![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
i dont understand how the fact that i'm a 1.86:1 underdog to make a flush by the river with a four flush on the flop is relevant to the game.
what if i call with 3:1 odds and miss on the turn. how could it possibly be profitable to call getting 3:1 on the river in a situation where I am an ~4:1 dog.
and if this is true (the turn call is incorrect), then my flop call was incorrect because my flop call assumed i was going to the river.
i treat the turn and river cards as 2 separate events. also, i subtract the current amount of rake from pot odds.
comments?
nate
The situation you describe is more complex than you are making it out to be. 1.86:1 comes in handy when you are deciding whether to raise your flush draw for value, and also whether to call, planning to call the turn. If there are two opponents against you, there must be at least three sb in the pot. If they both stay in on the turn, then you are getting more than enough odds to draw at your flush. However, if there are three or four or five opponents, you will still make your flush draw slightly more than once in three tries, so you can now raise for value with all those callers.
You are right in considering your effective odds when deciding whether to pursure a draw on the turn, but most of the time you will be getting the odds to draw to a flush (you also must consider implied odds as well). A worst case might be when there are three players including you, no raise BTF, and one bets and another calls, then you call with your flush draw. THEN, the turn is a blank for you, and the first bets and the other raises, and the first may very well reraise. NOW you can fold your flush draw, assuming you have no other outs. However, face it, this type of situation is rare, and you are almost always getting the right odds to play flush draws, assuming the board isn't paired, there is multiway action of at least two opponents, and there isn't excessive action.
As far as calling on the flop, then having the turn call be incorrect, it happens sometimes with flush draws, but very, very rarely. This type of logic works better for gutshots, where you plan to call one small bet on the flop, but if you miss, fold the turn for a big bet. With open ended str8 draws and flush draws, you will usually be going to the river. Looking for excuses to fold flush draws when the action is reasonable and there is no pair on board is looking to lose money.
Dave in Cali
Is that all you want to know? lol
Do you want me to also tell you that during those years (early nineties) I went to Vegas a dozen times and lost thousands at $20-40 and higher every trip? Do you want me to tell you that I blew gobs of money at sports and at gin? Do you want me tell you that I "invested" by sending chunks of extra money to "pay down" a mortgage? All this with no job or outside support of any kind? Is that what you want to know?
Around here (in CA) it costs about $18/hour to play. That means that a BREAK-EVEN player at $3-6 is making betting decisions that are 3BB-per-hour better than his opponents. The games I played in cost about $1-$2 dollars an hour to play in, for a super tight player, and again, they were the losest games imaginable. Softer, more often, than any legal-casino game I've ever seen. The math checks out. I've got nothing to prove here, and no motive to lie. All I was saying was, "Jim, I agree. And here's why."
Tommy
I have watched some $10-20 rocks reach most of that win rate at $4-8 tables, doing just what you said you did. They are so tight they have dust on themselves and cobwebs on their chips.
I think the secret to their success is they know why they are there....
I think winning limit poker can be distilled down to a few basic concepts: why are you there, how much action you need, your patience level, and how important winning is to you. Of course you have to have the knowledge base too: game selection, probabilities, etc.
I believe what seperates the winners from the rest, all else being equal, is the proportion of importance they each give those common factors. Once you are a winning player there is a lot of fine tuning that goes on, but it's beyond the scope of this post.
I know this view is simplistic, but it's the right direction. Anyway, I don't doubt the win rate for a second.
Bob Stupak and Russ Hamilton, I believe.
n/t
I need some opinions and help. Assume we have an excellent player who beats a good loose (albeit expensive in terms of dead drop collection) 9/18 holdem game for almost two big bets per hour. The 9/18 game has a $3 small blind that is 1/3 of the $9 big blind.
Let’s say you notice a single leak. This player will call in the small blind against a typical field of opponents (three to seven) with all hands in the category of offsuit high card/garbage. This includes hands as good as A9 offsuit and as bad as J2 offsuit.
Question 1: Assuming the player plays very well post flop, how expensive is this call in terms of expectation? For example, let’s say the call is $6 but the average hand in this category is only worth $2.50 (you would call if the small blind where $6.50 and expect to break even). In this case the call would have a negative expectation of ($3.50).
Question 2 (for math whizzes only): Assume that the blinds pass four times per hour. Based On the likelihood of being dealt this type of hand, how expensive is this leak in dollars per hour in the long run?
Regards,
Rick
"Assuming the player plays very well post flop..."
Does this mean that, despite limping with J2 preflop, this player will usually/often fold the hand after hitting top pair postflop? If not then things are much worse, because a hand like J2 will actually cost you more money than the initial call. But assuming the play post flop is indeed excellent:
1. I'd guess that this leak costs ($2.00) on average. It is greatly balanced out by the aces (and perhaps some kings) which with expert play should show profit.
2. 12 combinations of each specific hand. 8 garbage cards, 4 good cards, so 32 different hands. This means 384 hand combinations, out of a total of 2652.
(4 hands/hour)*(-2 dollars/bad hand)*(384 bad hands/2652 hands)= -$1.15 dollars/hour
So that's my estimate. I might have underestimate how much you lose on average with these hands, but given that the game is loose you should make a lot when you flop well, so...
Bart,
In my above post I should have make it clear that I meant offsuit garbage with at least a jack and four gaps or more (i.e., no chance of using both cards in a straight).
Also, isn't the number of possible two card hands equal to 1326 or has my memory completely failed me? Anyway, thanks for responding.
Regards,
Rick
"Also, isn't the number of possible two card hands equal to 1326 or has my memory completely failed me?"
You have a good mememory :) It's 1/2*52*51=1326 The 2652 thing comes from if you consider JcAh different than AhJc; he forgot to halve it.
Regards, ME
nt
I know you wanted numbers but you know I have trouble thinking in $/hour. I'll skip right to $/year. I think this leak is enormously tremendously huge, as in, the difference between winning and losing. Partly because of straight up stats and hand strength and all that, but also because of two psychological aspects, one extrenal, one internal.
When a player mucks an unraised SB, it reinforces a message to the table. And it's a mighty cheap way to send the message. I think of it as a great bargain. It's free!
Internally, the button is coming next hand. To get wrapped up in a pot with a suck hand right before the button and cutoff hands is BAD timing. That's when a solid image and clear mindset is needed most. Round after round, year after year, I think mucking the SB pays huge but intangible rewards.
Tommy
In a 9-18 game with a $3 small blind - AND a player who plays extremely well after the flop - I am not sure that there EXISTS a hand you can call with from the SB (unraised pot of course and a raise from the BB unlikely) that costs you a full $3.
Part of this comes from the credo from our hosts that, "if the SB is 2/3 of a bet all hands should be played".
If this is true then there cannot really be a hand that "costs" more than $3 to play from the SB.
This does not answer your question in a dollars and cents manner, but it may (or may not) give you a new perspective as to how expensive it is to play too loosely out of the SB.
- I am NOT a world class post-flop player; I muck ALOT of hands that might be playable for profit by someone who is. This is especially true when the SB is less than half of a bet. (3-6 = 1, 5-10 = 2)
When it is exactly half as in 10-20 I will play a few more hands; I do not play alot of 15-30 where the SB is almost always $10 (or 2/3 of a bet).
Hope that helped at least a little -
J D
P.S. Without doing any math I would put the cost of your loose friends leak at about $1/hour. There is no way I can see it as being much more than this.
But, that is still 2K per year if he plays full time.
J-D,
Actually in 15/30 I will fold a few hands that are totally disconnected, unsuited and with no higher card then a jack when I have three to six opponents. But I could be wrong in doing so. Even if I am right for this number of opponents, I always call with two opponents (and an unagressive blind) simply because I believe I can win some pots when my two opponents miss and I bet.
My guess is that this leak in 9/18 costs about $2.50 per hand. Based on Dead Barts corrected math, I figure the leak to cost about $3 per hour, which is huge in a game where you do well to win $30 per hour.
Regards,
Rick
I am thinking about becoming a part time prop for a local nor-cal cardroom. Can anyone give me advive about this? What rooms are best to work in. What type of wages will I be making (not counting action from the games.
It seems to me that this would be the ultimate job for the winning poker player. I am missing somthing?
any help/advice/suggestions would be great thanks
stud,
It can be a great job or terrible job depending on conditions. Try to find someone who has the job or look over how they are used by visiting the club and watching. For example, make sure management doesn't use a "salary return" policy be putting six props in a game with a high rake.
Regards,
Rick
You will have little or no choice in which games to play, and the ones you do play in will usually be lousy short-handed games.
Proping is a real tough job. You MUST know how to play squeaky tight to survive the regular downs in these lousy games.
Use this time to work on your personal skills like discipline and alertness.
- Louie
I am curious. Is it possible to be prop for foreign tourist for lets say 3 weeks? Or is it treated always like regular job (so without legal permit for work it's impossible)?
Zbych,
Well, one can find an "employer" who hires his props as "contractors" and pays them straight pay each week, without any witholding of taxes. It would be the contractor's job to file self-employed taxes (and FICA) and the end of the year.
An unethical contractor COULD supply a false social security number and probably get away with it, at least until the end of the year.
- Louie
I am a prop at the Oaks club in Emeryville. I believe they are hiring for both full-time and relief props. Where are you thinking about working? If you want more info, feel free to e-mail me. Scott
Hello,
I recently started playing online poker (0.50/$1) at Paradise Poker.
Does anyone have any opinions on whether this particular casino (or online poker in general) is trustworthy.
Personally, I would think that it would be quite easy for several people to cheat by playing at the same table. And if so, has anyone witnessed this at a low limit table?
Does anyone have any complaints regarding this particular casino.
I don't think I would ever play limits any higher than a $1 game. But I am comfortable at this level.
Is there a resource which rates online casino's credibility?
Any opinions/help on this matter would be appreciated.
Thanks, JM Th
If you look at the "Internet Poker" Forum (six below this Forum, on the left) you will see dozens, nay, hundreds of posts about Paradise.
If you are comfortable playing the low limits and don't plan on moving up you really shouldn't be worried about collusion. It's can't really worth it at a low-limit table.
As far as Paradise goes, you will get your money when you cash out and there are loads of games to choose from so you can usually pick a soft one (I would guess at $0.50-$1.00 you get 40-50% seeing the flop) and if you get nervous about some players possibly colluding you can jump to another table.
You might want to look at Planet Poker as well as they also have these small limits you are interested in.
Good luck,
Paul Talbot
Sorry, couldn't resist. I love PP and play it every day.
Use the Internet forum. You will get some good info on playing the Internet amid all the posts from the conspiracy buffs.
Good Luck
Plus, crazy Steve Badger has a decent primer on playing Internet poker at http://www.playwinningpoker.com/guide1.html.
I was wondering if I could get some comments from those of you that have played Canterbury Park in Minnesota. I am moving to Minneapolis very soon and wanted to hear what the place is like (it is the only place to play in the area, right?).
What I am interested in is things like type of action, staff competency, rake, games played, food, and anything else you can think of.
Thanks in advance for any responses, Jason
Yes, it is the only card club in Minnesota.
By law the top bet allowed is $30 so they don't play anything high then 15-30. although it has been reported that they are trying to get approval to increase to 30-60. It is very much a Hold'em town so it is rare that there is any stud game higher then 4-8 going. They also offer Omaha H/L, and Stud 8 or better.
Rake is 10% to max. of $4, except for 15-30 games which is 5% $4 max.--there is also a $1 rake for the jackpot, except for 15-30 which are not jackpot games.
Action is very good--being about one year old alot of the games are still very soft. Also probably because of the newness of it all there is very little player or dealer abuse.
Food can be very good at times--or nothing special oher times, but I am very picky about these things so I can be hard to please.
Smoking is allowed at most tables with the two seats on either side of the dealer designated non-smoking. All tournaments are non-smoking. There are also non-smoking games at the lowest limits, but they rarely go.
I have never had any complaints about the staff. They do have rule books available and I never had any experience of the staff making a ruling contrary to the printed rules.
The rake hurts. I hear it is high for a card club, but I have no experience anywhere else. A forty dollar pot costs you $5. ($4 for the rake, and $1 for the bad-beat jackpot) Plus, you probably will want to tip the dealer. The same $40 hand on Paradise costs you $2. You do the math.
Any comments on whether this rake is high, and what the rake is at other card clubs around the country?
Small correction on the rake:
At games 6/12 or higher, the rake is 5% to a $4 max. $1 Jackpot drop on games less than 10/20. The stud rake on 6/12 and lower is tough - 10% to $4.50 and a $1 jackpot drop. Whoo!
Check out www.canterburypark.com for info on games, tournaments, etc. The tournaments are very well run and fun to play in.
Russ is correct about the food. One day it's fine, the next day it sucks. They should bring in somebody decent to run the food service there.
It is rare to see stud games higher than 4/8, but I did see a 15/30 Stud game going last week.
I agree that the dealers and staff do a very good job.
I play Canterbury a ton. It is a fine cardroom except for the rake.
All the original staff still seems to be there which is a good sign as to the quality of managment.
Games are the softest I have ever witnessed (all the way up to 15-30).
I just played the weekly winner takes all NL holdem tourney on Sunday nights ($250 buyin). Totally a blast.
Good luck
Also, I believe this post is in the wrong section.
Question:
When is it correct to call a raise in the big blind with unsuited connectors and one-gappers?
Í need help with the range of lets say 45 through QJ and 46-KJ (all unsuited).
Thanks, Puggy
Unsuited connectors are worth about 2/3 the value of the equivalent suited connector. The BB is getting a 50% discount and so would call raises MORE often than he would if he had to call 2 bets with the suited connector.
I suppose.
- Louie
For unsuited connectors, I would play ten-nine or better and fold nine-eight or worse. For unsuited one gappers, I want a notch higher so jack-nine or better is playable. Ten-eight or worse is a fold. However, I tend to play pretty loose out of my big blind. You also have to be willing to dump top pair type hands when you get heat especially from an early position raiser. If you are the type to stay married to top pair, dutifully paying off all the way to the river, then you should play much tighter than I recommend.
Here is an example. The UTG opens with a raise and everyone folds to you. You have queen-ten offsuit in your big blind. I would call. Now the flop comes Q-5-2 rainbow giving you top pair but no kicker. I would bet. If I get raised, I would take off a card and then check-fold if the turn gets bet after a blank comes. But if you are the type who cannot fold top pair in a heads-up situation because you are worried about being faked out by the utg preflop raiser, you should fold preflop.
Playing out of position with a clearly inferior hand that's trouble unless you make 2-pair against an opponent you respect in a small pot is about as bad as implied odds get. You should confidently and quietly fold all those trouble hands against a solid early raiser. Heck, fold AQ against many of these players.
87o will do better than QT in that spot.
- Louie
I agree with Louie here. I would muck that QT in a second against a solid UTG raiser.
What I was really getting at is trying to ascertain some guidelines for calling with these hands when the pot is multiway. Suppose we have 2 limpers, then a raiser, and we're sitting in the BB with something like T9 off. Is this a call? If yes, how many other players do you need to call with 65 off?
Puggy
"Here is an example. The UTG opens with a raise and everyone folds to you. You have queen-ten offsuit in your big blind. I would call. Now the flop comes Q-5-2 rainbow giving you top pair but no kicker. I would bet. If I get raised, I would take off a card and then check-fold if the turn gets bet after a blank comes. But if you are the type who cannot fold top pair in a heads-up situation because you are worried about being faked out by the utg preflop raiser, you should fold preflop."
Hmmm... I'm not sure I would do this in a low limit game. Almost everyone I know will raise you with AK on the flop, bet the turn, and check the river if they dont hit (heads-up). I simply do not play these hands in the big blind against an UTG raiser, and if I did, I would check-raise him and fold to a 3-bet. I have to little experience in mid-limit games though.
This is your best post yet for me. The reason I say this is because on my very own I have been playing like you say. I call with group 4 or 5 cards sometimes. But if I only flop top pair, I let go if I'm not sure I have the best hand. I don't fall in love with it.I have being doing real nice lately, I guess I'm improving. Thank you and everyone else in 2+2, you are putting $$$$ in my pockets.
I think it makes a considerable difference whether the pot is being played short-handed or not.
By the way, the seemingly excellent odds you appear to be getting from a large field when holding something like 98 offsuit in the BB are not as good as they might seem. This is because your hand really doesn't play well either short-handed or multiway at this point--you have no high card strength, and your opponents may well have combined hands to reduce what you might think are your outs...they may even have a lot of runner/runners covered by such as higher straights and backdoor flushes. Without being suited or without holding a pocket pair or very high cards, your opponents may well have you both dominated and they may have better implied odds than you.
I am not saying never, ever play these types of hands, only that most players overestimate the playability of these type of holdings (98 offsuit, 54 offsuit) out of the blinds in multiway pots. And they don't play too well short-handed either.
nt.
that what you are saying is true. We always see when three or more players are going after a straight that they don't make it because the other players have the cards they need.
I would ask if the raise came late, like from the small blind, as you may see a reraise from a slow roller. And of course you have to consider the money in the pot (number of players)(heads up?)
I am in a 4-8 game of average looseness and slightly higher than average aggressiveness. There is one player two to my right who is tough and very aggressive, and waiting for the 8-16 game. I get AKo and raise in late position, first in. He reraises me and we see the flop heads up for three bets each.
Flop comes J T 7 rainbow. I bet and he raises me.
I wonder what he reraised me pre-flop with that hit this flop so hard.... I can't think of anything other than an overpair, which I am not yet convinced of yet. I know that no matter what I had done in this situation, I could expect him to raise my flop bet about 60-80% of the time.
So I reraised him, partially because I suspect I might have the best hand, partially to see where I am at, and partially as a semi-bluff. If he comes back at me again, I know he has an overpair, or possibly JTs or TT or JJ. If that happens, I will call, then fold the turn if I don't catch a queen, and maybe fold if I catch a K or A, depending on my read and his actions.
To my amazement, he immediately folded as soon as I reraised him. I quickly muck and take the pot.
This hand could bring up all sorts of issues, both on my play, his play, and each of our reads on the other. I am curious to see what comments the forum has on this hand.
Dave in Cali
Raising and reraising is the most powerful play in poker.
Sounds like you had a good read on him, and he got caught....
Mike
The opponent adopted the same offensive strategy you did: he bets or raises marginally under the assumption that the opponent will cowar and respond predicatably. So when you 3-bet he "knows" you have an over-pair and folds his J.
"Finding out where you are at" is rarely a viable reason to do anything. It is only worthwhile so long as you do in fact confidently find that out AND it significantly changes your play. Lets not presume the opponent, even the good opponent, (actually especially the good opponent) will respond the same way you do in his spot.
Except for your accidentall great counter strategy, your 3-bet is a loser since finding out you don't have an over-card draw (when he 4-bets) costs the same as calling the turn. The information does you no good.
- Louie
Louie
I was wondering when someone might mention the possibility that three betting the flop was overplaying my hand. Although I did win the pot, that does not automatically imply that I played well. In fact, I didn't even post this hand because I thought I played it well, I posted it because I thought it would bring about interesting responses. Thanks man!
I think you are right, he folded a jack. The only hands that make any sense for him are AJ, AQ, or 99. I doubt he would have folded AK, and actually, I am not so sure he would have folded AQ either. However, three betting me with AJ seems like a pretty dumb move, this player knew me well enough to know that I ain't no maniac, and I generally raise with good hands. I am not sure why he didn't just fold BTF. Maybe he thought he could muscle me out of the pot.
Dave in Cali
In the interest of fairness to the 2+2ers who don't have access to RGP I am posting this here (no need to thank me) but most of it does refer to RGP....
Being an aspiring poker player I have spent months of my valuable time lurking on the poker RGP and 2 + 2 forum. I have been diligent, following many threads to their illogical conclusion and reading the pearls cast (flung may be a better word) amongst us truffle hunting swi… err poker players. After all this effort I feel I can now claim to be an expert. Not, of course on poker (I don’t care what anybody says I am definitely going to cap it every street with ‘AAAA7’ in Omaha 8 – provided it is suited), but on poker RGP. I myself have remained unsullied by never ever posting to RGP. Firstly because I know nothing (and I have several independent witnesses to that effect) and secondly (mainly) because I can’t access it in work.
Quiz and Questionaire -----------------------
Being now a self-proclaimed expert I have decided to test myself against my fellow RGPers with the help of the following quiz/questionaire. All the questions below are based on author’s or well known poker names posted in the recent past. I will allocate points to each correct answer posted. If there are more than 2 responses then I will report on the statistical validity of their answers. There will be a separate category for authors who can correctly identify themselves.
A Who is most likely to Have Said:
1. ‘…that doesn’t really interest me..’
2. ‘ I will call you’
3. ‘…backstabbing’
4. ‘…systems ….’
5. ‘….behind the scenes…’
6. ‘ What are the names’
7. ‘ I will not call you’
8. ‘ You’all….’ (may refer to poker RGP, all poker players anywhere or possibly the whole world)
9. ‘I am sorry for you…’ (i.e. for you being you).
10. ‘Please post on the exchange… ‘
11. ‘… leave it to others to elaborate …’
12. ‘… leave it to others to elaborate …’ – (but said with a more patronising tone)
13. ‘I will address the first point only….’
14. ‘… i would never play this hand utg but maybe in the sb for half a bet with five limpers’
15. ‘….knows nothing. ‘
16. ‘… email me in confidence as usual.’
As we all know the Gods are jealous and have stricken down some of our mortal poker idols with serious speech impediments (which are also apparent in their writings). Consequently it is physically impossible for some to say certain words or phrases.
B. Who is least likely to have said;
1. ‘I am wrong’
2. ‘You are right’
2. ‘I am sorry’
4. ‘I apologise’
5. ‘We may have opposing opinions but I respect your integrity’
Insults. A truly great RGP poster has a complete array of insults at his disposal but everyone has his favourites.
C. Who is most likely to refer to somebody as a:
1. ‘Jerk’
2. ‘Wimp’
3. ‘Pr**k
Trademarks. To an expert like myself each poster has their own unique style but can you identify their trademarks?
D. Who would I be refering to if I described a poster as;
1. Verbuse
2. Obtuse
3. Aggressive – Loose Mongoose
4. Pass Remarkable
5. Always Gets the Last Word In
6. Always gets the last Insult In
7. Always gets the last Boot In
8. Always get the last Raise In (oops poker content – please ignore)
E. Flameability. We all know that poker authors are made of alcholol soaked cotton wool and are therefore highly flamable. All it takes is one spark.
1. Who is the most flamable?
2. Who is flame proof?
F. Censorship. We are all against censorship (but I’ll sue the ass of anybody who reposts this message). However it does exist – mostly in the form of self censorship.
2 + 2
1. Who has had their posts removed from 2+2?
2. Who has been banned from 2+2?
3. Who has publicly announced their withdrawl from 2+2?
4. Who has publily annnounced their withdrawl from 2+2 and did not come to a very sorry, but undoubtedly deserverd, end?
RGP
1. Who has publicly announced their withdrawl from RGP?
G. Doctors CaseBook. As a recent medically inclined author recently demonstrated it is perfectly ethical to perform accurate psychological evaluations based on RGP posts. As a student of phrenology myself I prefer the hands on approach but given the available evidence who most likely suffers from the following conditions:
1. Sociophobia
2. Agrophobia
3. Skitzophrenia
4. Superioity Complex
5. Inferiority Complex (LOL)
6. Digitalis
7. Acute Beardiness
8. Smokophobia
9 Technophobia
10 Persecution Complex
11 Cheatophobia (fear of cheats)
12 Anti-Cheatophobia (fear of being called a cheat)
13 Reverse Polish Anti-Cheatophobia (fear of being called as some one who calls someone else a cheat)
H. Alternative Careers. Many of our respected authors/poster have other lives beyond poker some infact have totally unrelated interests such as smoking, drinking, sports betting and watching pretty girls. But what do you think are the most likely alternative occupations for the following if they didn’t resist the truly vocational call of playing poker:
1. What are the possible other career paths for our respected poker writers/posters?
Thank for your time in completing this form. If you don't not wish to post a reply, email me in confidence as usual …. (oops!).
Keep Folding
Folding Pete
Burrrrp!
Vince
Now I remember why I don't go to RGP anymore.
who can respond to a post that long?
Cosmic. You typed exactly what I was thinking. I wouldn't even mind sifting through some of the "I'm better and smarter than you are" bla bla if I could find my way around over there.
Tommy
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Now I don't claim to be an expert, not on poker nor on RGP. I am a "super-genius". Just like Wile E. Coyote. Now let me say that even though I, of course, knew every single answer at the mere blink of an eye, I only feel the need to answer a couple, just to prove what a super-genious I really am..
11. ‘… leave it to others to elaborate …’ Sklansky
12. ‘… leave it to others to elaborate …’ – (but said with a more patronising tone) Lepore
13. ‘I will address the first point only….’ Malmuth
4. ‘I apologise’ No one
8. Always get the last Raise In (oops poker content – please ignore) what the hell you putting poker content on the forum for anyway... moron!
1. Who has had their posts removed from 2+2? not me.
8. Smokophobia Me.
[Skunknophobia] ... anyone who has seen the tiny toons "how I spent my summer vacation" will know what I mean. so I'm a grown man who still likes cartoons... Pete's post is just as funny as that...!! Or just as disturbing... Take your pick!
1. What are the possible other career paths for our respected poker writers/posters? Clinical chemistry Researcher, rocket scientist, garbage man, poker columnist, used car salesman, poker room floorman, or possibly escort or drug kingpin.
Dave n' Cali
Super-Genius
And the answers are ... ?
http://www.portailcasino.com
Sorry if this is the wrong forum for this question, but do you guys know of any cheap hotels near hollywood park or commerce casino?
Also are those the two casinos in L.A. with the best mid/high limit holdem action right now?
thanks
Shawn
Shawn why don't you just ask Fatty Frayman?
HP has rates at Crowne Plaza, $59 (+ parking), and at Crystal Park, $25 weekdays, and $35 weekends (free parking). CC has a rate at Wyndham Gardens, about $79 I think. Crowne is 5 minutes away from HP, and about 20 minutes from CC. Wyndham is the opposite. CP is about 15 minutes away from both.
I stayed at CP recently when there were no rooms at Crowne, and I actually like it. The rooms have refrigerators and parking is easy. Some people complain that the rooms are dirty, but mine wasn't. Anyway, with the money you'll save, you could buy your own cleaning supplies.
Alright, I'm not saying you'd want this situation, but what is the best hand to play against AA and why. I'll assume the game is heads up.
Any suited connector from T9s to 65s, preferably of a suit different than either of the two aces, will give you the best chance. You need to make two pair or better to win, and so you're relying heavily on your chances of making a straight or flush. For this reason, T9s is imperceptably better than JTs because JTs has 2 fewer cards to a straight (the aces).
Some various hands' chances of winning against AsAc: Td9d: 22.6% Ts9s: 22.2% JdTd: 22.0% JsTs: 20.0% 9d9h: 19.7% KdKh: 18.3% KdQd: 16.9% 7s2c: 10.3%
(Statistics come from 10000 simulation runs each)
I believe 87s is actually the best.
Ken Poklitar
I seem to have erred in my previous post. I've spent the past hour thinking about it, and I've decided that 87s, 76s, and 65s are the absolute best against AA, and they are exactly equal in strength to each other.
Let's take it as a given that the best hand(s) against AA is/are suited connectors. Now the only question is which suited connector has the maximum chance of making a straight - the BEST straight - with two of the aces gone. We can do this by enumerating all of the possible five card boards that give our suited connector a straight without giving the aces a higher straight. The suited connectors with the maximum elements in their enumeration are the best.
First we enumerate all of the ways each of the suited connectors can make a straight using both of their hole cards...
T9s: KQJxx, QJ8xx, J87xx, 876xx
98s: QJTxx, JT7xx, T76xx, 765xx
87s: JT9xx, T96xx, 965xx, 654xx
76s: T98xx, 985xx, 854xx, 543xx
65s: 987xx, 874xx, 743xx, 432xx
... where the x stands for any card. As you can see, each suited connector down through 65s has the same number of ways to make a straight. The only problem is T9s. One of the ways it can make a straight, KQJxx, gives the aces a higher straight. So T9s is slightly inferior to the others, and can be dropped from our list.
Now we must enumerate the ways to make a straight using only one of the hole cards, which is easy since there's only one way for each...
98s: KQJTx
87s: QJT9x
76s: JT98x
65s: T987x
... again, we can see that if 98s makes a straight in this way, it's given the aces a higher straight, so it also is slightly inferior to the rest.
I think that's all right. Please correct me if you see anything wrong with my reasoning.
You are very close to right, but have overlooked one tiny thing.
When you hold 78s, there is a chance that you'll make a straight with
9TJ.
However, there are two more cards to come, and if those two are QK, then you've lost.
With 56s and 67s, if you make a straight, AA CANNOT make a higher straight (though it can still make a fullhouse). Thus, 56s and 67s are the best (and as near as I can tell, are identical in win percentage). 78s is just a tiny bit behind.
Just don't give me AK!!!
Worm
> You are very close to right, but have overlooked one tiny thing.
> When you hold 78s, there is a chance that you'll make a straight with
> 9TJ.
> However, there are two more cards to come, and if those two are QK, then you've lost.
If the board is KQJT9, then even if your opponent didn't have aces, you still wouldn't have won, because there is already a straight on the board (which your cards do not contribute to), so you tie. So the fact that your opponent has aces turns the tie into a loss. But we were talking about the chances of WINNING, not tying.
I did make a small error, though. When I showed the possible ways to make a straight with four cards (87s: QJT9x, 76s: JT98x, 65s: T987x), I said that the x can stand for ANY card, which isn't the case. x cannot be a card that would put a straight on the board, because then you tie with the aces (you both have a straight). So, while it is true that KQJT9 doesn't win for 87s, it is also true that 76s and 65s have identical non-win cases that balance out (QJT98 for 76s and JT987 for 65s). So, in the end, they both have the same number of wins. 87s does have one less way to TIE, but I believe the original question asked about your chances of winning.
You're right...I was thinking EV, not win %.
I lost two pots (over the course of the last week) in which I was as heavily favored pre-flop as it is possible to be; I held K-K while my opponent held K-2 off-suit.
In the 1st one the flop was Q-7-2, turn a 6, river, ---well you guessed it. BTW, his deuce was of the same suit as one of my Kings so he didn't even have THAT miracle to shoot for.
- I've mentioned before that I do not own POKERPROBE but I am almost sure that I was an 18.9 - 1 favorite going in; I seem to recall this exact figure being mentioned in an article in CARDPLAYER. I am 100% sure that I was better than an 18 - 1 favorite even if I am mistaken in regard to the exact number.
In the 2nd, my opponent - no it was NOT the same person - caught a flop of 5-4-3 with the "5" and the "4" suited to one of my Kings. The turn was the suited 9; he now had 6 outs that could be considered clean. (In fact he had 8; two of the remaining deuces would have given him the pot.) Of course an off-suit 6 landed on the river - another one that got away.
Oh yes, he attempted to check-raise the river. (I really need to learn to use my [apparently] imbecilic appearance to my advantage more often; I did not bet - a fact which seemed to irritate him quite a bit :-)
- I did get nailed for two bets on the river in the 1st hand.
Did I mention that in ~ 15 hours against this group over a 2 day period I was able to take just over $800 out of this THREE-SIX game ?
I must have just been running lucky since we all know those low limit games cannot be beaten. (lol)
These were the two most STATISTICAL bad beats I took; they were NOT the two most painful.
I was even able to find the tiniest bit of amusement when my AKs flopped top pair with a flush draw and was taken off by pocket 3s when the ONE card that would cost me the pot landed on the river. (My opponent did not hold the 3 that would have given me my flush; IT was still in the deck.)
I tracked as many of the hands as I could - it would not have been appropriate to sit there and keep notes -but I really do believe that I got LESS than my share of cards. Assuming this to be the truth, I wonder how much I could (or should) have taken out of this game.
With all due modesty, I feel like I should be giving lessons.
I wonder if "2+2" would read a draft if I were to submit one. (LOL)
To all those out there who are struggling (or have had rough times) in these games - don't give up yet.
When it comes it doesn't come by the bunch; it comes by the truckload.
Sincerly,
"the pokerplayer who has pushed his hourly average back over three big bets per hour in 3-6" (with an obscene rake - $4 per plus tip)
- It had been hovering at ~ 17.75 for the last four months (200+ hours). Total number of hours at this level is well over 2,000.
J D
P.S. Using the formula in "GTOT" my standard deviation is just under $2 meaning there is ~ a 99% degree of certainty that my actual W/R is at least $12 per hour and ~ a 95% "DOC" that it exceeds $15 P.H.
It makes it hard to find reasons to play higher since I don't do this for a living, ergo another 4-5 dollars per hour does not seem like a big improvement if I have to risk ALOT more money.
Not bragging, just reporting. I have always been of the opinion that there are a good number of players out there who are earning close to - if not more - than this. My guess is that THEY are smart enough to keep their mouth shut :-)
nt
10-handed game. Do you cold call a raise with Axs against a fairly tight raiser?
Thanks
No.
... you can listen to ..err.. read Rick's concise and accurate post. Nobody else does.
The basic question is: "how often will I make something I like compared to the number of opponents?"
- Louie
Ikke,
If the tight raiser is in early position and you are the lone opponent always fold. If the raiser is early AND you have about six other cold callers you call but you are playing for the flush or other miracle as flopping an ace is usually makes an expensive second best.
If the tight raiser is first to open in very late position you usually can three bet him, but it is nice if your X card is a five or better. If there is a string of callers then the tight player raises late you can call or three bet depending on your control over the table.
Or you can listen to Louie ;-).
Regards,
Rick
I don't think you need that many (6) cold-callers - it SEEMS like even as few as four should do the trick if there is ANY chance of getting a call from one or both of the blinds.
Rick plays in California - or so I thought.
If they are still playing 9 to a table you CAN'T GET 6 cold-callers; there are only 7 players other than the blinds. If there were 6 CCs of a raise this would mean everyone had called; you could not have a hand.
BTW (and this is NOT in conflict with what Rick said), if all else was equal I would call a little quicker if my "X" was a 2,3,4, or 5. It is a long shot but why not have the extra out of showing down a straight.
5-10 holdem, 10 players.
I raise preflop with AA UTG. All fold to mid position player(MP, not a maniac) who makes it 3 bets. All fold to me and I decided to just smooth call for deception and go for the check raise on the turn.
Flop: K T 3 r
I check. MP checks! (I cannot think of a hand here MP would check besides TT or KK. This is almost like screaming "I've got trip")
Turn: 4
What's your course of action from this point on? Still go for the check-raise, or bet out, or check-call all the way.
I'll post the result later...
Preflop, I do not like your smooth call because you are out of position. If you had position over your opponent than smooth calling would be okay.
Having relinquished control of the hand by failing to make it 4 bets preflop, I would bet the flop and hope to get raised so that I could reraise. When you check and your opponent checks back this could mean one of several things:
A. He has KK and is slowplaying top set.
B. He has QQ or JJ and is afraid that you raised with AK.
C. He has TT and is slow playing middle set but is he the type who would 3 bet an early raiser with pocket tens?
D. He was reraising preflop with a lower pocket pair and has decided to get through the hand as cheaply as possible given the king-high flop.
I would bet the turn. If I get raised, I would probably fold against most opponents.
Some opponents would check the flop with AK here, and then raise you. I think you should call down one way or another. This may chang the turn from a bet-fold to a check-call, as most opponents will always bet when you check a second time, even if they are afraid.
1) When you raise UTG you've got a strong hand. There is nothing to conceal. Hence, I'd make it 4 bets before the flop.
2) I'd lead on the flop, because your UTG raise suggests that the flop hit your hand.
3) Given your flop play, a bet on the turn seems mandatory. Why give a weaker hand a free shot at 2 pair or a set?
I went into the check-call mode. MP turns over KK for top set and took down the pot. Thanks for all the responses.
His most likely holding is a big pocket pair, so I go into a check and call mode. With pocket kings or tens, you're going to get raised if you bet, with pocket queens or jacks if you check again, you're likely to get him to bet on the turn and even again on the river. You're risking him sucking out on you by calling, but since there are no overcards to your pair the risk is less than it might otherwise be.
My usual policy with pocket Aces, especially with many opponents, is pound, pound, pound, but in this case the check on the flop after the 3-bet pre-flop should be, as it was for you, an alarm. If you have the best hand, you can't win any more than you would by check-calling, and if you're beat, you lose the minimum. And who knows, maybe you'll suck out on him.
Yes, flat call B4 flop, hehehe.
Lets see ... you correctly deduce the opponent will bet EVERYTHING except a set, and he checks. And you wonder if you should bet or check-raise... I would routinely check-cry-call, but can and have quietly check-folded in this situation.
This situation highlights the hopelessness of the strategy of routine aggressiveness combined with slow-playing monsters. Its easy to see the pattern and easy to take advantage of.
- Louie
We all know the feeling. Two pair, even top two pair, even the mighty Big Slick top two pair. It seems like such a nice hand,its an illusion, a giant money sucking turd that looks like a good hand. Maybe not or surely not that bad.Two pair might not be a giant money sucking turd but I sure have lost some chips with it. Here’s what I think about two pair in the games I play in which are sort of loose low limit games.
Early Position: If you raised up front with decent high cards and you flop two pair. There must be a straight draw out there. Now seems to me if you raised with big cards flopped two pair and bet, the callers gotta think you have some of the flop cause chances are they don’t. So your hoping for a call from some Goof with K, x or A, x or whatever. Maybe they all fold or maybe you get one caller and win a smallish pot. The big pots in these situations always seem to go to the guy who sucks out who you raised a few times defending your mighty two pair. Or at least thats how it works for me. Or seems to.
Middle to late position: You sneek in with a lot of callers in an unraised pot with j,10 or 9,10 s or something along those lines and now its even worse for the Turd hand. Two pair on the flop is a sure fire straight draw and this time there are a gang of chasers in an unraised pot and here I am Raise, Raise, Raise. Not only do you have to worry about the staight draws but now when an Ace or King hits on the turn the Goof with A or K, x just made a higher two pair. Doesn’t stop me from Raising em a few times just to be sure. If that doesnt happen here comes the straight or backdoor flush on the River. You might win a small pot but you’ll lose the Big ones, or at least I do.
The Blinds: Now this is where El Turdo really sneeks up and takes a bunch of money. It happens to me like this, I am sitting in the Big Blind minding my own business ready to fold to any raise. No raise, Flop two cheesy pair. Maybe a checkraise, maybe a bet out with three bet intentions, whatever I am slingin’ money into the pot.Use your imagination on the millions of ways two Cheesey pair lose in this situation out of position in an unraised pot.
Those are some of the Two pair flop problems I have. Starting on the flop with one pair and making two pair on the turn or river seems to hurt you more than it helps you by completing straight draws, or now that I think about Flush draws too.
What is the answer, how do you Flush this Turd without sometimes folding the best hand? Oscar .
n/t
I think you are asking the impossible. If you always know when your two pair is the best hand, it wouldn't be poker, and you would have a hard time finding people to play with you.
If you don't fold the best hand once in a while at low limit, you are playing way to loose. Because you never know when you have the best hand, be it two pair or something else, it is certain that occasionally you will fold the winner.
What I try to do is pay attention to what the average hands my opponents will play to the river. I use that to judge where my cheesy two pair or other so so hand fits in. Hope this helps.
You're talking about illusions. Any two pair on the flop is a big money maker in any game. Top two tends to get from 2/3's to nearly all the money going in head-up and half the money going in 4-way. Multiple straight draws usually mean multiple partly-dead hands. They're also easier than sets to get away from when they lose.
.
I would take two pair on every flop if I had the chance. it is usually the best hand and often stands up, even in loose games. I think I agree with natedogg regarding the assessment of your post.
as far as making two pair on the turn or river, if you are consistently running into flushes or straights when you make two pair, you aren't choosing which two pair to draw to very wisely. for instance if you have JdTd and the flop is T K A with two clubs and one spade, drawing to two pair is pretty darn stupid. Spend more mental energy thinking about what your two pair might give someone else before you draw, and before you post bad beat stories about how you lost to a flush when you drew to bottom pair.
The most dangerous two pair hands are when your two pair are both broadway cards, like QJ or KQ. However, they are still strong hands when they flop two pair! You should be charging the flush and straight draws as much as possible when this happens. Sometimes they will still draw out on you anyway. Towels for crying in are generally not provided by cardrooms, so bring your own for when you get drawn out on.
I suggest you lose the attitude concerning two pair and just play your hand when you get a good flop, like two pair for instance.
Dave in Cali
Thanks everyone for the reponses.
I see from the reaction, that my post may have had a whining, sort of Bad Beat, I am running bad, I suck at at hold em flavor to it.
I agree with all the feedback regarding the money makingness of the hand. I think my problems with playing this type of hand comes from not ditching it when all logic says I am beat. For me its the well I see a flush & straight just got there and I am probably beat but I have 2 pair,I call.
The hand just makes me nervous. later oscar
nt
So, flopping or making a split 2-pair is a bad thing, eh?
The trick to folding two-pair while rarely folding a winner is to immediately go take care of your REAL turd without observing the show-down. That way you can continue to live you your own little world without letting things like facts upset your bliss.
Another option is to pull back the raise-reflex to the point that you end up paying other players off often when you genuinely feel you have a reasonable chance to have the better hand.
Or maybe you need to get this notion that you are "supposed" to win all your "good" hands.
- Louie
Mason, Louie said the "T" word! Plus he said we weren't supposed to win on the hands we were "spose-da" win on!!! WAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! Now we have to chastize him and cast him out of the club!!!
Then, last week, I got dealt pocket aces... and lost!!! That dealer really screwed me over!!! I suspect she also had something to do with the fall of the roman empire AND the sinking of the titanic!
Between Louie and those darn dealers, how are we supposed to ever win anything when we flop dueces and nines from UTG! It must be low limit, it's just unbeatable because of the loose players. No wait, it's a conspiracy...
So don't be affecting our state of bliss with any of your darn "facts" anymore Louie!
;-)
The REAL conspiracy has been all those people plotting to make one think he has been alive all these years. They recently found the corronor's report, the grave, and they showed all those "photos" were really imposters. Who'd have thought it? Elvis has been dead for years.
BTW, only the "main" butt-heads here are allowed to be sarcastic. Oooopps, that's the "B" word...
- Screwy
n.t.
What is the difference between a typical good and a great low-limit-player ?
What is the difference between a typical good low-limit-player and a great high-limit-player ?
I know the difference between a bad and a good player !?
But what is the difference between good and great ?
Is there 1,2 or 3 point's that I should put focus on ?
Any comments appreciated !!
Well, there really shouldn't be any "great" low limit players for obvious reasons.
I totally disagree. There are some absolutely fantastic low limit players. Playing loose low limit is a completely different game than playing 80-160 at the bellagio. If the 80-160 players brought their usual game to the 3-6 at the Oaks, they could not win.
A truly great player will be able to adjust to whatever game he's in. But if he doesn't, he will get hammered by Dave in Cali, and Lee Jones, Larry from LA and other low-limit experts who can demolish loose low limit games by playing them properly.
natedogg
". If the 80-160 players brought their usual game to the 3-6 at the Oaks, they could not win.
A truly great player will be able to adjust to whatever game he's in. But if he doesn't, he will get hammered by Dave in Cali, and Lee Jones, Larry from LA and other low-limit experts who can demolish loose low limit games by playing them properly."
That's a hell of a qualifier! Of course they would change their games to adjust. But how many of the best 3-6 players could go play 80-160?
I was speakng in absolute terms, not relative by the way. Anyone who is "great" should be able to win at high stakes poker. Anyone capable of this shoudl build up a bankroll and be out of the low-limits rather quickly. While soem don't for various reasons, they probably do not develop the expert skills needed to beat high-limit games.
Regards,
Paul Talbot
In HPFAP, Sklansky refers many times to tough, average, and loose games. Could someone give me a definition of these ideas in terms of the average number of players who see the flop in a ten person game, and the average number of bets you have to put in to see the flop? For example, you might say...
Loose: 5.0 see the flop for 1.4 bets
Average: 3.5 see the flop for 1.8 bets
Tough: 2.2 see the flop for 2.5 bets
(If you're curious, I'm looking for such a precise definition for a program I'm trying to write to play hold'em. I want it to be able to identify what kind of table it's sitting at)
This is a question that many of us novice players want to know...What makes a champion/winning poker player? With the exception of the obvious (years of experience, bankroll and reading many books), what differences do these players have that your average players don't yet have. Could it be their "feel" for the game or their aggressiveness? Or is it their willingness to "gamble" more or even bully the other players in the game? Maybe it's their ability to read players and/or the table? Or could it be patience and discipline? While "basic strategy" should be common knowledge, knowing when you have a strong hand or not and playing smart are a part of most players' arsenal, what separates the champions from the average player? These are just some questions as to finding out what makes a champion/winning poker player. What common traits do these champion players have? Any comments and/or advice are certainly welcome and thanks in advance.
"The difference between winners and losers is character"
Champions will have: 1. excellent basic strategy and know most of the fancier strategies- the trick is to know when to use one or the other. Basically one needs to have a superior knowledge of the game. 2. excellent hand reading skills. 3. the ability to diguise their hands when necessary 4. the ability to rapidly out-think their opponents 5. the ability to take all their vast knowlege and skill and be able to put it all together in the heat of battle. 6. good game selection. These are a few things that are highly imortant, of course this all doesn't mean much unless their discipline is top notch also. The list could go on and on but you probably get the idea.
Along with everything Goat said, I would add: no fear of losing (or no respect of money). These so called champions put thousands and thousands on the table, if losing this kind of money scares you, you aren't gonna be able to compete.
nt
.
Good players have few weaknesses. Great players take advantage of the opponents weaknesses. Champions create weaknesses in the opponents.
Good players control themselves. Champions control the opponents.
Good players play with their cards face down. Champions play with the opponent's cards face up.
I hate it when that happens.
- Louie
Going to vegas in a week for the first time.
Anybody having some thoughts about which casinos that are putting up good mid-limit holdem games when it comes to bad competition and rake ?
Thanks in advance
From the report on the WSOP pot limit hold'em event:
Sexton, a bracelet holder with 33 WSOP final tables to his credit, moved in with A-10. Nguyen called with 7c, 9c, and flopped a seven. One down. On the next hand Men held exactly the same cards. He raised to $9,000, retired attorney Roger Easterday re-raised with pocket aces and Nguyen moved him in and proceeded to make a flush. Two down.
“I play to win, not play scared,” boasted The Master
Let me see if I get this straight.
A well-known player who has made a WSOP final table 33 times moves in on me. He's a tough, aggressive, tricky player who knows how to play big bet hold'em in his sleep. I look down and see 9c7c. What's my move? Call of course. I play to win!
Next hand. I'm dealt 9c7c again. I raise with it but it turns out I get re-raised from out of position by a player who has obviously been patiently waiting for a spot to make a stand. He's patently pot-committed and going with this hand. What's my move? Put him all-in of course. I play to win!
--shaking my head--
natedogg
Now you know why those of us who play very few tournaments still like to follow the tournament trail: We get to play in ring games against players like Men.
I do see your point here, well stated. "I play to win" is a pretty dumb thing to say after those two hands. The not playing scared thing obviously applies though, as not even pocket aces would scare him when he has a medium suited one-gapper.
good post
dave in cali
Good post. I have seen this man play, and he is just plain very lucky. People I know that have played against him said the same thing. That is no champion. His luck will run out one of these days.
Maybe you just don't get no limit.
How big were the opponents stack sizes? If they were small relative to Nguyen's, what is the problem?
He is an aggressive player - you play back at him and your stack goes into the pot. People know that. That's his image and that's why he's a big winner. This way he gets to pick up a lot of small pots - his stack grows and grows. Once in a while he gets into a pot as a dog, sometimes he wins, sometimes he loses. But he's always picking up those pots.
That's exactly the same thing I thought when I read the post. What about the stack sizes?
While having lunch with some friends two weeks ago, someone from our group was on their cell (talking with someone table side at the final table). They were told that Mike was very short stacked. Men had a monster amount of chips. That's what was relayed to us anyway.
Good Luck
Howard
Obviously I am not going to win this hand.
So I'm in a good n' loose game down at the local low limit palace extraordinaire... I get 55 and limp in on the button. BB raises and we see the flop seven handed.
Flop is Q Q 5 rainbow. Flopped a full house. Doink! Danger will Robinson, Danger!! So as you fully expect to happen in this situation, everyone checks to me.
Now some background on the game... The suckers, er, I mean nice friendly people who came to gamble a little and have a good time... are basically losing their cash, or at least that's the trend of the day... So three of them are fairly close to all-in on this hand.
Now back to the hand....
So I bet out my flopped full house on the button and one player calls all-in. Another raises all-in, making it two bets to go. Two more call and I reraise. Both call and we are five handed, but two are all-in.
The turn is the 7c, putting two clubs on board. Again it gets checked to me and I bet. One player calls and the other check-raises for 1$ more, going all-in. We both call (I can't raise again here, or I would have...).
The river is the Ad. My lone remaining opponent checks and I bet, he folds.
Now here's the kicker...
Have you ever flopped a full house, and came in FOURTH!!!!!!!!
Well, I have. Last all-in player, who check-raised the turn for 1$, had Q5 and also flopped a full house. Second all-in player (flop raiser) had Q7 and turned a better full house, but was already all-in. The first all-in player had, you guessed it, pocket aces and won the main pot..
Now this really ain't a bad beat story. I was behind all the way by a mile. What it really boils down to is a GOOD BEAT story. The reason for this is that heh, I FLOPPED a full house and came in FOURTH, but I only lost a few bets! Because all the players involved in the hand were very low on chips, none of them could bet anything significant to charge me to draw dead all the way to the river. And you know I would have put some bets in the pot on this hand... Hell, if I flop a full house, and come in fourth, and didnt' lose a lot of money, then I probably played it WRONG!!!! Unless my opponents were all-in.
Don't play short stacked.
The REAL irony of the hand is that the all-in players went all-in in the reverse order as to the value of their hand when they had to decide. Except for me, I was drawing to a one-outer the whole way. The aces went all-in first, in last place out of four. Then the Q7 went all-in by raising the flop, but he was behind the Q5 and me. The Q5 then check-raised the turn, now drawing dead to the Q7, but winning the very small 2nd side pot from me, the last place contestant.
Go figure.
Dave in Cali
I did not have a one outer, I had a no-outer, as the Q5 had the case five.
Sorry folks, happy hour was festive this week...
you say don't play short stacked, but think of what happened here. Everyone got lucky, but you who got unlucky. First you were dominating Q-5 before the flop. What is somebody doing calling a flop with Q-5. The only spots where this is a legit call is in the SB if it is not raised and it is 2/3 of the BB, or in the BB.
Now Q-7... who plays this hand. He isn't dominated preflop, but on the flop with 2 cards to come he has a 3 outer. On the turn he got really lucky.
The A's were dominating everyone before the flop, but then when the flop came it was ugly. He is now playing a 2 outer, and he got lucky. IMO, A's don't get lucky they get even. I like seeing someone suck out with pocket A's... However, after the flop you dominated him, and 7 handed from the button with 5's... how can you fold. He had only 2 outs after the flop and he hit against you... But in reality you hit against him before the flop...
So IMO these guys should play short stacked because they are only wasting their money quicker otherwise (minus the guy with A's from this).
Derrick
have a similar story... had 33 on the button and I limp in. Flop comes QQ3. I bet, one person calls and all others fold. turn is a 5. I bet and the other player calls. River is a K. I bet, other player raises, I call and of course he has KK in the pocket. that one hurt.....
Dave, you have often posted about game selection.
Why would you play on a table where there is so little money on the table? Three people all have less than $20 on the table? What is there to win...
David
two out of three had at least 100$ at one time, but coincidentally, all three lost most of it when this hand occurred. One of them is an irritating player who always buys in the the minimum, then goes all-in, then makes a short buy, then tries to make another short buy, but when forced reluctantly buys in for the minimum, etc.... I know they are weak, but it's still irritating not to be able to charge them to draw, which is exactly why they are always buying short.
To answer the point you were making, if there is little money on the table, it's not a very good game, and I am more likely to look for another game or go home. The cardroom is right down the street, so this is a viable option. However, most of the time, the amount of money on the table at this cardroom makes the game more appealing, not less. A typical 3-6 kill game here might have 1000-1500$ on the table, as an educated guess. It will have 200$ more when I sit down.
Dave in Cali
I play hold'em at my local casino[Crown Casino Melbourne Australia]in both tournament and live games,I play a tight aggessive game and generally play the standard opening cards preflop,[I sometimes play a little looser depending on the texure of the game]. I find playing offsuited hicards[10,J,Q,K,A] preflop seem to cost more money than they make.If you don't flop anything worthwhile you can assume your dominated.Or can you?...Any thoughts on how to play offsuited hicards{or whether to play them at all], would be appreciated.
rather sure I have read that suited cards are worth only about 4% more than unsuited, thus if you like KJ suited, you should likeKJ offsuit only slightly less. yes, they are prettier, but don't win much more. bottom line, you will make $$ playing BIG offsuited cards. good luck, Jim
Your 4% is accurate (as far as I recall) but seriously misleading. Yes, you will make a flush only 4% of all hands but if your hand is winning 25% by itself (3:1 against) an additional 4% of wins makes is 29% for a real upgrade to only 2.5:1 against.
Also, the presense of a flush draw increases your semi-steal chances AND gives you additional outs: you may not have the odds to chase over cards but you get these over-card draws for-free when you flop a flush draw.
- Louie
You'll flop some kind of draw and end up with a flush about 5% of the time, but as Louie points out this doesn't make the suited card only 5% more valuable than unsuited.
Some time ago I ran some cold sims with various hands against various raising combinations. Heads-up agaisnt a player with AA-TT/AQ, I came up with the following win rate increases for various hands when suited: AK 5.9%, AQ 10.5%, AJ 12%, AT 19%, A9 16%, KQ 15%, KJ, 13% (I'm not suggesting calling a raiser with all these hands). This is pretty crude, and I think I skewed the test to give the flush draw a maximum chance (raiser held no flush cards), but when you consider Louie's points about how the suited cards play better during the hand, I think you have to conclude that 5-10% value difference is too low. Also, in limit these margins often make the difference between profit and loss.
the original post asked if playing unsuited big cards was profitable, and spefically listed A thru 10. I wanted to answer YES, and supported with thought that they were only slightly less profitable than suited cards....thats my final answer!
did I win the million ? Jim
Unsuited high cards change DRASTICALLY in value depending on whether they are the "best" hand. AJ is a terrible hand when beat and a great hand when best. YOUR over-all net with these hands, therefore, can greatly be increased if you were to abandon these hands early when they are likely beat.
Two ways to do this comes to mind: [1] when a tight player raises you should determine his minimim hand and play ONLY unsuited trouble hands twice as good as his minimum (If he'll raise with KJ don't call with KQ) [2] When in early position play the "odds" that someone may have a better hand by sticking to the 2+2 starting hands.
Over-card draws are only worth drawing in very big pots or when there is some reasonable chance the better does NOT have a better hand.
- Louie
One thing you should realize with offsuit high cards is that once someone else has raised, they are far less valuable. I will often raise with ATo if I am first in, but if someone else has raised, I will fold the same hand without question. Same with KQo, AJo, KJo, KTo, QJo, QTo, and JTo. AKo plays differently, as you will sometimes reraise a raiser, or maybe just call in certain situations. AQo is a hand where you might reraise a very liberal raiser, but should probably fold most of the time against a solid player's raise, especially if he is early.
Once the flop comes, you need something worthwhile to continue on, and you need people to get out! KJ with a flop of J T 8 with a two-flush is a very tenuous holding. If you are in a loose game, this is probably where you are losing money with high unsuited cards. You must get people out if at all possible. It may not be possible, and in extreme cases, you might even want to fold, even if you think you might be ahead. It depends on several factors, your position, your opponents, number of players in the pot, and the exact texture of the board.
The primary thing, if you are not already doing it, is to be very cautious of calling pre-flop raises with anything except AKo, and then you should probably be thinking about reraising. The other main consideration is to get people out when you flop top pair with one of these hands.
dave in cali
I like to raise first in with high off suit cards.
If there has been several callers i would throw away any but AK,AQ, and maybe KQ all the rest i pretty much throw in the muck.
When new to a game and posting a blind from the cutoff, what's the weakest hand you can raise with if everyone folds to you?
I tend to raise pretty liberally in this spot, e.g., any pocket pair, pretty much any ace, any two big cards, etc. However, I'm wondering if I'm getting too frisky in this spot.
Last night I posted in the cutoff, folded to me, and I raised with 9-8 suited. Folded to BB who 3-bet. I flopped an open-ended straight draw and called his bet. Turned straight and straight flush draw. He gave me a lot of action and of course wasn't pleased that I snapped his aces.
Question: Was my pre-flop raise reasonable? If I hadn't posted, I probably would have passed on the hand. However, since I was halfway in I thought it was worth trying to steal the blinds. Comments?
Thanks,
Caddy
Lets forget about "image" raises, which actually have much merit in this situation.
With callers already in you should raise with the same hands you would raise with if you had no prior investment: raise (with a hand good enough to call) if you are going to win more often than the number of callers.
With no callers and you can potentially steal... I think you should raise MORE liberally then you would with no investment, since the pot is bigger (includes your call), the risk is less (it costs only 1 bet to steal), and the opponents are faced with the same odds. I think this can turn some marginal hand which is not worth a cold-call nor cold-raise into a hand worth a partial raise, such as your 98s.
-Louie
I think that in general, you should not play that much differently than you otherwise would in the same spot. The difference is that you are already in, so you can't fold. This being the case, sometimes you may be better off raising rather than checking when you are first in. This will somewhat depend on who is left to act and how they play, in addition to the specific two cards you are dealt. In the case of your hand, 98s, I don't know if I would try to steal from the cutoff with this, unless I was against weak-tight players behind me. But halfway in, I think your steal attempt was fine, and I might do the same in some games. 98s is certainly quite a bit better than the average trash a blind will have, so why not try for the steal. I wouldn't go too much lower than 98s when trying this however. If the players left to act are loose and defend often, I wouldn't raise with 98s.
In the case of this hand, I would call the reraise BTF, and fold if I didn't hit something decent. You made legitimate plays after the flop, so let the AA get mad if he wants.
Dave in Cali
HPFAP makes a keen observation here - if it's folded around to you in the cutoff, then you have a raise or fold situation. You cannot fold, so raising should be better.
If I believe the button or blinds don't realize that the cutoff could have absurdly low raising standards, then I may raise with any 2 cards. You're getting 2.5:1, so if you only need everyone to fold 29% of the time to show an immediate profit. Plus you have chances to win on the flop or by making a hand. If the blinds are aggressive, I won't play offsuit trash, but I may still raise suited cheese and connectors.
This is all dependent on how much you can get away with ... but the big point here is that even if your opponents sense what you're doing, they still may not be willing to play enough hands against you. This is because you are new to the table and 1. They may not believe you are /this/ aggressive. 2. Most players will not adjust raising standards this much
So, the main reason I would be hesitant to raise is if I think my opponents are capable of a 3 bet with less than decent high cards. If a hand like T9 or J8 will just call the raise, then lots of flops provide difficult decisions for them. Now the pot is large enough so that the late position poster gets around 5:1 on another steal attempt. It's hard to call with a jack high and maybe a gutshot. The late position poster's play looks the same as if he has a strong ace, and the blind is guessing. On the other hand, if someone 3 bets the poster, then it is the poster who is guessing - even if he's checked to on the flop.
If the blinds don't protect too liberally I would make the same play. If the blinds are the type that won't lay down, I would only raise here with good short handed cards such as ATo or better.
If the blinds are frequent folders (and the button as well), you can raise here with anything, but don't make a pattern of it. If you are raising with crap don't do it every rotation.
Here you ran into a hand, and the hand ran into a flop/turn. It isn't your fault, he didn't show his aces to you.
Derrick
You can open-raise there extremely liberally, particularly if there's any reason to believe that your opponents may not realize that you posted.
-Abdul
Bob Ciaffone recommends that you pretend to look at your cards, then raise.Regards, Dave
lol
average game, which for me means fairly loose and slightly to moderately aggressive. I am in the BB with AhJs. Four limp and the SB folds. I check.
Flop comes Q 9 5 two hearts. I check and it gets checked around.
Turn comes the 7h and I pick up the nut flush draw. No one looks very enthralled or impressed. I suspect that the button will try to steal the pot if it gets checked again, so I decide to try for a check-raise semi-bluff. I check and it gets checked to the button, bets. I raise and everyone folds to the button, whose action I haven't yet specified...
Obviously, if he folded, I do best in the long run.
Questions:
What would you do if he called, then the 2c was the river card?
How would you play it if he reraised?
What are the considerations appropriate to what I did here?
What is your overall opinion of this particular play?
Dave in Cali
I think it depends on what type of player button is. If he's a calling station, then you are putting too many chips into the pot with a semibluff check raise, but if he's the type that's capable of folding, then it's worth a shot. However, you have to be aware that you could invest up to 3 big bets trying to win a 7 small bets pot...
1. What should you do if he calls and the 2c is the river-card ?
- I'm going to use the tried and true cop-out of saying "I don't have enough information to say for sure", but based on the little I do know it seems like he has either a weak hand (2nd or even 3rd pair) and has seen through your attempt to pick up the pot with a raise, but also realizes that re-raising is probably a waste of his time [not to mention his money if it turns out you checked a big hand twice] - OR - he is also on a draw and has bet it in the hopes of picking up the pot and is now forced to call to try and hit his hand.
In the FIRST scenario firing a 2nd time would probably be a waste of money; if he called you once he will call you a second time given the fact that the pot is now fairly large. I would therfore check if the 2c fell on the river, but I could be persuaded to bet if someone offered a compelling reason that I have overlooked.
In the second scenario you (the one where he too is on a draw) it is VERY unlikely that he "stumbled over" a winning hand with the 2c; if you had asked what to do had the river been a card that was more likely to have "accidentally" paired your opponent I might say bet but a deuce didn't do this. Ergo my advice here also is to check. (Be prepared to call however if he bets; you won't win often but you should win often enough to make a fairly significant profit.)
2. If he re-raises you call; I'm a little tired but I cannot think of any other possible answer. You have a draw to the nuts with plenty of money to make calling worthwhile so folding seems out of the question. There are 5.5 big bets in the pot - if I somehow KNEW he had a flush I would still say you have a call since even though two of your outs are gone you are now almost assurred of getting paid off on the river if a heart falls.
3-betting SEEMS on the surface like a terrible play, but bear in mind that with 5.5 bets in the pot, an absolute minimum of 7 outs, and virtually no chance of your opponent going another bet (since you have the Ace of hearts he can't have the nuts), he does not have to fold very often to make this a profitable play. I'm not inclined to do the math right now, but you would seem to have about a 20% chance of winning if he calls your 3-bet; if you think he would fold as little as 10% of the time it MIGHT work out to be a profitable play - due to the fact that folding is not an option. It's either call or raise. If the Queen on board was NOT the Qh, and you were able to comfortably put him on top pair with a worse flush draw than yours (and a kicker that was anything but an Ace) you now have ELEVEN outs and a raise would be great if he could be counted on to fold anywhere near 10% of the time.
I'm going to skip question #3 regarding what factors should be used to make your decision since I have (it would seem) already covered most of them.
I LIKE THE PLAY ALOT, but for reasons different from those you may be thinking of. Folding to his bet is very weak; even though there are only 3.5 big bets in the pot when it gets to you, there are at the VERY least 7 cards that give you the pot - there may be as many as 15 (if both your Ace and Jack are good and he does not have a heart in his hand) and now is a good time to tell him you don't plan too take any "crap" from him in future hands. ALSO, I like getting rid of the dead wood (the other players). If you lose this hand to someone who was ready to call one bet but would not have called two you have made a big mistake. I'm not going to say HUGE mistake given the fact that the pot is still pretty small, but it is a mistake you can't make a habit of going around making. Add in the (seemingly good) chance of him folding to your raise, and I give it an "A-" if it worked and a "B+" if it didn't. (LOL)
I'm sitting here with the feeling that there was something else I had wanted to add but if there was it doesn't seem to be here at the moment so I'll call it a day for now.
(I don't think it would not change any of my answers, but I would like to know if the Queen on board is the Queen of hearts.)
Don't forget to post the results. I am putting him (very tentatively) on the King of hearts with probably a decent kicker; a Jack or Ten would give him a gutshot to go with his flush draw, is he the type that would have bet these hands on the flop ? If the answer is yes I'm back to square #1 --)
Best wishes,
J D
JD
Good analysis, way to consider the possibilities.
To answer one question, he was the type who not only might bluff when checked to twice, but also who would probably fold if he had nothing, or was very weak. I think this would be a much tougher situation had the button been a calling station, or had a calling station been the one doing the betting.
Against this particular opponent, unless I was reraised, I was going to automatically bet the river again no matter what card fell.
If he had reraised the turn, I would have called but definitely not popped it again. Also, I would have checked and called the river if I paired, checked and called if I made the flush but the board paired, bet if I made the nut flush, and folded for a bet if I only had ace high.
James T had a good point about investing two big bets to try and win only 7 SB. One thing about this situation though, is that with a smaller pot, this play is more likely to work than if the pot was large.
As for the result, my opponent folded and I won the pot without a showdown, so I don't know what he had.
Dave in Cali
What would you do if he called, then the 2c was the river card?
I think if someone decides to call a check raise on 4th street he is most likely to call on 5th street as well. I would check it down. Sometimes you will have the best hand here as well.
How would you play it if he reraised?
I would call and check fold if a blank hit on the river. I may call even if a J came however. You don't have to catch a bluff very often for you to make the long call here.
What are the considerations appropriate to what I did here?
You should only do this if the people in the pot are willing to lay down weak hands like second pair or a weak flush draw or straight draw.
What is your overall opinion of this particular play?
This is a great play that you should use sparingly. It works very good when you have not been getting much action on your hands. Here if you get called down, and you hit people will give you action on hands to follow. However, this could be a curse as well. If the collective is calling you down, your good starting hands like AK will be cracked more often, but when you make it through the river, you will collect extra bets. It sounds like your games have plenty of action anyways. I would be reluctant to make this play in a game such as yours. If the people in the pot could fold though, and you have a reasonable chance of not having to show your hand, I would still try this occasionally.
Derrick
Haven't read other responses yet. I think its quite possible that he has small cards since he is on the button and there was no pre-flop raise. If he called the turn I'd bet the river, if he was the type of opponent that would fold a middle pair. If he raise the turn i'd probably fold. But it really depends on the opponent. I don't think many players will reraise a check-raiser without a legit hand. From the way it was played, i'd put him on a small flush or 8-6 if he reraised you on the turn, and if he just called I'd put him on a straight draw with a mid pair, maybe something like 6-7o or 8-7o.
Obviously, if he folded, I do best in the long run. What if he has a hand like KJ or AT?
Do you really think he is going to call the checkraise with Ace-Ten ?
As for King-Jack, yes - Dave does profit mathmatically if he calls with this hand. (I can't see that he would with 3 hearts on board unless he has the Kh but I've seen worse calls than this.) Note that his opponent is only making a small $$$ mistake if he calls with K/J.
Dave was [correctly] stating that unless his opponent is on an outright bluff, or is drawing to a "crippled" hand like Kh-X, it is better for Dave if the check-raise drives his opponent out of the pot immediately.
If the opponent in question had as little as 22 and insisted in calling the ck-rse to keep Dave honest, he (the opponent) is still the heavy mathmatical favorite.
Did I miss something here ?
J D
There are many hands that his opponent would bet that would be making a FTOP mistake in calling his check-raise. Dave had stated, in his original post, that when the turn came 7h, that he believed his opponent on the button would try and steal the pot. This implies that he believed his opponent had nothing. IMO, Dave is very likely ahead, with his opponent drawing to 3-7 outs. Therefore, his stating that his highest EV is in his opponent folding is incorrect.
Did I miss something here?
No, but I think that in this post and your other post (which is very good) you may not be properly assigning the correct chances that Dave is currently ahead, which may change the correct play of the hand.
One point here is that even if I knew I was ahead, but didn't know what his exact hand was, I would still raise. That way, either I would make him fold and win the pot immediately, or charge him in those cases where he had a chance to outdraw me. There really is no case to call against the button only, unless I knew he had a crippled hand like Khx. To clarify, MOST OF THE TIME, my highest EV is when my opponent folds.
I didn't necessarily believe that he had nothing, but that was a significant possibility, in addition to other weak hands I thought he would bet. In the end, I didn't believe he had much, and thought an ace, jack, or heart might win it for me even if he called to the end.
Interesting debate guys!
Dave in Cali
Dave,
Just so we are clear. I like the play but I believe that the probability that your hand is currently good and will remain good (opponent is drawing to 4-7 outs) + the probability that your hand is currently no good but will end up good (14 outs - 3A, 3J, 8Flush) is very high. Because of this, betting out on the turn may be a better option than the check-raise. Folding is unthinkable.
BTW, what would you have done on the river if your opponent called the raise?
On the river, I would have bet no matter what card came, had he just called. If he reraised and I didn't catch an out, I would check-fold. While betting the turn would have been OK, check-folding was the absolute worst option, and check-calling was not much better, because then I might let others in who would have folded for two bets, and they might outdraw me. So the only real options were bet it out, or check-raise. The check-raise was not that dangerous of a play to attempt, because I would not have been too upset by getting a free card here. Betting out has merits too, but less of a chance to knock out players who might fold for a check-raise.
Dave in Cali
What would you do if he called, then the 2c was the river card?
Check, as it strongly appears our man on the button was betting a draw himself. JT, T8, 86, KhX all are reasonable suspects to bluff with. If the button has a naked 9 or 7 or pair/draw you will lose the pot and possibly feel a little embarrassed about it, but most players will not bet for value with such a weak hand on the river.
How would you play it if he reraised?
Call, lay down on the river...probably even if I hit the jack. Unless I know something about the button, of course.
What are the considerations appropriate to what I did here?
I think you played great given your read.
What is your overall opinion of this particular play?
Often tough to get away with this bluff if the button has a pair+draw, however with anywhere from 9-15 outs it's clearly a +EV play.
Hi everyone... I am interested in finding some home games near my area (near Baltimore, MD), and was hoping you guys could offer some good sites which have classifieds/posting forums for home games. I have tried pokerpages.com and homepoker.com, but haven't had much luck getting responses from posters there. Any help, either anyone knowing a home game around here or knowing of a web site for where to look, would be appreciated!
In a typical game, is KJo and KQo ever correct to play in early position? I usually find myself limping in early position with both hands and was wondering if this is a major leak.
Any comments would be greatly appreciated.
I think both of this hands should be folded in an early position in most games.
In a Loose Passive game, you may flop the best hand, but it will get run over often, and you may be dominated.
In Loose Aggressive games you have to pay too much to see the flop from an early position with this type of hand.
In a tight aggressive game, you will often get raised by a much better hand.
In tight passive game, you will only get called by better hands.
Just My Thoughts.
Derrick
If memory of serious homework years ago serves, KQ is just a little better than even money to be the "best" hand with 9 other players yet to act. This means that "probably" nobody has KQs, AQ, AK, AJs, or a premium pair. But when you take into account that you won't get action if it IS best, you will have to give action if beat, and of your bad position; its an easy fold against all but the most predictable and controllable of opponents. KJ is out of the question.
Supplement your 2+2 advise with Caro's early position discussions and advice.
LiveIt, LikeIt, LoveIt: trouble hands and early position don't mix.
- Louie
I think in loose/passive games it's profitable to limp with KQo in EP, you almost always have the best kicker, if the pot is not raised. Lots of worse hands call in this kind of games, like KJ and KT, even K9/8.
With the rest I agree.
I loose passive games I will generally raise with KQo if I am going to play it in early position. You tend to get called by hands like KJ and KT anyway. Those times you get reraised, you should be looking to fold unless you get a very favorable flop. Folding it is not bad though, you can't really go wrong if you fold it UTG. In more aggressive games I always fold it in early position, at least the first two or three.
KJo I play the same, except I fold it in the first three positions for sure, and play more cautiously overall with it, until I am pretty sure I am not dominated.
In some games these hands are just too good to fold, but in average to aggressive games, only play them in middle or later positions.
Dave in Cali
Thanks to all for the advice.
Derrick: I am going to print out your post!
Louie: Where can I find Caro's discussion?
Suppose we have a situation where one holds bottom pair with an over card facing what figures to be either top pair or a flush draw. Let’s take a board such as K 9 5 (two suited), object hand is A5 suited (not in the board suits, with no backdoor possible.)
The following assumptions are made for simplicity:
1) If the opponent holds top pair, he does NOT hold an ace or a five.
2)Runner runners on both sides are discounted.
3)The pot was not raised before the flop
4)When the opponent holds a flush draw he holds two cards that are higher than the five (thus these outs are good unless the A5 improves).
5)All outs are considered to be normally distributed and there is no discounted of outs based on pre flop holdings.
6)The top pair hand will not give “free”cards unless ace comes.
7) There is one bet no other callers and the A5 is last to act.
Case 1
The opponent holds KQoffsuit. Object hand has three (3) aces and two (2) fives to improve.
On the turn, this is five outs which translates to about 11% improving with about a 4.5% chance of a redraw (two K’s), which is about 10.5% chance of improving and holding.
On the river, the chance is almost the same, except in this case we can know that the board has paired the king on the turn (notice the Q kicker is irrelevant ) on those approximately 4.5% of the times it does, thus negating our involvement.
4.5% of the time we cannot improve to win (remember this case assumes the opponent holds KQ). Approximately 11% of the continue we should improve to win on the river.
So without consideration of implied odds, we should need about 8.5 -1 odds to pursue this hand on the flop. If we assume we will make a bet on both the turn and the river, and will not pay off if the K comes, then we see that 4 small bets are earned as well as the immediate pot.
So for a small bet on the flop we would earn the pot, plus four small bets which means 5-1 on the flop should be enough. 6-1 might be a safe number, a cushion.
On the turn things change(when you don’t improve with is about nine times out of ten) The bets double, and your implied goes down. Assuming no king, you still need about 8.5-1 to one. You have only one big bet in implied to aid you. Asking for a cushion, 8-1 is what you might want.
So there we have a basic starting point. We should adjust for and consider the following:
1)In real life, you can’t be that certain of holdings. The presence of AK, or K5, two pair or a set will punch a hole in one’s chances.
2)You probably have to pay off the K, as the holding maybe less than top pair but is from your standpoint pretty much the same if its say middle pair. You still must overcome.
3)There may be free cards.
4)You may be able to push the opponent off a stronger hand such as and underpair like 88 or even JJ.
5)There is some chance that you are good and that the opponent is bluffing. (This isn’t as good as one might think unless this chance is high enough to make a river call correct)
6)The implied odds assumptions might be wrong in either direction.
So to adjust, determine which considerations counterbalance each other than make adjustments for the leftovers.
Case 2:
Now with regards to case 2, the flush draw, anyone want to pick up the ball? And the integration of the two?
Questions:
Are there any important assumptions missed?
Are there any critical assumptions that would drastically change things?
How might what we learn here apply to other types of boards?
How might the presence of opponents remaining to act change things?
What else might one ask?
Will anyone run with the ball?
See you on fifth street.
Good luck.
x
Suppose we have a situation where one holds bottom pair with an over card facing what figures to be either top pair or a flush draw. Let's take a board such as K 9 5 (two suited), object hand is A5 suited (not in the board suits, with no backdoor possible.)
The following assumptions are made for simplicity:
1) If the opponent holds top pair, he does NOT hold an ace or a five.
2)Runner runners on both sides are discounted.
3)The pot was not raised before the flop
4)When the opponent holds a flush draw he holds two cards that are higher than the five (thus these outs are good unless the A5 improves).
5)All outs are considered to be normally distributed and there is no discounted of outs based on pre flop holdings.
6)The top pair hand will not give "free"cards unless ace comes.
7) There is one bet no other callers and the A5 is last to act.
Case 1
The opponent holds KQoffsuit. Object hand has three (3) aces and two (2) fives to improve.
On the turn, this is five outs which translates to about 11% improving with about a 4.5% chance of a redraw (two K's), which is about 10.5% chance of improving and holding.
On the river, the chance is almost the same, except in this case we can know that the board has paired the king on the turn (notice the Q kicker is irrelevant ) on those approximately 4.5% of the times it does, thus negating our involvement.
4.5% of the time we cannot improve to win (remember this case assumes the opponent holds KQ). Approximately 11% of the continue we should improve to win on the river.
So without consideration of implied odds, we should need about 8.5 -1 odds to pursue this hand on the flop. If we assume we will make a bet on both the turn and the river, and will not pay off if the K comes, then we see that 4 small bets are earned as well as the immediate pot.
So for a small bet on the flop we would earn the pot, plus four small bets which means 5-1 on the flop should be enough. 6-1 might be a safe number, a cushion.
On the turn things change(when you don't improve with is about nine times out of ten) The bets double, and your implied goes down. Assuming no king, you still need about 8.5-1 to one. You have only one big bet in implied to aid you. Asking for a cushion, 8-1 is what you might want.
So there we have a basic starting point. We should adjust for and consider the following:
1)In real life, you can't be that certain of holdings. The presence of AK, or K5, two pair or a set will punch a hole in one's chances.
2)You probably have to pay off the K, as the holding maybe less than top pair but is from your standpoint pretty much the same if its say middle pair. You still must overcome.
3)There may be free cards.
4)You may be able to push the opponent off a stronger hand such as and underpair like 88 or even JJ.
5)There is some chance that you are good and that the opponent is bluffing. (This isn't as good as one might think unless this chance is high enough to make a river call correct)
6)The implied odds assumptions might be wrong in either direction.
So to adjust, determine which considerations counterbalance each other than make adjustments for the leftovers.
Case 2:
Now with regards to case 2, the flush draw, anyone want to pick up the ball? And the integration of the two?
Questions:
Are there any important assumptions missed?
Are there any critical assumptions that would drastically change things?
How might what we learn here apply to other types of boards?
How might the presence of opponents remaining to act change things?
What else might one ask?
Will anyone run with the ball?
See you on fifth street.
Good luck.