Grosjean, Schmosjean

this may be a total embarrassment

Mission has preserved what I wrote if you want to look at it, this is under edit

if I get back to this, it will be un-editable here. However, if so I can still bitch about the strategy card, stay tuned.

Quote: odiousgambit

this may be a total embarrassment

Mission has preserved what I wrote if you want to look at it, this is under edit

if I get back to this, it will be un-editable here. However, if so I can still bitch about the strategy card, stay tuned.

Stephen How seems to address this on his strategy page:

https://discountgambling.net/ultimate-texas-holdem/

According to his strategy, it wouldn't matter if your kicker were a three---you would raise.

Quote: Mission146

Stephen How seems to address this on his strategy page:

https://discountgambling.net/ultimate-texas-holdem/

According to his strategy, it wouldn't matter if your kicker were a three---you would raise.

I'm going to have to study this. Possibly, I was so thrown off with by what I was dealing with, I learned something that was wrong and now have this all screwed up. I'll have to edit the above to 'under edit'

Quote: odiousgambit

I'm going to have to study this. Possibly, I was so thrown off with by what I was dealing with, I learned something that was wrong and now have this all screwed up. I'll have to edit the above to 'under edit'

I wouldn't be embarrassed, but what did you say that I preserved? ;)

The mess is on me, but it's not too bad maybe. The original that needed editing/correction did include some thank-you's that I don't mind preserving - plus now I thank Mission-146 too for his help. Plus some links.

The next post, sometime today I think, will expand on some thoughts about UTH and a few remarks about strategy cards and strategy help.

>>>

Having a little fun here and talking about the LasVegasAdvisor.com strategy card for Ultimate Texas Holdem that has "copyright 2011 James Grosjean - beyondcounting.com" printed on it. [I stand corrected and will say I now have more of a minor criticism, stay tuned]

I have satellite internet and I want to thank the WoO site for working on improving the UTH free game and on the Calculator Page for UTH that let's you check out any hand. Up until a few days ago I would constantly get a warning that my internet failed at a critical point and not to trust the advice. Likewise, the calculator page would fail to function, I suspect for the same reason. Satellite internet has a lag-time I've been told, creating some other problems for me too. In any case, this has recently mostly gone away for these two things, links provided below. 

Now that it is working pretty good, the function for the free game that gives you a pop-up warning that you should have bet when you didn't or vice-versa is working for the flop stage very well now, and it was at this stage that previously I couldn't trust that there was no malfunction. But I noticed that I was getting the warning that I should have bet when I didn't on the hole-card-dependent pair of two's situation, and it didn't fit either the Wizard's advice or the Grosjean strategy card advice. So I started going to the calculator page for evaluation. [stay tuned]

https://wizardofodds.com/play/ultimate-texas-hold-em/
https://wizardofodds.com/games/ultimate-texas-hold-em/
https://wizardofodds.com/games/ultimate-texas-hold-em/calculator/

The Stephen How page I think helps explain how I developed playing with an error. In the process of realizing I was playing with that error, which came about from the Wizard game playing properly for me, I thought I had been misled by strategy cards and strategy pages. 

Quote: from How link

Generally, you bet (2x) any pair you’ve made on the flop.  The only time you’d check your pair is if the board is suited, and you have a pair, no flush draw, and your kicker is smaller than the board (it’s pretty rare). 

So I was going from not trusting the flop-stage warnings in the Wizard game [fault mostly of satellite-type internet] to sometimes seeing a warning and sometimes not when I paired 2's on the flop. This confused me because the error I developed in my play was to not bet on the hole-card-dependent* paired 2s until the last 1x stage, same as pocket paired 2s. So when I was going to the strategy card, or to the Wizard page for that matter, I see this for the flop: "bet any pair using a hole card, except pocket 22" and "Make the 2X raise with ... [a] Hidden pair*, except pocket deuces", resp. Unfortunately I was thinking they meant to include the hole-card-dependent paired 2s in this advice, though clearly you can say I should not have thought that. But the error was pretty ingrained, making it hard to shake. I do want to be critical about that sentence construction, though. "bet any pair using a hole card, except pocket 22" makes a nonsensical sentence since pocket 22 is already excluded from the set that makes up 'any pair using a hole card'. So this is what remains, a minor beef, I'm sure nobody is impressed, ha. 

I do have further thoughts about UTH for a later post. 


*That's another thing, describing what I am calling hole-card-dependent* paired 2s is a mouthful and the other choices suck too. The LVA strategy card uses "any pair using a hole card" , another mouthful, and the Wizard chose "hidden pair" which on first blush seems the worst choice but at this point I'm starting to think that's the way to go. It's not confusing to a seasoned poker player, but might be to a newbie

Maybe you can publish under the name "Schmosjean."

Quote: odiousgambit

I do want to be critical about that sentence construction, though. "bet any pair using a hole card, except pocket 22" makes a nonsensical sentence since pocket 22 is already excluded from the set that makes up 'any pair using a hole card'. So this is what remains, a minor beef, I'm sure nobody is impressed, ha.

I agree that the wording "bet any pair using a hole card, except pocket 22" is terrible. I also have never liked "hidden pair" since it is not hidden from the player. In standard poker terminology, you would say "Bet when you have paired the board."

Quote: odiousgambit

The Stephen How page I think helps explain how I developed playing with an error. In the process of realizing I was playing with that error, which came about from the Wizard game playing properly for me, I thought I had been misled by strategy cards and strategy pages. 

So I was going from not trusting the flop-stage warnings in the Wizard game [fault mostly of satellite-type internet] to sometimes seeing a warning and sometimes not when I paired 2's on the flop. This confused me because the error I developed in my play was to not bet on the hole-card-dependent* paired 2s until the last 1x stage, same as pocket paired 2s. So when I was going to the strategy card, or to the Wizard page for that matter, I see this for the flop: "bet any pair using a hole card, except pocket 22" and "Make the 2X raise with ... [a] Hidden pair*, except pocket deuces", resp. Unfortunately I was thinking they meant to include the hole-card-dependent paired 2s in this advice, though clearly you can say I should not have thought that. But the error was pretty ingrained, making it hard to shake. I do want to be critical about that sentence construction, though. "bet any pair using a hole card, except pocket 22" makes a nonsensical sentence since pocket 22 is already excluded from the set that makes up 'any pair using a hole card'. So this is what remains, a minor beef, I'm sure nobody is impressed, ha. 

I do have further thoughts about UTH for a later post. 

*That's another thing, describing what I am calling hole-card-dependent* paired 2s is a mouthful and the other choices suck too. The LVA strategy card uses "any pair using a hole card" , another mouthful, and the Wizard chose "hidden pair" which on first blush seems the worst choice but at this point I'm starting to think that's the way to go. It's not confusing to a seasoned poker player, but might be to a newbie

I agree that the wording could have been better, but in Wizard's defense, one can contextualize the point being made by the fact that 22 is the only pocket pair that would not have been 4x raised already.

So I have some more thoughts about UTH and playing it in the casino. I'm going to make the case that it's really pretty hard to play UTH well even if you have the strategies down pretty good. And make the case that you don't have time to count the outs.

This is why the UTH video machine I came across at Cherokee is calling me like a siren. I guess it's good that it's too far away for me to show up on a whim, but I miss being able to play on a regular basis thanks to some other casinos dropping it. I love the low minimum. It also may allow more time for decisions, though there must be a time limit as more than one person can play at a time and the video dealer puts the same hand to beat for everybody. I failed to check this out thoroughly, I was playing by myself, but never was warned to hurry up. Alas, it is either about to be repaired [3 out of 5 video terminals were dead] or it is on it's way out, so it might mean to play it's going to have to be the dealer-dealt game with much higher minimum and only certain hours.

Playing using the Wizard's game is good prep, not only do you get better with all decision stages, but it's almost impossible to make yourself slow down all that much. Maybe that's good, you do need to become a quick decision maker. The 4x decision needs to be something akin to muscle memory that I think the brain can develop, that is, it no longer involves 'thinking' if you know what I mean. The more each stage becomes that type to you, the better. One problem though is I can get click-happy, clicking on the 'check' icon when in my mind I'm thinking 'on to the next' , mentally I've already gone past the 4x decision and this easily might be clicking on the wrong thing. This never happens to me when it is dealer-dealt and didn't seem to happen the one time I got a chance to play on the video machine.

You want to get the 4x decision out of the way because it isn't just pair+ development you're looking for, but the development of straights and flushes. Speaking for myself anyway, by the time the flop comes you need to have determined what to look for. In regular 7-card poker, I get few straights compared to how many I potentially could get, because I fold something like 3h, 7d so quickly. But playing UTH you're not getting to a folding decision until you've seen the entire board, so that same hand should have you thinking 'possible straight'. If you want a confirmation that your straight if it comes can be overlooked, check out how often a so-so dealer can miss it amongst what can just look like a jumble. I suppose a flush is harder to miss, but my thinking is it is best to be the first one to spot that too, before the dealer evaluates your hand.

I'm always impressed by someone who never misses straights/flushes and the speed at which they spot them.

On the flop you're also facing the first kicker decisions too. The dealer calls every bet you make without knowing his hand, and you might win by out-kicking him. The advice comes down to what kicker you have when you have other good prospects, but not something made or nearly made. This requires memorization for the most part, and the closer it is to brain-muscle-memory, BMM shall we say, the better. A slight familiarity with a strategy card such as LVA has can be used for a quick glance should BMM be failing you. The dealer isn't going to be happy if you sit there and study it.

At the turn/river stage I think the number of decisions left can be underestimated. First you need to look hard at the board, while practically simultaneously possibly still determining if you have a straight etc. You can overlook your straight now for sure if it only uses one card in your hand and the straight you were looking for didn't materialize. That you have a flush, you should catch that even you started out unsuited quite a bit more easily ... still, you can be busy looking elsewhere. Again, that first good hard look at the board was essential.

You don't want to miss a paired board or see only one of two pairs on the board. If satisfied you have nothing, you rapidly need to determine if you have an 18 or 21 outs situation and which it is. I'm going to maintain that you do not have time to actually count these outs. After playing enough, I think most players develop a system. If the board is an unpaired, rainbowed jumble, K alone is a good kicker and you bet [with A you already bet]. If higher cards are present, there is an "order of succession" you might say. If there is A or K on the board, the Q is good; if both A and K, or K and Q, i.e. any two higher, then J is good. This can go down to a 10 or 9, but you might be running into a very high dealer straight.

In other situations, you need to recognize if the board represents not 15, but 11 or 7 outs. If 11, obviously 2 cards that outrank and are missing on the board mean 8 more outs taking you past 18, and 3 such missing take you past 21. I am still working on more BMM for these situations and I think I'll be there soon.

And you're not done yet. I suppose you can say shame on the player who has this happen, but let's say you have that 3-7 hand and instantly know on seeing the board you're dead for pairing, straights, flushes, and a decent kicker all. It sure is easy to fold that hand, forgetting to really study the board. You might miss, say, two pair with high kicker on the board. Though it looks like you're just sucking hind teat, that hand is heavily favored to push. You and the dealer are highly likely to have the same hand. If you have never accidentally folded that hand, my hat is off to you.

Finally, why am I saying there isn't enough time to count the outs? Well, I suppose you could keep telling the dealer to stop while you count them, but you're holding things up as far as the casino is concerned. If you did your due deligence on examining the board and your hand, you took a bit of time already. It is the job of the dealer to keep it moving, so he's going to worry about the pit getting on his case. It'd be similar to taking forever while you set the dice. Yeah, you can try taking all the time in the world, but you're going to get pushback. Sooner or later you won't be having fun, I've had some experience with this. There surely is also a time limit where you can find a video version of this game, at least if it is still going to be the same video dealer for each player, buxom though they might be.

If you made it this far hope you enjoyed it. You have a new acronym to use, BMM , ha!

1.) I have to respectfully disagree with, 'Not having time to count the outs." I think you can do it in a reasonable amount of time with enough practice on the WoO game. Also, it's your money on the table, so take as long as you need. In the few times I've played UTH I have just said them out loud, "Okay, so you could have four aces, four kings, three queens, two sevens, three fours and three deuces...(Board is Q-7-7-3-2)....that's nineteen out and no straights and no flushes." If another player asks what I'm doing, then I just tell him/her...it's good advice for that game anyway and probably better than however they are playing.

2.) What are the minimums in the casino you're talking about?

3.) You'll get that way with counting outs. When you're playing a medium high card, the only thing you'll have to remember to pay special attention for is straight draws. You'll see unpaired cards on the five-card board and won't even consider their ranks, you'll just think, "Three...Six...Nine...," and then any rank higher than your high card is four, so you're mostly adding by twos threes and fours.

-Most queens call, with the most frequent exception being all undercards (to the queen) on an unpaired board.

-It's probably not half the time exactly, but it seems like Jacks call about half the time. On an unpaired board with no straights or flushes, jacks call with two over cards (to the jack) in the community hand, so that's pretty common. Jacks call paired boards with one over card (no straights or flushes), all the better (for you) if it happens to be a high pair; the over card is important for this one, otherwise, higher ranks are four outs...and an unpaired undercard is three outs anyway, so it goes from seven outs (between the two ranks) to three. Jacks also call 2P on the board.

-Tens rarely call. Start with every over card that is not on the board is four, so many counts already start with twelve or (more rarely, especially since it can't have matched anything in your hand) sixteen. Tens like pairs with two over cards on the board, but not if it's an over pair on the board...of course. Tens can call unpaired boards with three over cards (to the ten) showing and no flushes.

-Nines very rarely call. A-K-Q-10-5, four over cards, no flushes, nine calls. Nines can call higher pairs on the board with two other higher cards, no straights and no flushes, of course.

Combine those general rules with counting outs and it becomes much faster. You see the situation and sometimes almost immediately know how many outs that there are just from having seen the situation (and remembering the general rules) before.

4.) That's a great tip for everyone. It's always worth the second or two it takes to double-check so you're not folding straights. Also, you could just take a strategy card for the 4x decision. When I play on WoO...it seems that I have a habit of forgetting Kx cutoffs, but otherwise have it down. I don't know why I sometimes forget the Kx cutoff; that's pretty silly.

5.) Yeah, I agree about what you said post-flop (but before turn and river) and also think that's the toughest decision point. For me, it's because I have practiced that the least on WoO because the individual possible decision points don't always come up a lot.

As far as the dealer being happy about you sitting there and studying it, it's your money; the dealer can go apply for other jobs if he doesn't like how long you take to make your decision. He's getting paid the same amount that hour either way, ignoring tips.

6.) As to your Turn/River straights and flushes paragraph, just do a quick double-check that you do the same way, every time, even if it's ridiculous. Check for flushes, then straights, then pairs and, finally, count your outs if you don't have any of those things. There might only be a maximum of two or three to any one suit in seven cards...check for the flush anyway. Look at the boards for missing gap straights and see if you have the cards. Identify the possible straights whether or not you maybe have something that can fill them...an inside straight is an easy to miss four dealer outs anyway, so now you've identified that and have included them in your count.

Basically, just have a procedure for that decision point that you do the same way, every time.

7.) You have all the time in the world to count your outs. I must suggest that you get any notion to the contrary out of your head. It's not a game show, so there's no timer running.

8.) On your, "Accidental fold hand," my advice is to ALWAYS count outs after the Turn/River when you have absolute rags. Besides, calling A-A-J-J-9 with 6-2 in your hand looks super bad ass, even though it's not. I love that call!

9.) If the casino doesn't like how long you're taking, then they can stop offering the game. I'm sure the casino would love it if everyone shot for 1,500 hands/hour on Video Poker, (I know my play would be a mess, even on my two best games/paytables) but don't give them the power over your money to make you feel hurried. Also, Table Games should be relaxing, not stressful, so just take your sweet time and BOO to anyone who says otherwise.

Besides, if you're playing recreationally, then just reflect the extra little bit of time you took in dealer tokes. It's better to have that EV give the crew a little something to lock up than it is to lose that EV to the casino by way of mistakes.

It's not similar to taking a year and a half to set the dice because setting the dice (it is generally believed, and also believed by me) does not actually accomplish anything. Pass Line EV does not change based on whether or not the dice have been set. YOUR EV on UTH changes based on whether or not you make the right play.

And, if the casino makes you feel like they don't want your action because you're taking your time making the correct playing decisions---good. Just don't give that shift (or, maybe even that casino) your action anymore. The best game for a player concerned with making the right decisions will be the slowest possible shift (probably early afternoon non-Friday, non-holiday, weekdays) that the game is actually open.

Thanks for a thorough reply

Quote: Mission146

1.) I have to respectfully disagree with, 'Not having time to count the outs." ...

I suppose I should take courage from what you are saying and pushback hard against any hurry-up. One thing you can be sure of is how you will stand out. The other players are simplifying their play, unaware of correct strategy, with few exceptions. 3x on first decision, not 4x unless you have AA, a quick assessment on the flop [no kicker assessment], and another quickie on the turn/river. A player who plays this badly but likes UTH anyway is probably really good at spotting his straights, flushes, and likely-pushing boards. I swear some spot their straights before they see the cards!

Quote:

2.) What are the minimums in the casino you're talking about? 

As far as I know, the only place that has UTH close to me is Harrah's Cherokee in NC. The video game version lets you play for a dollar min, while they had the table game at $15. That's actually $2 and $30 because you place bets on ante and blind both, something I'm not sure the pit boss is thinking about. Probably you sometimes see $25; when you buy in you'd need mucho black chips for the 4x bet. 

Quote:

3.) You'll get that way with counting outs.  When you're playing a medium high card, the only thing you'll have to remember to pay special attention for is straight draws.  You'll see unpaired cards on the five-card board and won't even consider their ranks, you'll just think, "Three...Six...Nine...," and then any rank higher than your high card is four, so you're mostly adding by twos threes and fours.

I guess you're saying if you keep playing this gets fast too. But I say making the decision by "order of succession" is quicker, were you able to follow that?

Quote:

-Most queens call, with the most frequent exception being all undercards (to the queen) on an unpaired board.

true enough, but no need to 'call with all queens'. Just a factoid. I'm not saying you're advocating 'calling with any Qs', hope not anyway. 

Quote:

-It's probably not half the time exactly, but it seems like Jacks call about half the time....

see last comment  

Quote:

Jacks also call 2P on the board.

a useful chunk of BMM

Quote:

-Tens rarely call... -Nines very rarely call.

in the case of 9s, I'd forgive anyone who says he won't consider them, except when 18 outs is the issue. 

Quote:

Combine those general rules with counting outs and it becomes much faster.  You see the situation and sometimes almost immediately know how many outs that there are just from having seen the situation (and remembering the general rules) before.

note you too sometimes consider time it takes

Quote:

4.) That's a great tip for everyone.  It's always worth the second or two it takes to double-check so you're not folding straights.

the straight you weren't looking for at first can get me

Quote:

Also, you could just take a strategy card for the 4x decision.  When I play on WoO...it seems that I have a habit of forgetting Kx cutoffs, but otherwise have it down.  I don't know why I sometimes forget the Kx cutoff; that's pretty silly.

  yeah, I have to say, practice more, the 4x can be instant decision from minimal practice

Quote:

5.) Yeah, I agree about what you said post-flop (but before turn and river) and also think that's the toughest decision point.  For me, it's because I have practiced that the least on WoO because the individual possible decision points don't always come up a lot. 

agree, still not where I want to be


[snips] [lots of remarks about how much time a player is taking]

Quote:

8.) On your, "Accidental fold hand," my advice is to ALWAYS count outs after the Turn/River when you have absolute rags.  Besides, calling A-A-J-J-9 with 6-2 in your hand looks super bad ass, even though it's not.  I love that call!

yep!


[more snips, same point re time]


After all your urging I'll just have to see how it goes insisting I take all the time I need. However, there is also the element of wanting to play with as much BMM as I can. It can be a matter of pride. Back to the craps example, I feel good about myself when I observe all the etiquette. Not only do I not take forever to set the dice, but I keep my hands out of the way, don't buy in at awkward times, check if the dice are in the middle of the table for this or that, check to see if the puck is on or off when I walk up, etc. The dealers are happy and I'm happy. So I guess I'm making the point that taking too much time is a matter of etiquette too. 
But, you know, I think you can make better decisions too, if a good hunk of them are nearly automatic

Quote: Mission146

Stephen How seems to address this on his strategy page:

https://discountgambling.net/ultimate-texas-holdem/

According to his strategy, it wouldn't matter if your kicker were a three---you would raise.

geez.. that strategy sheet looks confusing and intimidating compared to the Wiz's.

does it say the same thing as the Wiz's?

Quote: odiousgambit

Thanks for a thorough reply

I suppose I should take courage from what you are saying and pushback hard against any hurry-up. One thing you can be sure of is how you will stand out. The other players are simplifying their play, unaware of correct strategy, with few exceptions. 3x on first decision, not 4x unless you have AA, a quick assessment on the flop [no kicker assessment], and another quickie on the turn/river. A player who plays this badly but likes UTH anyway is probably really good at spotting his straights, flushes, and likely-pushing boards. I swear some spot their straights before they see the cards!

I'd definitely pushback if it's the dealer hurrying you. I'd just ignore other players, or if they ask why you take so long politely, explain why---it might help them play the game better themselves.

The casino's bread is buttered with player mistakes, that's for sure. The game has such a low HE/EoR that Table Minimum would probably be barely profitable if everyone were playing perfectly and not making any side bets. I'm sure there's nothing that the casino would love more than players who do nothing but 4x Raise in the dark. I saw a guy doing the equivalent of that, except it was on Mississippi Stud, I think. He was just betting max across and, as I recall, not even looking at his cards.

Quote:

As far as I know, the only place that has UTH close to me is Harrah's Cherokee in NC. The video game version lets you play for a dollar min, while they had the table game at $15. That's actually $2 and $30 because you place bets on ante and blind both, something I'm not sure the pit boss is thinking about. Probably you sometimes see $25; when you buy in you'd need mucho black chips for the 4x bet. 

That sucks and I'm sorry to hear it. Any table I've ever played has been $5, but I think a few of the places around me have mostly gone up to $10, post-lockdowns. I didn't play, but I know of one where I recall still seeing $5.

Quote:

I guess you're saying if you keep playing this gets fast too. But I say making the decision by "order of succession" is quicker, were you able to follow that?

Yes, I imagine even playing optimally there's no one, 'Right," way to go about it. For example, you mentioned missing possible straights after the Turn/River, but I don't think I would, because it's just natural for me to have identified all possible straights (with what I have) already before the cards are even turned over; same thing with flushes. So, I suggested that a person could do that check down order after every river, but I've already done Straight/Flush, essentially, in advance.

For that reason, by the time I see the Turn/River cards, I'm generally ready to start counting unless I have paired up. Paired up, I'm pretty much only worried about open-ended straights as well as a four-flush community hand on an unpaired board with me holding bottom pair using one of my hole cards with a bad kicker.

Quote:

true enough, but no need to 'call with all queens'. Just a factoid. I'm not saying you're advocating 'calling with any Qs', hope not anyway. 


see last comment  


a useful chunk of BMM

Oh, not at all. I meant my qualifications to those statements in a literal way.

Quote:

in the case of 9s, I'd forgive anyone who says he won't consider them, except when 18 outs is the issue. 

No way, winning holding nine kicker to whatever the board is looks too awesome to pass up when it's the right decision anyway!

Quote:

note you too sometimes consider time it takes

Honestly, not really. I've just played the WoO UTH game A LOT, so most of my decisions are de facto automatic. It's a truly excellent table game and is just an inspired work of brilliance on the part of Roger Snow. If I'm playing it with my money on the table, I'll take as long as I need---lucky for them that won't be very long, not that I'd care if it was.

Quote:

the straight you weren't looking for at first can get me

I agree. I'm just in the habit of identifying possible straights way ahead of those cards coming out, so I'm kind of always looking for them. I don't know how much Texas Hold 'Em (as opposed to UTH) you've played, but I've played some, so I think I'm just automatically in the habit of looking for those even before I ever saw UTH.

Quote:

yeah, I have to say, practice more, the 4x can be instant decision from minimal practice


agree, still not where I want to be


[snips] [lots of remarks about how much time a player is taking]


yep!


[more snips, same point re time]

I just have a hole in my brain where the king off cards are supposed to be---I have no idea why! Playing this in a casino, I'd probably just stack my chips in a way that two piles tell me my king off cards, I don't need the 4x chart for anything else.

Quote:

After all your urging I'll just have to see how it goes insisting I take all the time I need. However, there is also the element of wanting to play with as much BMM as I can. It can be a matter of pride. Back to the craps example, I feel good about myself when I observe all the etiquette. Not only do I not take forever to set the dice, but I keep my hands out of the way, don't buy in at awkward times, check if the dice are in the middle of the table for this or that, check to see if the puck is on or off when I walk up, etc. The dealers are happy and I'm happy. So I guess I'm making the point that taking too much time is a matter of etiquette too. 
But, you know, I think you can make better decisions too, if a good hunk of them are nearly automatic

I agree with all of that, except I'd consider, "Not stalling," a point of etiquette but not so much taking your time to make the right decision.

Quote: 100xOdds

geez.. that strategy sheet looks confusing and intimidating compared to the Wiz's.

does it say the same thing as the Wiz's?

I don't know. I have seen both, but haven't thoroughly compared the two. One of the things I like best about the play for fun games on WoO is that I'm better at learning things like that by way of practice. Making mistakes isn't so bad when it's fake money and the game lets you change your decision anyway.

Quote: 100xOdds

geez.. that strategy sheet looks confusing and intimidating compared to the Wiz's.

does it say the same thing as the Wiz's?

I can't/won't use it. Heavy jargon is only one of the reasons.

Also, I maintain you have only so much time [considering etiquette at least] vis a vis the number of decisions you have to make. A complicated strategy card doesn't fit into my idea of combating the problem, which is to be the best you can with automatic-at-sight decisions through practice*

* Or you could say 'BMM', but I gotta mix it up!

the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!”   She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder

[a lot of snipping where I don't have much to add]

Quote: Mission146

The casino's bread is buttered with player mistakes, that's for sure. The game has such a low HE/EoR that Table Minimum would probably be barely profitable if everyone were playing perfectly and not making any side bets. I'm sure there's nothing that the casino would love more than players who do nothing but 4x Raise in the dark. I saw a guy doing the equivalent of that, except it was on Mississippi Stud, I think. He was just betting max across and, as I recall, not even looking at his cards.

eventually you see it all

Quote:

That sucks and I'm sorry to hear it. Any table I've ever played has been $5, but I think a few of the places around me have mostly gone up to $10, post-lockdowns. I didn't play, but I know of one where I recall still seeing $5.

please list where they still have this game near you, but exclude the Texas Holdem Bonus variety unless you have some good news [i'm a little rusty as to why I don't like it, paytables they typically choose maybe?]

Quote:

... you mentioned missing possible straights after the Turn/River, but I don't think I would, because it's just natural for me to have identified all possible straights (with what I have) already before the cards are even turned over; same thing with flushes.

let me be very specific as to what might get me. It's the 3,7 unsuited start again, say, no chance 2-6, 3-7, 4-8 straights escape me. 7-J shouldn't either, but if I'm sloppy I might not look at the board hard and realize in the jumble there's a straight only needing my 7. I'm maybe affected by disappointment at getting the 3,7 starter. Or maybe it's just me. Gotta look hard at that board!

No comment on the "order of succession" method?

Quote: odiousgambit

[

please list where they still have this game near you, but exclude the Texas Holdem Bonus variety unless you have some good news [i'm a little rusty as to why I don't like it, paytables they typically choose maybe?]

The Meadows, The Rivers, Wheeling Island Hotel-Casino-Racetrack, LIVE! Casino Pittsburgh...and probably Mountaineer, though I haven't been to Mountaineer post-COVID, so maybe not.

Quote:

let me be very specific as to what might get me. It's the 3,7 unsuited start again, say, no chance 2-6, 3-7, 4-8 straights escape me. 7-J shouldn't either, but if I'm sloppy I might not look at the board hard and realize in the jumble there's a straight only needing my 7. I'm maybe affected by disappointment at getting the 3,7 starter. Or maybe it's just me. Gotta look hard at that board!

No comment on the "order of succession" method?

What was the, "Order of succession," meaning...for the final decision point? Flushes, Straights, Pairs, count outs against one's high card?

I understand what you're saying about missing straights. I think that's just the difference, perhaps, in how much THE (not UTH) we have played. When I see the flop, it's just instinctive for me to count suited cards and identify all possible straights. It's as close to automatic as something like that can be, for me.

Quote: Mission146

The Meadows, The Rivers, Wheeling Island Hotel-Casino-Racetrack, LIVE! Casino Pittsburgh...and probably Mountaineer, though I haven't been to Mountaineer post-COVID, so maybe not.

thanks. Hmmm.

Quote:

What was the, "Order of succession," meaning...for the final decision point?

I am adept at that point anyway, looking for 21 outs.

It's memorizing what card always is good for kicker and how that drops down to a lower rank when the board holds a card of higher rank. If the board has it, both you and the dealer have that card, so it is not a card that he can out-kick you with.

Say it's a rainbow, jumble board of low ranking cards on the last stage. It takes a K in your hand to avoid 21 outs as the 5 cards times 3 equals 15, the dealer can't beat you get to 21 outs with just an Ace, that adds 4 to equal 19 outs, if you have that K. If he has a K too, you can't be beat with it.

If the board has an A or K, but your best kicker is a Q, this is the first step in "succession". You don't need a K anymore, and the Q is good, because he could only have a K if the board has an A, and vice versa, to beat you with. Yeah, say the Board has a K but he has an A. Your Q is still good, it's only giving him 4 + 15=19 still as the 3 Ks that the board doesn't have are not counted are only counted as part of the original 15 as outs [edit], the board has a K so you both have a K. It is very quick to see the Q is good and you don't have to count, you see, you just see and know. This continues to J and 10 and 9. You don't need to take the time to count. [edit: by 'good' I mean it avoids dealer reaching 21 outs]

Quote:

Flushes, Straights, Pairs, count outs against one's high card?

Pairs do, but you don't try to use your kicker against open ended straights or 4 flushes acc to most strategies I've seen.

This is what I wrote upthread,

Quote:

After playing enough, I think most players develop a system. If the board is an unpaired, rainbowed jumble, K alone is a good kicker and you bet [with A you already bet]. If higher cards are present, there is an "order of succession" you might say. If there is A or K on the board, the Q is good; if both A and K, or K and Q, i.e. any two higher, then J is good. This can go down to a 10 or 9, but you might be running into a very high dealer straight.

I got 'order of succession' from the rules for replacing the POTUS, you know it's vice pres, then speaker of the house, and all that. You won't see this term used anywhere but this thread I think.

I just realized I shouldn't say the dealer can't beat you, it's just that he can't get to 21 outs

fixed now I hope

See if you can determine why you bet instead of fold with this hand and this board, UTH of course. 

a] Counting the outs tells you to fold and this the case of an exception to the 21 outs.
or 
b] The count tells you to bet. 

I'm pretty sure the calculator goes by total probability and does not 'count the outs' per se. The board represents so many outs, and the dealer could also have K,Q,J,10, four cards representing 16 outs that get added to what the board represents in outs.

is it a or b? For your answer, using spoiler cover would be polite. 





https://wizardofodds.com/games/ultimate-texas-hold-em/calculator/
https://wizardofodds.com/games/ultimate-texas-hold-em/

Quote: odiousgambit

See if you can determine why you bet instead of fold with this hand and this board, UTH of course. 

a] Counting the outs tells you to fold and this the case of an exception to the 21 outs.
or 
b] The count tells you to bet. 

I'm pretty sure the calculator goes by total probability and does not 'count the outs' per se. The board represents so many outs, and the dealer could also have K,Q,J,10, four cards representing 16 outs that get added to what the board represents in outs.

is it a or b? For your answer, using spoiler cover would be polite. 

what I think the answer is

I say this is related to the Wizard's statement at his site , "I get asked a lot about combinations of cards that will beat the player. For example, any two dealer spades that would give the dealer a flush in the example above [see site]. The answer is no. It would really make things complicated if the strategy accounted for double-card combinations that would beat the player."

This, though, would be a special case of this. I say you don't count the 4s on the board as possible outs! If the dealer had one 4 he would have another pair, sure, but now he has 3 pair with that and can only use 5 cards of course. So one 4 is useless and is not counted as an out. If he has 2 fours, he would have a full house, true, but having a pocket pair of 4s as a possibility, though real, goes against the Wizard's statement about that in counting the 21 outs. 

The board represents only 4 outs! 2 aces and 2 6s. 16 more outs in K,Q,J,10 gets you to only 20 and you do bet! this is my answer anyway. The answer is 'b', counting the outs tells you to bets

BTW I'd say I miss this every time when playing!

https://wizardofodds.com/games/ultimate-texas-hold-em/calculator/
https://wizardofodds.com/games/ultimate-texas-hold-em/

Counting the outs does not tell you to fold; there are twenty outs. A four does not improve the dealers hand, only pocket fours would.

I'm going to claim you looked at my answer first! Just kidding!

In all seriousness, this was a puzzle for me at first. Would you say you would seldom make the wrong choice when playing, that is, you just naturally see this?

Quote: odiousgambit

I'm going to claim you looked at my answer first! Just kidding!

In all seriousness, this was a puzzle for me at first. Would you say you would seldom make the wrong choice when playing, that is, you just naturally see this?

I feel bad saying so, but I would definitely not make the wrong choice on this one. Again, that's just from playing some degree of THE (not UTH). When you have a pair on the board with over cards as well as another card on the board that pairs you up (or a low pocket pair), then sometimes an over card will come on the Turn or River that completely nullifies your pair, or you second pair with the hole cards you are using.

Similarly:

Pocket: Kc4c

Flop: Ah Ks 4d

Okay, so I have flopped two pair in this scenario and we are obviously not all-in pre-flop, so this would be a snap all-in for me if anybody bets into me because I have a King blocked, I have a four blocked (which makes my opponent having 4s4h VERY unlikely), so I feel great about this flop. If I am first to act (or early in a multi-way), then I am probably going to get to try my favorite move, which is check---someone else bets---I shove.

Also, AA and AK should have shoved preflop in this scenario, which would cause me to fold preflop, which is why I say I am not all in already. They don't always shove there, but they should, in my opinion. The only way I am betting anything with suited K4 is if I am protecting a big blind against some fairly small bet.

The only card my opponent could have that gives me pause is an Ace. I have to worry about his second card catching a pair or another Ace coming out, but he would need runner-runner for a straight (if that's even possible for him) on this board, so my opponent bets and I am playing him for an Ace. The two obvious ways I think he beats me are to pair up his second card or to catch a third ace....I'm not scared of AA AK or KK because all should have shoved preflop and I have a King blocked anyway. I'm not too worried about A4 just because it's unlikely...and that's just going to happen on rare occasion...so you have to take your lumps on those.

So, he's got two aces (one is in his hand) and three of whatever side card.

(41/46) * (40/45) = 0.7922705314

Of course, I couldn't mentally calculate it to that decimal AND I am going to assume my opponent has Ax where x is a high-enough card to make runner-runner straight possible, AJ, A10, something like that...as AQ should have probably shoved pre-flop. It's not relevant for this flop, but I'm going to assume NOT suited in the high-card scenario because AJ or A10 suited should generally shove pre-flop most of the time, though there are exceptions---or maybe not---depending who you ask.

He could also have suited Ace with a low card making runner-runner flush possible, but that doesn't change my expectations for this hand THAT much.

WoO THE Calculator puts me at 72.93% to win (assuming opponent A-x where x is unsuited J or 10) and I would have estimated it to 75%.

But, there's something else that can be problematic and is one of those where you just take your lumps sometimes. That is the case of a running pair, such as:

Turn: 10c
River: 10d

Well, $#!+. I now have two pair, Kings over Tens...my four is useless and is actually a total non-card. My kicker is the Ace on the board. If my opponent even has the ace that I thought he does, then I lose to AA1010 and his kicker is the king on the board.

So, what I have done is given my opponent (in my mind) the best hand that I think he can possibly have based on his/her actions, which is how I tend to do that. I think he has an Ace with a high(ish), but not King. He might also have a king that he paired, but him to also have K4 is extremely unlikely, so I would love for him to have a king in this scenario. Even if he did have K4, I wouldn't mind.

Running pair here isn't terribly likely...but there are other situations where you will see a pair nullified or your two pair technically made better, just not with your cards.

Mostly, I think this tends to happen with low cards including a pair on the flop, maybe catching a low second pair on the turn using one of your hole cards and then the river comes and matches the off-pair card that came on the flop. Like this:

Player: 7d6d

Flop: JhJsAd

Okay, so supposing that the players to see this flop mostly limped in, in many cases, nothing about this is helpful to them. Now, imagine the turn comes 7s...you still have to worry that someone was slow-playing an Ace or a Jack and trying to trap you...so a good player would probably bet JJ77, but I'm not a good player, so I wouldn't.

And, then the river comes Ah and your opponent having any card better than a seven now beats you. He doesn't even need an Ace or Jack.

Anyway, if you have played THE to any great degree, then yes, the concept of a pair being nullified (for you or the other player---or, in UTH, the dealer) is something that pops into one's head automatically.

DISCLAIMER: I am NOT a GOOD TEXAS HOLD 'EM PLAYER. I am a fairly decent player, certainly no better than average and probably slightly below average---especially not with who is still playing these days, so this SHOULD NOT be taken as actual advice on how to play this situation.

The comments above reflect my personal thought process given this particular situation and SHOULD NOT be taken as advice as to how this hand should be played. That said, I do welcome other observations.

Quote: Mission146

I feel bad saying so,

you *should* feel bad for me, my poker playing has some serious holes in it!

Quote:

DISCLAIMER: I am NOT a GOOD TEXAS HOLD 'EM PLAYER.

I'm fairly convinced you are just being modest. Or perhaps you know where some of your holes are?

Eventually I plan to give my settled strategy with UTH that will have as little actual counting to 18/21 outs and as much automatic play by recognition, with 'succession' check down, as possible. Probably will start a new thread as the title of this one is getting a little old

Quote: odiousgambit

you *should* feel bad for me, my poker playing has some serious holes in it!

I'm fairly convinced you are just being modest. Or perhaps you know where some of your holes are?

Eventually I plan to give my settled strategy with UTH that will have as little actual counting to 18/21 outs and as much automatic play by recognition, with 'succession' check down, as possible. Probably will start a new thread as the title of this one is getting a little old

I'm not being modest, if I were good, then I would probably play much more often. My game has more holes than the underside of every piece of a Lego set.

More than anything, I don't have the disposition for poker. I'm usually at a table until I lose due to some sort of bad beat, so even if it's a table that my skill level should be beating, I usually end up quitting. I just can't help but get angry when I shove and get called when I'm holding the best hand (at the time I was called) and lose, or when I call a shove while holding the best hand (at the time I called) and lose. Most players are good enough not to let it impact them and are just happy that they called/got called with the best of it---not me.

That could be my only hole (it isn't) and would be enough to be pretty damning by itself. Other than that, I have a pretty good arsenal of various traps, but they'd only ever work against players at my skill level, or worse. I'm tight-aggressive in a way that a below average player probably wouldn't figure my game out, but any decent poker player would know what I am betting, when and why after being at a table with me for maybe two hours.

Take a flop like:

3d-5h-8s

So, I'm insta-shoving this pot in many situations. I'm actually shoving a pot like this a lot as long as there was no betting before it got to me post-flop. Someone good at poker who has spent just a few hours playing with me knows that I automatically have top pair, my kicker isn't terrible AND I'm almost certainly suited (though the suited probably doesn't matter here), so they're not calling me anymore unless they have a wired pair or maybe they want to chase an open-ended straight draw. A player who can't figure me out will usually call with something like Q-5 or J-5 because they think I have---I don't even know what they think I have---but players who can't figure me out are pretty much automatically not very good.

Thing is, I'm hoping for folds. I don't want overcards calling me here, or straight draws, which is why I would shove like that in the first place. I'm perfectly happy that everyone just folds it now and I take whatever happens to already be in the pot without a fight.

If I happen to have threes or fives wired up myself, then I'm probably going to try to slowroll trap, but again, good players would probably figure that out about me in an hour or an hour and a half. It wouldn't even take multiple hours. Player bets, I just call, they think, "Okay, I'm screwed this hand because he has trips already."

It wouldn't be 88 in my hand, because I'd have probably shoved that preflop.

Quote: odiousgambit

Finally, why am I saying there isn't enough time to count the outs? Well, I suppose you could keep telling the dealer to stop while you count them, but you're holding things up as far as the casino is concerned. If you did your due deligence on examining the board and your hand, you took a bit of time already. It is the job of the dealer to keep it moving, so he's going to worry about the pit getting on his case. It'd be similar to taking forever while you set the dice. Yeah, you can try taking all the time in the world, but you're going to get pushback. Sooner or later you won't be having fun, I've had some experience with this. There surely is also a time limit where you can find a video version of this game, at least if it is still going to be the same video dealer for each player, buxom though they might be.

I agree with what Mission stated earlier. It is your money on the line and you should take all the time you need. I've played many many many hours of UTH and occasionally for whatever reason my husband or I will need to slowly, carefully count the outs. I've never had a dealer or other players rush me. It's just a matter of maybe a quick apology and stating you're just double checking everything over or whatever. It really isn't a big deal at all. Aside from that, I learned long ago at the Blackjack tables never to let anyone pressure you into playing quicker or differently than what allows you to confidently make the correct decision.

I've read through a lot of your posts tonight and I think that a lot of the things you're thinking through will come with more experience at actual live tables. Counting outs/instinctively knowing them, when to bet, seeing/anticipating straights and flushes, etc will all come quickly with more real life experience. Plus, as I said, sometimes you have a brain fart and will need to take a minute to look things over and know that is totally fine too.

Your observations on the average player are spot on. It is truly a rarity to come across someone who knows proper strategy and always a bonding moment as we speak of the Wizard. Recently in Reno, I actually came across my first dealer who knew the strategy. The guy had a great personality too so that was extra fun.

It's also true that dealers often make mistakes so it is up to the players to know their hands and not rely on the dealer. The number of hands I've seen paid in error are too numerous to count. Same goes for the number of times a dealer has tried to take a player's winning hand away or not pay them out correctly on the blind or Trips. I watch all hands and regularly intervene on the players' behalf to save their hands/chips but never the other way around.. that's their business.

As for $5 tables, they were easily found pre-covid both locally and in Reno and Vegas. Post covid opening I had one trip where $10 was essentially the norm in Vegas but was able to find $5 at numerous locations on subsequent trips. I have another trip soon so will check it out but my sources say there are even more $5 tables lately than there had been earlier this year. Reno is still holding onto $10 at several of their casinos. It's such a bummer you don't have access to many.

I've heard about that video UTH at Cherokee and would love to give it a shot but that will never happen. I prefer live table games anyway but the novelty is fun.