|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 12/1/2008 3:49:42 PM PACIFIC |
 Terrible Beats, jhdoja, 6. Dec 2003 20:27 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I play a small cash game weekly with friend and the max buy in is $20. So as you can see we dont gamble that much. Recently a friend of mine had poket kings he raised four dollars ( an expensive raise) A firm believer in "Super Sysytem" calls with 7 8 suited. The flop comes giving the the super system guy trip 8, and he winds up getting four 8 oin the river. Do you think his intial call was a wise one? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, SpaceAce, 6. Dec 2003 20:40 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| How much was already in the pot? If there was no more than the blinds or they were heads-up, I'd say it was a pretty stupid play to call $4 with 78s. There aren't a lot of good flops for that hand; anything less than two pair is pretty worthless unless it also brings a nice draw. Most likely, he would have to dump that hand on the flop. So, unless there is a bunch of money in the pot, I don't know why he would play that hand. Edit: Unless he knew that he could get all your friend's money if he caught a big hand. SpaceAce | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, jag3398, 6. Dec 2003 20:55 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Im the brother of the guy with the Kings. He believes suited connecters are terrible cards and my freind he though had rags and mad a terrible call. There was a dollar raise after my brother raised 4. My friend had no business calling. After this i believe poker is just a game of luck now, if 78 hearts can beat KK and somebody thinks thats a good call. Tell me if im right or wrong. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, Brian462, 6. Dec 2003 20:59 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| You are right, poker is a game of luck. Lucky for me it's also a game of skill. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, SpaceAce, 6. Dec 2003 21:20 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I'd say you're wrong about poker being a game of luck but not wrong about 78s being a lousy call in that situation. Luck is a factor but it's not the deciding factor unless you are playing against someone who is just charmed. Despite what everyone else will tell you, I believe these people exist. Still, you shouldn't meet enough of them to impact your long-term results unless you are anti-charmed. Suited connectors are good for dragging in bigger pots because they are stealthy. Still, you only want to go in if you know you're going to get a better price from the pot than the odds of you making the hand. It's hard to imagine putting $5 in against only one or two opponents and hoping to flop a monster with my 78s. I can see limping in for the minimum once in a while but not calling a raise and a re-raise. SpaceAce | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, Numie, 6. Dec 2003 21:22 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| If there had been a raise and a re-raise in front of me I would obviously have folded, but I had already called a raise and the re-raise came after me. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, SpaceAce, 6. Dec 2003 21:33 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 6. Dec 2003 21:22 Numie wrote: > If there had been a raise and a re-raise in front of me I would obviously have folded, but I had > already called a raise and the re-raise came after me. Sorry if I misread that. I thought the original poster said he made it $4 and then someone else added $1. SpaceAce | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, Numie, 6. Dec 2003 20:44 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I was the person with the 87s in this hand so I wanted to give my input because I'm wondering if I played this right also. I did recently read Super System and although I'm relatively new to poker I think I'm a decent player. Anyway there was a pre-flop raise of a dollar which I called. Then the guy to my left (I'll call him LP) re-raises $4. The EP raiser folds and I figure LP for aces or kings which brunson says is what I want him to have. There was $8 in the pot so I was getting 2 to 1. Plus LP had about $7 in front of him so I figured with the implied odds my call would be getting 4 to 1. The flop was 8-8-X and I won all of LP's money. What do you guys think of the call. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, Brian462, 6. Dec 2003 20:57 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I don't think he had enough in front of him to justify the call. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, Numie, 6. Dec 2003 21:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I just calculated the odds on pokerstove and the KK is about a 3.5 to 1 favorite against the 87s so being that I was getting about 3.5 to 1 on my money wouldn't that justify the call? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, Brian462, 6. Dec 2003 21:17 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| The 3.5 to 1 assumes you stay around to the end of the hand no matter what. In that case you would be matching his last 7 dollars in ALL cases and you would NOT have the odds to call. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, SpaceAce, 6. Dec 2003 21:32 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 6. Dec 2003 21:03 Numie wrote: > I just calculated the odds on pokerstove and the KK is about a 3.5 to 1 favorite against the > 87s so being that I was getting about 3.5 to 1 on my money wouldn't that justify the call? Think about it: In that case, your are getting what amounts to 1:1 money to make the call. This assumes you know EXACTLY what your opponent has, which you can't. Risking $5 [edit: this may not be accurate since you said you had already called one raise - see other post] more to win $7 on a 3.5:1 hand is not all that swell. Also, you didn't bother to factor in the cost of making your hand and having it still not be the best hand. For instance, 910J is not your friend in this situaion. Two eights on the flop is nice but what if it comes K88? Now you're going to lose a ton of money unless you get that fourth eight. You can pretty much discount your quads because that is not going to happen often enough to justify the play. If you win exactly 7.5:1 every time you flop a set, you are going to lose money because not all your sets will hold up. The same is true with just about any hand. I'd say you made a poor call and got lucky. SpaceAce | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, Numie, 6. Dec 2003 21:39 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I was risking 4 to win 16. There was the 2 blinds of .25 and .50, EP raised a dollar so he put in 1.50, I called 1.50, and LP called and then raised 4 putting in a total of 5.50. So the pot was at $9.25 by the time I had to call $4. Plus I was almost certain that LP had AA or KK and that I would get his last $7 if I hit my hand. So I was risking $4 to win $16.25. Am I missing something or is this math correct? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, Brian462, 6. Dec 2003 21:45 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| For you to get his last 7 and still have your hand only be a 3.5 to 1 dog you would have to put him all-in preflop. This means you are now risking 11 dollars for the 16.25 which makes the call no where near correct. What you want to calculate is the odds of making a hand(or possibly a draw) on the flop UNLESS you are planning on calling him down all the way no matter what flops. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, Numie, 6. Dec 2003 22:13 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| That's true. I found on a past post that the chances of flopping a four-flush or flush with suited connectors is 13% and the chances of flopping an open-ended straight draw or a straight is about 12%. Also it says in the back of HEFAP that with 2 unmatched cards you will flop 2 pair 2% of time and I won't even consider the odds of flopping trips because they are so low (and because I couldn't find them anywhere.) That means I would be going all in 27% of time or about 3 times out of 7. So according to this logic wouldn't the 4 to 1 implied odds justify the call? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, Brian462, 6. Dec 2003 22:17 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| You won't be making every flush or straight draw you get on the flop so you have to consider all those times that you flop a draw and fail to complete it(which is the majority of the time). | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, Numie, 7. Dec 2003 00:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Ok I get it. What I was thinking was that when I would call all-in, it would be a good call because I would be getting 3 to 1 pot odds on a 2 to 1 draw. However, now I realize that I wouldn't be able to call the all in enough to justify the 4 dollar call pre-flop. Thanks for you help. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, SpaceAce, 6. Dec 2003 22:56 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| A) "Flush or flush draw" and "straight or straight draw" usually means _draw_. If you pick up your draw and not your made hand, you are then around a 2:1 dog to complete your hand. The odds of actually flopping the flush are around 118:1 and the odds of flopping the straight are about 75:1, I think. I don't know the odds of flopping a straight flush but I bet they're grim. Everything else is "or ____ draw". You need to keep that in mind unless you plan to go all the way to the river no matter what. B) If you make two pair with suited connectors, your two pair may very well give someone else a straight or flush draw. SpaceAce | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, ADAM THE EXPERT, 6. Dec 2003 21:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| No Way ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! The whole point of the advice given by Brunson In "Super System" is putting in a (realitivly) small amount, to win a ton. He will call 300, if there is a chance to bust someone out of 30,000. Not only does the raiser have to have this amount, but they have to be stupid enough, to actually put it in, when the small suited connector makes their hand. In the game you describe, the most the 87s could have won off the Kings, was 16 bucks, a ratio of only 4-1 (Assuming that they each had the 20 dollar "maximum" By the way, why do you have a "maximim" buy in?? This bullshirt , backjass concept, was invented by online casinos, to further their own financial needs, not for the good of the game. If you want to play a small friendly game, fine. Make it .50-1.00, and don't let anyone lose more than 20 or 40 dollars. But no limit, means NO LIMIT. Adam the Expert is shocked and saddened, that something that has no business ever existing, has now carried over to the "real" world. STOP THE INTERNET CASINOS, FROM CHANGING POKER, TO SUIT THEIR OWN NEEDS.!!! No more "maximum buy ins!!! No more !!!! limit on raises, heads up!!! Person Formerly known as Adam the Expert | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, Brian Starr, 6. Dec 2003 23:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| WOW, you are basically claiming that you would like to go heads up with 87s against KK or AA. COME ON. When people say that you want medium suited connectors against a preflop raise, they are assuming multiple players so you can extract maximum value when you hit your hand (which isnt often). YOU ARE HEADS UP. YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME. THINK ABOUT IT, YOU ARE SAYING YOU WANT TO BE HEADS UP AGAINST AA WITH 87. I WANT SOME OF WHATEVER YOURE SMOKING! | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, Schuster, 7. Dec 2003 00:53 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Adam said: "He will call 300, if there is a chance to bust someone out of 30,000. Not only does the raiser have to have this amount, but they have to be stupid enough, to actually put it in, when the small suited connector makes their hand. " And I even left the double spacing format in there. Now, if the raiser was stupid enough to put in his whole stack when I hit a hand, and had over 100 times the current bet in front of him, I'd play a 72o against him. I'll leave it to you to figure out why for yourself, but I assure you, it is correct. Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Terrible Beats, Chris W, 7. Dec 2003 17:56 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I couldn't agree more! The maximum buy in rule is a perversion of the game that needs to be eliminated. It costs good players a ton of money; just about every time you sit down at one of these tables there some joker with four times the buy in and he's giving his chips away except you can't bust him. by the time you build up your stack he's already broke. It's ridiculous. | ||
| 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 |
|