134 replies to this topic

[Zach6668]

:icon_wall:It's not the fact that we're only paying an extra 1/2 of a blind, it's the fact that we're then playing a crappy hand OOP for the rest of the hand.I have no doubt someone like DN can make this hand profitable in his live games, but 99.9999% of poker players won't be able to play Q8o OOP, and for them, it's not worth the extra 1/2 bb.

[Sheiky]

Don't bang your head on a wall at me.Saying that is costs us such a % of BB per hand is taking all of these things into account and making an estimation of how profitable/unprofitable the hand will be in terms of BB per times play.If Daniel pays 1/2 a BB to play the hand in this spot 100 times, it has cost him 100SBs, if after these 100 hands he's won 200SBs, then he makes an average 1SB/per hand profit. All i was doing was correlating that to show the minute effect it has on winrate.

[Zach6668]

I don't even understand what we're arguing about, but all I want to explain is that it doesn't matter how big or how small one specific decision is, with respect to it's EV. These things add up. If you know that playing Q8o out of the SB is a losing play (whether it be a 4 BB/100 or 0.000...001 BB/100 losing play), then you should NOT be playing it out of the SB. If it's a winning play (4 BB/100 or 0.000...001 BB/100) you should be playing it from the SB.Say that it is in fact a -0.0000001 BB/100 mistake to play Q8o here, you can still be a winning player overall, even if you consistently make this specific mistake, but that still doesn't mean you're playing optimally. Our goal in poker is to maximize our EV, not be happy with such and such BB/100 while making small mistakes.

[Sheiky]

And i was explaning that the difference is so minute and impossible to assatain that it's stupid there's been so much discusion on it compared to the rest of the hand.

[Acid_Knight]

Sheiky, on Friday, January 4th, 2008, 11:32 AM, said:

It does matter how minute it is, and this is incredibly minute.If you assume that you lose half the SB every time you complete, which is more realistic, then the amount you lose is even more ridiculously minute.

The point Zach is making is relatively undisputable. If you assume that your expectation every time that you get Q8o in the SB in a limped pot is -0.5BBs (1 SB) if you complete, then you should fold. It's a losing play. If you don't care about that 0.5BB of -EV, then what's to stop you from making hundreds of other -EV plays that are very small?Poker is a long run game. In theory, you will eventually play enough hands to see the avg result of every situation balance out. If calling with Q8o from the SB in a limped pot has even the slighest -EV result in the long run after considering all factors, then it's a snap fold when it comes around to you. Willingly making plays which are -EV overall, no matter how small, is stupid.

[Acid_Knight]

Zach6668, on Friday, January 4th, 2008, 11:35 AM, said:

I have no doubt someone like DN can make this hand profitable in his live games, but 99.9999% of poker players won't be able to play Q8o OOP, and for them, it's not worth the extra 1/2 bb.

I am not even going to question his ability to profit with it in any situation, live OR online. It's just that for almost everyone else (pretty much everyone who posts in this forum, me included obv), calling with Q8o here almsot certainly has a negative expectation, whether it's small or not.

[Sheiky]

Acid_Knight, on Friday, January 4th, 2008, 8:38 PM, said:

The point Zach is making is relatively undisputable. If you assume that your expectation every time that you get Q8o in the SB in a limped pot is -0.5BBs (1 SB) if you complete, then you should fold. It's a losing play. If you don't care about that 0.5BB of -EV, then what's to stop you from making hundreds of other -EV plays that are very small?Poker is a long run game. In theory, you will eventually play enough hands to see the avg result of every situation balance out. If calling with Q8o from the SB in a limped pot has even the slighest -EV result in the long run after considering all factors, then it's a snap fold when it comes around to you. Willingly making plays which are -EV overall, no matter how small, is stupid.

All i was saying is that i found it ridiculous how many words were spent on discussing PF as opposed to the rest of the hand.It's stupid imo worrying so much about the minute affect completing with Q8o has on your winrate when there are 100000 other more important aspects of your game and thought process you should be worrying about.

[Acid_Knight]

Sheiky, on Friday, January 4th, 2008, 1:26 PM, said:

It's stupid imo worrying so much about the minute affect completing with Q8o has on your winrate when there are 100000 other more important aspects of your game and thought process you should be worrying about.

This is true, but we're also analyzing THIS hand and not others.Additionally, if we're making small leaky (my opinion) plays completing with this hand, we're surely doing it with many others as well and the sum of all of those minutely small leaks will add up to something substantial and should be considered.The rest of the hand isn't like super interesting. I think he plays it incredibly standardly on the flop and turn and I like the fold on the river, though I wouldn't hate a call either. There's so talk about preflop because that's the root of all of the other decisions. If he mucks this marginal hand preflop, he doesn't find himself in a marginal post flop situation which wound up costing him money this time.

[PokerMiz]

DanielNegreanu, on Sunday, December 30th, 2007, 9:25 PM, said:

If you are calling, what hand can you put the UTG limper on that you can beat after he makes an over call on the flop and then bets the river? Do you really think he has A4? Possibly AA? If he has a Q, could his kicker possibly NOT play with the board reading J-10? I could tie Q-9, but would he limp with Q-9 in a full ring game UTG? How often do you think you'll make this call and win the pot? How often will you chop, and how often will you be beat?

This is my first post so I hope I'm doing this right! LOL. I've been reading the responses and took a day to think about what I would do and what I could potentially put the UTG limper on. Keeping in mind that you were in the SB without a raise in front of you, I don't disagree with the call to see the flop. On the flop, the Button's bet (to me) is a position bet. I would've raised; you would only expect someone who hit the flop to call, no? So potentially the UTG limper calls your raise and the Button folds. You can now derive that, seeing as the UTG is the short-stack in this hand, he hit the flop. He's not going to limp in preflop with a poor hand. He's going to limp with something that he can either push/trap with should he hit the flop. Knowing that, I would not have put him on AA, KK, or AK. Although I don't know how he plays, I would think he would've raised preflop. I could see him limping in, however, with KQ, JQ, or low pockets like 4s. His calling the flop bet leads me to believe that he's not holding a draw hand (8-9, A-K). On the turn, I'm checking. I can't beat 44, Q-10, Q-J, 10-10... Should he check the turn, the river doesn't do anything but dig me in deeper. I'm done. Is it wrong, Daniel, to raise the original flop bet from the Button? Is it also reasonable to consider that the hand from the UTG is going to be a pretty decent hand considering his chip stack? He wants to see a flop cheaply but it's also going to be good enough to push with?

[David_Nicoson]

Imagine for a moment that we limped with Q8o (or anything similar for that matter) in the small blind. Then the table offers us the button position for an additional $25. Would you take it? How about $15? Or $35?

[Acid_Knight]

David_Nicoson, on Monday, January 7th, 2008, 6:30 AM, said:

Imagine for a moment that we limped with Q8o (or anything similar for that matter) in the small blind. Then the table offers us the button position for an additional $25. Would you take it? How about $15? Or $35?

IMO, position on everyone in the hand would easily make the hand worth another $50 (1BB) because I think that we could easily use that to our advantage and make the situation profitable.

[David_Nicoson]

Acid_Knight, on Monday, January 7th, 2008, 10:20 AM, said:

IMO, position on everyone in the hand would easily make the hand worth another $50 (1BB) because I think that we could easily use that to our advantage and make the situation profitable.

Amen, brother!Therefore, a player who can make money after the flop with Q8o or similar in the small blind should also be playing it on the button.

[Acid_Knight]

David_Nicoson, on Monday, January 7th, 2008, 7:34 AM, said:

Amen, brother!Therefore, a player who can make money after the flop with Q8o or similar in the small blind should also be playing it on the button.

This is true. Not always something I think of, but definitely a good point.

[francis9]

i think you can find a fold given that UTG overcalled the Flop. But remember the hand against Todd Brunson on HSP there he overcalled with a hand he knew that wasnt good anymore? He just did that to bluff you out on the river, you folded the acehighflush cause you thought he had jacks full ))The problem is: To UTG your hand is absolutly hidden. The Button might just took a stab on the Flop or has some little to mediocre PP 22-77 and your call could mean everything from a 4 with some random kicker to a silly float attemped. So infact you and the Button have shown so much weakness and a 4 cant really call on that board anymore, so why is he valuebetting that strong given what he thinks about your hand? The UTG limp looks quite donkish btw or perhaps he limped cause a bad player was sitting in the BB or somewhere else at the table or he has some unconventional style.So i dont think folding is terrible, but this is a quite odd situation and your hand is underrepped. Perhaps he is making a superthin valuebet. If i knew that villian is somehow tricky or loves to make longshotbluffs i would beat him in the pot.

[socomo]

I think the fact that the pot is still relatively small, would lead me to play this hand a little slower. As has been mentioned, either you're way ahead or way behind; and with the overcall on the flop, why risk it? On the river, there's not much need to call this bet. there are too many hands that beat you.