Re: Simple Question
[ QUOTE ]
No ulterior motive - this is just one of those hands that comes up a few times.
[/ QUOTE ]
wrap, backdoor low and flush, no pair? Sure, these do come up often enough.
[ QUOTE ]
Where's the long term money coming from with this hand, against an unknown opponent? Is it picking up the flop pot (small but frequent)?
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes. We don't have a pair, but we do have initiative. We should be perfectly happy to bet and take it down without improving.
[ QUOTE ]
Being ready to get all in on the flop (rare but large amounts of money involved), when you could easily be dominated by raising hands?
[/ QUOTE ]
I guess I don't see what hand would call a raise that would truly have us crushed much worse than 60/40 here. Help me out?
[ QUOTE ]
Building a pot for the turn/river(fairly common, but how does a larger pot and the flop action affect profitability when we hit)?
[/ QUOTE ] This seems like a more plausible action in the concrete than in the abstract. With certain pot to stack ratios we couldn't possibly fold the river If we only improve to nut low on the river. If our stack ration was such that we would jam the nut high but fold the nut low, it seems quite likely to me that the anony-villain will be capable of finding a fold to our large bet.
If the board pairs, can we really bluff into an unknown opponent on the river?
[ QUOTE ]
Or some combination? How much is each of these lines worth, and how are they best achieved?
I feel like there should be a clear line that maximizes EV against an average, unknown opponent with common stack sizes.
[/ QUOTE ] I probably don't play enough deep stack to truly understand the complexity here. With any stack size where 70% of the money is in by the river the appropriate line seems clear to me.
|