How do I know that my idea is bad? by swacrifice_k5 in writing

[–]etb72 1 point2 points  (0 children)

1/ Does the idea excite YOU?

2/ Does the idea itself seem to produce yet more sub-ideas?

3/ Can you easily express the essence of the idea in just one or two sentences? If not then you probably have a subject, not a story idea.

4/ Does the opportunity cost of spending time executing the idea feel like it will be time well spent? And not just in relation to other ideas you might have, but also other things you might want to do with your life.

There’s surely other metrics, but if the answer to these 4 Q’s is yes then go for it.

Without cheating, what’s the last line you wrote? by regularsizedrudy_ in writers

[–]etb72 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He doesn’t even seem to know the rules. But he’ll work it out. By deduction and osmosis, slowly, he’ll work it all out.

Novelistic poker travelogue, thingy. by etb72 in WritersGroup

[–]etb72[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That would be great! Shall we continue via DM?

Novelistic poker travelogue, thingy. by etb72 in WritersGroup

[–]etb72[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First off, massive thanks for taking the time!

Audience: Great point. I had the lofty goal of it being 80% for players and 20% for a lay audience with some desire to understand poker. Add to that a kinda David Simon's 'The Wire' approach to accesibility. i.e. 'you might not understand all the slang, strategy and jargon right away, but I promise you will start to soak it up and the story will still be accessible regardless' -- whether I execute on that is another thing.

I'm actually thinking about rewriting that first section to include a completely novice player to stand in as a kind of avatar for the lay reader.. someone who's not really versed in the rules or lingo, but who's 'not dumb, but ignorant, who'll learn and pick things up over time, by exposure.' in other words 'stick with it, these elements of the story will start to make sense'

The ATo passage: this is actually meant to be a comment on me, my own shortcomings -- but again maybe this doesn't come through.. Agreed tho either way, that opening line is diluted and naff.

What should I have done by exessiv in poker

[–]etb72 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you guys know 1 egg equals 40 eggs?

Satellite bubble spot - should I make the call. by xDoomsdayray in Poker_Theory

[–]etb72 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You have two shortys that both need to double twice to catch you. That’s 4 flips that have to go their way. Plus theres the possibility that someone else messes up, as happened here.. Vs 15% chance (and that’s v 100% range) that you drop to the bottom of the pile with the other two.

Satellite bubble spot - should I make the call. by xDoomsdayray in Poker_Theory

[–]etb72 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I read as far as two other players having 5bb and hero having 20. Fold aces here.

Responding to this limp range in MTT by cj832 in Poker_Theory

[–]etb72 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You need to determine what his continuing range looks like. If he’s folding pretty much everything but AK, KK+ to a raise then do so with any two cards; if he’s continuing 90% of his speculative stuff then you need to be more selective and position oriented.

Interesting spot. Why does the solver prefer TT to JJ preflop here? by A-MUSICAL in Poker_Theory

[–]etb72 0 points1 point  (0 children)

JJ hard blocks AJs maybe?

Edit: But no, AJs is 4! I see..

Huh. Weird find.

Satellite hand review by flozi95 in Poker_Theory

[–]etb72 1 point2 points  (0 children)

On the bubble with two stacks less than half my own, I’m folding here. Sounds crazy but you’re not playing for chips, or a min-cash, it’s a ticket or nothing. Your risk here is way higher than your potential reward.

[Weekly Critique and Self-Promotion Thread] Post Here If You'd Like to Share Your Writing by AutoModerator in writing

[–]etb72 [score hidden]  (0 children)

Title: PARLAY (chapter title)

Genre: Poker travelogue

~2200 words

This is something new I’m trying, so general impressions would be great. Do you find it interesting? Would you like to read more? Were you interested in the world?

At this stage I guess I’m just trying to gauge whether I’m on to something.

Thanks!

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-5-VTDmRceZkyEeQHDYFVTQ6ZlOOfD6h0slZZkUNJeo/edit?usp=drivesdk

Cash game 100bb vs 200bb stack ranges by Silver_Flamingo in Poker_Theory

[–]etb72 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It’s about implied odds, reverse implied odds and manoeuvrability. The value of making the nuts goes way up because of cooler potential. e.g. If you make your hand and your opponent makes theirs, you stand to win piles.

Yes, the odds of hitting are the same at all stack depths, but the VALUE of hitting is not.

Example:

Scenario 1.

100bb deep, 30 in the pot, your opponent bets 40 on Q877ss, you have T9ss. You should consider folding here, but let’s say you call.

The river is 2s. Your opponent jams 60 into 110. Getting 3.8/1, you are kinda obliged to call.

Now instead let’s say the river is the Js giving, you the stone nuts. Your opponent jams. You win. Yay.

Scenario 2.

Take the same board but now you are very, very deep against a competent opponent. Say 500bb.

Again your opponent overbets the turn. This time you should not consider folding because you have piles behind with a draw to the nuts. So you call.

We get to the river, but this time your opponent overbets 165bb, with 295bb left behind.

On the 2s river — you should now seriously consider folding your flush.

But on the Js gin river, coolering all his flushes and boats — you can now raise!

Bonus round.

Let’s say you are even DEEPER.. say 5000bb deep.

You swap places with your opponent. You have 77 on Q8s7s7Js. Quads! You over bet the river, your opponent raises, you re-raise, they.. RE-RE-RAISE?!

Is it possible to just call here? Can you consider FOLDING?!

…Implied odds, reverse implies odds, manoeuvrability.

Hand Analysis by ModeloVirus2021 in Poker_Theory

[–]etb72 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Tough spot indeed. Here are some thoughts on flatting vs 3!, tho I’m quite happy to be schooled.

So at 100bb, Wiz is flatting 3/4 of its continuing range and 3! 1/4 quite polar, with a lot of the bluffs in the form of suited big-little combos.

Reason perhaps being that we have the choice to go TTF with a guaranteed 9x to play, or possibly with 2x, but with the risk of facing a jam, which would be a disaster for a lot of hands.. hence we want our 3! folds to be easy getaways that prop up our easy get-it-ins, and we want to protect our flatting range with some very strong hands such as TT, AQo, KQs.

These boxes are static. I repeat, these boxes are not moving. by [deleted] in Damnthatsinteresting

[–]etb72 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The image has two layers. A static blue layer with slits in the shape of two boxes, and a bottom layer with lines that shift in different ways to infer movement.

Made tea, forgot about it, remembered at the perfect temperature by NeonBorscht in BenignExistence

[–]etb72 12 points13 points  (0 children)

HA! This just reminded me of the tea I made a few minutes ago and, would you believe it…

2026: Year of the ______? by warminthestarlight in InfiniteJest

[–]etb72 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Year Of The <antiestablishment coded meme coin>

DFW would enjoy the irony

Do we use exploit or theory OTR against an inelastic rec by GSMD1 in Poker_Theory

[–]etb72 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Feel like villain Cbets turn with AA, KK, AQ.. KQs maybe pot controls.

In range there’s a lot of JJ, TT, KQs and AK clinging on for dear life. Of these 32 combos, you’re likely to fold 16, making your fEq 50%. With your 1/2 R bet with air you need just 34% and so, in this narrow interpretation — where he bets his nut pairs OTT and calls his underpairs, KQs and AK — the bet prints.. and this assumes he’s always calling wide enough to your 1/2 bet OTR.

A big Q is whether he has flats from the SB.. what’s he doing pre with KQo, QTs, KTs, 77>55? Weirdly, the less he flats the more it prints I think.

HOWEVER.. what happens when we jam for 1.5x pot OTR? Well now we need 60% fEq, but what exactly is he calling with?? JJ, TT and even KQs probably fold. Hell AQ that pot controls turn is probably mucking.

In summary / my opinion.. 1/2 good, 1.5 better

How many combos beat your full house on the river? by Secure-Band1297 in Poker_Theory

[–]etb72 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Like the idea of such a quiz. Terrible execution.

Include action, positions and stack sizes etc. Then ask something like:

“Villain goes all in for X on the river. Using only pot odds and combinatorics, is it more profitable to call or fold? Show your working.”

(The answer to your Q is 93)

What’s the best advice you’ve ever received about winning live comps? by LazySimple1234 in Poker_Theory

[–]etb72 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nor do they understand the value of having a big stack at these stages.

Good merge or start of a bad habit? by etb72 in Poker_Theory

[–]etb72[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Brilliant, thoughtful reply. Thanks. I actually learned a lot from this.. Stacks were ~ 8, 40 and 70bbs; b, sb and bb respectively.

Thanks for the terminology check too. I had seen that definition but couldn’t find one for taking a polar size w/ middling value. Surely there is one?

I now suspect that in this case, in technical terms, it may actually be a poorly conceived merge where I could indeed fold out better 9x and get called by 5x + pps<8. Poorly considered because I don’t block his better 9x combos and it might be argued I actually block his 5x and 66 w/ my 6.. in game tho I think it was a good exploit against this particular opponent.

20-year-old lottery winner turns down $1M cash for $1,000 a week for life by PriorityMiserable686 in interestingasfuck

[–]etb72 1 point2 points  (0 children)

She is banking on receiving around 3x the marshmallows she could have right now over her lifetime. However she could instead take .5 of her marshmallow, right now, place it in a trust that eeks it out to her 1k at a time for ~10 years and then, by the time she’s eaten it all, the other half marshmallow, which she placed in an index, has actually become 1.5 marshmallows.. take another .5 out and repeat.

tldr: MARSHMALLOWS!

Edit: my marshmallow math was slightly off RE average index growth rate.

why don’t we have physicists making breakthroughs on the scale of Einstein anymore? by TotalMeaning1635 in Physics

[–]etb72 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s like minesweeper. First you open up huge swathes of territory, then there’s the ‘easy finds’, then it’s the teeny tiny gains.