Another unforeseen consequence
Jun. 11th, 2005 12:53 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
peterbirksI idly fired up the Betfair tournament an hour ago (at which, BTW, I played like a twat, which serves me right for only being half-hearted about playing in the first place). Anyway, I sort of saw a promotion about pocket rockets, which said that every time you got Aces (on a cash table) which turned into a set on certain days, then you would be credited with up to £150.
Well, I'm sure that you are ahead of me here (and I'm sorry that I can't supply further details, but, needless to say, there is no sign of it on the laughable Betfair poker page), but this bonus will have the same implication as it does in the Excalibur, where if your aces get cracked you get to "spin the wheel" for anywhere between $10 and $100. You can always spot the tourists at the Excalibur, because they are the ones raising with Aces pre-flop.
Obviously the same thing applies at Betfair, where the bonus (worth a not bad 7.5p a hand if the prize is £150, or 3.75p a hand if the bonus averages £75) only kicks in if you see a flop with the Aces. Which would indicate that anyone with half a brain will not raise with aces. That could be as many as 25% of the players on low-stakes Betfair tables.
The thing looks like working out at something like a $3 an hour rakeback, but it will be interesting to see how many spot the "raising with aces is mad" line.
In fact, what is the negative EV of raising with AA? Notwithstanding the fact that there is a strong argument against raising with AA in this kind of low limit game anyway, it would look to be something like this:
Raise with AA: Take hand down 10% of time. of that 10%, you would hit set once. Cost = minus £75 on average. Cost per hand that you get AA = 75p. Net cost for every hand = minus 0.3p.
So, you have to take the line that raising with AA on average wins you at least 75p more than does flat-calling. If you think that there is little difference in the EV in a low-stakes limit game, then by raising with AA you reduce your "rakeback" to 3.72p from 3.75p per hand.
Insignificant? Not if this were always on offer and you played all the time, at three tables. Then it would cost you 60p an hour, £24 a week, or more than a grand a year.
Of these little things, the online winner's edge is made.
Well, I'm sure that you are ahead of me here (and I'm sorry that I can't supply further details, but, needless to say, there is no sign of it on the laughable Betfair poker page), but this bonus will have the same implication as it does in the Excalibur, where if your aces get cracked you get to "spin the wheel" for anywhere between $10 and $100. You can always spot the tourists at the Excalibur, because they are the ones raising with Aces pre-flop.
Obviously the same thing applies at Betfair, where the bonus (worth a not bad 7.5p a hand if the prize is £150, or 3.75p a hand if the bonus averages £75) only kicks in if you see a flop with the Aces. Which would indicate that anyone with half a brain will not raise with aces. That could be as many as 25% of the players on low-stakes Betfair tables.
The thing looks like working out at something like a $3 an hour rakeback, but it will be interesting to see how many spot the "raising with aces is mad" line.
In fact, what is the negative EV of raising with AA? Notwithstanding the fact that there is a strong argument against raising with AA in this kind of low limit game anyway, it would look to be something like this:
Raise with AA: Take hand down 10% of time. of that 10%, you would hit set once. Cost = minus £75 on average. Cost per hand that you get AA = 75p. Net cost for every hand = minus 0.3p.
So, you have to take the line that raising with AA on average wins you at least 75p more than does flat-calling. If you think that there is little difference in the EV in a low-stakes limit game, then by raising with AA you reduce your "rakeback" to 3.72p from 3.75p per hand.
Insignificant? Not if this were always on offer and you played all the time, at three tables. Then it would cost you 60p an hour, £24 a week, or more than a grand a year.
Of these little things, the online winner's edge is made.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-06-11 04:00 pm (UTC)"It must be on a £ sterling real money cash tables
It doesn't apply in heads up play, at least 3 players must be involved in the hand "
and furthermore,
Table Limits.............3 Aces Prize
0.15/0.25 to 0.50/1.00.....£15
1/2 to 3/6.....................£30
5/10 to 10/20.................£50
etc., you only win the full £150 if you're playing £150-300.
So the actual value must be a lot less. More to the point though, is it really better to just call with AA pre-flop in a low-limit game ? I haven't even considered it to date.
Andy.
Calling with Aces
Date: 2005-06-11 04:20 pm (UTC)As for the limping with Aces, this is an old debate.
Basically, will the increase in the size of pots that you win as a result of not driving out hands pre-flop more than compensate for the losses that you suffer, which you would not have suffered if you had raised?
The answer to this depends on the tone of the game, and I'll admit that I tend to raise with Aces rather than flat-call with them, because it eliminates any irritations when the occasional suck-out occurs.
But, if you are first in, and a raise tends to drive out players, whereas a call results in lots of players coming in (there are several games like this, where players will call with utter tat for one bet, but will fold quite reasonable hands for two) then your Aces can win some very nice pots that are significantly larger than they would have been if you raised.
Now, if people KNOW that you limp with aces, it loses some of its strength. But if you limp, and someone with KQ limps behind you, and the flop comes Kxx, then you do very nicely.
If you get RAISED behind you (say by an AK, or a pair), then you can flat-call and wait for the flop or turn before heading into raising mode. Alternatively, you can reraise pre-flop, although this does tend to give away your hand (the "omaha" flaw).
This kind of play increases the volatility of your result with Aces, but in low-limit games there is a cogent case for it winning more money. It also "mixes up" your game and gets the poor souls confused.
One could also argue in this kind of game for limping with AK when first in, because a raise is likely to drive out hands you dominate (KQ, KJ) but keep in hands that are favourite over you (QQ down to 99). On the plus side, your raise achieves one of its other objectives, to establish where you stand. If you limp and a limper comes in behind, you don't know whether you are dominating him or not. But I quite like this tactic with AK, occasionally. Come any flop you promptly play as if your hand is made of solid gold and that your "small pair" has hit a set.
Re: Calling with Aces
Date: 2005-06-11 09:22 pm (UTC)DY