Deuces Wild Progressive - CasinoGames77.com » Poker » Video Poker. Igrajte Video Poker II igre online besplatno. To je najbolje Video Poker II igra objavljena na webu. Besplatne online igre Video Poker II je doveo do vas 321FreeGames.com. Poker 123 igre that has to be wagered. For poker 123 igre example, if you deposit €100 and receive a €500 bonus, then you have to wager €600. 40 = €24 000 before you can make a withdraw. Add a maximum withdraw limit to this and your chances to win big are poker 123 igre severely decreased.
Preflop raising decisions can be very complex. What stakes are we playing? Is it a live game or online? How strong is our hand? Which limpers will call? Will we be in position postflop?
Sometimes our decision is obvious: 'I have aces, so I'm going to raise for value here.' Sometimes it's subjective: 'I think I can force the limper to fold here.' But we should also consider what a mathematical analysis of preflop raising can teach us. When is a raise our most profitable action for the moment? When might it be the most profitable action for the hand?
Las Vegas $1/$2 NLH Stats
In order to calculate the expected value for our preflop actions accurately, we need to know certain key frequencies that are typical for our game.
Figure 1 below contains some of the most useful stats for these EV calculations for both online NL100 and $1/$2 NL live games in Las Vegas, most of them published here for the first time. (Check out Donkey Poker Volume 2: Postflop, Section 7.5 to see how these stats were generated.)
Here I define 'EP/MP' as the first four seats after the big blind on a nine-seat table. Since the vast majority of Vegas $1/$2 players are position-dumb, we can combine the results from these seats into a single stat in order to make the stat more reliable. The hijack and cutoff stats are similar to the EP/MP stats.
VPIP and PFR are the primary stats useful to determine an opponent's playing style. '35/6' means that the average Vegas player voluntarily invests in 35 percent of his dealt hands, while raising only 6 percent of them. This player would be considered a 'loose-passive' player in an online game, but he is average in a Vegas $1/$2 game.
Calling a Preflop Raise (CPFR) is a statistic that applies only when a player calls a raise after having already invested in the pot, which applies to limp-callers as well as to the blinds. This is not the same thing as Cold Calling Preflop (CCPF).
Compared to an online game, a Vegas preflop raise is fraught with more risk. Not only is our average raise size larger, our Vegas opponents are more likely to call it. Although their calling range is weaker, we often face multiple callers, which is rare online. Consequently, it is extremely important to have a solid idea of how these stats influence the profitability of our preflop action.
A Simple Example: A Big Blind Hero vs. a Single EP/MP Limper
Let's consider a situation which is relatively easy to calculate. Suppose an average player limps from one of the EP/MP positions. It folds around to Hero in the big blind who can check his option or raise.
Figure 1 indicates that that Mr. Average has a range of 35 percent, but he normally raises with 6.1 percent of this range. So we can assign his limping range as [6.1–35]. The specific card combos within his range depend on the ranking system we use. Although there is no single ranking system that is always correct, I will use the Flopzilla NLHE ranking in this column, since it is easy for anyone to access.
Suppose Hero has and decides to check. We can estimate Hero's 'Momentary Expected Value' (MEV) as...
MEVCheck = Pot0 × EWC = $5 × 0.474 = $2.37
...where Pot0 = $5 and EWC (Showdown Equity When Called) is 47.4 percent for Hero's pocket deuces when facing Villain's range. I call this his 'momentary' EV since it applies only at the moment he checks.
Suppose Hero decides to raise to $10 with the same . Figure 1 shows that an average villain will call a preflop raise after limping in EP/MP about 56 percent of the time (Row 8). This would be a Flopzilla range of [6.1–22.7].
Hero's Fold Equity is FE = (1 - 0.564) = 0.436. His showdown Equity-When-Called is EWC = 0.454. Notice that even though the villain has folded nearly half of his range, Hero's EWC is only slightly worse than when he checks. This suggests that the villain's actual limping and calling ranges are not critical in establishing Hero's MEV.
After deciding to raise, we can calculate Hero's MEV as...
MEVRaise-$8 = (FE × Pot0) + ((1-FE) × (EWC × Pot1 - Raise)) = $2.27 + $0.28 = $2.55
The first term is just the average amount earned when the villain folds. The second term is the amount earned when the villain calls. ' Pot1' is the size of the pot after he calls, minus the rake. 'Raise' is the size of our raise ($8 in this case). Since three-betting is so rare in Vegas $1/$2, and limp-three-betting is even rarer, we can ignore it for this calculation. Again, we consider this our momentary EV since it only applies at the end of the preflop action.
So Hero's raise appears to be more profitable (by $0.18) than checking. It gains nearly all of its profitability from fold equity and a just little from showdown equity. This is generally the case for heads-up battles.
However, there is a serious issue with these estimates. MEV uses showdown equity, which essentially assumes that the hand will be checked down postflop. This rarely happens in a real game, which makes its usefulness imperfect. We haven't considered such factors as skill and position, which can increase or decrease our expected profit in the hand. Hero's inferior position in this scenario suggests that his actual 'Hand EV' (HEV) will be lower than his calculated MEV. Even Hero's superior skill will not likely overcome his inferior position.
Since Hero's inferior postflop position makes it difficult to realize the full MEV of either action, it's difficult to say which action would have the higher HEV. Hero's best decision could depend on whether the villain appears more or less likely than the average villain to fold to Hero's raise. We might also consider that if both actions result in a similar HEV, the check does so with less risk.
Figure 2 shows the results of these calculations applied to some of the hands listed in the Donkey Poker starting hands chart. The solid symbols represent Hero's MEV when raising to $10, which is positive for each of these combos. 'JTs-' denotes 'suited connectors JTs and smaller.' Meanwhile the '+' symbols represent the difference in MEV between raising and checking.
When MEV is positive, raising is more profitable than checking, which is true for a range including approximately 22+, A2+, KT+, and QJ (i.e., any pocket pair, any ace-x hand, any two Broadway cards). This represents 27.6 percent of all starting hands.
Since we are out of position in the scenario, our HEV is probably lower than these values, so checking is probably preferable when the Delta MEV is close to zero.
Button Hero vs. One Limper
The previous scenario is rare in Vegas $1/$2 games, but it serves to illustrate the principals used for our analytical EV calculations. A more common and useful example is when the Hero is on the button with and facing a single EP/MP limper. In this case Hero can fold, limp, or raise, where folding has an EVfold = 0.
This calculation has additional complexity because we have the blinds behind us, which means we must consider their propensity to check behind or complete and their propensity to call a raise. (We will ignore their negligible three-betting frequency here.)
Suppose Hero limps and the two blinds raise 4.8 percent and 3.4 percent of the time, respectively. If the small blind completes with [4.8-50] and the big blind has a range of [3.4-100], we will have a four-way pot about 92 percent of the time.
Let's suppose the other 8 percent of the time Hero limp-folds after one of the blinds raises. (This is plausible for those hands with which Hero would actually limp.) We can also assume that the EP/MP limper has a range of [6.1-35.7]. All of these values are based on the actual Vegas stats listed in Figure 1.
We then have...
MEVLimp = 0.92 × (Pot0 × EWC-Limp) - (0.08 × Limp) = 0.92 × ($8 × 0.222 - $2) - (0.08 × $2) = -$0.38
In other words, limping on the button with is not immediately profitable.
Suppose we raise to $10 with on the button. Using the above frequencies, everyone will fold 23.1 percent of the time. A single villain will call 47.0 percent of the time, two villains will call 25.7 percent of the time, and everyone will call 4.2 percent of the time.
It turns out our EWC is nearly the same no matter which villain calls, so we can treat each villain as interchangeable. Thus, Hero's MEV is approximately...
MEVRaise = (0.231 × Pot0) + (0.47 × (EWC1 × Pot1 - Raise)) + (0.257 × (EWC2 × Pot2 - Raise)) + (0.042 × (EWC3 × Pot3 - Raise)) = $0.63
...where the various values depend on how many players called our raise. We can see that raising with our pocket deuces is much more immediately profitable than limping with them. Furthermore, our Hand EV should be better than this since we have superior position and skill and since we can leverage our profit when we flop a set.
Note that when the blinds are tight and/or passive, they are less likely to call our raise and less likely to three-bet. (Pre-loading tells are very important here.) In these situations, raising a single limper from the button is even more +MEV. And our HEV is even more enhanced since we are less likely to face multiple villains in a raised pot. (It's generally easier to outplay a single villain than three of them.)
Figure 3 depicts the MEV results for various hand types. The symbols represent the MEV for raising to $10 in a Vegas $1/$2 game. Each series represents a descending hand grouping. For example, 'T9s-' denotes 'suited connectors T9s and smaller.'
Bottom line: in low-stakes cash games such as the $1/$2 NL games in Vegas, raising is nearly always more profitable than limping (except for 63s, 53s, 65o and 54o). In fact, 33 percent of all starting combos are immediately profitable. And some of the negative-MEV combos are probably profitable for the hand due to our superior position.
Since most Vegas $1/$2 players are position-dumb, they generally limp and call with a similar frequency from the hijack and cutoff positions. So our very wide button raising range is valid for any single-limper situation when we are on the button.
Button Hero vs. Multiple Limpers
The previous single-limper scenario occurs only a small fraction of the time in Vegas $1/$2 games. We can readily extend this to multiple-limper scenarios, which are much more common. This calculation is even more complex and we are less likely to fold everyone out with a $10 button raise. This time I will spare you the gory math and show you the results below in Figure 4.
Here the top four curves represent the MEV for raising to $10 facing one, two, three, and four limpers. The smooth line represents the average MEV of limping. These curves show that our 'immediately profitable' raising range is 33.6 percent when facing a single limper, and that our range decreases to 13.4 percent when facing four limpers.
We can make several conclusions here:
- The more limpers we face, the tighter our raising range should be from the button.
- When facing one or two limpers, we should generally either raise or fold, since once raising becomes unprofitable, limping is even more unprofitable.
- When facing three or more limpers, limping is generally more profitable than raising once raising becomes unprofitable. So we now have both raising and limping ranges.
- When both raising and limping have MEVs near zero, limping may be preferable since we risk less for the same reward.
- Our slightly negative-MEV combos may still have slightly positive-EV for the hand. Our superior skill and position, coupled with our ability to leverage our big flops should increase our profit for the hand. This is combo-dependent since some combos are more likely to flop big. (22 is stronger than 54o.)
- Another way to state this is that some -MEV combos may have sufficient implied odds play. For instance, we can play a -$0.50 MEV combo if we believe our implied EV for the hand is worth more than this.
The Effect of Raise Size
A typical rule of thumb for these Vegas $1/$2 games is to raise to about 4x BB plus one additional BB for each limper. Thus we would raise to $10, $12, $14, or $16 as the number of limpers increases. The previous analysis kept the raise size constant to see the influence of the number of limpers.
A key question we would like answered is how the villains will respond to reasonable variations in raise size. Unfortunately, that data does not exist for these Vegas games. My general feeling, however, is that most Vegas $1/$2 players are not very sensitive to our raise size as long as we keep it within the table norm. So, to a first approximation, we can assume that the Figure 1 stats do not change very much when we increase our raise size incrementally.
Figure 5 shows what happens to MEVRaise as we increase the size of our raise when facing four limpers. We can see that that our raising range decreases slightly as we increase our raise size. This effect is fairly small and may be counterbalanced by a decreased likelihood that a villain will call a larger raise.
Here the symbols represent the MEV for raising to $10, $12, $14 or $16 in a Vegas $1/$2 game. These combos are sorted in order of MEVRaise.
The important thing to notice in this graph is that we have a much larger MEV when we raise our best hands by the maximum amount that will not result in a villain adjustment. If we have aces and the villains will call a $16 bet as often as a $10 bet, we should bet $16.
On the other hand, we should consider betting smaller with our borderline raising hands. Of course, this sets up the possibility that we could be telegraphing our hand strength. But most Vegas $1/$2 players are not paying much attention to our bet size unless the size is unusual for the table. Here we can make adjustments based on our knowledge of the players at our table.
Hero is in the Cutoff
Putting the Hero in the cutoff makes the analysis even more complex. Making some reasonable approximations, I can make a few generalizations:
- All players, including the button, are very unlikely to three-bet, so we should generally ignore this possibility when deciding to raise. (If our particular button opponent likes to three-bet, we should consider changing seats.)
- The button is less likely to cold call our cutoff raise than an EP/MP player is to call after a limp.
- Being in the cutoff facing three limpers is similar to being on the button facing four limpers. This is equivalent to the button replacing the fourth limper.
- The average button will call our cutoff raise about 22 percent of the time. We will then not have a postflop position advantage on every villain. This means that our average HEV will not be as enhanced from the cutoff as it would be from the button, and thus our cutoff raising range should be somewhat tighter that it would be from the button with one additional limper.
- If we have a tell that suggests that the button intends to fold, we can play the cutoff exactly as we would normally play the button.
Conclusions
We can't yet decide on a specific hand range for each scenario since we have not yet determined just how valuable our superior position and skill is. Nevertheless, it is clear that the more limpers we face, the tighter our raising raise should be.
Also, our raising range should be much wider than the typical Vegas player. We can also play from the cutoff facing X limpers with a similar range as from the button when facing X+1 limpers.
And of course, we should always adjust our ranges depending on the tendencies of the specific villains we face and based on specific tells we observe.
Steve Selbrede has been playing poker for 20 years and writing about it since 2012. He is the author of five books, The Statistics of Poker, Beat the Donks, Donkey Poker Volume 1: Preflop, Donkey Poker Volume 2: Postflop, and Donkey Poker Volume 3: Hand Reading.
Be sure to complete your PokerNews experience by checking out an overview of our mobile and tablet apps here. Stay on top of the poker world from your phone with our mobile iOS and Android app, or fire up our iPad app on your tablet. You can also update your own chip counts from poker tournaments around the world with MyStack on both Android and iOS.
Tags
cash game strategyno-limit hold’empreflop strategystarting hand selectionpositionbet sizingpot oddslive pokertells
Did you ever play Omaha in a casino poker game and wish that you could use more than just two of your hole cards? That, I think, was the rationale of the poker player who invented this poker game – 2-1-3 — one that I've played with enormous pleasure in a fairly large pot limit game that used to meet weekly in the Boston area.
The Deal:
Each player receives five cards face down. A board is dealt face down at the same time as follows:
X X
X
X X X
Players may use their hole cards and any vertical or horizontal combination of the cards on the board to make a five card hand. They must use the number of cards from their hand that, when added to the cards in the vertical column or horizontal row on the board, adds up to exactly five cards.
So, for example, they may use two hole cards and the three cards in the first column. Or they may use three hole cards with the two cards in the first row. Or, similarly, they may use four cards with either the one card in the second row or the one card in the third column. Get it? Pretty tricky I think. And that's why I like it.
Players may also replace one card before the final row is revealed. This is not a separate betting round, but they are charged $5.00.
Let's look at a sample game.
You dealt the following hand as follows, clockwise to your left:
First Round
YOU
DOC (X X X X X )
MING (X X X X X )
JELLA (X X X X X )
JIM (X X X X X )
RICH (X X X X X )
BOB (X X X X X )
The way the game is played, the dealer antes $2.00 and the betting is pot limit. The betting starts to the left of the dealer on the first round. Thereafter, the first bettor is the player who initiated the last betting action.
Doc, to your immediate left, is the first to act:
DOC (X X X X X ) Check
MING (X X X X X ) Bet $2
JELLA (X X X X X ) Call $2
JIM (X X X X X ) Call $2
RICH (X X X X X ) Call $2
BOB (X X X X X ) Call $2
YOU Call $2
DOC (X X X X X ) Call $2
Pot $2 ante plus 7 X $2 = $16
The board cards are revealed one row at a time with betting after each row. There is no declare. The game is played hi-lo with an 8 qualifier as in Omaha8.
Second Round
3h Ah
X
X X X
This is a very good flop for you – though not a perfect one. With your hand of As2sAc2cKs You have made three Aces for high going across. Someone could have made an Ace high flush or a straight however.. You made no low going across the top, but you have the potential for a good low going down the first column with you're A and 2 combined with that 3. You also made at least three Aces going down the second column, but it will take you to the last row to see if you made a full house.
The betting starts with Ming since he initiated the last raise.
MING Check
JELLA Check
JIM Check
RICH Check
BOB Bets $10
YOU Calls $10
DOC Calls $10
MING Calls $10
JELLA Folds
JIM Calls $10
RICH Folds
Pot = 5 X $10 plus $16 = $66
Third Round
3h Ah
8c
X X X
Bob initiates the betting again because he started it last time and it wasn't raised. This card wasn't very good for you. Though you're heading toward the best possible low in the first column, anyone with a 7 low or better in the first row will beat you for low. And the 8 doesn't help your high at all. You'd like to get to draw and see the last row cheaply.
BOB Bets the pot of $66
YOU Call
DOC Call
MING Fold
JELLA XX
JIM Call
Poker Igre 123
RICH XX
Pot = 4 X $66 + 66 = $330
Fourth (and final) Round
The replace starts to the dealers left.
DOC replaces for $5
JIM replaces for $5
BOB does not replace
YOU replace the 2s for $5 and receive the 3c
The final row on the board is revealed as follows:
3h Ah
8c
7s 6d Kc
You have hit the perfect card. You now have As 2c Ac Ks 3c. With your Ace, Ace and 3 you have Aces full of 3s going across the top row. You have a qualifying but lousy low going down the first column – though it is the best low anyone can make in that column. But you know someone is bound to have a low that can beat it going across the top, going down the second column or even going across the second row. Still, you are very pleased. Maybe if you can knock out other players with low hands you can scoop the whole thing.
BOB is first to act since he initiated the last round of betting and no one raised.
BOB Bets the pot of $330
YOU Raise the pot by $970, making the bet $1100
DOC Calls $1100
JIM Calls $1100
BOB Calls $970
Pot is 4 X $1100 plus $330 + three $5 replace fees = $4730
BOB reveals 2d 4d 5c 8h 8d
YOU have As 2c Ac Ks 3c
DOC reveals 2h 4c 4s 6c 7h
JIM reveals 3d 4h 5d Jc Kd
BOB, using his 2d, 4d and 5c with the top row makes a wheel.
YOU, using your As Ac and 3c across the top make Aces Full
DOC, using 2h 4c 6c makes 6432A (second best low) across the top
JIM, using his 5,4, and 3 makes a 6543A in the second column.
YOU and BOB split the pot and take down $2,365 for your efforts.
As you can see, the game twists and turns many times before the final conclusion. Still, there is a lot of thinking that goes into it. It was always one of my favorite games in this pot limit poker contest. If you like it, please email me if you're coming to New England. Maybe we can get you to sit down and play it with me and my buddies for real.