poker

[darthtrader 10]

I noticed Soultrader posted he use to play pro and I'm just starting to learn.

 

anyone else play?

 

any tips on books or whats the best way to learn? I started playing on yahoo with an odds calculator, its been interesting. I'm not ready to play with real money yet, still "paper trading".

 

On another non finance forum I'm on poker came up and I had got into it with a guy who plays pro online. Something I don't get with online poker is couldnt you easily build a system with 3 players, a networked app where everyone sits at a table, puts their hand into the app and then use text book probability theory/money management to gain a serious edge over everyone else at the table? The guy thought that was absurd but I still don't understand why.

[Nick1984 10]

Check on limewire for Howard Ledderer he has a cpl of videos out for poker basics and intermediates.

 

Best way to learn is by playing though. Books you want to look up on revolve around poker stats and learning how to spot tells.

[Soultrader 12]

Books wont help... i never read a single poker book. I play the man, not the cards. Which is why I used to do alot better on the poker tables compared to online. Its like trading... its a game of psychology.

[Dogpile 10]

I highly recommend reading the books by Ed Miller:

 

for newbie: start with 'Getting Started ni Hold 'Em' by Miller

 

once you have read that a played a while: read 'Small Stakes Hold Em' by Miller (this book is considered the bible for online players).

 

there are a ton of parallels between poker and trading. most especially regarding bankroll and going 'on tilt'. 'on tilt' refers to how you much more poorly you play after you face serious adversity -- bad luck or a series of events where you think it is unbelievably unlucky. I can't tell you how important this is in both poker and trading. Every single person in the world will go 'on tilt' to some degree -- the question is how much. It is much much better to face this 'tilt' situation at a small stakes poker game than it is when trading futures. you need to learn to control this or you will blow out your account -- either poker or in trading. honestly, you would be amazed how your breathing and heart rate change when you have lost money. the issue with poker is, how much worse do you play when on tilt versus how much do you win when others go on tilt.

 

poker is actually a 'cleaner' game than the markets. after a hand is over, you can see the other persons cards and then go back and calculate precisely what % of time you would win the hand and what % you lose and therefore can see in retrospect what you SHOULD have done and compare that to what you did (cost of a bet versus the payoff -- called 'pot odds'). you can't do this in trading -- but the concept is the same.

[Nick1984 10]

Books wont help... i never read a single poker book. I play the man, not the cards. Which is why I used to do alot better on the poker tables compared to online. Its like trading... its a game of psychology.

 

Only thing I gotta disagree with you is that I reckon it's important to read about poker stats. Most ppl who start never count their outs and they don't know the stats behind a hand. AK suited versus wired J's pre-flop..who has the best chance of winning.

 

Its not always easy to play another man, because someone who has absolutely no idea what they're doing can actually be harder than playing a seasoned player. Its kind of like drunken boxing against noobs and I've been bad beat heaps of times by people who will call an all in when I have wired kings and they have only an Ace high with a 7!

[Dogpile 10]

<<I've been bad beat heaps of times by people who will call an all in when I have wired kings and they have only an Ace high with a 7!>>

 

I know what you are saying but for others reading this: the answer to calling with A7 vs KK depends entirely on how much money is already in the pot and the ratio of what the all-in call amount is versus the amount already in the pot. It is CORRECT to call an all-in with A7 vs KK even knowing you are way behind if there is a lot in the pot and it is incorrect to call an all-in with A7 vs KK if there isn't much in the pot.

 

think this way, if you and I were to flip coins and we each had $100 in our stack. if there was a $1 ante in the pot put in there by somebody else, it would be technically CORRECT for us both to put our entire stacks in because the reward is greater than the 50% odds of each of us winning. we should do this all day long and split up the $1 ante (1% dead money 'overlay').

[Nick1984 10]

I couldn't make that call. If a guy has gone all in and I'm holding an ace high with a low card, then I'd assume hes holding an ace or at least a king. If hes got an ace, then there are only 2 aces left in the entire deck so I woulnd't risk my entire stack on a very low chance that I hit only 2 outs. I have no chance of getting a straight and the next best opportunity for me is if my cards are suited I may get lucky and get a flush draw.

 

A wired pair of face cards would be one of the hands that i'd put my opponent on if he bet hard and went all in pre-flop. He has the same chances of hitting another K as I do an ace which would put him with trips against my pair.

 

In a value pot if I was on a short stack then yea I would probabbly call but if we both have $100 then theres no way I'm risking that even if theres $50+ dollars in the pot.

[Dogpile 10]

mathematically;

 

Ace-Seven is about a 2.9-1 underdog vs Ace-King

 

Ace-Seven is about a 2.5-1 underdog vs King-King

 

those are the odds you would need given each hand. so long as your opponent doesn't hold AA, which would be rare since you hold 1 ace -- then you should ALWAYS call so long as you are getting 2.9-1. this is because when your oppenent has KK QQ JJ TT 99 etc..., the odds are in your FAVOR and you would be a noob for not calling if you KNEW he could have one of these hands at least some of the time. when he does have an ace with a bigger kicker, you will be 2.9-1 but you are getting 2.9-1 so this has breakeven expectation.

 

you could do all the math and come up with a precise number based on all the hands he COULD have but this is not really all that important. in general, so long as you hold an Ace, you are never more than a 3-1 underdog -- except against AA. but the times he actually has AA is offset at least somewhat by the times your opponent is bluffing or by the times he has a pair that is under 77 -- in which case you are not much of an underdog and again would be a noob for not calling.

 

you can see that math is based on what your opponent could be holding rather than what he is holding -- since you will never know what he actually is holding. you can take these concepts and come up with a number. you have to make estimates on what % of the time he is bluffing in that particular situation. I have made some calls where I felt very strongly that I was beat but the odds were close based on the size of the opt --- and magically some of the time -- your opponent is bluffing and you win that 1 big extra pot -- which can be the difference between winning and losing overall.

 

but in my opinion, the real crucial factor in poker is, how do you handle a bunch of bad beats that happen in a series. waiting for KK for an hour or two and then getting nailed with it by a noob is tough mentally. now what if you are dealt QQ the next hand and lose again to the same noob. now you make a straight and lose to a full house on the river. these things happen and the question is do you tilt off another stack holding AQ, a good hand on its own but a bad hand in most all-in situations.

[notouch 10]

Slansky's 'The Theory of Poker' tells it best. You can calculate probability and odds playing poker much more precisely than you can trading. For each hand you hold you know (or can calculate) the exact probability of that hand winning. You can also calculate your exact odds on each bet you make because you know how much you stand to win if you have the best hand and how much money you need to bet to continue. Therefore if your probability of winning is higher than the odds you need to pay to continue then you should bet. Of course in reality there's the issue of bluffing and gamesmanship but these apply less to online poker.

[Soultrader 12]

The trick is to play the cards against an amateur and play the man against a pro. New players play loose and will call anything. Which is why patience is needed and all that is required is one hand to send him home. They never know what hit them while you were setting him up the entire time.

[james_gsx 16]

I watched a poker tournament on TV over the weekend with my mom. The girl was up big, then you could see emotion take over her. Sure enough, the professoinal took advantage and she lost. When they asked her questions later, she never referred to emotion, but it was clear as day thats what it was.

 

It made me think of how similar it was to trading. The amateur starts off well, while the professional sits back and waits for the planned setup. The amateur makes a mistake, gets emotional, and the professional goes in for the kill and takes their money.

 

I also noticed very quickly how well the professional kept to a good capital management plan. If he had a band hand he took no time to fold and move onto the next one. Just like a professional trader, exiting the trade before it hurts his account.

[darthtrader 10]

thanks guys,

 

Edward Miller's books look like exactly what i was looking for. Thats interesting soultrader you didnt read books, counting the outs though is what I want to learn. Haveing no idea and starting out with an odds calculator it was pretty interesting to see hands i thought would have been really good have a 5% probability.

 

Tilt sounds great, thats why i would like to only learn low limit right now with some idea i know some theory. Should take some tilt out. Suprised there isnt more talk about tilt with trading.

 

I think I have noticed the drunken boxing idea on yahoo already as an extreme example. Everyone is so loose and clueless that half the table calls anything, if you play tight at all you bleed dry.

 

Something else that sounds interesting for a fun read about emotions is the Professor, the Banker, and the Suicide King. Story of a billionaire that took on all the top pros who combined their rolls and played him one on one. The pot would go up to 20 million a hand and the pros lost all their edge because the emotions of losing their entire roll was overwhelming.

[darthtrader 10]

once you have read that a played a while: read 'Small Stakes Hold Em' by Miller (this book is considered the bible for online players).

 

Hey Dogpile, I cant thank you enough for this info. I found a pdf online of it, even just looking at the table of contents I was ready to order when I caught the "tight is right" subject. Scrolling through to find that section I caught the expectancy graph per hand in the book and immediately ordered it. I was shocked how few hands have positive expectancy.

It sounds like the whole book is about how to play tight against typical loose/clueless players in low limit. I could never play no limit, no way I can play anything but tight. My goal is to be able to go up to niagara casino thats about 20 min from here and come home with some pocket change on the weekend from small limit for fun. This is perfection.

[Dogpile 10]

just be aware Darth that the Small Stakes book is not a beginners book. the concepts in there are pretty advanced -- despite the title saying its Small Stakes.

 

poker is a funny game statistically. the 'variance' in your results is high relative to the win rate. often times, a few hours of playing will show a profit or loss based on just a small number of the hands you played. did you make a flush on that big pot? did your Aces (AA) hold up or get cracked by 97 offsuit? the nice thing is a lot of the time you can take solace in studying the hands you played and seeing if in retrospect you played them well. if you consistently play hands well and minimize the 'tilt' factor, you can clean up at small stakes games. I suggest you start at the very lowest online stakes you can find and play at least 20 thousand hands before you even attempt to move up. The free games probably won't teach you much. But if you can't beat those, you can't beat money games. You should clean up over time if too many players are playing too many hands. In the short-run, say over a few hundred hands, poker is a luck game. Over the course of thousands of hands, skill wins. Over tens of thousands of hands, skill dominates.

[notouch 10]

What do you think of the poker bots that are around? You need programming skills to program them to play a winning strategy but it strikes me that any relatively competent programmer could program a strategy to clean up on the tables. I know the online poker rooms try to ban them but there are ways round. Do these bots take away your edge?

 

Also what do you think of the legitimate software around? There are odds calculators and programs that keep track of other players. Can you incorporate these into a winning poker strategy?

[Reaver 10]

I am not scared of poker bots, for the same reason I am not worried about automated trading systems..sure, they will win some money, and blow a lot of players right out of the water...but they are ultimately predictable..no machine has dynamic thought, and no machine can use discretion. No matter how sophisticated it's programming is, it is still a machine and has to follow systematic rules. You will find a way to exploit a system with enough work.

[Sparrow 10]

Sorry for resurrecting this old thread but simply didn't know where to put it.

 

If any of you guys likes to watch poker, the High Stakes Poker series is available on

youtube.

Just got to search for high stakes poker season x episode x there or check this.

x being the number you are interested of course.

 

It's really entertaining, and I love to watch it.

 

In the 4th season from episode 11 on the buy in is at least 500k.