The 2+2 Forum Archives: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long)

Terms & Conditions

Internet Magazine

Non–US new players
Get five 2+2 books

Order Books
Book Translations
Forum Login

Expand All Collapse All

Two Plus Two

General Poker Discussion

Coaching/Training

German Forums

French Forums

Limit Texas Hold'em

PL/NL Texas Hold'em

Tournament Poker

Other Poker

General Gambling

Internet Gambling

2+2 Communities

Other Topics

Sponsored Support Forums

Other Links
Books
Authors
Abbreviations
Calendar
Order Books
Books by Others
Favorite Links
Feedback
Advertising Information
Home
Posting Hints
Privacy Notice

The 2+2 Forums

Before using this Forum, please refer to the Terms and Conditions (Last modified: 2/26/2006)

Be sure to read the Two Plus Two Internet Magazine

This is an archive. The main forums are here

These forums are read only.

UBB.threads™

Groupee, Inc.

You are not logged in. [Login]

Main Index · Search · Classified Ads
New user · Who's Online · FAQ · Calendar

PL/NL Texas Hold'em >> Small Stakes

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | >> (show all)

BalugaWhale
Busto on tatas

Reged: 01/25/06
Posts: 4869
Loc: blog: http://letsdosomethingcr...

the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long)
#6605819 - 07/19/06 09:17 PM

no, I didn't name it after myself. Somebody suggested it and I guess it caught on.

I've gotten a few questions about it and there have been some threads recently, so I thought I'd clarify some examples where I think it applies and some where it doesn't.

You (100bb) have A

K

in MP at a 6max game. UTG (100bb) limps, you raise to 5xBB, Button (100bb) calls, UTG calls.

Three to the flop (pot ~15bb), which is:

A

4

6

UTG checks, you lead out for 12bb, Button folds, UTG calls.

On to the turn (pot~ 36bb)

8

UTG checks, you bet 25bb, he raises all-in.

We fold. One pair is not good here. A draw does this about never. We have to bet this turn because we can't let spades draw, and we need value from worse A's, but now that he raises, we can rule out worse A's and draws.

However, to slightly alter Isura's example, lets say we have A

A

, same pf action as before and the flop (pot~15bb) comes down:

K

2

2

UTG checks, we bet 12bb, Button calls, UTG folds.

the turn (pot ~36bb) comes:
J

We bet 25bb, Button raises all in.

Here, I think we should call. We are very likely to see KJ here, as well as AK or KQ. Occassionally we see a random 2, but we are ahead of his range more often than not.

Basically, the whole point of the "Baluga theorem", as I see it, is to strongly reevaluate one-pair hands facing a turn raise.

A few notes to remember-
turn checkraises are more frightening than turn raises

big turn raises are rarely pure draws-- occassionally they will be draws that pick up a pair, or pairs that pick up draws, but most of the time you can count on a strong made hand.

when playing against a goood TAG, particularly a 2p2er, most especially me, raising the turn with a draw is a powerful (but risky) play.

Post Extras:

Print Post

Remind Me!

Notify Moderator

cbloom
Carpal \'Tunnel

Reged: 07/20/03
Posts: 8940
Loc: communist

Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
#6606001 - 07/19/06 09:38 PM

Word. I dig the Baluga Theorem.

I think there are a few general principles at work :

1. People tend to play more tight-weak / straightforward when the pot & bets are big. On the turn, if it was PFR'ed and the flop was bet, the pot will be quite big. Very few people make moves for lots of chips.

2. People tend to make moves on the flop much more for various reasons. One is that people know they can raise draws on the flop & get free cards or at least have good equity if they get all in. Another is that people are used to cbets and trying to pick off cbets, so they have a habit of messing around on the flop.

Post Extras:

Print Post

Remind Me!

Notify Moderator

goofyballer
Emo Communist

Reged: 06/12/05
Posts: 7108
Loc: THESE IZ THE OLD FORUMZ

Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
#6606053 - 07/19/06 09:46 PM

BW, the second example is clearly a two-pair hand

Post Extras:

Print Post

Remind Me!

Notify Moderator

BalugaWhale
Busto on tatas

Reged: 01/25/06
Posts: 4869
Loc: blog: http://letsdosomethingcr...

Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: goofyballer]
#6606096 - 07/19/06 09:49 PM

Quote:

BW, the second example is clearly a two-pair hand

doh.

Post Extras:

Print Post

Remind Me!

Notify Moderator

Black winter day
Carpal \'Tunnel

Reged: 06/20/05
Posts: 4420
Loc: Don't you dare to call!

Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
#6606132 - 07/19/06 09:53 PM

Thanks,i actually asked about the theorem today in one the thread.
For me it's autofold in hand 1.I would call a shortstack who had 50BB or less at the start of the hand.
I may call in hand 2 but only against a donk who would overplay a good K.

Against a solid player i would very much suspect slowplayed KK,JJ or A2s.

Post Extras:

Print Post

Remind Me!

Notify Moderator

Rev. Good Will
Carpal \'Tunnel

Reged: 01/25/05
Posts: 2824
Loc: greener pastures

Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
#6606464 - 07/19/06 10:26 PM

I might need this

Post Extras:

Print Post

Remind Me!

Notify Moderator

MyTurn2Raise
The drug-free MVP

Reged: 06/28/05
Posts: 18508
Loc: Evolving Day-By-Day

Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
#6607581 - 07/20/06 12:20 AM

Post Extras:

Print Post

Remind Me!

Notify Moderator

Grunch
Bounty Hunter

Reged: 08/25/04
Posts: 9623

Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
#6607951 - 07/20/06 12:55 AM

Very nice, you get an entry in the MS.

One thing, tho:

Quote:

We have to bet this turn because we can't let spades draw

Being heads-up, I can't say I totally agree. Without a read or against default opponents, I agree. Must bet. But against opponents you know well, opponents you know will play any piece of the board this way, it is possible to be correct to just check.

I'm not saying that it's correct to check a lot, just that it's not always incorrect to check, and sometimes it's best to check.

Post Extras:

Print Post

Remind Me!

Notify Moderator

yad
veteran

Reged: 08/31/05
Posts: 1546
Loc: stealing the button

Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: Grunch]
#6608026 - 07/20/06 01:04 AM

Nice post, Baluga.

I do agree with Grunch though that in your first example it is often better to check behind the turn though. Depends on your opponent. Against a donk I would never do it, but against a decent aggressive player check that behind all day.

Post Extras:

Print Post

Remind Me!

Notify Moderator

nickcee
member

Reged: 05/10/06
Posts: 170
Loc: @ the coffee shop

Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: yad]
#6608229 - 07/20/06 01:29 AM

I think checking, when in position, is somewhat of a standard play when head-up. By checking your representing weakness,managing the pot size, and making it more likely you will get paid off or make a little something when they decide to bluff. You can't do this all the time, but I think it's a decent play especially in situations similar to the first hand.

Post Extras:

Print Post

Remind Me!

Notify Moderator

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | >> (show all)

Extra information

0 registered and 40 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator: Isura, orange, ajmargarine, 4_2_it, Matt Flynn, Sunny Mehta, Mike Haven

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 20549

Jump to

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5

Message Boards and Forums Directory

Pages provided by ConJelCo