|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 2/13/2012 5:44:26 PM PACIFIC |
 Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, mkpoker, 4. Nov 2003 20:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I made a terrible mistake on this hand (well, almost terrible), and it wasn't apparent to me until I started writing this post. Read on and try to find the flaw in my thinking. We're at 3/6 HE online. I'm relatively new to the table, but from what I can tell, the BB is a bit looser than average. From the SB, I'm dealt 99. 3 early limpers to me. With no pre-flop raise, I figure I'm ahead and think about raising, but elect to call only. (I'd probably have raised with TT but not 99). The flop comes JcTh9c, giving me bottom set and putting very dangerous str8 and flush draws on the board. I doubt I'm behind to an overset because of the lack of pre-flop raising, but it's very possible I could be facing a made str8 from a KQ early limper. For a guy holding set, I'm feeling mighty insecure. I bet out. The BB raises and the early limpers call. I figure the early limpers have some kind of draw. The BB could have a made str8 or be betting on a draw--I really don't know. I reraise, hoping to get info from the BB. I figure, if he caps, he's probably got the str8. He caps and everyone calls. At this point, I figure I'm beat unless I fill up (which, of course, is quite possible), so I call. The turn comes 4d [Board now JcTh9c4d]. I check, waiting to see what develops. If there's a lot of agressive raising, I'll probably fold, figuring it's a 100% certainly I'm facing a straight. But when the BB bets and the early limpers fold, I make a call, hoping for a miracle card on the river. The river comes As, which couldn't help the BB. Either he has the str8 or he doesn't. I check. He bets. I think, think, think, and make a crying call. He turns over JTo for top two-pair, and I unexpectedly win a nice pot. So, what was my mistake? I'll post it in a moment. . | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; The Answer, mkpoker, 4. Nov 2003 20:16 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| What was the grotesque error I made (or more accurately, that I almost made)? Even THINKING about folding the turn to agressive raising was a blunder. I simply wasn't considering my odds for improving on the river. With a set, I had 10 good outs--I'll make a FH or better with any jack (3), any ten (3), any 4 (3) or the case 9 (1). And because I'm almost sure there's no other set out there (because there were no pre-flop raises), my outs are almost certainly solid. 10 outs means I have odds of about 3.5:1 to improve. The pot was laying me 10:1 to call a single bet, 6.5:1 to call a raise (I would have folded to a raise); 5.3:1 to call a 3-bet; and just under 4:1 to call a 4-bet! And because any straight or flush holder would probably call a river bet if I hit, the implied odds make it an even easier call. I should have been willing...eager...to call ANY bet that came my way. (In fact, I probably should have bet the turn!) The moral of this story (lest you repeat my near-massive error) is to always count your outs...even when you figure you're behind, your chances to improve may be better than you think. (And, of course, you could be wrong in your read of your opponent--as I was--and you may actually be ahead! | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; The Answer, 4 POKER, 4. Nov 2003 20:57 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| True, you did have outs, (although 'you' were actually ahead here, so...), however in this hand, with the BB holding onto the J/10, 6 of those cards wouldn't be good for you if they hit - but you are still the favorite against his holding. 4P- | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; The Answer, BigRed1, 5. Nov 2003 15:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 4. Nov 2003 20:57 4 POKER wrote: > True, you did have outs, (although 'you' were actually ahead here, so...), however in this > hand, with the BB holding onto the J/10, 6 of those cards wouldn't be good for you if > they hit - but you are still the favorite against his holding. > > > 4P- Those 6 would not help the BB. It would only give the BB a set, but it would complete his Full House. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; The Answer, magnus, 5. Nov 2003 15:07 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 5. Nov 2003 15:03 BigRed1 wrote: > on 4. Nov 2003 20:57 4 POKER wrote: > > True, you did have outs, (although 'you' were actually ahead here, so...), however in this > > > hand, with the BB holding onto the J/10, 6 of those cards wouldn't be good for you if > > they hit - but you are still the favorite against his holding. > > > > > > 4P- > > Those 6 would not help the BB. It would only give the BB a set, but it would complete his > Full House. No, with BB holding JT and having JT9 on the board any J or T would give BB a higher boat, so they are not clean outs in this case. -Magnus | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; The Answer, BigRed1, 6. Nov 2003 11:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Your right. But since he did not know they are still outs for him, and should have figured in his decision to bet, call or raise. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; The Answer, 4 POKER, 5. Nov 2003 15:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi - No, those 6 possible out cards (3 jacks and 3 tens) *would* hurt mk's set of nines, as it would give the BB a higher full house. If the flop is J-10-9, and the BB holds the J-10....if the jack OR the ten falls, mk loses to that hand, because nines full doesn't beat jacks full or tens full. (that doesn't mean however, that mk wasn't clearly the favorite over the BB's holding, but nonetheless, there were cards that were not good/clean for him if they showed up). 4P- | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; The Answer, mkpoker, 5. Nov 2003 15:34 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Yes and no. My strategic assumption (which turned out to be wrong) was that I was facing a made straight. If that assumption had been correct, all the outs would have been clean. Hence, my decision on calling should have been based on the presumption that I had 10 clean outs. (Perhaps a secondary lesson from this hand is not make such ironclad assumptions about your opponents' holdings, but that's another post). I would like your thoughts on one point, though: holding two-pair with a flop of JT9, my opponent raised, and when I reraised, he capped. Do you think that was over-aggressive, given that he could have been facing either a made straight or a set? In his shoes, I think I would have slowed up a bit. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; The Answer, 4 POKER, 5. Nov 2003 16:22 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hey mk, (Yes, if you indeed put your opponent on a made straight, then of course, any of those outs would be good for you. Okay, so now I understand where you're coming from on that.) You asked about the 'BB's aggressive play', so here are my thoughts on that: As far as the BB raising you on the flop, I think I would have handled it in the same manner as he did. If I flopped the top two pair in the BB, and the SB (you) bets out there, I'm going to raise. Perhaps he put you on top pair with a Queen for the straight draw, and that's why he capped it on the flop. When the turn card brings a 4, he's assuming that's another good card for his holding. (I would think). If the turn card is a total blank, I may raise you again if you lead at it, if I put you on a lesser hand (which is very possible), or, if there were other players in there acting 'after' who I put on holding hands that were still "drawing type hands". It's not for certain that I would raise you on the turn, BUT, if you checked it to me on the turn, I'm betting, and I'm not going to just check it to the players who I think may need improvement still. You played the hand great on the flop (imo), but your hesitance on the turn allowed the BB to think that his hand was the best. Now because you just checked and called on the turn, and never made another "peep", then it's not always going to be an automatic assumption that the BB should fear that you have him beat here, and add to that, that the other players 'behind' him folded to his turn bet also. Perhaps he put you on a straight draw, with perhaps holding a Queen. (could be, considering you just went into the 'C & C' mode). Thus, when you checked the river, (even though the river card was an Ace).....Jacks and Tens are a pretty strong hand to hold 'and' to bet out with when it's just the two of you, and because you were very passive on the turn. (Had you put in a check-raise on the turn, or even just a lead out bet, then he may not have bet the river...who knows). ( If I had your hand mk, I would have lead at the turn.) (side note : even though a straight was likely here, he still needed both of his cards in which to make one). 4P- | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, Angel, 4. Nov 2003 21:10 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I'm not sure I want to post this response but what the heck... I think the biggest mistake you made was being afraid. Not that fear is something to be avoided - just reacting to it. For the same reason, ecstatic joy would have been a terribly blunder too imo. The time for emotion is after the hand. Better yet, after the session. The only thing I can think of to be afraid of during a poker hand is being ill-prepared with insufficient bankroll, insufficient knowledge or skills. Sometimes you're 90% sure you're beat and it's still correct to call - sometimes you're a 90% favorite and get drawn out on but it's all about making correct decisions - and if you do that, then there really isn't anything to get worried, fearful, excited, scared, happy or sad about. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, Phish, 5. Nov 2003 08:56 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I agree with Angel. You said you made a 'crying call' on the river. With a set, against one player? This statement leads me to think that you may actually fold a little too frequently on the river in other hands. That is a major leak with many novice players who are trying too hard to play correctly. Since they know that the biggest mistakes the worst players make are calling too much, they overreact in the opposite direction and try too hard to not do the same and wind up making too many costly incorrect folds. I would suggest that instead of focusing so much on saving a bet by folding on the river, you should focus instead on getting an extra bet when you're ahead. That value bet will, if you're wrong, cost you one or two bets at most, while a big laydown, if you're wrong, will cost you 12 bets or more. And if you're right, both actions will gain you the same amount, 1 bet. So, as Angel says, don't be afraid. Bet or raise to get that extra bet. And don't be afraid of making a bad call on the end. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, mkpoker, 5. Nov 2003 09:16 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| That's an excellent post, Phish...thanks. In this hand, when the BB capped the flop, I was almost certain he had a made straight (fortunately not certain enough to fold my hand...but it was close!) That would have been a real weak-tight blunder on my part. On another hand I played this weekend in Vegas, I held a J-high flush with a 4-flush on the board (including the Q). We were 3-handed and a player who had check-called all the way suddenly bet the river. Again, I came within a hairs-breadth of folding. I called and he had a 5-high flush. Both hands (plus your post and Angel's post) have given me food for thought about whether I'm playing a bit scared and weak-tight...thanks. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, shorn, 5. Nov 2003 09:57 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I agree with Angel and Phish here. Now, if the 4 that came was a flush card, then folding might be (although still probably not) more palatable since there are now two ways that you could be beaten. This hand follows my general rule on the river...if a lone opponent needs both of his/her hole cards to beat me and the pot is 5+ bets, then I will call 90%+ of the time. If it is only 1 card, then folding may be the better play (but not always). | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, gary ford, 5. Nov 2003 10:59 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 5. Nov 2003 09:16 mkpoker wrote: > That's an excellent post, Phish...thanks. > > In this hand, when the BB capped the flop, I was almost certain he had a made straight > (fortunately not certain enough to fold my hand...but it was close!) That would have been a > real weak-tight blunder on my part. > > On another hand I played this weekend in Vegas, I held a J-high flush with a 4-flush on the > board (including the Q). We were 3-handed and a player who had check-called all the way > suddenly bet the river. Again, I came within a hairs-breadth of folding. I called and he had > a 5-high flush. > > Both hands (plus your post and Angel's post) have given me food for thought about whether I'm > playing a bit scared and weak-tight...thanks. Not to be nit-picking, but i think a 5 high flush is a str8 flush. He had the Q from the board, then down to 5432, Actually a 5 high flush is an ace-hi flush but still a str8 flush. i tnink lol | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, Mark, 5. Nov 2003 10:06 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi mk, I don't think your3-betting the flop was a big mistake, but i would have played it differently. I wouldn't have 3-bet the flop. With 2 (or was it 3) other players already cold calling 2 bets on the flop, I would have just called, not reraised. If they are on draws, they won't fold to another bet or two. If you do make that raise and the 3rd flush card or a K, Q, 8 or 7 falls, you'll be sorry you made it. Also, the extra money in the pot makes it more likely someone will be drawing on again on the turn even if a blank falls. (they have odds for a gut shot) I would have called the raise and lead at the turn when a blank fell. Passively playing the flop is not going to change anything but the amount of money you risk on a scary board. If you're willing to call to the river anyway (if blanks fall), why not minimize your risk? Lead at the turn when a blank falls and see what happens. The information you gain on the turn is much more reliable. Mark Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, Phish, 5. Nov 2003 12:29 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 5. Nov 2003 10:06 Mark wrote: > Hi mk, > > I don't think your3-betting the flop was a big mistake, but i would have played it > differently. > > > I would have called the raise and lead at the turn when a blank fell. Passively > playing the flop is not going to change anything but the amount of money you risk on > a scary board. If you're willing to call to the river anyway (if blanks fall), why > not minimize your risk? > > Lead at the turn when a blank falls and see what happens. The information you gain > on the turn is much more reliable. > > Mark > > Mark Sorry, Mark, but I have to disagree fundamentally with your approach towards poker. You seem to advocate a style that puts the emphasis on not losing money when you should be more interested in winning money. > I wouldn't have 3-bet the flop. With 2 (or was it 3) other players already cold > calling 2 bets on the flop, I would have just called, not reraised. > > If they are on draws, they won't fold to another bet or two. If you do make that > raise and the 3rd flush card or a K, Q, 8 or 7 falls, you'll be sorry you made it. > Also, the extra money in the pot makes it more likely someone will be drawing on > again on the turn even if a blank falls. (they have odds for a gut shot) But if you're ahead, you want to charge them for drawing. And at this point it is actually more profitable if you could make the pot big enough for them to draw for the gut shot again on the turn. To illustrate with a simple example: suppose you are heads up on the turn against an opponent who has a gut-shot. Would you rather that the pot be 12-bets big and your opponent has the proper odds to call? Or would you rather that it be 9 bets big at that point and he does not have the odds to call? Do the math. You're always better off with the bigger pot in that situation. You also talk about minimizing risk. Minimizing risk is fine, but in this situation, it also means minimizing return. There are situations where you have two course of actions and one of which will give you a very similar return with reduced risk. This is not one of them. In this situation, minimizing risk will reduce return. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, RamDannyboy, 5. Nov 2003 13:14 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I'm new to this but here's my 2 cents worth. When you flop a set you most likely have the best hand. In addition, a set is also a great drawing hand. The odds against improving (full house, quads) by the river is only 2:1. So if you have more than 2 opponents you're wanting to be jamming it. By the turn, you easily have the pot odds to call. There is a say..."If you dont lose alot of money when you lose with a set, you're not playing it right". Or something like that. I think you get the idea. Is my thinking right? Ram | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, mkpoker, 5. Nov 2003 14:06 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think you're exactly right (see my post "the answer" above for more). Playing this hand, I was quite sure I was facing a made str8. This turned out to be wrong, but even if were facing a straight, I should still be calling (or betting) because my odds to improve were far better than the odds the pot was laying. My mistake was CONSIDERING folding on the turn. Given the pot odds, folding would have been a woefully incorrect blunder. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, Mark, 5. Nov 2003 18:37 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| * Note: all odds are rounded* > Sorry, Mark, but I have to disagree fundamentally with your approach towards poker. This is not my "fundamental" approach to poker, just my approach to this hand and situation. >You > seem to advocate a style that puts the emphasis on not losing money when you should be > more interested in winning money. > But if you're ahead, you want to charge them for drawing. 1.) You don't know that you are ahead at this point and 2.) at least 18 cards are very bad for you (as it turned out as many as 24 could have been bad) >And at this point it is > actually more profitable if you could make the pot big enough for them to draw for the gut > shot again on the turn. Against only a made str8, he is a 2:1 dog. Add some other draws in there and a JT, he goes down to a 3:1 dog, making the situation very close to a neutral EV (depending on the actual hands and # of opponents). Of course, if the opponents are capable of calling with complete trash hands, then it has a slightly + EV. (i used poker stove for calculations) >To illustrate with a simple example: suppose you are heads up on > the turn against an opponent who has a gut-shot. Would you rather that the pot be > 12-bets big and your opponent has the proper odds to call? Or would you rather that it be > 9 bets big at that point and he does not have the odds to call? Do the math. You're > always better off with the bigger pot in that situation. This example does not translate to the situation we are talking about. Also, as Sklansky as shown, you are always better off if you can get your opponent to call without odds than with. > You also talk about minimizing risk. Minimizing risk is fine, but in this situation, it > also means minimizing return. There are situations where you have two course of actions > and one of which will give you a very similar return with reduced risk. This is not one > of them. In this situation, minimizing risk will reduce return. In this situation, you are only minimizing return if the players are very bad, otherwise, it is very close to neutral on the flop. Once a blank comes on the turn, it becomes an even money situation against pure drawing hands and 5:1 versus a made str8. Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, Phish, 6. Nov 2003 11:39 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 5. Nov 2003 18:37 Mark wrote: > * Note: all odds are rounded* > > > Sorry, Mark, but I have to disagree fundamentally with your approach towards poker. > > > This is not my "fundamental" approach to poker, just my approach to this hand and situation. > > > >You > > seem to advocate a style that puts the emphasis on not losing money when you should be > > more interested in winning money. > > > But if you're ahead, you want to charge them for drawing. > > > 1.) You don't know that you are ahead at this point and 2.) at least 18 cards are very bad for > you (as it turned out as many as 24 could have been bad) > > > >And at this point it is > > actually more profitable if you could make the pot big enough for them to draw for the gut > > > shot again on the turn. > > Against only a made str8, he is a 2:1 dog. Add some other draws in there and a JT, he goes > down to a 3:1 dog, making the situation very close to a neutral EV (depending on the actual > hands and # of opponents). Of course, if the opponents are capable of calling with complete > trash hands, then it has a slightly + EV. (i used poker stove for calculations) > > >To illustrate with a simple example: suppose you are heads up on > > the turn against an opponent who has a gut-shot. Would you rather that the pot be > > 12-bets big and your opponent has the proper odds to call? Or would you rather that it be > > > 9 bets big at that point and he does not have the odds to call? Do the math. You're > > always better off with the bigger pot in that situation. > > > This example does not translate to the situation we are talking about. Also, as Sklansky as > shown, you are always better off if you can get your opponent to call without odds than with. > > > > You also talk about minimizing risk. Minimizing risk is fine, but in this situation, it > > also means minimizing return. There are situations where you have two course of actions > > and one of which will give you a very similar return with reduced risk. This is not one > > of them. In this situation, minimizing risk will reduce return. > > In this situation, you are only minimizing return if the players are very bad, otherwise, it > is very close to neutral on the flop. Once a blank comes on the turn, it becomes an even money > situation against pure drawing hands and 5:1 versus a made str8. > > Mark Mark, If he KNEW for certain that he's up against a made straight and the top 2 pairs, then he should fold, not merely back off. But poker is a game of imperfect information. All you can do is make some reasonable guesses of the hands that your opponents may have, and play in a manner that maximizes your expectation across the spectrum of those hands. If you flop a set in a low limit game against 3 opponents, and you immediately begin to fear the worst and back off, that is the definition of weak tight to me. Weak tight players don't win except against loose clueless players. No, this is the perfect situation to make money in a low-limit game. Pump in the chips when you most likely have the best of it. If you're wrong, so be it. Playing with scared money is not the way to win. It is a style I strongly disagree with. And as for your quoting Sklansky, I think you're using him out of context. You are confusing expected return with marginal return. He is correct that on the turn, if the pot is greater than 12 bets, you are better off if your opponent folds with a gut shot (your expected return is greater if he folds). But that doesn't mean you should check the turn. You should be betting or raising him every chance you get since each additional bet that you pump in gains you about an additional 0.8 bets in expected equity (your marginal return is +.8 since a gut shot is about 11 to 1). The contradiction between expected and marginal EV is due to the money already in the pot, giving him proper odds to draw. But if you're ahead, you should be jamming all the way. Likewise, on the flop, you should be pumping up that pot if your opponents are on draws, since your marginal expectation is quite positive. And by building up that pot now, you will gain additional marginal equity when he calls the turn. Do a simple example: assume there's 10 bets on the flop. A bet and a call will make 12. You know your opponent has a gut shot. Do you bet, knowing that making it 12 bets will now make him call the turn? Work out the math. The choice is pretty clear. And even without the math example, I don't think that there's anyone out there who would advocate checking to keep the pot small so he won't call the turn or will be making a mistake to call the turn. In Omaha hi/lo, there are many situations where you may have the best hand on the flop but you should still fold. But in holdem, it is rare where you have the best hand and should not raise. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, Mark, 7. Nov 2003 13:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > > Mark, > If he KNEW for certain that he's up against a made straight and the top 2 pairs, then he should > fold, not merely back off. But poker is a game of imperfect information. All you can do is make > some reasonable guesses of the hands that your opponents may have, and play in a manner that > maximizes your expectation across the spectrum of those hands. If you flop a set in a low limit > game against 3 opponents, and you immediately begin to fear the worst and back off, that is the > definition of weak tight to me. I'm not "fearing the worst", i'm trying to come up with the best play. >Weak tight players don't win except against loose clueless players. Thanks, but i'm not weak-tight or clueless. > No, this is the perfect situation to make money in a low-limit game. Pump in the chips when you > most likely have the best of it. If you're wrong, so be it. Playing with scared money is not the > way to win. It is a style I strongly disagree with. Sklansky and Malmuth have show that always pumping the pot is not always the best play. Heads-up i would 3-bet. But in this situation, there are 2 other callers, making it less likely you are ahead in the hand or will stay ahead in the hand. > And as for your quoting Sklansky, I think you're using him out of context. Re-read Hold'em poker for advanced players, Part 4, Playing in Loose Games, pages152 - 181. I'm trying to win the pot when it gets big. Also, Briar and Ciaffone recommend playing passive early when there are alot of cards that can hurt you. >You should be betting or raising him > every chance you get since each additional bet that you pump in gains you about an additional 0.8 > bets in expected equity (your marginal return is +.8 since a gut shot is about 11 to 1). This situation is not heads up and you don't know that you are ahead. >The > contradiction between expected and marginal EV is due to the money already in the pot, giving him > proper odds to draw. But if you're ahead, again, why assume your ahead? Also, its not just a few cards that can come to beat you, there are alot >you should be jamming all the way. Likewise, on the > flop, you should be pumping up that pot if your opponents are on draws, since your marginal > expectation is quite positive. I've shown that your expectation is not "qutie" postitive, but slight at best. >And by building up that pot now, you will gain additional marginal > equity when he calls the turn. But against 3 opponents, you will win less often, decreasing EV > Do a simple example: assume there's 10 bets on the flop. A bet and a call will make 12. You know > your opponent has a gut shot. Do you bet, knowing that making it 12 bets will now make him call the > turn? Work out the math. The choice is pretty clear. And even without the math example, I don't > think that there's anyone out there who would advocate checking to keep the pot small so he won't > call the turn or will be making a mistake to call the turn. Heads up, no, no one would check. But this is the same type of example (but with multiple opponents) given by Sklansky and Malmuth, and Briar and Ciaffone, where not re-raising can become correct. Look, i don't want to argure about hypothetical situations. On the actual hand given, depending on the # of opponent who call and their actual hands, mk's Ev is slightly (-), neutral, or slightly (+). Now, if you can accept that, fine. If you don't accept that the EV is very close to neutal, please "prove" why. Your above examples don't show that the ev is + because they do not consider all the relevant factors in this situation (ie. mutlitple opponents and possibility of being behind). If the situation is neutral EV , or very close to it, do you still advocate 3-bettiing? Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, Phish, 6. Nov 2003 11:44 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 5. Nov 2003 18:37 Mark wrote: > * Note: all odds are rounded* > > > Sorry, Mark, but I have to disagree fundamentally with your approach towards poker. > > > This is not my "fundamental" approach to poker, just my approach to this hand and situation. > > > >You > > seem to advocate a style that puts the emphasis on not losing money when you should be > > more interested in winning money. > > > But if you're ahead, you want to charge them for drawing. > > > 1.) You don't know that you are ahead at this point and 2.) at least 18 cards are very bad for > you (as it turned out as many as 24 could have been bad) > > > >And at this point it is > > actually more profitable if you could make the pot big enough for them to draw for the gut > > > shot again on the turn. > > Against only a made str8, he is a 2:1 dog. Add some other draws in there and a JT, he goes > down to a 3:1 dog, making the situation very close to a neutral EV (depending on the actual > hands and # of opponents). Of course, if the opponents are capable of calling with complete > trash hands, then it has a slightly + EV. (i used poker stove for calculations) > > >To illustrate with a simple example: suppose you are heads up on > > the turn against an opponent who has a gut-shot. Would you rather that the pot be > > 12-bets big and your opponent has the proper odds to call? Or would you rather that it be > > > 9 bets big at that point and he does not have the odds to call? Do the math. You're > > always better off with the bigger pot in that situation. > > > This example does not translate to the situation we are talking about. Also, as Sklansky as > shown, you are always better off if you can get your opponent to call without odds than with. > > > > You also talk about minimizing risk. Minimizing risk is fine, but in this situation, it > > also means minimizing return. There are situations where you have two course of actions > > and one of which will give you a very similar return with reduced risk. This is not one > > of them. In this situation, minimizing risk will reduce return. > > In this situation, you are only minimizing return if the players are very bad, otherwise, it > is very close to neutral on the flop. Once a blank comes on the turn, it becomes an even money > situation against pure drawing hands and 5:1 versus a made str8. > > Mark Mark, One other point I forgot to address in my previous response. You mention that bottom set against flush draw, str draw, top 2 is very close to neutral. Yeah, but remember, he is getting 3-1 return. Even if collectively they will beat him 60% of the time, he should still be pumping in as much money as he can. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, Mark, 7. Nov 2003 12:42 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > > Mark, > One other point I forgot to address in my previous response. You mention that bottom set against > flush draw, str draw, top 2 is very close to neutral. Yeah, but remember, he is getting 3-1 return. > Even if collectively they will beat him 60% of the time, he should still be pumping in as much > money as he can. Actually, what i was trying to say was that he is a dog if he figures he is up against a str8 (as he stated in his original post). as a 2:1 or 3:1 dog, the EV of the situation is very close to neutral, depending on the the number of callers he gets and the hands out agaisnt him. So if he is a 3: 1 dog and is only pulling in 2:1 on his bets, obviously this is a - EV situation. Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, RamDannyboy, 7. Nov 2003 20:45 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Mark, This situation on the flop is a classic example of what has become known as Morton's Theorum. That is, the contest between a made hand (str8) and a drawing hand (set), in a multiway pot. You can find quite alot of material on this on the net. Basically, it was found that any extra bets going into the pot doesn't benefit the made hand (str8) but benefits the BEST drawing hand. In other words, in a multiway pot, if you have a set and you know you are against a str8, it is correct for you to be jamming the flop. In fact, the more people in the pot the better your EV. Essential, what happens is the other weak holdings subsidise the str8 and the set. If you are 2:1 dog in a multiway (say 4+), you should be happy when it is capped. IMHO S&M doesn't address loose games very well. You are better off looking to poker theorists like Abdul Jalid and even read Gary Carson's book. Ram | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, Mark, 7. Nov 2003 22:31 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > Mark, > > This situation on the flop is a classic example of what has become known as > Morton's Theorum. That is, the contest between a made hand (str8) and a drawing hand (set), in a multiway > pot. You can find quite alot of material on this on the net. > > Basically, it was found that any extra bets going into the pot doesn't benefit the made hand (str8) but > benefits the BEST drawing hand. In other words, in a multiway pot, if you have a set and you know you are > against a str8, it is correct for you to be jamming the flop. In fact, the more people in the pot the better > your EV. Essential, what happens is the other weak holdings subsidise the str8 and the set. If you are 2:1 dog > in a multiway (say 4+), you should be happy when it is capped. > > IMHO S&M doesn't address loose games very well. You are better off looking to poker theorists like Abdul > Jalid and even read Gary Carson's book. > > Ram Thanks Ram, I haven't heard/learned Morton's Theorem. Mathematically it seems wrong if to be jamming heads up when a 2:1 dog, due to EV. I will search for a detailed explaination of it, and let you know what i find. If you have a good handle on it and want to explain it in detail, i would appreciate it, or if you have a web address that would be great. Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, Mark, 7. Nov 2003 22:54 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Ram, The articles i found about Morton's Theorem state When you have the best the hand, there are times when even if an opponent has incorrect odds to call, you still would prefer he folds (in contradiction to the Theory of Poker). I did not read this to mean the draw gains by calling, or that extra bets in the pot are good for the draw. I don't think this theory contradicts either 1.) -EV situations are bad 2.) calling without pot odds is bad. ( I guess these are the same thing.) What do you think? Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, RamDannyboy, 8. Nov 2003 04:50 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Mark, I'm no expert on Morton's Theorem but I do find the concept interesting. I sure would like to hear what others think. Morton's article was written initially from the perspective of the "best hand" (in our case, the straight). He says...."you want your opponents to fold correctly, because their mistake in chasing you will cost you money in the long run". This is counter-intuitive and contradicts FToP. Further in the article, Morton discuss a 3 way contest between top pair, middle pair and a flush draw. Once the pot gets large, he says.. "both the [top pair] and the [middle pair] are losing money when the [middle pair] calls incorrectly. In fact, the [flush draw] is benefitting more from [middle pair's] call than the magnitude of [middle pair's] mistake." A number of theorists has taken this theorem a step further. I was actually quoting Gary Carson where he has looked at it from the drawing hand's perspective. In his book he states "When many hands with draws are competing on the flop against a semi-strong made hand, the primary beneficiary of the flop bets is the best draw, not the best hand". In our case, the best draw against a made straight is most likely the set. When you have several other people calling incorrectly , the set benefits. RAM PS. Morton's Theorem is probably a good topic for a new thread. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, Phish, 10. Nov 2003 10:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 7. Nov 2003 12:42 Mark wrote: > > > >> > > > > Actually, what i was trying to say was that he is a dog if he figures he is up against a str8 (as he > stated in his original post). as a 2:1 or 3:1 dog, the EV of the situation is very close to neutral, > depending on the the number of callers he gets and the hands out agaisnt him. So if he is a 3: 1 dog > and is only pulling in 2:1 on his bets, obviously this is a - EV situation. > > Going back to my initial post: in a small limit game against 3 opponents: if you flop a set and get a little bit of action on the flop, and you immediately fear the worst and even think about folding your set, that is the definition of weak-tight. Yeah, if he KNEW for certain he was up against a made straight, your points may be valid. But to be so fearful at this stage that you consider folding on the turn or even to back off from your aggression on the flop is just too timid. Someone that timid cannot beat but the softest games. If you want to be a winning player, you have to take some chances. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, Mark, 10. Nov 2003 12:49 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Going back to my initial post: in a small limit game against 3 opponents: if you flop a set and get a > little bit of action on the flop, and you immediately fear the worst and even think about folding your set, I never talked about folding. I was talking about making the play that maximized the chances of winning while at the same time minimized the amount you lose when you are behind or end up behind. > that is the definition of weak-tight. > Yeah, if he KNEW for certain he was up against a made straight, your points may be valid. So then what do you think he's up against? overcards, top pair? 2 pair? what are the callers calling with? But to be so > fearful at this stage that you consider folding Again, i didn't advocate folding. on the turn or even to back off from your aggression on the > flop is just too timid. I'm not timid or scared, i'm trying to be realistic. The board is right in the play zone for everyone. >Someone that timid cannot beat but the softest games. > If you want to be a winning player, you have to take some chances. Like you? You keep saying i'm wrong, so prove it. Show the math that makes 3-betting correct. Why do you assume that you are so far ahead? What are the most likely scenarios of 3-betting the flop? 1. everyone calls. Great now you know you are ahead (unless being slowplayed, but unlikely). If one of the many cards that can hurt your hand fall, are you still happy you 3-bet? So now you lead the turn into a 3 flush or 4 str8 and get raised, what did 3-betting the flop accomplish? 2. Some one caps and one or two others fold. Now do you figure to be up against a straight ? If so, your 3-bet had a negative value. There are 21 cards that either complete the 3 flush or put a 4 str8 on the board. And in this case, there were 4 more cards that made a bigger full house. Obviously, you can't know for certain what you're up against, but with against opponents who are going to stick around and with soo many cards that can hurt your hand, flat calling the flop raise can't be that bad. If you are ahead in the hand, you don't want 3 draws out agaisnt you (by Morton's theorem). By not 3-betting the flop and leading the turn, you make it harder for the draws to call. If you are behind, you minimize your loss. I think these factors out weight the slight +EV you gain on those times that you are ahead in the hand and 3-bet the flop. Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, Phish, 12. Nov 2003 09:16 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 10. Nov 2003 12:49 Mark wrote: > Going back to my initial post: in a small limit game against 3 opponents: if you flop a set and get a > > little bit of action on the flop, and you immediately fear the worst and even think about folding your set, > > > I never talked about folding. I was talking about making the play that maximized the chances of winning while at > the same time minimized the amount you lose when you are behind or end up behind. > > > that is the definition of weak-tight. > > Yeah, if he KNEW for certain he was up against a made straight, your points may be valid. > > So then what do you think he's up against? overcards, top pair? 2 pair? what are the callers calling with? > > But to be so > > fearful at this stage that you consider folding > > Again, i didn't advocate folding. > > on the turn or even to back off from your aggression on the > > flop is just too timid. > > I'm not timid or scared, i'm trying to be realistic. The board is right in the play zone for everyone. > > >Someone that timid cannot beat but the softest games. > > If you want to be a winning player, you have to take some chances. > > Like you? > > You keep saying i'm wrong, so prove it. Show the math that makes 3-betting correct. Why do you assume that you > are so far ahead? > > What are the most likely scenarios of 3-betting the flop? > > 1. everyone calls. Great now you know you are ahead (unless being slowplayed, but unlikely). If one of the many > cards that can hurt your hand fall, are you still happy you 3-bet? So now you lead the turn into a 3 flush or 4 > str8 and get raised, what did 3-betting the flop accomplish? > > 2. Some one caps and one or two others fold. Now do you figure to be up against a straight ? If so, your 3-bet > had a negative value. > > There are 21 cards that either complete the 3 flush or put a 4 str8 on the board. And in this case, there were 4 > more cards that made a bigger full house. Obviously, you can't know for certain what you're up against, but with > against opponents who are going to stick around and with soo many cards that can hurt your hand, flat calling the > flop raise can't be that bad. > > If you are ahead in the hand, you don't want 3 draws out agaisnt you (by Morton's theorem). By not 3-betting the > flop and leading the turn, you make it harder for the draws to call. If you are behind, you minimize your loss. > > I think these factors out weight the slight +EV you gain on those times that you are ahead in the hand and 3-bet > the flop. > > Mark > > If you were playing in a 100/200 game with good players, you should be worried if you had 3 opponents calling multiple bets with that flop. But in a 3/6 game, where you often will have multiple opponents calling multiple bets drawing almost dead, it's a different story. And the ultimate 'proof' for my arguments was the actual hand itself: he was ahead all the way. > | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, Mark, 12. Nov 2003 22:22 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > > > > Mark > > > > If you were playing in a 100/200 game with good players, you should be worried if you had 3 opponents calling > multiple bets with that flop. But in a 3/6 game, where you often will have multiple opponents calling multiple bets > drawing almost dead, it's a different story. > And the ultimate 'proof' for my arguments was the actual hand itself: he was ahead all the way. > > Phish, this is my last post on this topic, obviously we don't see eye-to-eye. 1. ) Just because the limits are low, doesn't mean everyone at the table is an idiot, and it definately doesn't mean the players can't be holding good hands. 2.) Poker is not a results oriented game. To use the outcome of a hand as your proof is fundamentaly wrong. Maybe i am giving the opponents too much credit, but when I don't have a read on them ( and none was given in the original post), I'm not going to immediately assume they're bad players. Mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Find my mistake; set w/ a scary flop, theo, 6. Nov 2003 01:42 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| well in the post flop, you should have reraised the bb, you had your set if he was wired up with paint he would have raised ALOT STRONGER i would have raised the bb when he called on he turn......especially with that crappy 4 on the board.....just my .02 | ||
| 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 | Find Vancouver Businesses |
|