Poker Perambulation

It is a basic tenant relating to our quality as human beings. But, integrity doesn’t necessarily apply at the poker tables; nor is it a cause for admiration. Still, believability is what will often separate us from the also ran.

I’ve been playing limit lately between .25-50 and 2-4. I played $25 and $100 NL tables. My tournament stuff was up to $20 buyins. There are identifiable differences as you move up. But, less volatile does not mean immune. The normal mix at all levels isn’t as constant as cement mix. You get a lot of variety.

A stock that is volatile is said to carry a high beta. That beta is a coefficient that show how a particular stock preforms against the broader market. It is a common value rooted in statistics and displayed by most financial sites. I guess it’d be possible to calculate the beta for the tables. Tables certainly have both negative and positive expectations for most of us based on similar beta. Beta can also be a coefficient of believability at the tables.

As people we want believability because it improves our image with others. We want to be thought of as reliable folks at home, work, and play. It translates to love, success, and getting picked up early when sides are chosen in a now muscle pulling pickup game. That can be boring and the blogs point to that aspect of life frequently. Breaking out of that mold for at least a while is the reason some folks play poker.

There are jokes about believability. They tend to revolve around lawyers and sex. In poker they relate to cards from position. This builds our image. You can succeed with an image from either end of the spectrum. There have been a bizillion words on that already put to type – so I won’t beat the dead horse for a change.

So, here we are. We’re Saint Lizzy the Mom or Saint Bob the Banker and the weekend rolls around. We’ve avoided killing the offspring or writing another sub-prime loan. We should get to howl a bit and let off steam — so we head to the tables and become the unbelievable antithesis of our norm. Max over in the Chris blog can’t understand those folks. They aren’t looking to win. They are looking to suckout and bluff. And, even when they don’t succeed, they get joy from breaking the day-to-day mold. Yes, sports fans; their joy is in the tilt – being both tiltee and tiltor.

If you are the type that likes to talk about Level I, II or III play, you may be flummoxed by the negative play/beta you are seeing. Bloggers are all students of the game and obsess over the negative expected value bits that creep into our game. Then we blow it all by projecting our values on others. We seek to vary our play and exploit our believability. It is our raison d’etre. But the other player may be the obverse. For the price of a freeroll or an overpriced visit to Starbucks, he can open the escape valve for a bit at let out the steam buildup.

If you look at it as a table of donkeys or fish, you are failing to exploit correct believability. When you raise them, they will, knowing they are beat, reraise and gloat. Subsequently. they suckout to cause you to steam and wax poetic in the chat. Note that either way they won.

P.S. I hope your next hand is a huge one. You blew your credibility and have a chance to exploit believability as well. For a bit, you can exploit that same evil twin tilt.

This was going to be about specific situations that always come up at the tables. It seems I got here without getting there. Stop by next blog and maybe I’ll get it out.

ADDENDUM:

This is how to double up in the first 5 hands. Who said having 3 out of 5 completions is bad? Yeah… right… all skill…

During current Stud session you were dealt 5 hands and:

- saw fourth street 3 times (60%)

- saw fifth street 3 times (60%)

- saw sixth street 3 times (60%)

- reached showdown 3 times (60%)

Pots won at showdown - 3 of 3 (100%)

Pots won without showdown – 0

But, the .50-1 table keeps killing me. Today it was a monkey that was seeing 80% of the doors and had a win rate when I left of over 67 BB per 100. I moved to a 1-2 table and made that back and a bit more. I guess I should avoid the .50-1 table. They’ve been nasty to me. They seem to always draw out.

Sunday results:

.25-50 14.65

.50-1 (17.25)

1-2 21.65

My buyins for these tables were 10, 20, 40

An interesting value is my aggression factors:

2-4 2.25

1-2 1.39

.50-1 1.04

.25-50 .88

Part of that was getting decent hands but it also seems to indicate that bets are workable far more as you move up in limits. I can’t say it is anything close to definitive with the limited play I’ve made so far having moved up recently. But, I am watching it.

—————————–

Truly cheap shot for today and Pauly:

Just can’t resist a cheap shot here.  Pauly doesn’t deserve one; but then who does?

This entry was posted on Monday, February 18th, 2008 at 11:36 am and is filed under Other poker. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.