888poker za iPad

Poker pisac

Pre dva dana sam okačio tekst o Jungleman12 koji je napisao Jay Caspian Kang, evo linka za još jedan njegov teks koji je objavio u oktobru prošle godine, "The high is always the pain and the pain is always da high" . Teks je interesantan, drugačiji, autor priča poker priču.

Ma svima je dobro zato se i ćuti

Ajde i ja da stavim link za tekst o kockanju on-line, legalizaciji, državi... koji je objavio Akter Online, pod nazivom "Sajber kockari pune budžet".

"Strastveni internet kockari, koji bi od toga želeli i da žive, voleli bi da se ta oblast uredi i spremni su da državi plaćaju sve dažbine".

Naravno da nisam spreman da plaćam porez, ako mogu da biram, biram da ne plaćam. Pa jel postoji neko ko bi voleo da plaća porez. Mada ne zanam kako bi ga obračunavali, kao porez na dobit, ili na prihod, ili na promet, da li bi se obračunavao proporcionalno, progresivno ili paušalno. 

"u slučaju da Hrvatska reguliše onlajn kockanje mogla godišnje da ubira 4,5 milijarde evra."

U slučaju da država reguliše online kockanje nebi ubirala baš mnogo. Uvek bi igrači našli način da izbegnu plaćane poreza. Uvek mogu da se nađu ilegalne poker sobe, koje država ne bi mogal da kontroliše preko naših provajdera. Ako bi uzimali procenat od isplata, igrači bi prodavali online novac, ne bi ni podizali, i na taj način bi oni koji preve profit dobijali pare od onih koji gube a da to država ni ne zna, i dalje je u Srbiji više onih koji gube novac od onih koji prave profit. Ne mogu da nabrojim sve načine kako bi igrači mogli da izbegnu plaćanje poreza, zbog toga što su ljudi mnogo veštiji kada se tako nešto desi nego kada to gledaju sa strane, kao ja sada, a i zato što ne znam kojom metodom bi država pokušala to da uradi.

"Jedan od sagovornika „Aktera“, tridesetogodišnji Beograđanin N. A, tvrdi da se kocka isključivo radi zabave i da nikad nije ulagao preko 10 evra, a dobitak mu je bio za svega oko pet evra veći od uloženog. On tvrdi da na internet pokeru, konkretno na igri „Texas holdem“ koja je najpopularnija, teško može da se zaradi, jer su svi uglavnom oprezni i ulažu malo. Prema njegovim rečima, najveća zarada je tamo gde je takozvani blind (ulog) hiljadu dolara kao i na turnirima, na kojima je jedan kockar iz Srbije uzeo 200.000 dolara."

Šta reći a ne zaplakati.

"Prema srpskim zakonima nije zabranjeno kockanje na internetu"

Jeste. Odnosno nije. Ustvari, zabranjeno je uplaćivati novac na strane poker sobe, tako stoji u zakonu, nigde ne piše da ne sme da se igra, ali kako da igram ako ne uplatim keš.

"Ipak upravo to se desilo u Sloveniji koja je prošle godine usvojila amandman na Zakon o igrama na sreću koji nalaže internet operaterima da blokiraju pristup stranim kockarskim sajtovima, a za nepoštovanje te odredbe predviđene su visoke kazne. Internet kockanje zabranjeno je i u SAD-u."

Sta? A koko na Full Tilt-u onda ima armija igrča iz SAD i dosta iz Slovenije. U zakonu može da piše bilo šta, tako je u Srbiji, ali nikog to ne intresuje, što je dobro.

Sve u svemu baljezgarije.

Stanje koje imamo je dobro. Niko nikog ne dira i svi ćute i igraju. Zašto bi se bilo ko trudio, angažovao ili lobirao da se reguliže (dereguliše) oblas poker-a, nikom to nije u interesu. 

- Onaj ko ima dozvolu da ogranizuje živu ili on-line igru, neće se zalagati za to da može svako da otvori klub ili poker sobu.

- Oni koji drže klubove na crno ćute i niko nikog ne dira, ili dira, ali to oni reše već nekako, pa im nije u interesu da se dozvoli lako otvaranje klubova, tada bi morali da legalizuju posao,a i svako bi tad mogao da otvori klub i bude konkurenciju.

- Neko ko još nema poker klub ili poker sobu neće se zalagati da se promeni zakon kad možda ni nebi otvori klub ili online sobu.

- On-line igrači igraju, uplaćuju i dižu dobitke bez problema, nema razloga da se bune, pa nama razloga ni poker sobe da lobiraju kod naših vlasti da se nešto menja.

- Oni koji vole da igraju live poker mogu da nađu dovoljno igre po klubovima.

- Poker portali, zarađuju i ništa im ne fali, rade ilegalno ali niko ih ne dira zbog toga, pa nema razloga ni oni da se bune i pokreću  nešto, radiće dok mogu.

-Država neće da se angažuje oko toga jer smatra da je novac koji bi mogli da prihoduju od toga mali, a mogućnosti za izbegavanje plaćanja poreza mnoge.

Sve u svemu, svima je dobro. Onog trenutka kad većina bude oštećena tada će se neko i buniti, do tada svi igraju, reklamiraju, promovišu i organizuju igru, na crno. Ono što se desilo u Subotici je oštetilo neko ljude, ali priče tipa SVI MI URA URA URA nema ništa, dva dana piskaranja i zaboravljono. Nastavili ljudi da žive i da rade šta su radila, ono što mogu da izgube je više od onoga što mogu da dobiju bilo kakvom akcijom. Jednostavo, samo lični interes može da pokrene neke promene, dok neko ko ima uticaj ne vidi svoj interes u promenam biće po starom.

Jedna priča

Jungleman12 je moj favorit u svetu pokera, jedan od najboljih on-line igrača. Možete pročitati njegovu životnu priču, koju je objavio The New York Times. Priča je interesantna, donekle. Međutim ono što je bitno, je to da se mnogo piše o pokeru u medijima. Kod nas to nije slučaj, verovatno zato što poker nije toliko popularan i zato što nema igrača koji igraju high stackes poker.

Online Poker’s Big Winner

By JAY CASPIAN KANG

Daniel (jungleman12) Cates, a 21-year-old self-made multimillionaire, lapsed economics/computer-science major and one-day Bubble Trouble champion of the world, was mildly annoyed. A reputedly solid player under the gun had just bet, and Cates needed to figure out if he was bluffing. Cates consulted the stat readout and deduced that the kid’s erratic betting over the past 200 hands was a product of emotional fragility. With no pair, no draw and no hope of winning a showdown of hands, Cates again raised the pot. At a second table, Cates had just made his flush. He put out a value bet that was precisely calibrated to resemble a bluff. At a third table, he folded. At a fourth, he called for time. At a fifth, his mouse slipped, causing him to accidentally fold. He muttered a profanity before turning his attention back to the first two tables.

Both plays worked. The reputedly solid player was, indeed, bluffing. He folded. Cates chuckled and said, almost seductively, “That’s right, spew monkey, spew all those chips over here.” At the second table, Cates’s opponent called the value bet and showed the worst of it. Cates had just won more than $30,000, but his attention had already shifted over to Table 3, where he had been dealt a monster hand. He turned to me and said: “Sorry if these stakes are boring. I would be playing bigger, but it’s been a rough week.”

His apology was interrupted by a beeping. At one of the empty tables tiled across the top of the screen, Gus (The Great Dane) Hansen’s personalized Full Tilt Poker avatar appeared. (Hansen is one of the most recognized players in the world. His avatar is a cartoonish rendering of his face.) Cates muttered, “There he is.” In the chat box in the lower-left-hand corner of the screen, Hansen asked Cates if he would like to play some Pot Limit Omaha (P.L.O.), a form of poker known for its wild swings and even wilder betting patterns. Cates typed, “Not right now.” Hansen’s avatar disappeared. Cates said, “Gus has been sort of crushing me at P.L.O.” When asked what the phrase “sort of crushing” might mean in the context of high-stakes online poker, Cates shook his head and said: “I don’t know. I’ve lost maybe a million, a million point two over the past few days to Gus. Something like that.”

The thought was sobering enough for Cates to call it an afternoon, and he suggested we have dinner at the Cheesecake Factory. For the next 10 minutes, we sat in the driveway of the modest Orlando condo he shared with two roommates as he fumbled around with the Bluetooth-iPhone sync-up in his new Lexus ISC, a car whose $40,000 sticker price seems perfectly practical for a 21-year-old whose net worth places him in such a high income bracket. After much cursing and mumbling, he gave up and plugged his iPhone into the car’s USB port. The next five minutes were spent trying to find a decent driving song. He ended up choosing a recent dance-hall mash-up of various tunes from the Super Mario video-game series.

The Cheesecake Factory was mobbed. We found a spot at the bar, and Cates flagged down the bartender to order the filet mignon. In the five meals Cates and I shared over three days, he ordered filet mignon three times. As we waited for the bartender to bring us our drinks, I noted our luck in finding a seat on Valentine’s Day. Without a trace of irony, Cates, who speaks in the halting cadence most often associated with World of Warcraft group chats, asked, “Why would a restaurant be any more crowded on Valentine’s Day?”

Daniel Lawrence Cates was born on Nov. 14, 1989, on the Virginia side of the Beltway, and he grew up nearby in Bowie, Md. His father works in a managerial position in a technology firm. His mother works as a manager at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. He describes his childhood as “weird, a bit aloof and mostly spent alone.” Around age 6, he began to withdraw from the regular play of his classmates. “I was figuring out that my interests were different than the other kids’ at school. I was never into fashion or politics or sports. So I began to spend most of my time by myself.” Most of this alone time was spent in the basement of his childhood home, where he discovered a “natural talent” for playing video games, especially Command and Conquer. Lillian Cates describes her son’s obsession with video games as “uncontrollable”: “When he was a kid, we tried to limit his video-game time and his computer time, but it was impossible.”

At Eleanor Roosevelt High School, part of the Washington area’s network of math-and-science magnet schools, Cates was a gifted, if somewhat unmotivated, student who routinely sneaked off to the school’s computer lab to play Minesweeper, the puzzle game that has come standard with Windows since the first Bush administration. During his junior year, he began playing in local live-action poker games held in the kitchens and living rooms of people whom he describes as “not really friends.” Despite the relatively low stakes involved, Cates managed to lose several thousand dollars over a period of three months. The losses alarmed his parents, who put a freeze on his savings account. Faced with a cash-flow problem and owing $600 to a fellow player, Cates took a job at McDonald’s. But he continued to play poker with a dogged mantra. “I knew that if I just kept working at poker, my game would vastly improve,” he said. “When I started playing Minesweeper, I thought it was inconceivable that someone could clear all the mines in 90 seconds. Then I kept working at it. Before I knew it, I had accomplished what I thought was impossible. The same thing happened with poker. When I started out playing low limits, I’d look up at a guy playing with $2,000 and think, How is he doing that? He must be so good. But I just kept working at it. Eventually, everything changed.”

Within 18 months, Cates went from routinely losing at local $5 games to winning at the highest stakes of online poker for anywhere between $10,000 and $500,000 per night. In 2010, his reported $5.5 million in online earnings was more than $1 million higher than the nearest competitor. Unlike other young poker millionaires who make the bulk of their money by winning televised tournaments — a proposition that, because of the high number of players and the unpredictability of their actions, involves roughly the same amount of luck as winning a small lottery — Cates earned his stake by grinding, the term used to describe the process of pressing a skill advantage over an extended period of time. Because poker is a game of high variance, where a significant difference in ability can be mitigated by a bad run of cards, a player’s Expected Value (E.V.) must be actualized over thousands of hands. Every year, a few dozen kids go on hot streaks and take a shot at the big time. Almost invariably, these kids are eventually ground down by higher caliber players. What made Cates’s run different wasn’t his total winnings or the speed with which he earned his millions. What caught the attention of the poker world was that the 20-year-old top online earner of 2010 won almost all of his money in head-to-head confrontations with poker’s elite.

The gospel of E.V. that keeps the poker hierarchy in order was shaken. Cates had taken on all comers in 2010, including highly publicized matches against top-flight pros like Phil Ivey, Patrik Antonius, Ilari (Ziigmund) Sahamies and his fellow young gun Tom (durrrr) Dwan. Each of these men has helped turn poker into a multimillion-dollar celebrity enterprise. Each ranks among the 20 or so most recognized players in the world. And in each of his matches with poker royalty, Cates came out hundreds of thousands of dollars ahead.

In Sweden, an even younger poker pro named Viktor (Isildur1) Blom was also winning and losing at a dizzying rate. In December 2009, Blom took Cates for $500,000, handing Cates the worst beating of his career to that point. Later that day, Blom won more than $700,000 from Brian (Sbrugby) Townsend. His next opponent was Brian (Stinger) Hastings. Within a few hours, Blom lost an estimated $4.2 million to Hastings, reportedly the biggest one-day loss in online poker history.

The vast sums of money shuttled among the accounts of these young professionals — and the shocking aggressiveness and recklessness with which they played — deepened the divide between the young online players and the older guard who earned their millions when poker was still a game played by men sitting around a table. Since the rise of online poker in the early 2000s, every principle of the game, every lesson learned over hundreds of thousands of hours of play, every simple credo uttered in some old Western gambling movie — all those tersely stated, manly things that made up the legend of poker — has been picked apart and, for the most part, discarded.

Patience is no longer rewarded. If an 18-year-old online whiz can play 12 hands at once, then by his 19th birthday, he is no less experienced than a career gambler who has sat for a dozen years at the big-money table at the Bellagio. It didn’t take long before the young players began crushing established gamblers online, and the question rang out across the poker world: How were these kids, many of whom were too young to set foot inside a casino, outsharking the sharks?

In Command and Conquer, the video game that consumed much of Cates’s childhood, a player leads an army into a real-time battle. The combat units are vaguely futuristic and highly specialized. Success depends on the efficiency with which a player can build his resources and the speed with which he can deploy them. It is a difficult game to play and an even harder game to master. The best players develop a predatory instinct for detecting the exact moment when an opponent has weakened. High-end strategy combines lightning-fast reflexes, unabashed aggression and razor-thin resource management. Reckoning comes by way of particle cannon. By the age of 15, Cates told me repeatedly, he was one of the world’s best Command and Conquer players.

Phil Gordon, a 40-year-old poker professional who has won $3 million in tournaments, written three best-selling books and hosted several TV shows, including Bravo’s Celebrity Poker Showdown, says he believes that the early and immersive training offered by video games, paired with online poker’s increasing space in the mainstream, has laid out a practice ground for a militia of young, fearless, invincible players. “The prototypical successful young gun is fast and unpredictable,” Gordon says. “Those traits make them nearly impossible to beat, especially when playing at warp speeds. The manual dexterity required to play 12 or even 16 or 20 tables at one time is enormous. The mental dexterity required to play well while making that number of decisions in a very short amount of time is even more impressive. Many of the video games the kids grew up with like Command and Conquer or Call of Duty required a similar dexterity and gave these kids a leg up — the more tables they could play accurately, the more decisions they got to make, and the quicker they were able to learn.”

Then there’s the fact that high-stakes poker rewards aggression. A player who cannot fire off a bluff because he is worried about his daughter’s private-school tuition will be quickly run over by the players who don’t have such concerns. While heightened dexterity, comfort with snap decisions and the stamina gained from years spent sitting in front of a computer screen give the young online pro an edge over his older counterpart, the greatest benefit borne from a life spent playing video games lies somewhere in the strange, disconnected relationship between what is simulated and what is real. The armies of Command and Conquer do not suffer real casualties. An unsuccessful session of Minesweeper does not result in the loss of a leg.

In online poker, lost money registers only as debits in the player’s offshore account. When a player loses a million-dollar pot, the action plays out in cartoon animation.

“Most of us young kids who play at nosebleed stakes don’t really have any clear idea about the actual value of the money we win or lose,” Cates says. “Most of us see the money more as a points system. And because we’re all competitive, we want to have the highest score. But really, we don’t know what making $400,000 or losing $800,000 means, because we don’t have families or whatever. This blind spot gives us the freedom to always make the right move, regardless of the amount at stake, because our judgment isn’t clouded by any possible ramifications.”

It is unclear whether Cates actually does understand that the money is real. On the second day of my visit, we took a trip to Best Buy. Cates had grown bored of playing poker and wanted to buy a video game. As we stood in the PS3 aisle, discussing which games looked good, I asked him if he had ever walked into a store like Best Buy — or perhaps a car dealership — and thought to himself, Hey, I can buy out this entire place. Cates smiled sheepishly. He said: “I’m not really into material wealth. Plus, I need to save up some more money. My fiscal goal for 2011 is to reach $10 million in liquid cash.” I asked what the difference might be between $5 million and $10 million, especially for a 21-year-old whose relative spending habits sit somewhere on the line between modest and monastic. He explained: “You can do anything with $10 million. Like, you can buy a house and still have around $5 million left over.”

Days before our first scheduled meeting in Orlando, Cates called from Australia, where he was playing in the Aussie Millions, a live-action tournament similar to the World Series of Poker. He asked if I might be able to move our date back a few days. He was vague about the reasons, citing “a thing” with “some guy.” After a few reassurances, he finally came out with the reason. On the date of our interview, Cates was flying to Austin, Tex., to see a “specialist in human interactions.” This specialist had promised to help Cates understand the nuances of body language in social situations. Cates has been reading several works on human psychology and interactions, including “Social Intelligence,” a book that warns against the dangers of digital absorption. These studies are aimed toward the goal of achieving the “balance of life” (during our time together, Cates used this phrase more than 50 times) that will allow him to enjoy his fortune.

When asked what this balance of life might entail, Cates shrugged and said: “I don’t know. Exercise. Girls. Basically, I need to figure out how to be Daniel and not jungleman. If you draw a Venn diagram of Daniel and jungleman, you’ll see that jungleman is completely encapsulated within Daniel, but he isn’t actually Daniel. This hurts me when I meet people, because all they see is jungleman and not me. I become aloof to them. If I can achieve a balance of life and allow a balanced Daniel to shrink jungleman, I should have more success in my human interactions.”

Ashton (theAshman103) Griffin, Cates’s roommate and online rival, also cites a balance of life as the final frontier for the young poker millionaire. In mid-2009, Griffin says he won $7 million in just three months but lost three-quarters of it in the following five months. He cites that swing as a turning point in his career. “Back when I was jungleman’s age, I only saw money as a system of keeping points,” he says. “But the swings caught up to me. I couldn’t stomach being in front of the computer for six, eight hours a day and having the result be that I lost $2, $3 million. So now my primary objective is to have a healthy balance of life.”

To ensure this balance, Griffin, who is 22, has reduced his time in front of the computer to two hours a day. He spends the rest of his time wrestling for the University of Central Florida. He is also a dedicated runner. Recently, Griffin made the following bet with Haseeb (InternetPokers) Qureshi, a fellow pro and a former roommate in Cates and Griffin’s condo: If Griffin could run 70 miles on a treadmill in 24 hours, Griffin would win $300,000. If Griffin failed, he would pay out $900,000. He crossed mile 70 at the 23rd hour.

It is impossible to see Cates and Griffin sitting side by side in their apartment, backlit by three monolithic computer screens, and not wonder when Cates’s day of reckoning will come. Was the million-dollar loss to Gus Hansen the beginning of the end for jungleman12? Losing, even when it registers in cartoon animation, begins to take a psychic toll. There has never been a player, from Doc Holliday to jungleman12, who can go head to head with the pain of poker and expect to come out with a positive Expected Value.

Lillian Cates has a simpler outlook. “Gambling is gambling,” she says. “Some of those poker pros look like they have happy lives. Some of them don’t look like they’re having the greatest time. I don’t really know if all this will work out for Daniel, but I hope it will. After a while, your kid grows up, and you just hope he’s learned enough from you to have a happy life.”

During one of the long sessions in which I sat next to Cates at his computer, the action had died down, leaving us with little to do. Finding a willing opponent is sometimes hard for jungleman. To pass the time, he was chatting with a fellow online millionaire, Scott (Urnotindanger2) Palmer. The two know each other from their teenage years, when they played poker in the kitchens and living rooms of their shared not-really friends. The nickname jungleman comes from these days, referencing Cates’s frequently disheveled appearance and simian arms. For about an hour, Cates and Palmer played at lower stakes, shooting jokes back and forth. Cates, who, until then, had been distractedly answering my questions, completely shut me out and gave his full attention to his old friend. He giggled, frantically typed his responses to Palmer’s jokes, which were unfailingly about poker. Although thousands of dollars were still switching accounts, jungleman12 and Urnotindanger2 were clearly playing for fun — wild bluffs were made, called and then delightedly discussed over Skype’s chat function.

I asked Cates if he and Palmer ever caught themselves reflecting on those early games in Palmer’s kitchen, if their millions ever felt a bit unreal. He gave a sheepish grin. “Yeah, it’s pretty cool,” he said. “But, you know, we both worked hard.”

Nova zanimacija a možda bude i zarada

Jednostavno dosadi kada uvek igrate isti poker format, tako sam i ja odlučio malo da šaram. I dalje mi je glavna okupacija cash game, ali sam počeo da igram Sit & Go pomalo. Kad se zasitim cash game odigram sat vremena između 5 i10 S&G sa 6 igrač, nekad igram i Heads up. Krenuo sam od početka, sa najnižeg nivoa, 1.1e buyin.

U planu imam da napredujem kroz nivoe tako što ću igrati na nekom nivou dok ne budem ima 10 sesija u plusu  više nego sesija u minusu. Recimo odigram 24 sesija od toga 17 u plusu, a 7 u minus, tada prelazim na veći limit. Ovo pravilo verovatno ne postoji nigde. Ako bih poštovao bankroll menadžemt pravila mogao bi da igram mnogo veći limit, međutim, hoću da vidim da li mogu da igram profitabilno na manjim nivoima i koliko profitabilno mogu da igram.

Za sada sam uspeo da ogram 5 sesija, svaki put sam bio u plusu, moj ROI je za sada 51%. Nadam se da ću i na većim nivoima moći da održim toliki ROI, mada bi se zadovolji i sam manjim. Veliki je to ROI, ali kad se pogleda profit u eurima to je ustvari malo, jel ne odigravam puno S&G tokom sesije i igram mali limit. Ali kad pređem na veći limit i profit u eurima će biti veći, bez obzira što će ROI možda biti manji.

Ove S&G igram na RRpoker, tamo su najveći fish-evi, kakvi tamo potezi mogu da se vide to ne može nigde. Plaćaju kad nemaju ništa, blefiraju kad ne treba, igraju all-in za male potove sa lošim kartama i ostali neverovatni potezi početnika. S&G turnire početnici vole da igraju, zato što su jednostavni za shvatiti, platiš ulaz i igraš dok ne ispadnes.

Freezeout i Sit & GO turniri

Turniri se igraju tako što svaki igrač plati istu cenu uluznice i dobije istu količinu žetona. Kad neki igrač izgubi sve žetone ispada sa turnira, pobednik je onaj igrač koji na kraju ima kod sebe sve žetone. Nagradni fond čine uplate svih igrača, on se deli na nekoliko prvoplasiranih igrača, to odeđuje organizator turira. 

Da objasnim koja je razlika izemđu Freezeout i Sit & GO turnira.

I razlika je broj igrača

Broj igrač ne nekom freezeout-u je nepoznat, koliko igrač se prijavi toliko igra. Dok je na S&G unapred određen broj igrača, ne može da bude ni manje ni više igrača. S&G se obično ogranizuju za 2, 6 i 10 igrača.  Tako na S&G turniru unapred znate nagradni fond i raspodelu nagrada, dok na Freezeout turniri to znate onog trenutka kad turnir počne. Na freezeout turnirima su moguće i naknadne prijave, to dozvoljavaju neke poker sobe i klubovi sa live igrom. 

II razlika je vreme početka

Freezeout turniri počinju u unapred određeno vreme, racimo 8:00, ko se prijavi do tada može da igra. Dok S&G turnir počinju onog trenut kada se prijavi unapred određen broj igrač za taj S&G. Primer, ogranizator objavi S&G od 10 igrač, kada se pijavi 10 igrača turnir počinje, bez obzira na vreme. On-line igrači vole da igraju S&G turnire, i da bi se skupio broj igrača predviđen za početak ne treba više od 2 minuta. Mnogo S&G turnira organizuju poker sobe svakog dana, i po nekoliko hiljada, jednostano ljudi vole ovaj format.

III razlika je veličina početnog stack-a

Freezeout turnir su deep stack, broj žetona na početku turnira koji dobije svaki igrač je 200bb ili više. Dok je početni broj žetona 150bb ili manje. Zbog toga se kod igranja ova dva formata pirmenjuje različita strategija. 

Veliki potovi su za velike ruke, ali stvarno

Stvarno treba samo sa jakim rukama igrati za velike potove, to je naročito bitno na micro limitima. Evo i saveta Full Tilt-ovog profesionalca. 

Don't Play a Big Pot Unless You Have a Big Hand

John Juanda

I'm at Foxwoods playing the $2,000 No Limit Hold 'em event. We all started with $3,000 and now I've got $15,000. At my table is Richard Tatalovitch, a player whom I've competed against many times.

I raise pre-flop from middle position with K-J offsuit and Richard calls from the big blind. The flop comes 9-6-4 with two diamonds on the board.

Richard hesitates for a moment before checking, and I put in a pot-sized bet. Richard thinks for a while and calls. All of a sudden, I don't like my hand -- so much.

Imagine my relief when a non-diamond J hits the turn. Now I have top pair and a pretty good kicker. Then Richard comes out betting. Uh-oh.

Now, let me back up a moment and mention that when someone hesitates before checking, it's usually a huge tell. But Richard is the king of delayed action, so I ignored his tell and bet the flop anyway. And his bet on the turn just screams, "Raise me! I dare you!"

I go into the tank and my thoughts go something like this:

1. He flopped a set. That explains the smooth call on the flop - he's trying to trap me into staying, hoping I'll bet the turn, too.

2. No. If he had a set, he'd have checked the turn and waited for me to hang myself right then and there, or let me catch something on the river. He can't have a set.

3. The jack helped him. I don't have the jack of diamonds. Maybe he does, and he called the flop with a jack-high flush draw. If so, I like my kicker and my hand.

4. He's betting on the come with a flush or straight draw and is hoping to buy the pot right there. 

I run through these possibilities and reach no conclusion. 

Normally, I would just call here. We both have a lot of chips, and I don't want to put them all in with nothing but top pair. Then, I have the misfortune to remember a hand from a month earlier at Bellagio:

Richard had been running bad and was complaining about a string of horrific beats. I saw him check and call with top boat because he was afraid of quads! A guy that afraid of monsters under the bed isn't going to check-call top set on the flop with a flush draw out there.

"All in!" I declared.

Oops. This is now a Big Pot. And rest assured, top pair doesn't even resemble a Big Hand.

In the four years I've been playing with him, I've never seen him call so fast. I am drawing dead to his perfectly-played 9-9.

Sometimes, we all forget that big cards don't always equal a big hand and that the smart move can be to play conservatively instead of going for the quick kill. As for Richard - he had the good sense to be in a Big Pot with a Big Hand, and the patience to make it pay off.

Matematika - VIII deo - Greške u primeni poker matematike

Kod korišćenja poker matematike igrači prave mnoge greške. Prva je pogrešno računanje auta, i videćomo uticaj te greške na profit.

Na primer, pretpostavimo da čekate kentu sa obe strane i pretposavljate da vaš protivnik čeka boju. U ruci držite 5s4s. Na flopu izlazi Th-3d-6d. Vaš protivkvnik ima JdTd. 

Obično kada imate čekanje kente sa obe strane, računate da imate 8 auta. Ali pošto ste stavili vašeg protivnika na čekanje boje, vi oduzimate 2d i 7d. Tako da vam ostaj 6 auta, to su 3 sedmice i 3 dvojke. Time što ćete oduzeti ova dva auta, možete uštedeti mnogo novca, kad donosite doluke.

Kada čekate kentu sa svih 8 auta, vaše šanse da kopletirate ruku su 31.45%. Međutim, kada vaš protivnik čeka boju, a vi umesto 8 imate samo 6 auta, vaše šanse da kompletirate pobedničku ruku na turnu ili riveru su 24.14%.

Sada pretpostvite da se nađete u ovakvoj situaciji tri puta tokom svake partije, u proseku igrate četiri partije nedeljno. To je ukupno dvanaest puta nedeljno. Peretposavimo da svaki put kada vam ne izađe aut gubite 10$, a svaki put kad vam aut izađe zaradite 25$.

Posle dva meseca vi ćete ovu situaciju imati oko 100 puta. Ako ne oduzmete 2 auta, vi ćete očekivati da pobedite 32 pata (pošto su šanse 31.45% da kompletirate ruku sa 8 auta). Kad pobedite pravite profit od 25$ to je ukupno 800$ (25 x 32), dok vas kad ne kompletirate ruku košta 10$ što ukupno iznosi 680$ (10 x 68). To znači da očekujete da za dva meseca budete u plusu 120$. Vredi?

Ali ako bi sad izračunali šta se dešava sa TAČNIM autima, videli bi da je stvarnost potpuno drugačija. 

Sa 6 auta koliko stvarno i imate (a ne 8), vaše šanse da kompletirate ruku iznose 24.14%. Na 100 odigranih ruku vi ćete 25 puta pobediti, što vam pravi profit od 625$ (25 x 25), jer vam svaka pobeda pravi profit od 25$. Ali 75 puta nećete kompletirati pobedničku ruku, svaki puta kada ne kompletirate ruku gubite 10$, to je gubitak od ukupno 750$. 

Vi pravite gubitak iz ove situacije u iznosu od 125$, ne pravite profit od 120$ kao što ste mislili, nakon dva meseca igranja. Ovo je velika razlika, a govorimo samo o jednoj situaciji. Mnogo je drugih odluka koje igrači donose na osnovu pogrešnog računanja, a to je onda još mnogo izgubljenog novca.

Da vidimo sad još jednu grešku koju igrači prave. To je kada igrači upoređuju svoje betting odds (pot odds) u jednoj rundi klađenja sa svojim šansama da kompletiraju ruku na turnu i riveru zajedno. Zapamtite da kada računate šanse da kompletirate ruku u odnosu na pot odds, treba da ih računate za sledeću kartu, ne za sledeće dve karte. Svaka runda klađenja je NEZAVISNA od bilo koje druge runde.

U situaciji kada treba da platite bet od 20$ za pot od 100$, trebaju vam šanse da kompletirate ruku bolje od 5:1. Recimo da imate 6 auta, šansa da kompletirate ruku na na turnu iznosi 6.83:1, a na riveru 6.67:1. Dok je šansa da kompletirate ruku na turnu i riveru zajedno 3.14:1. 3.14:1 je boje nego 5:1, da li to znači da treba da platite bet?

Ne treba da platite taj bet, a evo i zašto. 20$ sa kojim treba da platite bet je samo za turn kartu, ne i za turn i za river. Šanse koje treba da uzmete u obzir su 6.83:1, što nije dovoljno da opravda vaše plaćanje. Tako da bi trebalo da bacite karte. Jer, kad turn izađe vaš protivnik može opet betovati, ovaj put 40$. Ako platite i tih 40$ to znači da ste ukupno platili 60$ a ne 20$ sa čim ste računali pot odds. Zbog toga 3.14:1 nije važno za donošenje odluke.

Postavlja se pitanje, da li nekada koristimo šanse da kompletiramo ruku na turnu i riveru zajedno? Odgovor je da. Kada donosimo odluku da li da odigramo all-in posle flopa. Na primer, imate puno auta na flopu i neko je odigrao all-in, vi tada treba da koristete šanse da kompletirate ruku na turnu i riveru zajedno da bi ste doneli tu odluku.

Sledeća greška koja se pravi je korišćenje poker matematike u pogrešnom trenuku.

U nekim situacijama treba platiti neki bet kada vam poker matematika sugeriše da ne treba da platite, dok u drugim situacijama treba baciti karte i ako vam matematika kaže da treba da plati bet. To se dešava kada vam ponašanje protivnika i informacije koje imate o protivniku govore više neko slepo računanje. Poker matematika je ALAT i ništa više, ne treba da vam bude jedino stedstvo za donošenje odluka, naročito ne u no-limit texas hold'em pokeru.

The micros - Specijal

The Micros - Epizoda III

The Micros - Epizoda II

The Micros - Epizoda I

Blind struktura - prvi nivo

Slučajno sam gledao strukturu jednog live freezeout turnira i primetio da je prvi nivo blindova 25/25. Šta tu ne valja? Ne može na turniru da se desi da small bline i big blind budu isti. Evo i žašto. Prvi nivo blindova se formira tako da small blind bude 2 puta veći od najmanjeg žetona koji klub ima, a big blind 2 puta veći od small blinda. Recimo, najmanji žeton u klubu je 25, u tom slučaju prvi nivo blindova bi bio 50/100.

Zažto je bitno da prvi nivo bude 50/100 a ne 25/25? Bitno je zbog narednih nivoa, ako su blindovi 25/25 drugi nivo bi bio 25/50, u tom slučaju ako je na turniru početni stack 200bb, već u drugom nivo bi bio duplo manji 100bb, a u trećem nivou kada blindovi budu bili 50/100 početni stack bi bio 50bb. Ako vam je pri nivo blidnova 50/100 i imete početni stack od 200bb, u drugom nivo blindovi bi bili 75/150 što je 133bb početni stack, a treći nivo bi imao strukturu 100/200 i tek na trećem nivou početni stack bi bio 100bb. Ovde se vidi da turniri sa istim početnim stackom, a različitim prvim nivom blindova imaju drugačiji tok, i na trećem nivuo se značajno razlikuju.

Jednostavno, kada vam je prvi nivo 25/25 blindovi rastu prebrzo.

Ako recimo na freezeout turniru stavite prvi nivo 25/25, drugi 25/50 i treći 50/100, onda to i nije baš freezeout turnir, nije deep stack, to na trećem nivou postane S&G turnir. Da uporedimo freezeout sa pogršnom strukturom blidnova (25/25) i Sit & Go sa normalnom strukurom blindova, sa veličinom stack-ova ova dva turnira. 

                                                   Freeze out                              S&G 

I nivo                                        25/25 - 200bb                    50/100 - 100bb

II nivo                                      25/50 - 100bb                    75/150 - 66bb

III nivo                                     50/100 - 50bb                    100/200 - 50bb

Onyx Cup

Najveći se spremaju za neverovatne cifre, Onyx Cup. Ali bele čarape koje Durrrr nosi su baš fensi, verovatno i drugi igrači nose iste, samo se ne vide.

Hitting the nuts

“We made a ridiculous movie on purpose,” said Joe Boyd, the pastor turned director who also plays Ezekiel Yoder, an Amish farmer in the movie. “The poker community has been burnt by a series of unpopular, terrible movies over the last five years. I think people like this movie so much because it takes nothing seriously. It’s a complete silly farce. It’s like the movie Airplane…ifAirplane was a fake documentary about poker.”

Možete pogledati trailer na zvaničnom sajtu filma, www.hittingthenuts.com.

Srpsko-pokerski jezik

Nemam pojma kako da pišem poker pojmove i termine, da li da ih prevodim ili da ih pišem na engleskom ili da ih na engleskom menjam kroz padeže. Mnogo je to teško za mene, jer ne želim da bude problema u komunikaciji sa onima koji čitaju blog. Evo nekih primera:

- big blind, veliki bilin, čip, 2 big blinda, 2 big blind-a, blind-ovi, ulog na slepo

- fold, fold-ovati, foldovati, baciti karte, odbaciti karte, ne pratiti

- check, ček, čekirati, check-irati, dalje, 

- call, kol, call-ovati, kolovati, platiti, pratiti,

- bet, uložiti, betovati, bet-ovati, 3bet, treći bet, treće podizanje

- raise, podići ulog, predizanje, rejz, rejzovati, raise-ovati, raiseovati

- turn karta, trn karta, na turnu, na turn-u, četvrta karta

- river, na river-u, na riveru, peta karta

- out, aut, 2 outa, 2 out-a, 2 auta

- dealer, BU, diler pozicija, button, baton

- under the gun, UTG

- stack, stek, gomila žetona, žetoni ispred vas, vaši žetoni

- draw, čekanje

- straight draw, čekanje kente

- čekanje boje, flush draw

- open-ended straight draw, čekanje kente sa obe strane ili obostano čekanje kente

- c, clubs, mak, tref, krsta

- d, diamonds, kocka, karo, dinara

- s, spades, list, pik, mača 

- h, hearts, srce, herc, kupa

Ima još mnogo dilema i nejasnoća, ovo su samo neke. Ja ću se truditi da se razumemo, a da li je to lepo, tačni 

ili ispravno mislim da nije bitno.

Ljudi nisu u stanju da misle kad igraju poker

Lik je pokazao AcJc pre flopa. Ali onda je ćelavi pokazao da je ipak on veća budala.

Ručni mali par

Situacija

1$/2$, 6max

Pre flopa: Hero (vi) na CO sa 5c5d

2 igraca folduju, Hero raise do 8$, 2 igrača folduju, BB plaća još 6$

Flop: (17$) Qh-9d-6c (2 igrača)

BB check, Hero?

Odogovor

U ovoj situaciji, treba skoro uvek da betujete da pokušate odmah da odnesete pot.

Možda se pitate zašto da betujete ovakav flop kada je sigurno da se protivnik sa boljom rukom neće baciti, niti će vas platiti sa lošijom rukom. Ovo radite da bi zaštitili svoju ruku (protection bet). Nateraćete protivnika da baci karte kao štu su AT, T8, KJ, KT...ove ruke imaju pristojnu šansu da vas pobede do kraja. Betovanje vam olakšava da odigrate ruku, i ono što je još važnije, zaštitiće vas od blefa na turnu.

Ako check-irate može vam se desiti da donestom pogrešnu odluku na turnu. Može vam se desiti da je protivnik već bolji od vas a vi platite bet na turnu. Takođe, ako ste bolji od njega i platite turn meže vam se desti da on betuje i river i onda opet treba da donesete tešku odluku. Jednostavn je bolje betovati i dobiti neke informacije.

Ako vaš protivnik često igra check-raise onda ovde možete da čekirate, i pokušate jeftino da odigrate ruku do kraja.

Emmitt Smith igra poker za Full Tilt

Volim poker, volim američki fudbal. Kad se AF i poker spoje nastaje oduševljenje.

Emmitt Smith, bivši NFL igrač, jedan od najvećih svih vremena, postao je član Full Tilt tima. Ako bude bar pola uspešan kao u fudbalu, naprviće milione. Vest možete pročitati ovde.

Matematika - VII deo - Oduzimanje auta

U ovom delu poker matematike, objasniću da nija baš svaki vaš aut samo vaš. Ovo sam nazvao oduzimanje auta na engleskom je to “discounted odds”.

Primer

U ruci imate QhJd. Izašao je flop i izgleda ovako Th-9h-4d. Imate čekanje kente sa obe strane. To znači da imate 8 autra. Međutim, pretpostavimo da vaš protivnik ima čekanje boje. Odnosno, da u ruci ima  Ah2h. 

To znači da ako izađe 8h ili Kh vi ćete imati kentu, ali vaš protivnik će u toj situaciji imati boju. S obzirom da su auti karte koje vam prave pobedničku ruku, 8 i K srce nisu vaši auti, jer vam prave gubitničku ruku. Zbog ovoga je broj vaših auta manji, ukuno 6.

E sada, vi ne možete sa sigurnošću znati da li neko čeka boju, kao u primeru, ali na osnovu toga kako protivnik betuje i na osnovu njegovog imidža, vi možete to pretpostaviti. Ova vrsta obluka objedinjuje čitanje protivnika i poker matematiku. 

Još jedna stvar koju morate imati na umu kod oduzimanj autra je to koliko igrača imate za stolom. Recimo da sedite za 10max stolom i 5 igrača vidi flop. Pošto imate ovako veliki broj igrač možete pretpostviti da jedan ili davojica, možd i više, imaju keca u ruci. Ako u svoje autre računate i keca, bilo bi dobro da ih ne računate sve. Umesto da računate 4 uata (četiri keca) trebalo bi da računate samo jenog ili dva. Nema smisla pretpostvaiti da niko od vaših protivnika nema nijednog keca u ruci. 

Ovde nema puno nauke, jednostavno treba da kombinujete informacije o igračima i malo matematike.

Ustani ili ostani

Povermeno pročitatm neki savet Full Tilt-ovih profesionalaca. Kada naiđem na neki dobar, odnosno, neki da mi se sviđa ja ću ga podeliti sa vama. Evo jednog baš dobrog saveta.

Should I Stay Or Should I Go

Jennifer Harman

Being a winning player isn't only about playing good cards - it's also about making good decisions. And there is one important decision you face every time you sit down in a cash game: Should I quit, or should I keep playing?

When should you keep playing?

I see so many players playing short hours when they're winning, and long hours when they're losing. It should be the other way around.

When you are winning in the game, at least a few of the other players must be losing. And when your opponents are losing, they often aren't playing their best. But you are.

When you're winning, other players fear you; you have a good table image. And when you have a good table image, you can get away with things that you can't seem to when you're losing. For one thing, you can bluff more. Usually a losing player is scared to get involved with a winning player, so it's easier for you to pick up pots. You can represent more hands than you actually have because your opponents believe you're hitting every flop.

The only time to quit when you're winning is when you are tired, or when you start playing badly.

When should you call it a day?

Many players can't seem to quit when they are losing. You have to remember that there will always be another poker game -- if not tomorrow, then the day after, or the week after. I like to think of poker as one continuous game going on for my whole career. So, if I'm losing more than 30 big bets in the game, I usually quit.

There are a couple of reasons I do this: For one, if I lose a ton of money in one day, I don't feel so hot the next day. That means if I go in to play the next day, I might not be able to play my best game. I might actually have to take a few days off to get my head straight. Another reason is that when I'm losing more than 30 bets, I might not be playing that well. I might think I'm playing my "A" game, but in reality, I'm probably not. You can't be as objective about your play when you're losing. After all, we are not robots; we're just human beings...

Crnogorci prže poker na veliko

Hotelu Maestral povremeno oraganizuje jače turnire u texas holdem-u. Sledeći je predviđen za početak aprila. Detalje o turniru i dešavanjima oko turnira možete videti ovde.

Stolovi znače izbor

Kada igrate online poker imate više stolova na limitu koji želite da igrata. Dok kod live pokera, često imate samo jedan sto u klubu, niste u mogućnosti ni limit da birate. Ovo se odnosi na cash game. 

E sada kako ja to koristim.

Prvo pregledam sve stolove na limutu koji igram, da vidim jel ima neki poznat fish ili neki poznat mi regular. Ako ima fish sednem, ako ima regular taj sto preskočim.

Ako nema pozntih igrača uglavnom gledam koliko para imaju igrači za stolovima. Ne sadam za stolove gde igraju sort stack igrači. Uvek sedam za stolove gde 3 ili više igrača ima full stack, to se odnosi na 6max stolove. Treba protivnicima uzeti pare, a koko da uzmete pare ako sednete za sto gde nema para. Zatov biram stolove gde ima dosta para.

Uglavnom gledam da sednem za stolove koji su popunjeni, prijavim se na lisu čekanja i kad se oslobodi mesto eto mene.

Vrlo često menjam stolove, ako mi se neki sto svidi sednem da igram, ako posle malo igre shvatim da to nije sto za mene, ja ustanem sa tog stola i nađem novi. Takođe, ustajem ako sa stola ustanu igrači koji imaju velike stack-ove, ako se promeni struktura igrača i ostanu većinom sort stack-ovi.

Ako sednem za sto ali mi pozicija nije odgovarajuća i tada promenim sto. Jednostavno neću da sedim a da neki regular sedi sa moje leve strane, i svaki put se pita posle mene. Hoću tight igreče sa svoje leve strane, a loose sa svoje desne.

Na stolu se retko kad zadržim više od sat vremena. Ne mrzi me da pogledam gde je bolje i gde mogu da igram profitabilnije. Mislim da je ovo veoma važno za moju igru. 

Naravno ovo važi za RRpoker gde igram, dok druge poker sobe nude mogućnost izbora stolova po veličini prosečnog pota, po prosečnom broju igrač u ruci, po broju odigranih ruku za sat i drugim podacima o igri na određenom stolu. Na RRpoker možete samo birati stolove na osnovu veličine stack-a.

U bodovanju Online vs Live poker, sada je nerešeno 1:1. Mogućnost da se biraju limiti i stolovi je velika prednos online pokera.

Bet, Raise?

Podizanje uloga u pokeru zovemo bet, raise, reraise, 3bet, 4bet, 5bet itd. Koji od ovih naziva će se koristiti za podizanje uloga zavisi od toga kada se dešava.

Bet - ovaj pojam se koristi za prvo podizanje uloga u svakoj rundi klađenja pojedinačno. Recimo, izašao je flop i igrač koji se pita prvi check-ira, nakon toga se vi pitate i uložite 10$, to se zove BET. Vi ste u ovom trenutku bet-ovali 10$.

Pošto je u svakoj ruci obavezno da se uloži big blind, to se smatra bet-om pre flopa.

Raise (2bet) - ovaj pojam se koristi za drugo podizanje uloga. Recimo, izaso je flop i igrač pre vas je podigao ulog 20$, vi hoćete da podignete ulog još više i uložete 50$, to se zove RAISE.

Posto se ulog big blind-a računa kao bet, dizanje pre flopa se računa kao raise.

E sad, tu postoji jedna igra reči.

Raise 50$ znači da ste podigli ulog ZA 50$. Ako je igrač pre vas bet-ovao 20$, a vi uložite 70$, to znači da ste raise-ovali 50$.

Raise to 70$ znači da ste podigli ulog DO 70$. Ako je igrač pre vas bet-ovao 20$, a vi uložite 70$, to znači da ste raise-ovali do 70$.

Potrebno je razlikovati sta je raise, a sta raise-ovati do (raise to), da ne bi došlo do greške u komunikaciji i nesporazuma za stolom.

Reraise (3bet) - ovaj pojam se koristi za treće podizanje uloga. Recim da posle flopa jedan igrač bet-uje 10$, posle njega neko raise-uje do 30$, posle toga vi podignete ulog do 80$, vaš ulog se zove RERAISE.

Kao i kod raise, moramo praviti razliku izmeću reraise (za), reraise do. U prethodnom primeru je reraise 50$, a reraise do 80$.

Reraise se često naziva i 3bet, jer je lakše za ruzumevanje. 

4Bet, 5Bet... - Svako dalje podizanje uloga nazivamo po brojevima, koje je to na redu podizanje. Recimo bilo je četiri podizanja uloga pre vas i vi podignete ulog, to će biti peto podizanje uloga, 5bet.

Sada da vidimo koja pravila važe kod podizanja uloga, za nolimit holdem.

Bet ne može biti manji od iznosa big blind-a. Ako igrate nl200$ gde je small blind 1$ a big blind 2$, bet ne može biti manji od 2$.

Raise (2bet) ne može biti manji od iznosa bet-a. Bet je 10$, raise ne može biti manji od 10$, raise do mora bit 20$ ili veše. 

3bet, 4bet, 5bet... ne može biti manji od iznosa predhodnog podizanja uloga. Primer, bet 10$, raise do 20$, 3bet do 30$, 4bet do 40$. Svako naredno dizanje ne može biti manje od prethodnog. Često ovde nastaje problem, pa igrači misle da ako je bet 10$, raise do 20$ da 3bet ne može biti manji od 40$, ali to je greška.

Ako vam je sve jasno, BRAVO. Ali ako niste uspeli baš sve da shvatite onda ste na pravom mestu, i ovaj blog je mesto za vas.

Matematika - VI deo - Računanje implied odds

Osnove poker matematike sam do sada objasnio. U narednih nekoliko postova ću pokušati da objasnim kako možete brzo i lako da koristite poker matematiku i pojednine varijacije i sitnice koje treba da imate na umu kod računanja. Za početak ćemo videti kako implied odds utiču na neše odluke.

Implied odds se odnosi na eksta novac koji osvojite kada kompletirate ruku (kada vam izađe uat).

Na primer. Čekate boju posle turna i imate 20% šanse da kompletirate ruku (4:1). Vaš protivnik ima dva para. Vi ste na redu, treba da platite bet od 20$. Pot iznosi 70$.

Kada bi zanemarili implied odds i uprodeili samo pot odds sa šansom da kompletirate ruku, 80$ je minimalna veličina pota koja bi opravdala vaš call od 20$. Ali pot je samo 70$.

Tokom cele ruke vaš protivnik je betovao agresivno. Ubeđeni ste da će on betovati i posle rivera, bez obzira na to šta će izaći, tada vi možete da ga raise-ujete ako kompletirate boju. Shvatate da možete da osvojite bar još 30$ sa bojom. Znači, treba dodati pretpostavljeni iznos na veličinu postojećeg pota i nakon toga videti da li je opravdano platiti bet od 20$. 80$ + 30$ = 120$, 120:20=6:1, 6:1 > 4:1, treba da platite. 

Implied odds nemaju puno veze sa metematikom, to je utemeljeno na intuiciji. Implied odds nije prisutno u svakoj ruci, samo u onima u kojma imate "skrivenu" ruku ili je protivnik pot-committed pa ne može da se baci. Da bi ste mogli uopšte da uzmete u obzir implied odds, morate pročitati vašeg protivnika.

Primer

U ruci držite AcAs. Tabla izgleda ovako Ad-8c-5c-10c. Protivnik ima KcQc. Znači da protivnik ima boju a vi triling (set). Ostalo je još da river izađe. Vaš protinik betuje 280$ u pot od 80$.

Ovde imate dosta auta:

1 kec + 3 osmice + 3 petice + 3 desetke + 7 clubs (makova) = 20 auta

Zadnji kec iz špila vam pravi poker. Osmica, petica ili desetka bi vam napravilo ful. Ako bi izaso neki mak to bi vam napravilo najaču boju. Ali i sa ovih 20 auta nije isplativo da platite 280$ za pot od 360$ (80$ od ranije, i 280$ bet). Međutim vi znate ako vam izađe aut i dobijete poker, ful ili boju, moći ćete da uložite sav novac koji imate i vaš protivnik će sa bojom koju ima učiniti isto, tada bi ste duplirali vaš stack. Implied odds su ovde učinili da vam se call od 280$ isplati.

Matematika - V deo - Računanje pot odds

Nastavljam sa poker matematikom. Na red je došlo računanje pot odds. Ovoj je pored računanj auta najvažniji deo poker matematike.

Pot odds predstavlja odnos iznosa koji treba uložiti i veličine pota. Recimo da bi ste ostali u igri morate da platite bet od 50$, a da je pot 100$, u tom  slučaju pot odds iznosi 1:2.

Sada nam je potrebna tabela za Probability i Odds Against, za sada ćemo koristit desnu stranu tabele, Odds Against.

Tabela se koristi na sledeći način. Prvo treba da znate koliko auta imate, pa onda to povežete sa odgovarajućom kolonom, ili sa onom koja se ondosi na turn kartu ili na sa onom koja se odnosi na river, ili na onu kolonu koja se odnosi i na turn i river. Evo i primera, ako imate 14 auta posle flopa, to zanči da su odds protiv vas 2.36:1 na turnu i 2.29:1 na riveru. 

Da vidimo šta odds against (protiv vas) stvarno znači. Ako su odds protiv vas 4:1 (4 to 1) nalzite se u situaciji u kojoj svaki peti put izađe aut koji čekate, odnosno 4 puta vam neće izaći aut a jednom hoće. Odnosno imate 20% šanse da vam izađe aut. Mnogi igrači greše pa 4:1 računaju kao 1/4, ali to nije slučaj. 4:1 je isto što i 1/5. četiri puta izgubite, jednom pobedite. Veoma je važno da se ovo razume, jer je to osnovno za razumevanje poker matematike. 

Sada da vidimo kako se ovo koristi. Kada treba da odlučite da li da platite bet treba da uporedite vaše pot odds sa vašim odds da kompletirate ruku (odds protiv vas). Recimo da su odds protiv vas 4:1 i treba da odlučite da li da platite bet od 5$. Trebalo bi da je veličina pota u odnosu a veličinu uloga (pot odds) veća od 4:1. U ovom slučaju, veličina beta je 5$, što znači da bi pot trebao da bude 20$ ili više da bi se opravdao call od 5$.

Da razjasnim. 

Ako su odds protiv vas 4:1, i ruka se odigra pet puta, evo šta se dešava (u smislu verovatnoće):

- Gubite

- Gubite

- Gubite

- Pobeđujete

- Gubite

Svaki put kada izgubite ruku to vas košta 5$, to znači da ćete ukupno izgubiti 20$. Vaš cilj je da, kada jednom pobedite, dobitak bude vići od 20$ koje ste izgubili. Na taj način stvarate profit. Ako vi osvojite 20$ kada pobedite, data su vam odds jednaki. Ali kada osvojite 21$ ili više, onda su odds na vašoj strani. Ako osvojite 19$ ili manje, odds su protiv vas.

Kako ova računica dolazi do izrašaju? Ako igrate profitabilno, odnosno vaši pot odds su veći od odds da kompletirate ruku, vi ćete na dugi rok ostvarti profit. Ali ako to nije slučaj, odsno, pot odds su manji od verovatnoće da pobedite, vi ćete pre ili kasnije izgubiti novac. 

Da vidimo sad malo drugačiju situaciju. Recimo da su odds protiv vas 7:1. Pot iznosi 150$. Neko od igrača je betovao 20$ i vi ste na redu da igrate. Da li treba da platite ili bacite karte? Treba da uporedite 150:20 sa 7:1. Šta je veće? 150:20 je isto što i 7,5:1, a to je veće od 7:1. To znači da ćete, ako osam puta odigrate ovu ruku, sedam puta izgubiti i jednom pobediti. Izgubićet ukupno 140$ (7 x 20$), a osvojiti 150$. Na ovaj način ćete ostvariti profit od 10$. Znači, treba da platite.

Odluka o tome da li da platite ili ne je laka, samo treba da znate da li su BETTING ODDS (pot odds) veći od HAND ODDS (odds protiv vas). ako su betting odds veći, onda treba da platite. Ako su betting odds manji onda treba da foldujete. 

U narednim postovima ću probati da vam objasnim još dosta stvari vezano za odds. Ove je bio tek jedan deo priče.

O pojmovima kao što su odds, pot odds, odds against, betting odds, hand odds i ostalih pojmova, ima dosta nesuglasice i nerazumevanja. Ja sam te pojmove pirhvatio na način kako sam i opisao u postu. Možda i nisam ispravno koristio pojmove ali to mi ni nije bitno. Bitan mi je koncept donošenja odluka. Nadam se da ću naići na razumevanje ako sam nešto pogrešno pretstavio. 

Svi vole ovu igru

Vukajlija  je još jedan sajt gde možete naći ponešto o pokeru, veoma retko ali se pojavi.

Pirati sa...

Nisam ni znao da postoji Piratska Partija Srbije. Baš interesantno. Juče su nešto protestovali, nako hapšenje, pa levo desno, šta ti ja znam. Sve to što je bilo, verovatno malo lažuckaju novinari, možete pročitati na sajtu B92.

E sada još da pokeraši u Srbiji osnuju svoju partiju, pa da svi idemo po ulicama da se smrzavamo, vičemo i lupamo u šerpe. Mislim, ne bi to bilo ni malo loše, ako bi pomoglo da se sredi ova situacija sa zakonom o igrama  na sreću. 

Proces učenja

Da bi neki igrač unapredio svoju igru, potrebno je da to radi na više načina, nije dovljno samo iskustvo. Evo nekoliko načina učenja:

1. Samo-učenje. Hvatajte beleške ruku koje ste odigrali, pa ih kasnije analizirajte. Pišite šta ste znali u tom trenutku o igraču i kako je on odigrao, a kako sto vi reagovali. Poker sobe igračima nude mogućnost da vide istoriju ruku koje su odigrali, na taj način možete posle završene igre analizirati ruke koje ste odigrali i kod kojih ste imali dilemu.

2. Drugi igrači. Razgovarajte o pokeru i strategiji sa drugim igračima u čije mišljenje imate povernja. Neki igrači jednostavno nisu voljni da odaju svoje tajne, međutim, većina igrač je spremna da pomogne drugim igračima. Na vama je da pozljivo slušate, i prihvatate savete, naranvno, ne bezuslovno.

3. Knjige. Odlične knjige o pekeru su mnogo vredne za napradak igrača, bez obzira šta volite da igrate i na kom igračkom nivou se nalazite. Kada nađete dobru knjigu, pročitajte je nekoliko puta, sve dok materiju ne savladate u potpunosti. 

4. Internet. Na internetu ima mnogo poker sajtova na kojima se nude sve vrste tekstova, od kratkih saveta do naprednih strategija. Forumi su mesto gde igrači diskutuju međusobno o raznim poker tema i gde se dosta toga može saznati.