|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 9/6/2008 4:48:31 PM PACIFIC |
 In disagreement with Tom McEvoy, The Prince, 6. Nov 2002 11:25 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi, this is my first post at UPF and it will not be the last. A lot of players will know me from RGP and 2+2 so here I am. I pickup my cardplayer magazine and read Tom's article about those pesky suited connectors. First of all, I'm no Tom McEvoy, and I haven't been in them winners circle as many times as he has. I respect Tom a lot, and will be the first to buy his new book with TJ on tournament hands. I agree with most of what he said in his article, and I don't mean this as an attack, but I do disagree with one thing he said in his article. Here the passage I'm talking about: "It isn’t your job to knock people out of a tournament. You have to knock out only one player — the last one. To expand this concept, suppose a player has J-2 in the big blind in a limit hold’em tournament. The blinds are $1,000-$2,000 and somebody who has only $4,000 in chips puts in the full $4,000 with an all-in raise. Everybody passes to the big blind and he says to himself, “It’s only gonna cost me $2,000 more, so I’m gonna call and try to bust him.” This is one of the worst plays in tournament hold’em. It isn’t your job to break him. It isn’t your job to lose an extra $2,000 on a hand that you had no business playing in the first place, yet you see so many players doing it." First, I do agree that it isn't your job to bust that player, and a lot of player do think that way. But it is your job, if you are a good player, to take those +EV situations when you can, and this is one of them. With only 2K to call, you are getting 3.5:1 on your call (4k+1k+2k to 2k). This makes every hand a call, IMHO. No hand is that much of an underdog to the wide range of hands the opponent can have. I mean, unless he's the rock of rocks, his raise does not mean a premium hand, as he should be raising with many hands. So, unless he shows you a pair of Jacks or higher, you should call (or get the floor for a ruling :-) ). And you don't call because you want to bust him, you call because you profit from it. Sure, you might double him up. But it just doesn't matter, because your play was +EV and you had the best of it. Comments? Nicolas Fradet (ThePrince) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: In disagreement with Tom McEvoy, Mark, 6. Nov 2002 13:08 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi Nicolas I think what Tom was getting at is J-2 doesn't have much of a +EV. Against a raising hand J-2 will have to improve most of the time in order to win. The most common way it to improve is pairing the jacks which are roughly a 3:1 dog. (Sure you could hit trip 2s or Js but thats a long shot) Even if you make a pair of Js you could still be easily beat. I don't see how J-2 can have an +EV, but maybe I'm missing something. Can you further explain your reasoning? (for my benefit) Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: In disagreement with Tom McEvoy, The Prince, 6. Nov 2002 13:35 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Mark, J2 has a +EV because, against all the hands the raiser couls have, it is not a 3.5:1 dog. It's much less than that. I did not say that J2 would be the best hand the majoritiy of the time, it probably won't, but the pot odds dictate a call. The only hands that our J2 is a worse dog than 3.5:1 is if the opponent has JJ, QQ, KK, AA. Althought these hands are possible, the fact that the raiser could have hands like 66, AK, QT, etc, dictates a call. This decision is pure math and pure pot odds, as there will not be no more betting after he has called. Nicolas Fradet (The Prince) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: In disagreement with Tom McEvoy, CapnD, 6. Nov 2002 14:46 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| This play is very dependant on how many chips you have. But lets assume you have infinite chips as in a ring game. If you assume he will make this play with any pair, any ace, and an assortment of hands such as KQ, KJ,QJ,JTs, etc, etc then your EV odds are around 2.7-1 against you. Since your getting 3.5-1, it looks like a +EV move. But if its late in a tournament and your short on chips then its probably a fold. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Calculating Odds, Mark, 7. Nov 2002 18:40 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| CapnD This is really for a different thread, but since you've brought it up, how do you calculate the odds for a range of hands vs. a specific hand (2.7:1)? I know how to calculate odds for a specific hand but not a range of hands. Mark on 6. Nov 2002 14:46 CapnD wrote: > This play is very dependant on how many chips you have. But lets assume you have > infinite chips as in a ring game. > > If you assume he will make this play with any pair, any ace, and an assortment of > hands such as KQ, KJ,QJ,JTs, etc, etc then your EV odds are around 2.7-1 against you. > Since your getting 3.5-1, it looks like a +EV move. But if its late in a tournament > and your short on chips then its probably a fold. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Calculating Odds, CapnD, 8. Nov 2002 07:18 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| You take all the combinations of hands and their odds and just calculate the average. Its easily done with a spreadsheet and some estimation. CapnD | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Calculating Odds, 2jelsky, 8. Nov 2002 10:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| why would you want to do that? it seem to me that it may be best to calculate the odds against making your own hand, and only against the hughest possible other hand | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Calculating Odds, Mark, 8. Nov 2002 12:33 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I wanted to know because in the thread CapnD stated the odds of a hand holding up against a wide range of other hands. I wanted to know how to calculate these odds so I could understand his reasoning and because knowledge is power. Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Calculating Odds, 2jelsky, 8. Nov 2002 18:20 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| it may be impossible to do before the flop. after the flop if your best possible hand can not beat the best possible hand which can be made, then all the other odds may not mean anything. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Calculating Odds, Mark, 9. Nov 2002 19:24 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 8. Nov 2002 18:20 2jelsky wrote: > it may be impossible to do before the flop. after the flop if your best possible hand can not beat the best > possible hand which can be made, then all the other odds may not mean anything. The discussion which prompted my question was about pre-flop play (in disagreement with Tom McEvoy). If you understand the basics about odds (which you probably do) and prepare, you can very quickly estimate the odds in many simular situations. It may be impossible for most people to get 100% acurate odds, but it is not impossible, or even hard, to get a reliable estimate. I would not have expected a J-2 to only be a 2.7:1 dog against a wide range of hands pre-flop, but now I know and understand why. Mark P.S. you won't always be up against the nuts. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Calculating Odds, 2jelsky, 9. Nov 2002 19:53 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| assuming that you will play frequently, over a good numberof years, then that 2.7 to 1 becomes a huge edge | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Calculating Odds, Mark, 9. Nov 2002 20:15 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 9. Nov 2002 19:53 2jelsky wrote: > assuming that you will play frequently, over a good numberof years, then that 2.7 to 1 becomes a huge edge I don't think it matters how much you play, its an advantage everytime that situation, or one similar as long as you know the odds, comes up. I think you're saying the situation won't come up enough to be noticably profitable, but I disagree. 1. If you play tournaments and make it to the late stages, it will come up. And the farther you go, in one tournament, the more it will happen. 2. In the low limit tables, on line and live, someone goes all in at least once every two hours (much more online). Winning two BB can make the difference between a winning and losing 2 hour session. As for the math, if you calculate the odds for a small crosssection of hands, you can reasonably estimate the odds for a any hand. Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: In disagreement with Tom McEvoy, Daniel Negreanu, 6. Nov 2002 20:18 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Prince is absolutely right in his analysis IMO. The J-2 is a CLEAR call against an all-in player, in all but the most extreme cases. Now, you wouldn't be making this play to 'bust a player', you'd be making the call simply because it is the correct fundamental play. If for example it was no limit (same situation) and the raiser had 7000 total, you'd be getting only 10-7 odds on the call. In this case you shouldn't just call to knock some one out, you should fold because it is likely a negative EV sitation. In fact, if you had a large stack, and there was a significant raise in prize money if a player is eliminated, you should also gamble in NEGAVTIVE EV situations as well. EXAMPLE: 3 players left, you have 50,000, player B has 50,000, Player C has 8,000. Blinds are 1500-3000. Player B folds on the button, and player C raises to 6000 from the SB. Even if you have 2-7 offsuit in the BB, you HAVE TO call here, getting just 11-5 odds. The opportunity to move up the pay scale, more than makes up for the slightly negative EV you might be giving up. I also respectfully disagree with Tom's comments in his article. Daniel Negreanu kidpoker@hotmail.com | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: In disagreement with Tom McEvoy, The Prince, 7. Nov 2002 04:14 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks for the reply Daniel. And BTW, may the poker gods be with you at the WPF, I'm coming down from Montreal tomorrow to be part of the action. Nicolas Fradet (The Prince) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: In disagreement with Tom McEvoy, 2jelsky, 7. Nov 2002 08:36 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| well Prince, i've read some of your posts on 2+2, even agreed with a few of them, but not this one. pot odds are good to use whenever you can rebuy (like in a ring game), but to me they seem less important than survival in a tournament. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: In disagreement with Tom McEvoy, The Prince, 7. Nov 2002 11:40 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| 2jelsky, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, and you really don't have to take my word for it. But you might want to take a look at Daniel's post. And, when you say: "pot odds are good to use whenever you can rebuy (like in a ring game), but to me they seem less important than survival in a tournament." this is simply not true. Pot odds are always important, no matter what the situation. If you had a flush draw and had to call for all your chips on the flop, knowing you will bust 2/3 of the times, but getting 8:1 on your call, if you fold, you've made a mistake. There's no way around that. Sure, sometimes you might take slightly the worst of it or pass a good opportunity because the risk/reward makes up for it. Like for exemple if you are low on chips and fold a hand even if it's slightly positive situation, because another player might bust in the next few hands and you might move up the ladder. Like in my example, if in the money and I had the J2o and I had to call with my last 2K, even if it's a +Ev situation, I might fold if the UTG player will be all-in on his BB. In fact, folding the J2o here might be a -EV move tournament chip wise, but a +EV move money wise, which is more important. But earlier in the tournament, not in the money, calling will almost never be wrong. Nicolas Fradet (The Prince) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: In disagreement with Tom McEvoy, 2jelsky, 7. Nov 2002 22:36 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| well Prince, I guess Daniel has won more money than we have. He has a good record, and you were right when you said"calling will allmost never be wrong" but, cause it seems to me that survival may be important, and cause you put that word "allmost" in there | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: In disagreement with Tom McEvoy, Charles Kincy, 8. Nov 2002 18:59 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Pot odds aren't irrelevant, nor are they less important. But the risk of elimination in a freezeout leads one to demand better odds than they would in a live game. Of course, in Daniel's example of when to take negative-EV chances, you can't go bust, so there you're taking the worst of it in the short term to improve your odds in the long term, AT LITTLE RISK. This last phrase is important. This is also where Tom goes too far in his "not your job to bust the player" thesis--in fact, it is in your interest to do everything it takes to bust a player when there is little risk to you. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|