Jump to content


deviant


  • Please log in to reply
54 replies to this topic

#21 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 09 February 2006 - 07:55 AM

kouta43,how low do you go, A8 off?and don't be a jerk, Screech has not been a dick to you.

#22 screech

screech

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 6,376 posts

Posted 09 February 2006 - 08:27 AM

kouta43 said:

Why speak with authority when you are wrong?
Ahahahahahahahah.The situation is no different than when you have 3 loose limpers to you in the BB in a full game.

#23 kouta43

kouta43

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 684 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 09 February 2006 - 08:39 AM

Actuary said:

kouta43,how low do you go, A8 off?and don't be a jerk, Screech has not been a dick to you.
I will always raise with AJ off here, and sometimes with A 10- i dont go any lower than A10 OOP.My point was AQ isnt even close to being borderline- it is a significantly better holding than 3 limpers 6 handed- 3/5=60% of the field is limping- highly likely with rubbish.Thats why 6max games are so good,people think playing crap is a good idea.

#24 kouta43

kouta43

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 684 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 09 February 2006 - 08:41 AM

screech said:

kouta43 said:

Why speak with authority when you are wrong?
Ahahahahahahahah.The situation is no different than when you have 3 loose limpers to you in the BB in a full game.
3 very very loose limpers maybe.But in a full game 3 limpers =3/9 = 33% of the fieldhere= 3/5 =60% of the field- implies worse holdings.For the last time here just raise with AQ if you like money.AJ also.I will accept reservation on A10 o/s, but im still raising a fair % of the time.

#25 econ_tim

econ_tim

    forum explorer

  • Members
  • 4,901 posts
  • Location:uncharted waters

Posted 09 February 2006 - 09:53 AM

by pokerstove simulation, AQ has 36.8% equity against 3 random handsthe villains would have raised very strong hands, but they also would fold very weak hands, so i think random hands are a decent approximation.so when i raise, i increase my equity by (0.368)*4SB - 1SB = 0.47SB or about half a small bet.i also simulate KJo as having 33.7% equity against 3 random hands. i don't usually raise with KJo here, although i do typically raise AQo. since most arguments in this thread are implicity based on equity, they suggest i should also raise KJo here. do you?

#26 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 09 February 2006 - 10:00 AM

Random hands generating, not going to pick up the Ax bias of players holdings, for one thing.AQ has far more post flop visibility

#27 econ_tim

econ_tim

    forum explorer

  • Members
  • 4,901 posts
  • Location:uncharted waters

Posted 09 February 2006 - 10:05 AM

Actuary said:

Random hands generating, not going to pick up the Ax bias of players holdings, for one thing.
OK. The KJo was just an example. But suggest a reasonable range and I'll recalculate the figures.From your response, I guess you don't like raising KJo here. You're also saying that something other than equity enters into preflop decisions.

#28 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 09 February 2006 - 10:11 AM

econ_tim said:

Actuary said:

Random hands generating, not going to pick up the Ax bias of players holdings, for one thing.
OK. The KJo was just an example. But suggest a reasonable range and I'll recalculate the figures.From your response, I guess you don't like raising KJo here. You're also saying that something other than equity enters into preflop decisions.
I'm also disputing the equity.OOP, with KJ off I prefer a more manageble pot preflopAnd give less odds.AQ off I think is strong enough to withstand the extra drawing odds you give by raising preflop.just a sense, I don't have lots of data/math to support this

#29 Guest_Anonymous_*

Guest_Anonymous_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 February 2006 - 11:09 AM

Actuary said:

I'm also disputing the equity.
I'm pretty sure KJo and other hands you're not raising here have a significant equity edge against any reasonable range of hands for the villains.

Quote

OOP, with KJ off I prefer a more manageble pot preflopAnd give less odds.AQ off I think is strong enough to withstand the extra drawing odds you give by raising preflop.just  a sense, I don't have lots of data/math to support this
This is the reason why I made the post in the first place. To get a better understanding of when we want to push an equity edge and increase the size of the pot OOP.

#30 econ_tim

econ_tim

    forum explorer

  • Members
  • 4,901 posts
  • Location:uncharted waters

Posted 09 February 2006 - 11:11 AM

Actuary said:

I'm also disputing the equity.
I'm pretty sure KJo and other hands you're not raising here have a significant equity edge against any reasonable range of hands for the villains.

Quote

OOP, with KJ off I prefer a more manageble pot preflopAnd give less odds.AQ off I think is strong enough to withstand the extra drawing odds you give by raising preflop.just  a sense, I don't have lots of data/math to support this
This is the reason why I made the post in the first place. To get a better understanding of when we want to push an equity edge and increase the size of the pot OOP.KDawg, if you see this, could you delete the previous "guest" post? Don't know why the forum is letting me post w/o logging in.

#31 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 09 February 2006 - 11:14 AM

how do we distinguish P.Sotves "equity" from reality.Where not all hands stay till the river,KJ's lack of visibility relative to AQ does not show up in an Equity calculation from P.Stove,.

#32 econ_tim

econ_tim

    forum explorer

  • Members
  • 4,901 posts
  • Location:uncharted waters

Posted 09 February 2006 - 11:22 AM

Actuary said:

how do we distinguish P.Sotves "equity" from reality.Where not all hands stay till the river,KJ's lack of visibility relative to AQ does not show up in an Equity calculation from P.Stove,.
the equity is accurate. but equity isn't everything, unless i'm all-in preflop. since i'm not all-in, there will be subsequent betting rounds, and thus my expectation doesn't equal my equity. this is true for both AQ and KJ. i agree AQ is probably easier to play (largely because KJ will lose to Ax UI a decent amount of the time), but we should still think about more than equity when deciding our preflop play.BTW, i hope i'm not being needlessly argumentative. i just find the math of poker interesting. when i can't play, it's the next best thing. i told you there was a real poker discussion to have.

#33 econ_tim

econ_tim

    forum explorer

  • Members
  • 4,901 posts
  • Location:uncharted waters

Posted 09 February 2006 - 11:31 AM

here's the link i was talking about earlier.it starts out as one of mason's book reviews, but then someone starts criticizing 2+2 publishing, saying SSHE and HEPFAP are inconsistent.mason attempts to reconcile the books.i think it's a very good discussion.

#34 screech

screech

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 6,376 posts

Posted 09 February 2006 - 01:37 PM

kouta43 said:

screech said:

kouta43 said:

Why speak with authority when you are wrong?
Ahahahahahahahah.The situation is no different than when you have 3 loose limpers to you in the BB in a full game.
3 very very loose limpers maybe.But in a full game 3 limpers =3/9 = 33% of the fieldhere= 3/5 =60% of the field- implies worse holdings.For the last time here just raise with AQ if you like money.AJ also.I will accept reservation on A10 o/s, but im still raising a fair % of the time.
No.Loose players hands will not be that different relative to our hand just because a smaller % of players are limping in in a full game.When we raise, we are building a pot OOP relying solely on high card strength. These types of hands don't fare well post flop in large multiway pots. That's what tim was getting at with his question.The reason I like raising AQ here as opposed to AJ is that it is much easier to pair our low card and win with AQ than AJ. In this situation, it is not that much more likely that our opponents don't hold K's/Q's than in full games with 3 loose limpers.

#35 kouta43

kouta43

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 684 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 09 February 2006 - 06:29 PM

screech said:

kouta43 said:

screech said:

kouta43 said:

Why speak with authority when you are wrong?
Ahahahahahahahah.The situation is no different than when you have 3 loose limpers to you in the BB in a full game.
3 very very loose limpers maybe.But in a full game 3 limpers =3/9 = 33% of the fieldhere= 3/5 =60% of the field- implies worse holdings.For the last time here just raise with AQ if you like money.AJ also.I will accept reservation on A10 o/s, but im still raising a fair % of the time.
No.Loose players hands will not be that different relative to our hand just because a smaller % of players are limping in in a full game.When we raise, we are building a pot OOP relying solely on high card strength. These types of hands don't fare well post flop in large multiway pots. That's what tim was getting at with his question.The reason I like raising AQ here as opposed to AJ is that it is much easier to pair our low card and win with AQ than AJ. In this situation, it is not that much more likely that our opponents don't hold K's/Q's than in full games with 3 loose limpers.
You are wrong. If you want to win more money raise with AJ here everytime.As for Tim, i raise with KJ also. I also kill 6 handed games.

#36 PoppinFresh

PoppinFresh

    Baking up Tasty Delights

  • Members
  • 1,587 posts

Posted 09 February 2006 - 06:42 PM

Kouta, cut the ego stuff out. This is a strat forum, not a dick waving contest forum. If you disagree with someone, back up your position with reasons, don't just say 'you're wrong' and leave it at that.

#37 kouta43

kouta43

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 684 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 09 February 2006 - 07:04 PM

PoppinFresh said:

Kouta, cut the ego stuff out. This is a strat forum, not a dick waving contest forum. If you disagree with someone, back up your position with reasons, don't just say 'you're wrong' and leave it at that.
Im not sure what better way to back something up with results?And how often do you see people limp with worse hands 6 handed than they do full ring ?

#38 econ_tim

econ_tim

    forum explorer

  • Members
  • 4,901 posts
  • Location:uncharted waters

Posted 09 February 2006 - 07:42 PM

kouta43 said:

Im not sure what better way to back something up with results?
As a social scientist with an empirical bent, I agree. That said, beating a game over a large period of time doesn't prove that every decision you make is optimal. Only that you make better decisions on average than your opponents.

#39 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,028 posts

Posted 09 February 2006 - 07:44 PM

kout,u are annoying as hell.Screech is a solid/successful palyer, like a lot of us here.There many ways to winyours may be best, may not.I don't recognize you from the strategy section and you post like a Gen Pop duche

#40 kouta43

kouta43

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 684 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 09 February 2006 - 08:30 PM

Actuary said:

kout,u are annoying as hell.Screech is a solid/successful palyer, like a lot of us here.There many ways to winyours may be best, may not.I don't recognize you from the strategy section and you post like a Gen Pop duche
maybe i am, but i am also right. I agree that there are marginal situations to discuss- these are what we call tough decisions.But it is not a tough decision to raise AQ here.In a full ring game do you raise AQ here?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users