Seeing the Flop Rate With 19 Hand Starting Strategy

[Jiggus]

I was just wondering what sort of percentage of flops players who use a 19 hand starting strategy are seeing?

To start off, I'm seeing 17% after about 11,000 recorded hands.

I believe that there are others out there who use the same pre-flop plan, no?

Just curious.

Jigs

[bearcats05]

19 hands? that doesnt sound good... what are those 19 hands?

if you are in position do you play more?

[Greedo017]

19 hands being about 17% preflop seems about right, depending on whether you're counting aks and ako as different hands or not. i may be wrong but i'm guessing 11000 hands is giving you a very significant measurement.

this can probably be figured out exactly

[Greedo017]

ok, assuming you play all pocket pairs, aks ako aqs aqo ajs ajo (not sure if that's your 19 but its probably gonna give us close odds).

5.9% chance of getting a pocket pair
.9% chance of getting any two unsuited
.3% of getting any two suited

so, 5.9% + .9 x 3 + .3 x 3 = 9.5% of your hands

so, let's assume you mean 19 hands, not counting suited or not. so, all pocket pairs, ak, aq, aj, at, kq, kj

that's 5.9% + .9 x 6 + .3 x 6 = 13.1%

so, if you play strictly 19 hands, your actual hands played is 13.1%. I imagine that your 4% over this is because of bb playing.

if that's all wrong someone feel free to piss on my hard work and correct it.

[Miffed22001]

I use a similar strategy while bonus whoring, although i add a few extra hands when its a multi way pot or mutli way raised pot and im in lp
I see between 17-20% so i guess jiggus your stats percentage are about right, he differnece comes only from ether raising the button to steal blinds or as said limping in lp with suited junk

[Jiggus]

OK, that's good to know Miffed, Greedo.

Yeah, my starting hands are what AOK (my guru) has recommended. I don't differentiate between suited or unsuited. That's all the pairs, indeed. The lowliest starting hand would be JQ.

I guess I should point out that this is AOK's Performance Poker starting hand strategy. The general idea is that you're playing many, many hands so you needn't concern yourself with any of the dodgier holdings. At Paradise, unfortunately, I am limited to three tables, so I'm not quite able to do what AOK recommends with playing 4 tables at once, but three is still not too bad for generating a decent volume of hands per hour.

Some think that this is too tight, but I must say that at the limits I play now, with many, many morons, it is pretty much the only way to go.

Interesting the math there, Greedo. Would the extra 4% be down to the blinds? I am notorious in not attempting to steal blinds nor to protect my own blinds UNLESS I have something pretty monstrous.

Again, at the nutbar tables I play, position is not a concern to me so I'm not loosening up at all. I'll leave that for my next level, although, I do tend to play a bit looser in tournies depending on position.

I can say that during a 300 hands session recently, I was as low as 9% at one point. It ended up around 13%, if memory serves.

Jigs

[bearcats05]

i think the 4% extra he is talking about is just from checking the big blind or completing the small blind

[Fnord]

...but I like folding AK pre-flop...to a single raise...

[Pelion]

I don't differentiate between suited or unsuited.

Do you differentiate between positions or just limp them all from any position.

[Jiggus]

...but I like folding AK pre-flop...to a single raise...

Hmm,... Fnord, I don't know if you're being sarcastic there. Enlighten me, please.

Do you differentiate between positions or just limp them all from any position.

I don't differentiate between position. Rarely, anyhow. It depends on how stupid the table is, but normally it's quite pointless to do so.

I don't hobble in with everything. It's supposed to be like this, though oft-times if I'm in counterplay mode, I'll limp in with AK:

AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AK and AQ are raised pre-flop, but not always. Other than KK and AA, the others are raised only if there are no raises in front. If there are, then I'll call with every other one EXCEPT for AQ which then becomes a fold.

My normal raise is 6X the BB, but with some tables I'll make that 10x. Remember, I'm only playing 1/2 cents here.

All the rest is limped.

I am sure that this seems exceedingly tight, but who am I to doubt AOK? It's definitely working for me. I just need to scrape up another 150 bucks and I'll try it at the next level.

[Miffed22001]

It is tight but for a staring game at the limits you play, it is the recomendation i'd make to you too.
I think when you move to 10nL (if you havent done so already) then this will need some tweaking but until then i think its probably the correct way to go about things.
FNord dont be such a bully

[Pelion]

yea i play pretty much the same as that at 5NL. I am more liberal with preflop reraises against LAG players than you are but apart from that it seems pretty much the same. I also dont limp many hands in early positions unless the table is very passive.

I think this strategy works very well at the ultra low limits though, especially at 5NL where for some reason the Blinds are still 0.01/0.02, so it is VERY deepstacked poker and you can afford to see flops with pretty much any hands with nut potential. I make alot of money from 2 gap connectors in late position when i make a straight and noone believes me.

[euphoricism]

I'm sure fnord will echo me when I say throw the chart out the window...

Learn "why" to play, not "what" to play.

From Fnord's post (that you should ALL read in its entirely, but here are some gems)

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...ic.php?t=19103

"Poker is a game of cards, people, and position. You can't do anything about the cards".

"Hand values are relative to the action in front of you."

"What is the +EV range of hands to raise if one player who limps crap but raises his best hands open limps? Two players? Tight blinds? K9s can be a monster. AQo can be toilet paper. "

and finally, "Ideal play doesn’t beat a game for the max. Exploitation does. "


Now, throw the chart out the window. Learn why and when you're folding AJo from EP and raising it from CO. Learn when you fold 44 UTG and cold call it from the button.

Fnord and I both admit to using charts when we began - and we both made money, but we're both making even MORE money once we understood the REASONING for what was on those charts.

Poker doesn't work like blackjack. Its not that clear cut.

[Irisheyes]

I want to argue on Jiggus's side here. I too play only 19 hands, just the same as Jiggus does. I have put a lot of thought into why I play them like I do and I can provide a whole list of reasons to that effect. IMO that IS playing poker. I understand your reasons for "folding AJo from EP and raising it from CO" etc. and I choose not to do the same because I have come up with a way to play whick I feel better suits the conditions I play in then a positional/reads-based game does. Its just my style of making money and I believe it can make as much as any other stlye given certain table conditions.

I think alot of people think that making reads based plays is more advanced poker and that everyone should learn to play in lots of pots and splash around. I don't think this is the case. Sure if you want to play 2000nl then you deffinitly need all these skills but I think people don't realise that if you start out nut camping at 10nl by the time you reach 2000nl you will have naturally developed these skills along the way without making much of a concious effort to "splash around". It just happens.

If you don't play >100nl then your best bet at winning poker is to play 19 hands and nut camp. Its plain and simple, you can make >15ptBB/100 at every stake up to and including 100nl by nut camping if you play the right tables.. Its the easiest way to play and I don't think its right for beginning players to be told that they should loosen up and start playing more pots so they learn faster.

I say throw the chart out the window when you are as good as Fnord and Co. Until then play the chart, learn progressivly and don't jump into the deep end as some may argue you should.

[bearcats05]

i think beginners can still learn to play a wider range of hands when they are in positon, like suited connectors for example.... if they can limp in position and get a straight or flush draw that shouldnt be too dificult for them to play. they dont have to do everything like you said though, i wouldnt expect a beginner to be making great plays post flop because of reads....

[Pelion]

sure. suited connectors and low pocket pairs are great hands for begginers to play. Easier than high PPs or AKo because there is a blackjack style clear cut strategy for them. Call them in late position for 1 BB and fold to a preflop raise. If you flop 4 to a straight (the high end) or 4 to a flush then look at your pot odds chart and decide how much you are willing to call to make your hand. Once you have made it you bet it. Easy.
Low PPs are the same. Hit a set and bet it or don't hit one and fold.

Occasionally you will lose a LOT of chips to a higher set or a higher flush but you will still make money and over time you will develop a feel for when you are against a higher set/ flush and occasionally start to make folds that save chips. Over a longer time you may start to get a feeling that nobody has anything when you miss your flush draw and start bluffing a couple of pots. You don't have to force thise stuff, it just happens over time if you concentrate while you play.
For a beginner, playing few preflop hands in a set way will allow them to survive without their bankroll shrinking (hopefully) until they have begun to develop these skills.
IMHO jumping in at the deepend probably does 2 things:
1) You learn to play sophisticated, thinking, aggressive poker a lot quicker than by nut camping.
2) You lose a lot more money trying to learn the game than you would if you were playing TAG.

If you look at both players a year later player 2 would probably be a better player and will probably become a winner at the higher stakes faster IF he doesnt bust out first. Player 1 will make the climb gradually but consistently.

[Fnord]

...but I like folding AK pre-flop...to a single raise...

Hmm,... Fnord, I don't know if you're being sarcastic there. Enlighten me, please.

Sometimes AK is no good. Sometimes it's just not good enough. Sometimes I need to save my stack so I can cover as much of the table sucker in case my number comes up in the stack donation lottery (although I try my best to stuff the hopper with as many tickets as possible.)

I don't differentiate between position.

Position is more important than hole cards in deep money NLHE. I love the button. I play it, I steal it, when I'm in the zone I even defend it.

[MannerBoy]

start to play some poker.

[euphoricism]

I want to argue on Jiggus's side here. I too play only 19 hands, just the same as Jiggus does. I have put a lot of thought into why I play them like I do and I can provide a whole list of reasons to that effect.

Good.

I understand your reasons for "folding AJo from EP and raising it from CO" etc. and I choose not to do the same because I have come up with a way to play whick I feel better suits the conditions I play in then a positional/reads-based game does.

Bad. I will grant you that at the micro-limits the people you are playing against are sufficiently bad to cover these aspects and give you their value implicitly. However, you will make far more money playing your position than not playing your position. Its that important.

You ARE playing poker if you feel that you're exploiting the game. "Exploitation wins the max, not ideal play", afterall. But I hesitate to say, "play these 19 hands and only these 19 hands, despite where you are relative to the button" is really exploiting much.

I think alot of people think that making reads based plays is more advanced poker and that everyone should learn to play in lots of pots and splash around.

Yes, lots of people do. We make money off of them. If anything, I'm telling you to be tighter.

I don't think its right for beginning players to be told that they should loosen up and start playing more pots so they learn faster.

Me either. I'm not concerned with learn faster, I'm concerned with learn better.

I say throw the chart out the window when you are as good as Fnord and Co.

Fnord and Co. wouldn't be fnord and Co if they never stopped using the charts. At some point to become part of Fnord and Co, you must throw out the chart.

Until then play the chart, learn progressivly and don't jump into the deep end as some may argue you should.

I have no problems with playing the charts. I used em, fnord used em, lots of people used em. I am suspect of any chart that doesn't take into account position. Its just too important. Charts are a great starting place. My point is a lot of people use the charts and don't understand "why" what goes where. Its not about "learning fast" its about "learning well"

[Jiggus]

OK, a general reply to all.

Since I'm the original poster, and seemingly considered a dimwit here, I'd like to say that I'm very happy to have sparked off such a lively and productive dialogue on this subject.

I am happy, too, to see some great FTR-ers taking time to write their thoughts about this subject in such detail.

Further, I wish that AOK would step in to defend this strategy, as well, but in the meanwhile,...

All that matters to me is my past history in the game and what is happening with it NOW. As some of the more astute readers will know, I've played for about TWO years online. Only in the last, say, three months, have I found a strategy that is a winning one, however.

Before this, I played with a fairly tight starting hand strategy anyhow. Sklanksy's SSH was my source then, just that now, I'm finding my NL feet and it's great. Like Iricheyes says, I am getting some confidence now. That's super important to me. I haven't gone on tilt for three months and that's something. There is one other non-poker factor that may be a contributor to that as well, but playing winning poker is the main one.

I would like to say, that I am aware of position, and know what it means for me, however, it is less important at this limit than my starting hands. Again, I am usually playing a counterplay game because there are just too many people who will call anything to the river. Again, counterplay is an AOK strategy, and it also works.

For instance, yesterday afternoon, I played in an MTT. My game was completely different there. Still fairly tight overall, but much more aware of position than in my crappy low limit ring game. Well, that said, this was a cheap 1 buck buy in at Paradise. I would say that my awareness of position kind of leapt out at me during this tourney.

Anyhow, for what it's worth, I came 36th out of 952 players. One coin toss that I lost would've likely made the difference between 36th and the last table, but hey, c'est la fekkin' vie, right? I'm pretty happy with that result, though.

And, no, it was not beginner's luck. I play these things a few times a week, usually ending up in the top 1/3 to top 10%. Yesterday I actually had the chance to play with 100% concentration, though, since my wife and son were out!

I use these tournies for some spice, but the ring games are where I want to win consistently, and by playing how I do at the $2 tables I am doing what I want to.

As for position being "everything", I would counter by saying that for me, at least, BANKROLL is everything. When my bankroll is at 25X the buy in for the next limit, I'll move up and try to be a bit fancier at my ring games, but until that time, I want to build my confidence by playing steady, disciplined poker. I think that AOK might even say that "Discipline is everything."

I will ignore the one or two smart-ass comments, as difficult as that is for me and my hotheaded temper, but as I was perusing my copy the Theory of Poker yesterday (it's my toiletside reading) I came across a section, for the 100th time, I think, wherein it is stated that the so-called "super-readers" can be easily confused by some clever deception. Reading is, I think, an over-rated and over-boasted-about "skill". Unless you have ESP you're just making a guess. You'll never be able to consistently "read" a moron or a genius, in any case. Where I'm playing, surrounded by morons, I'm winning and that speaks for itself, no?

Lastly, I sincerely want to become a more able and skilled player, don't get me wrong on that. I just want to learn to crawl before I can walk. I've lost a lot of money being a drunken, impetus fool, and now I'm just trying to play with some training wheels. I would say that entirely due to the people on this site, I've become a winning player. Thanks to those who've advised me.

(Like anyone well read ALL that).

Jigs

[euphoricism]

No one has said anything about "reading" anyone. I will give you that at $5 NL you can play AJo profitably from just about any position due to the fact that your opponents really, really suck overall. But theres a massive difference between playing AJo from UTG and from the BTN, particularly against "the school" and any strategy that fails to mention that (when there are sooo many that do!) is missing vital information.

You seem like you know what you're doing, so this line of "postings" isn't aimed at you necessarily.

[Jiggus]

BTN? Behind the,...

I was just going to add that, AOK's Performance Poker is all about playing large numbers of hands and winning money. My take on it is that by playing such a tight starting hand and intial betting strategy, you are minimising your decision-making times in later rounds, thereby enabling you to play 200 hands/hour.

By the way, I hate AJ. Always bites me in the ass.

Actually, I believe Iricheyes DID mention something about reads and reading and associated with "Fnord and Co." Check back and you'll see.

[euphoricism]

BTN = Button. Us limit doods are lazy.

Yeah RichEyes did. Hes wrong.

The tight preflop strategy is because at the micro limits your opponents are playing just to the right of any two cards. The only way to combat that is by being tight as hell and nutcamping, as you've said. The variance is hell, and you couldn't pay me enough to get me to play $.05/$.10 anymore.

[Jiggus]

Sorry for my density, but what do you mean by "to the right of any two cards"?

Ah, limit,... been there done that. Interestingly, there was a thread some while ago where someone asked about which game had the greater variance, and the general scuttlebutt was that it was limit. I sincerely agree with that. Limit almost got me to quit poker and go back to being a semi-professional bingo player.

[Pelion]

Sorry for my density, but what do you mean by "to the right of any two cards"?

He means prelflop they fold 72o because various WSOP commentators say its the worst hand but they are happy to play anything else

[Jiggus]

Ah, thanks for that Pelion. I've never seen a poker game on TV here in The Netherlands. Read about Vince van Patten though! Fine B-movie actor who's apparently parlayed his "fame' into a comfortable role as a poker colour man.

[Irisheyes]

i think beginners can still learn to play a wider range of hands when they are in positon, like suited connectors for example.... if they can limp in position and get a straight or flush draw that shouldnt be too dificult for them to play.

I believe in a deep stack NL game draws are difficult to play well. Compared to say small pocket pairs they are hell. I think beginners consistently throw away money on outs that dont exist, they dont properly understand implied odds and their value or lack of value in certain situations and they are unable to properly use tactics which are available to cheapen the cost of drawing. I also think beginners loose lots of money when their suited connector hits a weak top pair or similar and they get involved in pots they shouldn't.


they dont have to do everything like you said though, i wouldnt expect a beginner to be making great plays post flop because of reads....[/quote

[Irisheyes]

Firstly, good response to my kinda wandering post. Heres the best I can do.

I understand your reasons for "folding AJo from EP and raising it from CO" etc. and I choose not to do the same because I have come up with a way to play whick I feel better suits the conditions I play in then a positional/reads-based game does.

Bad. I will grant you that at the micro-limits the people you are playing against are sufficiently bad to cover these aspects and give you their value implicitly. However, you will make far more money playing your position than not playing your position. Its that important.

You ARE playing poker if you feel that you're exploiting the game. "Exploitation wins the max, not ideal play", afterall. But I hesitate to say, "play these 19 hands and only these 19 hands, despite where you are relative to the button" is really exploiting much.

The button/position is devalued when playing in a game agains pure calling stations. A game where you cant easily buy pots or continuation bet, you have no fold equity and no ability to make speciallised moves which are designed to intimidate players with mediocre hands. In this type of game showdown value is key. So you limp your AJ from EP, 80% of hands are unraised to the flop so why fold, you make top pair and you bet it down to win against an opps J6. I do the same thing on BTN, position is helpful but rarely vital. You say well if you raise your AJ on the button then you get to play in a bigger pot on the flop. I say I loose big when one of the blinds shows down AK which he would have raised preflop (allowing me to fold) had I not done so. Also when I raise all the J6 guys fold.

This is the game I play in. Playing tight and showing down good hands is exploiting the game.

I don't think its right for beginning players to be told that they should loosen up and start playing more pots so they learn faster.

Me either. I'm not concerned with learn faster, I'm concerned with learn better.

I remember a thread in the beginners circle a while ago which was about a new player asking about playing trash. Someone posted at the end (I think it was Rondavu not sure) saying that there will come a time for every poker player when trash can be profitable. You know you've reached that time when you don't need to post a question asking how. Thats how I feel the poker learning curve should be approached. Nut camp untill you have a series of realisations which allow you de veer off the path profitably. Untill then nut, camp.

I say throw the chart out the window when you are as good as Fnord and Co.

Fnord and Co. wouldn't be fnord and Co if they never stopped using the charts. At some point to become part of Fnord and Co, you must throw out the chart.

Throw out the chart when you have enough realisations to allow you to identify situations where the chart could be bendable. Not when you see a post saying "Poker is a game of cards, people, and position. You can't do anything about the cards".

Until then play the chart, learn progressivly and don't jump into the deep end as some may argue you should.

I have no problems with playing the charts. I used em, fnord used em, lots of people used em. I am suspect of any chart that doesn't take into account position. Its just too important.

Its not that awesomely important in certain games, especially some low stake NL cash games. And if it is that important alot of beginners dont understand enough to utalise it properly. So use a strategy which nullifies the effect of position to a certain extent.

[Irisheyes]

Oh and about the reads based play stuff I was talking about above, what I really ment was plays which utalise position more heavily then hole cards. I didn't explain myself too well I think.

[euphoricism]

Again, granted, at the micro-levels its not particularly important to worry about your position. Nut Camping = money. We all know this - thats not the point I'm trying to make.

The point I'm trying to make is that you won't simply "realize" when to make positional based play or when it is warranted. If youre used to playing AJo from any position, you will continue to play AJo from any position until you know why you shouldnt.

Granted, again, this won't take place until you're out of the micro limits.

[Jiggus]

iRICHeyes, you fully understand this low limit game.

I just lost a bit of cash to morons. C'est la vie.

I realise that the discussion has taken a more general tact, but I for one, fully understand the weakness or strength of AJ. AQ too, for that matter, which is what I just lost with to some asshole holding 7T off. You see, he would not put down his pair of sevens. I made two hefty raises, and he called 'em all. Of course, he ended up getting another 7 on the river.

Despite these adverse conditions, I reckon that a 12 BB/100 win rate over what is now well over 11,000 hands counts for something. I'm quite sure that if I posted those results and said that I was playing the 50 buck tables, the reaction would have been a lot different.

I'm going to stick with this for another few thousand hands, and then try a slightly more aggressive approach to see how that goes. I reckon that after about 20,000 hands I'll know which is the more profitable method.

Limit sucks, by the way. Just thought I'd reiterate that.

[Jiggus]

Oh, one more thing. My "won money at showdown" rate is over 57% which adds further credence to iRICHeyes very accurate theories on playing with jack-asses, no?

One would think that at saner tables, whilst that win rate might be more or less the same, the BB/100 rate would be far, far less, since players would realise that I was camping on premium hands.

This morning there was a peckerhead calling all in pre-flop with A6 off and getting called by another peckerhead with A-something off. Earlier, I folded pocket 9's to some other morons with similar all-in preflop strategies. Turns out I would've won, but I don't go all in with shit like 99. Ever.

These tables can be hazardous to your health, luckily, they're also a great source of entertainment.

[Pelion]

Jiggus. I think your strategy is a good one but i think you could add a couple extra BB/100 by noticing who the tight players are (VPIP < 20%) who raise plenty of unpaired high card type hands (e.g. AJ, AQ, AK). Hopefully these are observent players and once every so often i reraise them preflop in position with 67s type cards. If they reraise me again i let it go since they know im tight and dont raise these hands. Usually they call and i can buy the pot from them on an A free flop or take a sizeable chunk of their stack if i make 2 pair or a straight or a flush. I don't do this very often and i only do it against players i have at least 500 hands on but it works pretty nicely if they are raising with a good chance they have an unpaired hand. If you are playing counterplay you will stand an even better chance of stealing because they will notice this is they first hand you have EVER raised preflop and proceed to put you on AA.

[Jiggus]

Got you on that.

There are about 4 players that I've noted who are actually decent. When one of them is at my table, we're aware of each other and the tactics between ourselves can be slightly more interesting.

Over this holiday period, I've loosened up a bit from late position, but my wins are still coming only with the premium starting hands, though one or two bluffs did provide some profits.

It's crazy at this limit, indeed, especially when they're all drunk!