6 replies to this topic

[JFarrell20]

General thought here: Let me know what you guys think...Most people seem to agree that at a 10-handed table you should see around 25% of flops. Suppose you're playing .5/1 limit holdem.This means you are paying a minimum of $1.50 to see 25% of flops (if you only play the blinds and .5 other hands)This means you are paying a maximum of $5.75 to see 25% of flops (if you play 2.5 flops per 10 hands that get capped pre-flop, and you lay down both your blinds)Lets say on average you play the BB, fold the SB, and play 1.5 other hands out of the 8 free ones. Lets say 1 out of these 2.5 hands gets raised pre-flop. That means you are paying on average $2 per 10 hands. With the rake that is $2.20 per 10, or $22.00 per 100 hands. $11.00 of this money (or 50%) came from hands in which you were in the blind. (I'm including playing the BB for a raise every 2 hands, and a folding of the SB, plus rake = $1.10)So, in other words, half of your hands are ones in which you probably don't want to play, per se. Half of the money you spend pre-flop is on hands you want to play, the other half is on hands in which you don't have much choice. This doesn't seem very good. To me, it seems like if you pay to see 30% of flops, then you are seeing an extra hand every 20 hands for a "discount". In other words, a greater percentage of your pre-flop spending is on hands you want to play, as opposed to hands you have to play. So you are paying $5.50 more (rake included) per 100 hands for a total of $27.50 per 100 hands. $11.00 of this is blind money, while $16.50 of this is money you choose to play with. You are investing a higher % of your pre-flop money in hands you want to play, as opposed to have to play.This theory is way more prevalent at a small table, say 5 handed, in which you are getting hit with blinds 40% of the time. In this case you probably should play 60% of the hands pre-flop. This theory only works for limit, because obviously, at a NL 5-handed table, you will not see 60% of the flops, due to the ability of being bought out of the pot pre-flop.Thoughts???

[wrto4556]

what are you talking about??

[JFarrell20]

To condense it a little more...You have to pay a mandatory amount per 10 handsThe BB and the SB. Regardless of your cards.That means each round you have to pay .75 BB's just to sit at the table.That is tax (on top of the rake) for sitting there. "Sitting tax"Playing more flops means you are rendering the sitting tax as less of a percentage of your total pre-flop spending. You are getting more of your money in with hands that you want to get involved with. Obviously, there must be some perfect equilibrium number out there on getting the most bang for your buck.Let me put it to you like this, since we're both Houstonians:Say you go to a strip club with a cover that is $20.Each lap dance is $20. treat every lap dance like a hand that you play at the table.0 dances costs $20 (infinity per)1 dance costs $40 (40 per)2 dances costs $60 (30 per)4 dances costs $100 (25 per)You see, the more you buy, the less impact you are self-rendering the up-front tax, or 'sitting tax' in poker.Obviously, if you buy more than a few dances in a night (see too many flops at the table), you are just throwing away money. There is a perfect equilibrium somewhere...BTW, the "rake" at a strip club would be the tax that the ATM charges to pull cash out. lol.

[poker_bull]

That isn't all that condensed. :roll:

[wrto4556]

.....Jfarrell. You don't win with every hand you play. This post is rediculous.

[JFarrell20]

all im trying to say is get more of you $ in with hands you chose to play. Not blind hands. It automatically costs a certain amount just to sit at the table, seeing 25% of flops when you are in the blinds 20% of the time (MINIMUM) just doesn't seem cost-effective.Just a thought... what are your thoughts on this?

[Wilderness]

Most of what you have said is pretty hard to get through, but I believe I understand what you are trying to say and frankly doesn't really matter. The reason it doesn't matter is because the whole approach you took in this thread is relating the % of flops you want to see with the money you are paying to see those hands. But the money you pay to see hands has nothing to do with flop %; you want to be playing 25% of the hands at a 10 person table because that's how often, on average, you will get playable hands depending on your position.If you are playing 30+% of hands at a 10 handed table, you are simply playing too many marginal or -EV hands. It has nothing to do with the amount of money you are putting in to see those hands or anything like that. Ideal flop % is based on how often you will be seeing a playable hand, and its just not that often in a full table. Obviously it goes up as the number of players go down, but still 60% at a 5 handed table has still got to be too high.