texas Hold 'em, so you are correct there. However I disagree on your example on going all-in, at 3-1 three times, yielding chances of 58% loss.

That is because going all-in on subsequent bets is not influenced by the first bet. That is, suppose I go all-in with a 3-1 edge and win. The next time I have the same situation, I still have that 3-1 edge; the odds of my success are not influenced at all by the previous 3-1 all-in.

Your example would only be correct if I did the 3 hands in a row, knowing each to be a 3-1 advantage and knowing in advance that I was going all-in each time. That's impossible.
I would make the final point that going "all-in" is not necessarily the best tactic with even a better than 3-1 hand. After all, the opponents can fold, leaving the winner with only the money on the table. Milking them to get more of their money on the table could be a better tactic.

All-in is often used when you want to force another player to take the chance of calling, before more cards are dealt. More cards will give him a chance to beat you, so you want to win the hand without them being dealt. The advantage is still yours even with new cards being dealt though, so the opponent is presented with the dilemma of surrendering the pot immediately or calling when the odds are against him. This is in your favor.

The other big case all-in is used is when you think the opponents will call, in which case you DO get their money on the table.

Messages In This Thread

In the General Forum, it was written -- Warren -- 4 Jun 03, 4:42 am

I know D is broke ;-) (nt) -- Goats -- 4 Jun 03, 5:51 am

This is all true- but note: -- D -- 4 Jun 03, 5:54 am

Sponsors -- D -- 4 Jun 03, 6:02 am

One more note- -- D -- 4 Jun 03, 6:05 am

Looks like 120% to me -- Warren -- 4 Jun 03, 6:34 am

If hes unethical enough- -- D -- 4 Jun 03, 7:28 am

I learn something new everyday -- Ricky -- 6 Jun 03, 5:47 pm

I have heard of people selling more than 100% -- D -- 6 Jun 03, 11:52 pm

but getting your name in card player -- ...The Real MT -- 7 Jun 03, 1:34 pm

My question remains -- Warren -- 4 Jun 03, 8:34 am

A couple of thoughts -- D -- 4 Jun 03, 8:50 am

Can you clarify terms? -- Warren -- 4 Jun 03, 10:22 am

advantage play. -- Dreamer -- 4 Jun 03, 2:20 pm

I will add that............. -- Dreamer -- 4 Jun 03, 2:36 pm

I agree this is probably true (nt) -- D -- 4 Jun 03, 4:43 pm

Response -- D -- 4 Jun 03, 4:47 pm

I'm still learning but I disagree about luck -- Warren -- 5 Jun 03, 4:52 am

All excellent observations (nt) -- D -- 5 Jun 03, 6:00 am

Luck -- James -- 5 Jun 03, 10:27 am

Good point but... -- Warren -- 5 Jun 03, 11:12 am

"luck factor" -- Dreamer -- 5 Jun 03, 2:43 pm

Response -- D -- 4 Jun 03, 2:42 pm

number 4 -- No Name -- 4 Jun 03, 8:14 pm

Your answers raised a few more questions -- Warren -- 5 Jun 03, 4:37 am

Response -- D -- 5 Jun 03, 6:06 am

VERY informative. Thanx! Now... -- Warren -- 5 Jun 03, 10:19 am

Getting started- -- D -- 5 Jun 03, 12:53 pm

Thanx! What kind of bankroll does one need to get started? (nt) -- Warren -- 8 Jun 03, 3:55 am

I can't find the online website you recommend -- Warren -- 8 Jun 03, 6:59 am

Links -- D -- 8 Jun 03, 8:28 am

Poker Forum is maintained by Pi Yee Press