My PokerR

Are they still regularly spreading 8/16 hold’em, or 10/20, or both?

Answer 1:

They had one and or two tables of 8-16 and that replaced the 10-20.

I was told that the 8-16 is a better game because of the “number” of chips in the middle (mostly $2 chips were used) keeps people in. I also believe that they will start a 10-20 game if there is enough interest but did not see one going.

Answer 2:

There hasn’t been a 10/20 holdem game since 8/16 started and the 8/16 game has been going strong every day. The majority of players feel it’s a greater value.

Answer 3:

But what if the only reason that they are spreading 8/16 is because loose players are attracted to the 4 chip 8 chip betting structure, not because it would be fair to the jackpot players? OK, then what if half of the players are playing the 8/16 for the 4 chip 8 chip structure and half are playing for the free roll on the jackpot?

Are they still regularly spreading 8/16 hold’em, or 10/20, or both?

How do I beat a maniac heads-up in online limit HE Poker?  I am
up, but I don’t think I’m maxing EV vs. maniacs.  What kinds of
strategies and tactics do you recommend?

Answer 1:

Allow him to take the lead, and only play hands that have a greater than 50% chance of winning heads-up. You are letting him dominate you with chips, and he is winning his good hands, the blinds, and win he gets lucky. You need to go hard against him when you have the best hand. The Maniac IE aggressive player has a huge advantage in heads up play.  You are the only one giving information about the hand.

His strength is universally unknown, and he is going to win every blind that you do not have a good start on, and he is going to go straight for your stack. You start with only quality hands, bail quickly on bad flops, and continue with pot odds in your favor. Will you win?   A maniac is going to put you straight into high variance, who is lucky poker.  If good hands come up often enough to overcome the stealing of the blinds, and when he is lucky, and when he just plain has you beat, you will win, otherwise, he will win, a good maniac can often take you down based on blind stealing and otherwise winning hands that you chose to fold.  So long as the big loses do not overcome the lots of little losses, well you lose.

A maniac is even more “dangerous” on-line, because there are damn few external “tells” to give you a read on his hand. The other method is just going up stack against stack.  Become an equal Maniac.  At this point you are going for his stack and his blinds just as viciously as you are.  In this case, the poker is little more than cut for high-cards, and you have little long-term ability to win anything, because it is essentially a high-cost coin flip. Welcome to heads-up poker. Being a maniac in this case is NOT necessarily the sign of a weak player.  They are removing information, and creating a position where all weakness and domination is felt by the other player.  There are very few ways to overcome it, and any method can have dramatic short-term variations that can outstrip your bankroll.  They have no fear of their bankroll, and that puts you in a weak position.

A maniac will eat for lunch somebody that plays against them because they are a maniac.  That is their primary target.  This generally leads to overly tight, weak play, or overly loose, weak play.  It is a fine line that you need to walk if you are going to be anything other than an equal maniac. If this is uncomfortable for you.  DON’T play.  When you get to the final table in a tournament, take the chop.  Find another game that suits your style.  Ultimately the best way to beat a maniac, may be very well, to let others play them.

Answer 2:

I’m under the impression that the on-line poker sites charge $1 rake
on every heads-up hand.  If this is true, I’d tend to think it’s difficult to beat anyone but a total fish at one of the on-line heads-up tables.

Answer 3:

My strategy would be “don’t play a maniac heads up in online poker.” It’s a recipe for disaster if you ask me. Why would you get involved in a game where super aggression is your biggest weapon against someone who’s only playing style is super aggressive? Also, there is less in the way of tells you can generate in online as you cannot see the person face to face. Why would you ever want to play a super aggressive person one on one in the first place? I just think that’s bad business…try and find a more passive opponent. Those are the people you can dominate heads up.

Three guys go to Vegas for the WSOP and check in at a dumpy downtown motel. Upon check-in the desk clerk asks for $30 for the night. Each man pulls out a $10 bill, hands them to the clerk, and the clerk tells the bellman to take them to room 2. At the end of his shift the desk clerk realizes that he charged the men in Room 2 the weekend rate and today is only Thursday and should have been charged $25. He pulls five singles out of the till and calls to the bellman. Says “Take this $5 to the men in Room 2 and explain that we overcharged them.”  So the bellman takes the money to room 2 when he realizes that those cheap bastages never tipped him for taking their bags. So, he takes two of the singles and pockets them for his effort. Bellman knocks on the door and says sorry, we overcharged you - here your change and hands each of the three men $1. Now – Here’s the question…

What is 9×3?

How much did the bellman put in his pocket? So….Where did the other dollar go?

Answer 1:

There is no *other* dollar. The question is misleading. $10 each = $30 originally paid. $5 back from the desk clerk covers the $25 room rate. $2 bucks to the bellman leaves $3 left (split 3ways = $1 per man).

Answer 2:

The amended charge per person comes to $8.33. (25 / 3 = 8.33)  They paid $10.00.  Their return should have been $l.67.  They only got $1.00 back and the porter kept the $2.00 (.67 x 3 = 2.00)

Answer 3:

The problem is in trying to compare the total the men paid ($27) to the original amount paid ($30) even after the hotel has taken the $5 out of the till.  Once the hotel takes the $5 out, you need to compare the amount the men paid with the amount the hotel *has* ($25), not the amount the hotel originally had.  So, then, “9×3 is $27, but the bellboy put $2 *of that* in his pocket and the hotel has $25.”  (You
don’t *add* the $2 to the $27 paid, you *subtract* it.)

To fully illustrate, let’s say the bellman didn’t steal any of the $5.
The end of the problem would now read: ”$8.33 * 3 = $25. The bellman put how much in his pocket?  (0$) What happened to the other $5?” Now the problem seems silly, doesn’t it?  You instantly understand that there is no “other $5,” because you realize that the hotel let go of $5 and thus a comparison of amount paid by the patrons has to be made against the hotel’s $25.