Jump to content


Is This Standard? Basic Hand, 2-5


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
258 replies to this topic

#41 Zach6668

Zach6668

    FCHL Champion.

  • Moderators
  • 48,080 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 22 January 2010 - 01:39 PM

View PostRoyal_Tour, on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, 4:37 PM, said:

3 - aces, 3 - kings, 3- queens. we've put him on a AK, AQ holding. (or I put him on that) fair?
He doesn't have AKQ offsuit.
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#42 Zach6668

Zach6668

    FCHL Champion.

  • Moderators
  • 48,080 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 22 January 2010 - 01:40 PM

View PostRoyal_Tour, on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, 4:37 PM, said:

You bet to win a hand.
No, you bet to get him to call with worse, or to fold better (or fold equity in the pot that he'd be getting the right price to call with.)
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#43 Naismith

Naismith

    Perry Friedman: I was planning on reloaded through Naismith

  • Members
  • 4,556 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:BWTBH
  • Favorite Poker Game:No Limit Crazy Pineapple

Posted 22 January 2010 - 01:42 PM

Okay, I see there's no convincing you of this. There's simple math involved that doesn't even entail factoring in the percentage of time he slowplays or bluffs or whatever. The simple math is this. If we raise the turn, we lose an extra 250 every time we're wrong. If we check-call the river, we lose an extra 100-200 every time we're wrong.EDIT: I'll also add that if he never bluffs the river, we have an easy check-call on the turn and check-fold on the river and we lose nothing on the river, though no one has a 0% river bluff range.Lastly, I'll say this. Royal obviously is firm in his belief here, which is admirable. For everyone else that is trying to learn, please, please, please ignore his advice in this specific thread. I am certainly not saying to ignore his advice in other threads. I'm just saying he is giving fundamentally incorrect, fundamentally bad advice in this specific thread that will make you worse players.
Peace,
Jay



#44 Royal_Tour

Royal_Tour

    Sherlock Holmes of butt sex

  • Members
  • 14,322 posts
  • Location:Ontario

Posted 22 January 2010 - 01:43 PM

View PostZach6668, on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, 1:39 PM, said:

He doesn't have AKQ offsuit.
he doesnt have 9 outs. right'but what i'm saying is you have to dodge 9 because his range could be AK, or AQ.I dont know if its one or the other. so I'm saying any paint is a scare card, that he could bet and we would have to fold to



#45 Acid_Knight

Acid_Knight

    I'm what's left. I'm what's right.

  • Members
  • 9,292 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas
  • Favorite Poker Game:You vs Me. Cagematch.

Posted 22 January 2010 - 01:43 PM

View PostRoyal_Tour, on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, 1:37 PM, said:

I think you missed somethingYou bet to win a hand. If he calls with worse, he's making a mistake. You bluff to fold out better.The only time you can say you're making a bet that you want tp get called is when you hold a monster that you know you're way ahead.you have a pair vs a FD. his hand is worse, there is 100 in the pot. are you betting to get called by the worse, or are you betting to win the hand?
How have you been playing poker so long and you don't even know why you bet?There are 2 reasons. ONLY 2 reasons.1. You bet to get a worse hand to call2. You bet to get a better hand to foldEverything past that elaborates on one of those 2 categories.

#46 Royal_Tour

Royal_Tour

    Sherlock Holmes of butt sex

  • Members
  • 14,322 posts
  • Location:Ontario

Posted 22 January 2010 - 01:44 PM

View PostZach6668, on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, 1:40 PM, said:

No, you bet to get him to call with worse, or to fold better (or fold equity in the pot that he'd be getting the right price to call with.)
really?you guys are silly.you bet to get him to call with worse, or to fold better. and thats it? thats the whole point of betting in NL?



#47 Zach6668

Zach6668

    FCHL Champion.

  • Moderators
  • 48,080 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 22 January 2010 - 01:45 PM

View PostRoyal_Tour, on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, 4:44 PM, said:

really?you guys are silly.you bet to get him to call with worse, or to fold better. and thats it? thats the whole point of betting in NL?
In a nutshell, yes.
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#48 Naismith

Naismith

    Perry Friedman: I was planning on reloaded through Naismith

  • Members
  • 4,556 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:BWTBH
  • Favorite Poker Game:No Limit Crazy Pineapple

Posted 22 January 2010 - 01:46 PM

View PostRoyal_Tour, on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, 4:44 PM, said:

you bet to get him to call with worse, or to fold better. and thats it? thats the whole point of betting in NL?
In a nutshell, yes.EDIT: LOL, Zach.
Peace,
Jay



#49 Royal_Tour

Royal_Tour

    Sherlock Holmes of butt sex

  • Members
  • 14,322 posts
  • Location:Ontario

Posted 22 January 2010 - 01:55 PM

View PostZach6668, on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, 1:45 PM, said:

In a nutshell, yes.

View PostNaismith, on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, 1:46 PM, said:

In a nutshell, yes.EDIT: LOL, Zach.
dive in deeper into strategy and theory, you'll see there are soo many times when you bet to win a hand because you're trying to eliminate the idea of gambling.You're trying to win a hand without having to go to showdown. AA $400 behiind vs Ks,Qs $500 behindon a 8s,5s,10h board. 200 dollars in the pot. You bet here. cuz you have the best hand, and want to win. and if he calls, thats great. he's calling without getting proper odds. he's making a mistake. and you're fine with that.If your idea of Betting purely for the fact of getting called by worse was true, Then you should be betting exactly enough to give him the odds he requires.anything more and you're not giving him proper odds and he folds. which would mean you made a mistake by not allowing him to call with worse.do you see why your idea of only betting for those reasons is flawed?



#50 Zach6668

Zach6668

    FCHL Champion.

  • Moderators
  • 48,080 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 22 January 2010 - 01:57 PM

View PostRoyal_Tour, on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, 4:55 PM, said:

do you see why your idea of only betting for those reasons is flawed?
nope.
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#51 mtdesmoines

mtdesmoines

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 9,980 posts

Posted 22 January 2010 - 01:59 PM

Popcorn
Somewhere Jimmy Carter is smiling because he knows that he is no longer the worst President of the modern era

#52 Acid_Knight

Acid_Knight

    I'm what's left. I'm what's right.

  • Members
  • 9,292 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas
  • Favorite Poker Game:You vs Me. Cagematch.

Posted 22 January 2010 - 02:01 PM

:club: I remember this icon.

#53 trystero

trystero

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 3,780 posts

Posted 22 January 2010 - 02:03 PM

4bb out in forceHey Snamuh

#54 Royal_Tour

Royal_Tour

    Sherlock Holmes of butt sex

  • Members
  • 14,322 posts
  • Location:Ontario

Posted 22 January 2010 - 02:03 PM

pointless.I have a feeling that you guys probably think Raptors fold with 5,6 vs Doyles K,J on PAD was probably a correct fold given the situation that Raptor described



#55 Royal_Tour

Royal_Tour

    Sherlock Holmes of butt sex

  • Members
  • 14,322 posts
  • Location:Ontario

Posted 22 January 2010 - 02:05 PM

The problem with this hand Is that MY advice was spot on from the start.and that zach sucks at NL, and matt always gets into marginal situations with small edges and is probably very swingy.righht?matt, your results stil very swingy?



#56 Naismith

Naismith

    Perry Friedman: I was planning on reloaded through Naismith

  • Members
  • 4,556 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:BWTBH
  • Favorite Poker Game:No Limit Crazy Pineapple

Posted 22 January 2010 - 02:07 PM

View PostRoyal_Tour, on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, 5:05 PM, said:

The problem with this hand Is that MY advice was spot on from the start.and that zach sucks at NL, and matt always gets into marginal situations with small edges and is probably very swingy.righht?matt, your results stil very swingy?
LOL at making this a personal thing.Also, LOL even harder if either Matt or Zach posts their graph. :club:
Peace,
Jay



#57 Zach6668

Zach6668

    FCHL Champion.

  • Moderators
  • 48,080 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 22 January 2010 - 02:08 PM

View PostRoyal_Tour, on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, 5:05 PM, said:

The problem with this hand Is that MY advice was spot on from the start.and that zach sucks at NL, and matt always gets into marginal situations with small edges and is probably very swingy.righht?matt, your results stil very swingy?
Fwiw, I've been playing NL as a pro for about a year and a half now.Also, we don't care how swingy our results are. We're looking to maximize EV. That's the point of poker.If you want to sacrifice your overall winnings for some semblance of a smoother graph, go ahead, but that doesn't make your advice correct.
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#58 Naismith

Naismith

    Perry Friedman: I was planning on reloaded through Naismith

  • Members
  • 4,556 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:BWTBH
  • Favorite Poker Game:No Limit Crazy Pineapple

Posted 22 January 2010 - 02:08 PM

View PostNaismith, on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, 4:42 PM, said:

Lastly, I'll say this. Royal obviously is firm in his belief here, which is admirable. For everyone else that is trying to learn, please, please, please ignore his advice in this specific thread. I am certainly not saying to ignore his advice in other threads. I'm just saying he is giving fundamentally incorrect, fundamentally bad advice in this specific thread that will make you worse players.
Guess I didn't really mean, "lastly".
Peace,
Jay



#59 Snamuh

Snamuh

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 5,094 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 January 2010 - 02:09 PM

View PostNaismith, on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, 4:07 PM, said:

It's not a safe bet. It's the way to maximize your value. Let's say we all agree that we're ahead after seeing his 50 dollar bet on the turn. Give me one reason to raise that makes sense other than not wanting to have to make a river decision.EDIT: For the record, I think the majority of responses are "reading this villain" correctly. Hell, I think you're reading the villain correctly. I just think you're reacting to your read in a totally incorrect manner.
I agree with pretty much everything you've said in this thread, and generally tend to disagree with most of what RT says, but your bolded is slightly incorrect. If there was a way to be 100% sure that we were ahead on the turn (and be able to narrow villain's hand to AK/AQ), then raising would be the correct play. Unfortunately, there's really no way that we can be 100% sure and in practice, check raising this turn becomes very, very bad.Edit: Because I think in general, people will not continue bluffing a blank river often enough to compensate for the % of the time they hit their 6 outter. I don't play as much live though, so I don't know if people check back flop and will fire both turn and river in these spots.Double Edit: I want to clarify by saying that the optimal play would be to check raise the turn to get him to call with worse, not to end the hand. If you were playing face-up and saw your opponent had AK, the optimal play would be to check raise any amount that would get him to continue (perhaps a check/minraise). This is close to impossible to occur in practice though.
Snamuh raises to $76.75, and is all in
BigKamp: yyou lose
BigKamp has 15 seconds left to act
BigKamp calls $24.50, and is all in
Seat 1: BigKamp (small blind) mucked [Ad Ac] - a full house, Aces full of Kings
Seat 2: Snamuh (big blind) showed [Kd Kh] and won ($102.50) with four of a kind, Kings
Snamuh: you lose

#60 Acid_Knight

Acid_Knight

    I'm what's left. I'm what's right.

  • Members
  • 9,292 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas
  • Favorite Poker Game:You vs Me. Cagematch.

Posted 22 January 2010 - 02:09 PM

View PostRoyal_Tour, on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, 2:05 PM, said:

The problem with this hand Is that MY advice was spot on from the start.and that zach sucks at NL, and matt always gets into marginal situations with small edges and is probably very swingy.righht?matt, your results stil very swingy?
Posted ImageTry again.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users