| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Know-It-All Newbie
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 1:01 am Post subject: PLO8 and blind size compared to max buy-in question |
 |
|
On most sites, the max buy-in for a PLO8 table seems
to be 100X the BB. On Absolute Poker, it's 200X. How
does this affect proper strategy? I believe Sklansky
says you should play tighter when the blinds (or antes)
are smaller. However, I can see another argument that
if the blinds are very small as compared to the potential
pot sizes, that you are getting better odds on your
dime, so you should play more hands.
Which view is accurate? Or are they both accurate at
different times? How would you play on a table with
200X the BB being the max buy-in as compared to 100X?
Additionally, in pot-limit as compared to limit, should
you play looser or tighter, and why? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
FellKnight
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 1:30 am Post subject: Re: PLO8 and blind size compared to max buy-in question |
|
|
On May 3 2005 5:31 PM, Know-It-All Newbie wrote:
| Quote: | On most sites, the max buy-in for a PLO8 table seems
to be 100X the BB. On Absolute Poker, it's 200X. How
does this affect proper strategy? I believe Sklansky
says you should play tighter when the blinds (or antes)
are smaller. However, I can see another argument that
if the blinds are very small as compared to the potential
pot sizes, that you are getting better odds on your
dime, so you should play more hands.
Which view is accurate? Or are they both accurate at
different times? How would you play on a table with
200X the BB being the max buy-in as compared to 100X?
Additionally, in pot-limit as compared to limit, should
you play looser or tighter, and why?
|
You are getting better potential implied odds with bigger stacks at the
table. I say "potential", because you are not assured of winning another
player's stack if you hit, but against certain players, you are more
likely to do so. Thus, certain drawing or speculative hands are more
correct to play, and chase with (double bellybuster straights are great
for that).
The reason why Sklansky says "play tighter when the antes are smaller" is
because there is less dead money at the start of each hand to attack, and
assumes that you can occasionally steal that dead money to replenish your
stack and keep you playing longer. The more dead money, the more correct
it is to try to steal it (if your chances of stealing it are greater than
the odds of you failing to steal times the amount you are risking to
steal).
The way you would play on a 200xBB table vice a 100xBB table is that you
must play somewhat more cautiously with your mediocre hands (those hands
that *may* be the best, but which are either not that strong, or which are
vulnerable to draws). For example, you want to bet, but not push a hand
like KKQJ on a board of Kh 5h 4d. You could very easily be behind to a
draw like A23x, or Ah 2x Xh x, who would be quite correct to try to put
you all-in of the flop, even though you have the nuts.
Fell
--
Join Party Poker! http://www.partypoker.com/index.htm?wm=2562206
My Blog: http://FellAtTheWSOP.blogspot.com/
--------
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arlo payne
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed May 04, 2005 4:30 am Post subject: Re: PLO8 and blind size compared to max buy-in question |
|
|
FACT!
Max buy-in pot limit is SICK!
All it does is mess with the game and gives a huge edge to huge stacks in most
cases. That is if the huge stack has any idea how to play pot limit!
_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
