What percentage of hand do you play to the flop ?

brianon

I've been playing on ladbrokes poker for a few weeks now and am new (2 months) to hold'em.
Ladbrokes give you stats and it says that I play 60% of hands to at least the flop.
Is this too many ?
Whats the norm ? Do you think I might be playing with too many weak hands ?

Of the 60% I play to the flop I win 35% of them.

Iago

ok so you're winning about 1 in 5 hands then...

(3 out of every 5 hands played, 1 out of those 3 won)

To me that's a receipe for losing money IMHO

but it depends on a lot of factors, what is the table playing like, i.e. are a lot of players seeing the flop, how many of those are folding after the flop etc.

Also it depends on your position on the table and the table image you've built up, can you bluff if you don't hit the flop and will it be believed? That ties in with the point above.

How much of your stack are you commiting to see the blinds? Has there been any raisers or are you able to limp in. If you're limping in what are the odds on you having the best hand after the flop, and what percentage of your remaining chips is the blind? You should have at least 10-14 times the blind left if you are limping in and hoping to hit a hand

Lastly it depends on what cards you have, if you have the cards then you have to play, for example last night I saw 10 flops in a row and only won one hand, but my cards pre-flop where worth seeing the flop for and the blinds were cheap enough to make it worth my while.

Anyway, they're the things I consider when playing, I'm sure most of the guys will have their own opinions (and some will be more informed than me...or at least they would like to think so anyway )

At the end of the day, you have to be patient to play texas hold em, always be prepared to throw away cards time and time again. I've often sat and not seen a flop in 20 or 30 hands if the cards didn't hit. If you want to be succesful you have to have an element of that to your game..

Marq

60% is an average enough number for a game with low blinds (say .25 .50) if you have a large bankroll. if it's costing you very little you should try to limp into pots with marginal hands - you stand to make a lot more money when you do hit the flop well, because it's harder to predict what you have. When the blinds are higher, most people would play fewer hands before the flop. Some people swear by Sklansky's hand rankings - a rough guide to what hands should be played and from what positions devised by "einstein" sklanksy in the 70's. they've been updated and ammended by many people since then, a very thorough analysis of starting hand values can be found here:

http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/People/mummert/poker/

when the blinds are higher, you might be better off playing fewer starting hands, as it costs you a lot in real terms chasing the possibility of a miracle flop (7-7-2 maybe). on the other hand, limiting which hands you play makes you a more predictable player, and you may not get as much action when you do get good hands.

Hippo

As Iago says, it all depends on a multitude of factors, however........I play limit and no limit on VC, the limit stuff usually on the 3/6 or 2/4 tables, and I generally do ok. Apart from an exceptional run of hole cards, I'll see the flop maybe 20% of the time, and I know players who think that's too high. You can usually afford to play pretty tight online as most people don't pay too much attention to who's raising or playing tight. Just think of all that money you throw away on flat calling with very little hope of improvement. Stay tight and then mix it aggressively, you'll be surprised. You can afford to call a few more in no limit.
I think what I mean is 60% is very very high!

Waylander

I operate on a kind of sliding scale in relation to the blinds. When the blinds are only twenty I am more likely to limp in but as the blinds increase I start to play tighter. Also the size of my stack is a factor, and the playing styles of other people at the table.

Decker

Hi brianon ,

I posted a similar question to this a few months ago and like you got mixed responses.

I think it's important to point out that playing on the Internet is different to playing live so to speak; I've always found it difficult to build a table image on the Internet. For example, I would regularly expect to get a caller regardless of the flop and my bet, though this happens in the free rolls in the Fitz and Merrion as well.

To give you a more concrete example, I play on VC Poker on the .05/.10 cent blind tables. I will call all .10 cent blinds to see the flop so long as there is no raise, this is assuming I hold complete garbage. Basically I hope to hit something on the flop, a minimum of top two pair perhaps, possibly less if I can see the next card for free/very cheap, though the ideal is a set, which generally earns a nice pot. I'll then bet out or slow play when it gets to my action, depending on my hand. I consistently win about 5-10 dollars an hour playing like this (I've played about 40 hours like this so far). I think the main reason for this is the blinds are so small in relation to the average size pot, which normally hovers around the 2-5 dollar mark, winning one of these allows you to see 20 to 50 more flops. This combined with people playing badly, not raising with quality hands seems to make this playing style at least self-sustaining. Most people I’ve mentioned this to scoff at the idea, though it does seem to work for me. I would be very wary of trying this in non-internet games. I don’t play good hole cards like this and normally bet out big pre flop, to stop the above happening to me!

I tried to scale this up to the .50/1.0 dollar tables (you could probably make $10 an hour collecting tin cans) and lost $120 in two hours or 4 hands (I took two lots of $60 to the table), in summary:

2 x I got someone all in post-flop and got outdrawn, I reckon I should have won these as I was well ahead and they didn't have the pot odds to call, I suspect they thought I was bluffing, which I never do on the internet.

1 x I hit trips with a 6 kicker someone else had a higher kicker, once again post flop. I think the problem here was I hit trip Jacks. The other way around I would probably have faired better.

1 x I was out played.

I won and lost some other minor hands as well but the ones above are the ones that crippled me/put me out. Once again I made a big raise pre-flop with good cards.
The main difference I noticed was that the was much more pre-flop raising than on the .05/.10 cent tables, which would indicate a higher quality of play to me a least. Overall I'm not sure if this style works at this blind level table and it's difficult to base a decision on 4 results.

Also, I’m still very much a beginner, so take the above with a pinch of <insert your favourite seasoning here>:).

Let me know what you think and how you get on.

Alex

Davey Devil

I'm playing on Prima Poker - uses the same software as Ladbrokes. I usually play $2 + .50 single table tourney's, at the moment I see 38% of the flops with 43% success. Tight and aggressive is the way to play.

DeVore

That sounds about right, apparently you should see about a third of all flops and win a third to a half.

I'm reading up on starting hands right now in fact, seems I'm a very tight player as I have high requirements for starting hands. Dont expect me to turn into Pudding though!

DeV.

Hippo

we're all comparing apples with oranges here. Basically if you're playing low blind pot limit it's almost always worth paying your 25c to try and hit a flop. If you're playing tourneys you've got to be a bit less loose and a bit more aggressive, and if you play cash limit for any kind of real money and start calling and chasing with those 'might turn out ok' hands you'll be slaughtered. I've been that particular fish!

Decker

Hi Hippo,

I agree with you. Different types of game: internet, cash, tournament, limit all require different types of play, also I think your opponents should dictate the type of game you play to some extent, basically being responsive to the situation.

Though from what I read tight/aggressive is generally regarded as the optimum way to play. I was pointing out that in my experience there are others, which can be dictated by the type of game/opponent you are up against.

Alex