Jump to content


horribly played hand leads to weird river decision.


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

#41 Shimmering Wang

Shimmering Wang

    Daddy Wears the Daddy-Pants

  • Members
  • 6,362 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kalamazonk
  • Interests:I am very into ducks.

Posted 29 December 2005 - 10:27 PM

Abbaddabba said:

Quote

I think 40 hands is enough to suggest his three-betting range is narrow-ish (or, maybe more accurately, not looser than average). It's DEFINITELY significiantly (in the statistical sense) more likely to be narrow than it is to be wide. Which I think makes this a hand we can slow waaaaaaay down with.
It suggests that it's more likely to be narrow than wide, but not by how much.
That's kind of a silly thing to say, Abbadabba, and I think the fact that you said it just just... silly and nitty.Of course we don't know EXACTLY how narrow his range his. But we take the numbers we have (exactly o/40 hands did he raise preflop), but him in a category (tight/passive), and from that category we extrapolate his likely range. We'd be MORE sure he's was REALLY tight passive if he were 0/41 or 0/141. But we don't have that info. So we use what we know about statistics and decide it's much more likely he's a Tight Passive player with a very narrow 3-betting range than it is that he's just hit a very cold run of cards.It's not tough, guys. I don't understand why there's so much resistance to the narrow 3-bet range. Someone give me an argument incorporating AQs, 99, AQo, and AJ and 88...Wang

#42 mrdannyg

mrdannyg

    Cheese Salesman

  • Members
  • 20,267 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 December 2005 - 10:41 PM

Abbaddabba said:

I also dont think that pokerstove handles that, but ill check that later.

Quote

I think 40 hands is enough to suggest his three-betting range is narrow-ish (or, maybe more accurately, not looser than average). It's DEFINITELY significiantly (in the statistical sense) more likely to be narrow than it is to be wide. Which I think makes this a hand we can slow waaaaaaay down with.
It suggests that it's more likely to be narrow than wide, but not by how much.

Quote

if it isn't too difficult, maybe someone who doesn't suck at math could come up with some kind of chart which would show the likelihood after X number of hands, a person with long-term preflop raise percentage Y would have a certain PFR%.
Pfft, i thought you were interested in doing the MTAX program. Doesnt that require senior level stats?

Quote

ok i should've clarified that i dont disagree with permutations, but using permutations in the way that you did to estimate his hand range. i do not disagree with the concept of permutations in general. using them as you did implies that each permutation is equally likely. i don't think i need to elaborate on why this is a faulty assumption.
I called it first, censored :evil:
yes it does require senior stats. they were actually some of my best marks, but for the life of me i don't understand them. i'm not sure which emoticon to use here.good memory on that MTAX by the way. i'm still trying to figure out how difficult the entrance requirements are - any ideas?danielp.s. you win on the permutations thing
Long signatures are really annoying.

#43 Abbaddabba

Abbaddabba

    breaking even like it's 1999

  • Members
  • 5,225 posts

Posted 29 December 2005 - 10:43 PM

It's not silly at all.It suggests that he's closer to 10/0/0 than an average/random, but not how close he is.It's not nitty at all. 40 is a very small, unreliable sample.

Quote

and from that category we extrapolate his likely range
Your range is exclusively applicable to those who're extremely tight. He is not necessarily extremely tight. You should apply probabilities to a wider range of permutations. Even if they're low, there are so many combinations that their collective impact on your decision would be meaningful.

#44 Abbaddabba

Abbaddabba

    breaking even like it's 1999

  • Members
  • 5,225 posts

Posted 29 December 2005 - 10:48 PM

Quote

yes it does require senior stats. they were actually some of my best marks, but for the life of me i don't understand them. i'm not sure which emoticon to use here. good memory on that MTAX by the way. i'm still trying to figure out how difficult the entrance requirements are - any ideas?
I could tell you what the site says. The bare minimum is like what most of our programs require, 75%. But im sure that isnt even close to what you'll need to get in considering the level of competition.It's offered through our school of accounting. They generally set the bar pretty high there.

#45 Shimmering Wang

Shimmering Wang

    Daddy Wears the Daddy-Pants

  • Members
  • 6,362 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kalamazonk
  • Interests:I am very into ducks.

Posted 29 December 2005 - 10:50 PM

Abbaddabba said:

You should apply probabilities to a wider range of permutations. Even if they're low, there are so many combinations that their collective impact on your decision would be meaningful.
You vastly underestimate the reliability of a 40 hand sample.Okay. So do it. Give me some weighted probabilities for his 3-betting range. I'd wager there's a 90ish% chance his range is very close to the one I suggested.There MIGHT MIGHT MIGHT be as high as a 20% chance that he's also 3-betting with AQs, and TT as well. And it's probably under 10% that he's adding AQo, AJs, KQs and 99, too. But my model is still enough to play the hand passively and slowly.Wang

#46 mrdannyg

mrdannyg

    Cheese Salesman

  • Members
  • 20,267 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 December 2005 - 10:59 PM

Abbaddabba said:

Quote

yes it does require senior stats. they were actually some of my best marks, but for the life of me i don't understand them. i'm not sure which emoticon to use here. good memory on that MTAX by the way. i'm still trying to figure out how difficult the entrance requirements are - any ideas?
I could tell you what the site says. The bare minimum is like what most of our programs require, 75%. But im sure that isnt even close to what you'll need to get in considering the level of competition.It's offered through our school of accounting. They generally set the bar pretty high there.
thanks - not too confident about my chances to be honest, but we'll see how things turn out.
Long signatures are really annoying.

#47 fckthis

fckthis

    mmmmmmm Alba

  • Members
  • 2,038 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Long walks on gravel,<br />watching my 67year old neighbour undress,<br /><br />poker

Posted 29 December 2005 - 11:18 PM

screech said:

In the actual hand, I called the river even though everything told me to fold it. Villian had AA with the :club: .
YAY I was right. Though, he played it pretty badly, considering he had a diamond.

#48 Abbaddabba

Abbaddabba

    breaking even like it's 1999

  • Members
  • 5,225 posts

Posted 29 December 2005 - 11:19 PM

Quote

You vastly underestimate the reliability of a 40 hand sample. Okay. So do it. Give me some weighted probabilities for his 3-betting range. I'd wager there's a 90ish% chance his range is very close to the one I suggested. There MIGHT MIGHT MIGHT be as high as a 20% chance that he's also 3-betting with AQs, and TT as well. And it's probably under 10% that he's adding AQo, AJs, KQs and 99, too. But my model is still enough to play the hand passively and slowly. Wang
Ok. I dont know anyone would go about proving the probability of each permutation... but i think that your probabilities are too low for each of those hands outside your initial range. People can also be erratic. They may be frustrated that the hero raised too many hands in succession, and are putting their foot down.

#49 Smasharoo

Smasharoo

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 8,879 posts
  • Location:Boston

Posted 29 December 2005 - 11:56 PM

Ok, pointless math masturbation aside, if your decision process involves this level of analysis, you really need to take up chess or something solvable with more complete information.From a game theory standpoint folding this river sucks no matter what.Not close.good luck.

#50 Shimmering Wang

Shimmering Wang

    Daddy Wears the Daddy-Pants

  • Members
  • 6,362 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kalamazonk
  • Interests:I am very into ducks.

Posted 30 December 2005 - 12:04 AM

Abbaddabba said:

Ok.  I dont know anyone would go about proving the probability of each permutation... but i think that your probabilities are too low for each of those hands outside your initial range.  People can also be erratic.  They may be frustrated that the hero raised too many hands in succession, and are putting their foot down.
Or, they could be drag queens, look down at Q3, and decide, "Hey, it's my hand! I just have to play it!"Regardless of what you think of my villian range, even if you expand it by a reasonable amount (beyond adding AQs and TT, which I account for in the post that started all this), playing the flop/turn differently still isn't optimal.Oh, and Smash?I suggested bet/calling the river, due to the weirdo-turn play that was weird.My discussion was entirely flop-oriented. The turn plays itself, no matter how you play the flop, methinks.Abbadabba = gay.I am drunk.Wang

#51 screech

screech

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 6,376 posts

Posted 30 December 2005 - 07:39 AM

Quote

Ok, pointless math censored aside, if your decision process involves this level of analysis, you really need to take up chess or something solvable with more complete information.
You can't make as much money at chess. :-)I don't think this is that much analysis. I put my opponent on a range pf, and when the flop hit I realized I was behind to most of that range. BTW, what line would you have taken from the flop on and why?

Quote

From a game theory standpoint folding this river sucks no matter what.
By game theory do you mean "folding sucks because this 3/6 unknown's are capable of weird things when you play the hand so strangely?"I didn't actually folded the river. I wanted to. I posted it with the fold to see what people thought.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users