Player Discussion

[Mark1808]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Mark:

[ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
EV JJ = .67(165) + .29(-370) + .04(390) = 18


[/ QUOTE ]

No. If Player A folds his ace-jack suited (as we all agree he should) Player B wins $55. Thus the expectation for Player B from that point on is not what you show.



[/ QUOTE ]

We are both wrong, B will win $110 preflop call plus $15 blinds = $125. So JJ EV = $10.


Please check the edit at the bottom of my previous post, I think it pretty much sums it up!

[ QUOTE ]

Also, I agree that the probabilities are off a little. But as stated this was done deliberately to account for possible rare scenarios which might be detrimental to Player A. (Good statisticians like to error on the conservative side.)


[/ QUOTE ]

The chance of J flopping as well as A or Q by my calculations is 4% not 7%, making good AQ flops 29%. There are rare scenarios that are also great for A, J hits the flop and flush hits the turn!


The point of the whole post is 7-2 can be a preferable hand to even AA given the right pot odds and betting styles.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi amoeba:

You're absolutely correct. If Player B who holds the jacks auto bets the flop, that gives Player A certain playing advantages. On the other hand, if he were to only rarely bet the flop, that would give Player A other advantages, namely the chance to win by catching an ace or queen on the turn (or river).

I believe that most players think about not giving a free card, thus the "continuation bet" will almost always be there. If that's not the case, as I mention replying to your other post, then my analysis does not do a good job of representing reality.

Best wishes,
Mason

[amoeba]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi amoeba:

I believe that most players will make a "continuation bet" as Dan Harrington has called it. If that's not the case, then my analysis does not do a good job of representing reality and should be ignored.

best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

most players make a continuation bet because there is fold equity from hands like AQ on say a KQx board. if no such fold equity exists then I see no reason to make a continuation bet. it seems bad strategy to make a bet that will only be called if you are behind or if you both hit.

[TheWorstPlayer]

The greater point is that nobody worries about giving a free card on an Axx flop with JJ to a guy who will call re-raises out of position with a hand like AQs and who will also never bet the hand on an ace high or queen high board. The guy is obviously loose-passive and therefore JJ's play on an ace high flop is simply to check/fold unless he hit a set.

[amoeba]

[ QUOTE ]
The greater point is that nobody worries about giving a free card on an Axx flop with JJ to a guy who will call re-raises out of position with a hand like AQs and who will also never bet the hand on an ace high or queen high board. The guy is obviously loose-passive and therefore JJ's play on an ace high flop is simply to check/fold unless he hit a set.

[/ QUOTE ]

exactly my point.

this problem illustrates more the player A's depth of knowledge about player B's postflop tendencies and the lack of information player b has on player A's postflop play rather than whether AQ is better than JJ.

in fact if it was the case that hands like AQ would call a preflop reraise, then it begs the question whether JJ should reraise preflop in the first place.

what the whole thing boils down to is that JJ's strategy (reraising preflop and autobetting the flop ) on the whole is +ev against player A's range but player A can exploit this the specific times that he has AQ and player B has JJ, but loses out much much more the times that player B has anything else in his reraising range.

[El Diablo]

[ QUOTE ]
The greater point is that nobody worries about giving a free card on an Axx flop with JJ to a guy who will call re-raises out of position with a hand like AQs and who will also never bet the hand on an ace high or queen high board. The guy is obviously loose-passive and therefore JJ's play on an ace high flop is simply to check/fold unless he hit a set.

[/ QUOTE ]

One could continue this and do a reasonable analysis of the hand to show why JJ in position with last aggression is far preferable to AQs in this situation, but I'm not sure what the point would be.

[amoeba]

what this problem has boiled down to is that JJ is taking a line which is +ev against player A's range of hands but -ev against AK, AQ when played according to mason's specifications. The point that JJ's line is +ev against player A's range cannot be argued as otherwise why would he take it?

AQ is taking a strategy which is +ev against JJ but is -ev against all other hands in player B's reraising range.

[Phaedrus]

[ QUOTE ]

My answer was that if someone was all-in, the jacks would be better, but if they each had chips left, which was the case here, the ace-queen suited was better.


[/ QUOTE ]

How did this thread become so convoluted?

It's pretty clear to me that the original discussion at the table was intended as a simple discourse on implied odds.

The implication was that even though AQs is a slight dog preflop, it has implied odds if it flops a pair or ends up making a flush.

Unfortunately, all the experienced NL players say that the implied odds really reside with JJ because it can flop a set which is much more likely to be paid off.

The subsequent repeated redefining of the problem strikes me as bull****.

[slong]

[ QUOTE ]

This is exactly right and may be a point that is confusing many. If Player A, who holds the ace-queen suited, chooses to fold, his expectation from that point on zero. If he chooses to play, and perhaps follows the strategy I outlined and it gives him a positive expectation from that point on, then that positive expectation must come from somewhere. In this case it can only come from Player B who holds the jacks. Thus Player B's expectation is now negative from that point on.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is so wrong Mason, as I have said before the player with AQs only has a positive expectation with the $110 call because of the dead money in the pot. If there were no blinds and JJ opened for $110 then the expected value of AQs calling the bet is -EV. His +EV is not coming from the player with JJ.

On a lighter note: is "I'll let others elaborate" the new "Do you see why?" New and improved with 10x the condescension.

[amoeba]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi amoeba:

You're absolutely correct. If Player B who holds the jacks auto bets the flop, that gives Player A certain playing advantages. On the other hand, if he were to only rarely bet the flop, that would give Player A other advantages, namely the chance to win by catching an ace or queen on the turn (or river).

I believe that most players think about not giving a free card, thus the "continuation bet" will almost always be there. If that's not the case, as I mention replying to your other post, then my analysis does not do a good job of representing reality.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

in the cases in which the player with JJ is betting the flop in order to not give a free card, he is betting for value, to which player A folds to the bet.

lets say JJ bets all flops which does not contain an A without a J. then there are no freecards to give.

but even if JJ only bets on flops in which all under cards flop, he only gives a freecard when flop comes Kxx in which xx are rags, this is offset by the times he checks through Axx and Qxx flops and gets the freecard himself with a third J.

most players do not continuation bet here for fear of freecard. the predominate reason to bet out on Axx flops with JJ when you were preflop reraiser and opponent checks to you on the flop is to gain fold equity against better hands such as QQ and KK.