Welcome.

Take a tour. Enjoy some free sample content.

How it works

Free Video: CLP Video No. 287: Home Game Bart Reviews His Splashy At $1-$3 Deep Part 2

Free Podcast: CLP Podcast No. 54: Time Warp And Turn Value
New to Crush Live Poker?

The 15/25/35 Rule

Regarding the 15/25/35 rule, what player profiles and stakes are we applying this to? If a player raises an amount where I know he has an over pair and I know he'll stack off, why fold to hit a set if we only have 10x the raise size? Note: I play small (200 to 300 max 100 BB games). At certain times of the year, one of the games has a lot of tourists who are not poker savvy, so 15x seems a bit tight to me.

Comments

  • shmed Posts: 321Subscriber
    Ha ha, I just referred to this rule in my response to your other thread. I'll let Bart comment, but I think this is just a guideline based on his own experience -- and you should let your own judgment of your games dictate what you do. You should play the player and certainly lower your thresholds in those profitable situations.

    The point of the guideline is that these hands often do not hit flops so you should make sure that you have the implied odds to be overall profitable, considering you will be often losing small pots on the ones where you don't hit.
  • Shmed pretty much summed it up. Against players that I know will never be able to fold top pair I do sometimes reduce these odds back down to 10. Also the closer they are to the actually number--say they raise to $15 with $200 eff, the better it is for us as I find they even have more trouble getting away from their hands short.

    Bart
  • UntreatableFPS Posts: 1,004Subscriber
    10 times might still be cutting it close, even against opponents who never fold an OP. You have to account for the times when the guy has QQ or KK, and an A on the flop scares him
  • SkinnybrownSkinnybrown Posts: 286Member
    I cut it down to 10 sometimes just so I get to play more than 1 hand every 5 hours.
  • reedmylipsreedmylips Posts: 1,146Subscriber
    SanHoser said

    Regarding the 15/25/35 rule, what player profiles and stakes are we applying this to? If a player raises an amount where I know he has an over pair and I know he'll stack off, why fold to hit a set if we only have 10x the raise size? Note: I play small (200 to 300 max 100 BB games). At certain times of the year, one of the games has a lot of tourists who are not poker savvy, so 15x seems a bit tight to me.
    It's also 15x for small pocket pairs because, while it's possible we may not put in another dollar if we miss, there will be occasions when:

    1) we hit our set and the PFR raised with big broadway cards (AK, AQ, etc.) and missed the flop, and will fold to a bet, so we don't realize our implied odds; or
    2) we hit our set but the board runs out scary and slows you and the PFR down, so we don't realize our implied odds; or
    3) we hit our set and the PFR hits a big draw (nut flush draw usually) and gets it in with us OTF and sucks out; or
    4) we hit our set and the PFR hits an overset (rare, but happens).

    When you factor all of that in, 15x seems almost not conservative enough. Having said that, 10x is definitely the LEAST to call for implied odds.
  • shmed Posts: 321Subscriber
    reedmylips said
    SanHoser said

    Regarding the 15/25/35 rule, what player profiles and stakes are we applying this to? If a player raises an amount where I know he has an over pair and I know he'll stack off, why fold to hit a set if we only have 10x the raise size? Note: I play small (200 to 300 max 100 BB games). At certain times of the year, one of the games has a lot of tourists who are not poker savvy, so 15x seems a bit tight to me.
    It's also 15x for small pocket pairs because, while it's possible we may not put in another dollar if we miss, there will be occasions when:

    1) we hit our set and the PFR raised with big broadway cards (AK, AQ, etc.) and missed the flop, and will fold to a bet, so we don't realize our implied odds; or
    2) we hit our set but the board runs out scary and slows you and the PFR down, so we don't realize our implied odds; or
    3) we hit our set and the PFR hits a big draw (nut flush draw usually) and gets it in with us OTF and sucks out; or
    4) we hit our set and the PFR hits an overset (rare, but happens).

    When you factor all of that in, 15x seems almost not conservative enough. Having said that, 10x is definitely the LEAST to call for implied odds.
    Hmm... thinking this through -- couldn't you take points 1-3 above and insert AK and TPTK and make the same argument (conceding that AK has an advantage of 6 A/Ks to hit vs. 2 remaining of your PP)? But I don't hear of people saying there's a stack-size rule to playing AK? I'm not saying AK needs to have one, or discrediting that PPs do, but simply saying that a lot of the bearish arguments above apply to many hands you might make on the flop.

    PPs also have another advantage in that they are a made hand. So you can sometimes show down the best hand when no one has hit anything (I often see the multiway hand that gets checked around a few times, and then the guy with A high bets and gets snapped off by the guy with 77).

    In favorable games where you think your competition isn't folding top-pair, I think you can use your judgment and play PPs, especially in position. Also like Bart's point that if they are on the shorter side, they may not get away from their hands. Your pair is generally ahead of unpaired high cards on every street.
  • reedmylipsreedmylips Posts: 1,146Subscriber
    shmed said
    reedmylips said
    SanHoser said

    Regarding the 15/25/35 rule, what player profiles and stakes are we applying this to? If a player raises an amount where I know he has an over pair and I know he'll stack off, why fold to hit a set if we only have 10x the raise size? Note: I play small (200 to 300 max 100 BB games). At certain times of the year, one of the games has a lot of tourists who are not poker savvy, so 15x seems a bit tight to me.
    It's also 15x for small pocket pairs because, while it's possible we may not put in another dollar if we miss, there will be occasions when:

    1) we hit our set and the PFR raised with big broadway cards (AK, AQ, etc.) and missed the flop, and will fold to a bet, so we don't realize our implied odds; or
    2) we hit our set but the board runs out scary and slows you and the PFR down, so we don't realize our implied odds; or
    3) we hit our set and the PFR hits a big draw (nut flush draw usually) and gets it in with us OTF and sucks out; or
    4) we hit our set and the PFR hits an overset (rare, but happens).

    When you factor all of that in, 15x seems almost not conservative enough. Having said that, 10x is definitely the LEAST to call for implied odds.
    Hmm... thinking this through -- couldn't you take points 1-3 above and insert AK and TPTK and make the same argument (conceding that AK has an advantage of 6 A/Ks to hit vs. 2 remaining of your PP)? But I don't hear of people saying there's a stack-size rule to playing AK? I'm not saying AK needs to have one, or discrediting that PPs do, but simply saying that a lot of the bearish arguments above apply to many hands you might make on the flop.

    PPs also have another advantage in that they are a made hand. So you can sometimes show down the best hand when no one has hit anything (I often see the multiway hand that gets checked around a few times, and then the guy with A high bets and gets snapped off by the guy with 77).

    In favorable games where you think your competition isn't folding top-pair, I think you can use your judgment and play PPs, especially in position. Also like Bart's point that if they are on the shorter side, they may not get away from their hands. Your pair is generally ahead of unpaired high cards on every street.
    Shmed,

    With a holding of let's say AK or AQ, there is the added benefit of potentially dominating the PFR when both you and the PFR hit TP. Also, if the PFR has a pocket pair and you have AK/AQ, you have many more opportunities to steal the pot from villain unimproved, because he will be hesitant to call big and/or multiple-street bets with an underpair to certain board cards.

    With pocket pairs, especially smaller ones, the chances are much more the exact opposite of dominating the PFR, where YOUR pair is more than likely dominated by the PFR's overpair, and only 54/46-ish against his/her two unpaired overcards.
  • shmed Posts: 321Subscriber
    Reed, your first point in first paragraph is true when it lines up for you. I think the second point more has to do with positional aggression given neither of you have improved... I would argue that you could have two good players swap hands and the guy in position would win most of the time. On the second paragraph, this is true when they have a PP also, but this is what makes PPs potentially easy to play. If you are confident and have reads you can bully in position, but you can also easily give it up.

    Anyway, my point is not that I'd rather have 33 than AK or visa versa, but I just think that my willingness to play PPs is situational and I think I'm respectfully arguing against your comment that you have to have at LEAST 10x BB stack sizes. Against the right opponent(s) and in position, I'm more than happy to raise up a PP with less if there are some other great reasons to play the hand, and try to win post flop. I think Bart's guidelines make sense but the original poster was asking if this is a rigid rule and I'm arguing that I don't think it is.
  • grindbler Posts: 131Member
    its really so dependent on the game/ opponent...
    oop against a player whos opening wide, and plays ok postflop, 44 doesnt really have much more value than 34... even when you hit, youre prolly not getting paid anyways...
    against the guy who limps AK 'cause you dont have anything yet' you can obviously much more profitably call raises w/ PPs
  • StopHammertimeStopHammertime Posts: 81Member
    To touch on the interesting idea of a multiplier for playing AK against people who will never fold PPs...

    - Consider that their pocket pairs that they refuse to fold are skewed towards hands that dominate us (AA/KK); they are obv more likely to fold QQ, JJ
    - If there were such a rule, it would surely be below 15x; it might be as low as 4x. IIRC, two unpaired cards flop a pair around 25% of the time; we're much less likely to flop a pair (which is the case A or K) when our opponent has AA or KK, respectively.
    - If we're only playing suited cards, flopping four to a flush is around 10% so we have that equity as well. Flopping a flush is ~ 1%
    - Villain also often has hands we dominate, like AJ or ATs that they're (rightly?) getting it all in with top pair (if they have an stack-to-bet ratio of ~ 5x)
    - Given that the multiplier would be so small, we'd rarely be able to narrow Villain's hand range to hands that have us dominated, and we would almost never the multiplier (5x? 4x?) into consideration and would just play our hand as we do now.
    - If the multiplier were that small, they're often all-in preflop anyway

    It's fun to consider what it would be, though.
Sign In or Register to comment.