HOH Volume 1 - Book Discussion Part 1

[Makwa]

With regard to hand values -- taking into account all the elements required for a decision, particularly in end game play where you are short stacked or near to it, your cards are often the least important factor. Position, pot size, relative stacks and player styles are most important. It is quite possible to play using these factors, without looking at your cards at all. Even postflop play can be handled by playing the board, not your cards.
So Harrington's point about your cards not always being a big factor is correct (of course).
The importance of your cards themselves is 'up there' when the tourney starts, and in middle stages, but is reduced to almost zero with a short stack in the end game.

There was a pro recently who went deep (or finished final table) without looking at their cards once. I seem to recall it was a woman -- does anyone know who that was?

 

[Poker Orifice]

The player was Annette_15 (Annette Oberstad .. sp?) and I believe it was while playing a $10 mtt online. She's also the woman who won the wsop Europe event.

 

[Poker Orifice]

She took 1st place!

 

[NineLions]

She won, but I think the buyin might have been less. 180 player, she says she looked at her cards once.

I suspect she's played this way more than once, but posted the hand history because she happened to win this one. I think it's available to watch via replayer on Pocket Fives.

 

[bulldog2782]

I dont really get what Harrington is saying about play the opposite syle as your opponents. I mean it makes perfect sence but then in this case you opponent would be playing the opposite style as you so both people benefit so it does not seem to me like it helps one person a lot.

 

[Alon Ipser]

I dont really get what Harrington is saying about play the opposite syle as your opponents. I mean it makes perfect sence but then in this case you opponent would be playing the opposite style as you so both people benefit so it does not seem to me like it helps one person a lot.

He is talking about the table in general and not just one player. If the over all image of a table is tight, then play more aggressive and vice versa.

 

[odinscott]

I thought this part of the book was pretty basic, but the talk about the different styles was decent.

(or are we discussing that part next time?)

 

[Makwa]

I dont really get what Harrington is saying about play the opposite syle as your opponents. I mean it makes perfect sence but then in this case you opponent would be playing the opposite style as you so both people benefit so it does not seem to me like it helps one person a lot.

'Sense' is the word you mean.
Many times your opponents will not be aware of how they are playing, or what style they exhibit. In this case, take advantage.

 

[dg1267]

Damn, I really wanted to get this book so I could participate! Oh well, maybe next week.

 

[RickH2005]

I have a question ..........

I hope I'm not to late to ask, but I,d like to know-------on 'Pot odds' he's talking about how it works in limit hold 'em, which is easy to understand, but when it comes to no-limit, I understand what he's saying, but what do you do when you come across a player and your bet is correct, you can control the pot odds the way he says in the book, but going up against somebody who knows NOTHING about what pot odds are all about, aren't his chances of beating you just bt luck really pretty good? I mean, he doesn't know that he shouldn't even be in the hand (chasing the flush with 4-1 against catching)--he's gonna call no matter what you do. How is it possable, then, to control the uncontrollable?? Phew! It really IS easier to play against players who KNOW how to play!

 

[Steveg1976]

All you can do is make him/her make the mistake of calling with improper odds, then be smart enough to recognize when they got there and fold. You cannot control the cards that fall, and you want them to call with improper odds as most of the time they will miss as has been discussed extensively elsewhere.

 

[Poker Orifice]

You might be able to pick up HOH Vol.1 from your local library, via 'inter-library loan' (usually allowing books to be loaned for approx. 2wks.). If you've never read the book, you will probably want to purchase it anyways. Vol.1 is pretty basic/low-intermediate but is a great grounding for those who've never read any poker books. I'd say it's the best one to get started with for sure (Phil Gordon's Little Green Book is good for this purpose also,.. another well-written introductory book to NLHE, to intermediate play).
Enjoy the read for all those reading it for their first time.
In response to betting amounts and with donks calling off their chips when they don't have pot odds to do so, I would just slightly increase my bets to make them pay for it (sometimes in online play, one needs to adjust bet amounts to slightly higher amounts than typical live play, ie. a flp bet of 1/2pot in live, might be translated to 3/4 pot online). If your opponent is still calling off their chips as a 5to1 dog after the turn, trying to catch a flush, just bet out accordingly so that they're making a mistake to call your bet.... maybe even shove if you you're sure they're on a dr. If you lose,.. just Unlucky. You want to make your opponents making mistakes as this is a big part of what poker is about,.. 'force them to decisions, make them make mistakes, and taking advantage of it'. Overbet pot myself, shoving on turn last night, 3x pot when I turned 2pr., guy calls off 7/8 of stack to make the call with a weak fl. dr. (no overs, etc., drawing to max. of 8 outs as the one would give me a fullhouse,.. he hits, I'm out.... just the way it goes,...many have no clue and don't know better... frustrating when you lose, but odds are you will win from their mistakes.
GL!!

 

[NineLions]

... but what do you do when you come across a player and your bet is correct, you can control the pot odds the way he says in the book, but going up against somebody who knows NOTHING about what pot odds are all about, aren't his chances of beating you just bt luck really pretty good? I mean, he doesn't know that he shouldn't even be in the hand (chasing the flush with 4-1 against catching)--he's gonna call no matter what you do. How is it possable, then, to control the uncontrollable?? Phew! It really IS easier to play against players who KNOW how to play!

It doesn't matter if you opponent knows or not. He still has the same chance of filling his flush as someone who does understand.

If you always give 3-1 pot odds and untrained opponent always calls but only hits 1 out of 4 times.

If you played 100 times for $1 it costs him/her $100 to call 100 times. They hit 1 out of 4 times so they win 25 times out of 100, and they win $3 each time so $75 total. Your net is + $25.

 

[shinedown.45]

It doesn't matter if you opponent knows or not. He still has the same chance of filling his flush as someone who does understand.

If you always give 3-1 pot odds and untrained opponent always calls but only hits 1 out of 4 times.

If you played 100 times for $1 it costs him/her $100 to call 100 times. They hit 1 out of 4 times so they win 25 times out of 100, and they win $3 each time so $75 total. Your net is + $25.

You also have to understand that no matter how poorly your opponent plays, you are always making the right plays at the right times and therefore you are making correct plays and will come out ahead in the long run.

 

[shinedown.45]

This discussion has been open for a week already and was wondering when we will start part 2.
I have already been skimming through part 2 of HOH 1 and believe it will make a more interesting and an even more lengthy discussion IMO.
I would also like to suggest we make these weekly or at the least, bi-weekly discussions per chapter.

 

[RickH2005]

This discussion has been open for a week already and was wondering when we will start part 2.
I have already been skimming through part 2 of HOH 1 and believe it will make a more interesting and an even more lengthy discussion IMO.
I would also like to suggest we make these weekly or at the least, bi-weekly discussions per chapter.

Debi wants to start on Oct. 9th--I've already read part 2 and have started the next. But I think I'm gonna stop, go back to the begining of part 2 and keep going over it until I get a really good grasp of it. So far it's making alot of sense and alot of what he's been talking about I already PRETTY much do---but I really do need more discipline. Like tonight at our FR at Ultimatebet, I held pkt Qs and even tho I KNEW I was beat on the flopw/an ace on the flop, I just COULDN'T let go of those Qs! Hoping for the best onna turn or the riv even tho the odds were far against it happening! And I like the bi-weekly idea too!

 

[OzExorcist]

He is talking about the table in general and not just one player. If the over all image of a table is tight, then play more aggressive and vice versa.

^ this.

FWIW this approach can work heads up as well, as long as you're better at your style than your opponent is at his. It'll be a pretty even contest though.

But yeah, in this context Harrington is talking about full tables and it's playing the opposite style to the table in general that can reap you some rewards. If most people have gone tight (on the bubble, for example - we'll get to that bit of the book later I assume) then you stand to gain a lot by loosening up and stealing lots of blinds and orphan pots.

 

[Debi]

I just reviewed my notes on part one and went back to the book and re-read a few things. I want to make sure I don't have any questions before moving on to read part 2. I was able to answer most of them by going back to "Elements of a Hand."

I still don't know how to use #9 - "what are the pot odds" - but I see he covers that in detail in part 4 so I will move forward.

You can laugh at me if you want - but another important point he makes that I need to be much more conscious of -

In the sample hand he says that pre-flop the raises are usually multiples of the big blind and post-flop they are fractions of the pot. I have a bad happen of continuing to bet in multiples of the big blind without paying enough attention to the pot size.

I know I have been playing long enough to know better - but we all know there are plenty of holes in my game lol. That is one of them. But after reading that several times and discussing it here I can assure you I will be paying more attention going forward. Now I just need to know how much of the pot to bet lol.

I am going to start reading part 2 today. We can start the discussion earlier if you guys are ready - just let me know and I can start the next thread. As each new thread starts I will unstick the previous one - but feel free to continue discussing here.

Thanks to all of you who are participating - I am really glad to see so many responses in this first part. I think it will get much more involved as we move through it - and I plan on recruiting some of our top tournament winners to jump in here on some of the discussions.

 

[Alon Ipser]

I still don't know how to use #9 - "what are the pot odds" - but I see he covers that in detail in part 4 so I will move forward.

You can laugh at me if you want - but another important point he makes that I need to be much more conscious of -

In the sample hand he says that pre-flop the raises are usually multiples of the big blind and post-flop they are fractions of the pot. I have a bad happen of continuing to bet in multiples of the big blind without paying enough attention to the pot size.

This brings up a question for me. Probably jumping the gun here but I've never read the book before so don't know if my question is covered later on. I normally bet 3 times the big blind when I raise preflop and am the first one that has acted. However if one person limps in in front of me I will usually bet 4 times or if 2 people limp then 5 times. Is this correct or should I be looking at some other way to determine my preflop raises with limpers in front of me?

 

[Debi]

That is covered in part 5 Alon - you have a bit of a wait for that answer in here lol.

 

[RickH2005]

Funny you should mention that...

I, too, never paid attention to that betting asspect either. I USED to bet in dimensions of the BB also. However since reading the part about betting % of the BB pre-flop and betting according to the pot post-flop, I've changed that part of my strategy (or LACK OF). Now I'm more aware of how the betting SHOULD go! And now I understand what it is others are doing. Anyway, I would like to start our disscusion of part 2 ASAP!

 

[OzExorcist]

This brings up a question for me. Probably jumping the gun here but I've never read the book before so don't know if my question is covered later on. I normally bet 3 times the big blind when I raise preflop and am the first one that has acted. However if one person limps in in front of me I will usually bet 4 times or if 2 people limp then 5 times. Is this correct or should I be looking at some other way to determine my preflop raises with limpers in front of me?

From memory Harrington looks at some ways of changing up your bet sizing so it's less predictable / harder to read, we'll get to those sections in a few weeks though.

 

[salex77]

Pot odds

If your opponent is involved in a hand with you and he is drawing to a flush and he has no idea of the pot odds that's great for you because the best thing you can do is to give him improper odds more than 4-1 to draw to the flush and then you're doing the right thing and the fact if he hits the flush is ok because he will one time of 5 tries and that happens in poker. In limit poker of course you have to be very aware oif pot odds because of so many multi-player pots and often times you have to take pot odds even in a situation where your hand may be 2nd or third best because of pot odds such as calling $20 in a $300 pot !!! In no limti this situation does not arise very often because normally at the most you will have maybe 2 or 3 players whereas in limit it could be 4 too!

 

[salex77]

Pre flop sizing bets

Normally if you had 2 limpers ahead of you and you receive a premium hand like QQ in 5th pos with blinds 25-50 I would raise to 250 which is 3x blind and add two bb' for the two limpers. That is a way of pre-sizing to limit your callers and if you had no callers you would only raise 3x blind but it allso depnds on position too and if you are on the button or cut-off you could increase your preflop raise to 4x but this is a preference made by players and your knowledge of your opponents to tendecies to defend bb's folding, staying in the pot.

 

[jaymfc]

This brings up a question for me. Probably jumping the gun here but I've never read the book before so don't know if my question is covered later on. I normally bet 3 times the big blind when I raise preflop and am the first one that has acted. However if one person limps in in front of me I will usually bet 4 times or if 2 people limp then 5 times. Is this correct or should I be looking at some other way to determine my preflop raises with limpers in front of me?

pretty sure this correct because thats how I do it and I'm sure I didn't come up with it on my own , read it somewhere . now harrington could have a different view though