Four Simple Steps To Conquering Crazy Games

Great article as usual, but I did find this paragraph a bit confusing:

For instance, say five players limp, and you make it $20 to go with A-Q. Four players call, so there’s $100 in the pot. The flop comes A-J-8 with two of a suit. Everyone checks to you. You could move all-in immediately. Or, depending on the situation, you could bet around the size of the pot. But by betting less, you’re not holding back so you can fold if things get a little scary. That money is going in eventually, just not this minute. If a scary turn card comes and someone else bets, you’re calling. This is a crazy game, after all, and in crazy games people do crazy things. You have only $80 left, and there’s already at least $380 in the pot. No folding.

I take “But by betting less” to mean, by betting the pot, i.e. $100. In other words, you start with $200, bet $20 on the flop, $100 on the turn, and have $80 behind.

The $380 is a bit confusing — I take that to mean, $100 preflop, $200 on the flop (you bet $100 and got called), and now you’re facing an $80 bet on the turn if the flush comes in, giving you 380:80 => almost 5:1 on your last $80 call. Is that right?

It seems like, in deciding whether to push the flop for $180 into a $100 pot, you’d also want to consider what amount will induce the flush draws to make incorrect calls. If they’ll incorrectly call $100 (getting 2:1, but with additional betting to see the last card) but not incorrectly call $180, wouldn’t you rather bet $100 than push for $180?

Thanks for another great article Ed. I’ve found lots of your advice has really helped my game - previously I’d felt like my only choices at crazy games were to play super tight (no fun and small profits), or just join in the madness.

One bit of advice - I’ve just bought a book you recommended, but as I’m in the UK I couldn’t use your Amazon.com link. Is it possible to put up UK links too?

Hmmm… maybe I’m suffering from too little information here. It seems that if I’m counting on being stacked three times, I’m counting on doubling and redoubling my fourth buy-in just to break even. If I accomplish this redouble, I’m 3:2 in decisive hands and breaking even. I can break even at the noodle bar.

My usual style of play brings me most (around 70%) of my wins without contest, and of those that go to showdown I win most of the big pots and about half of the small ones. So when I’m 3:2 in decisive (rebuy vs. double or more) hands and just breaking even, I start to think that maybe someone’s got my number. Maybe it’s because I tend to chum for the fish at my table, every now and then throwing them a win that’s small relative to my stack, large relative to theirs, and designed to keep them rebuying instead of walking. If someone else pays the fish off, my favorite tablemate might find himself 3:2 in decisive hands and at even money… for a little while. So when I’m in that sort of position, I instinctively start checking myself for scales.

So how does one justify planning for a 3:2 in decisive hands and breaking even? What am I missing?

Gotta say it: Love PNLHE Volume I even though I haven’t yet got my head wrapped around allowing SPR to be the deciding factor, can hardly wait for Volume II so maybe I’ll finally get there.

Thanks for the clarification, Ed.

So far, I’m at that stage in my development at which I can’t help but be shocked when I’m being felted for the third time in a session. I’d like to say something that a good student ought to say, such as “I’ll work on this, Master”, but I’m really not eager to do so!

So far, I have indeed found it easier to win at crazy tables than to lose, but the losses do sting. Just last week, rockets all-in pre-flop lost to suited connectors… the best hands pre-flop are still single pairs, eh?

Hey Ed,
Sorry to hijack but didn’t want to bother you with an email. I can’t find the “Support the Site” link. I even tried under Admin. and advertising.

But not where I was supposed to, right here in front of my face–duh. Money will be on the way tomorrow.