[1p0kerboy]

Sunny,

[ QUOTE ]
Those of you saying button is somehow justified in his isolated decision to call your reraise based on his initial decision (mistake) to raise after you limped UTG, is globally shortsighted imo.


[/ QUOTE ]

He's justified because of his pot odds, implied odds, and information that he has now obtained about our hand. The fact that he originally raised isn't really relevant at this point, other than the fact that the pot odds have changed because that money is now in the pot. Nobody said anything different than this.

[ QUOTE ]
Secondly, I believe many of you are way overestimating the implied odds required by your opponent to play this situation profitably, even given the isolated decision. Almost no one in this thread has cited anything in the way of math to back up some of the implied odds assertions made.

[/ QUOTE ]

I started to do the math but it's actually an extremely long process factoring everything in. But it's definitely +EV against a range of AK+ KK+, which Matt said is what he would have in this spot. As I have said before, if your LRR range in EP is too much bigger, there are other easier ways to exploit it than trying to set-mine.

[ QUOTE ]
You estimate implied odds by looking at what you stand to make on average in a given situation over all possible outcomes, not *the most you can possibly make in one particular outcome*. So, saying "OMG the raise is ten percent of my stack therefore I'm getting 10-to-1 in implied odds!" is incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]

??? Nobody said this.

[ QUOTE ]
When you call 10 percent of your stack, your implied odds are usually much less than 10-to-1.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe this is where your logic is flawed. The button isn't calling 10 percent of his stack. He's calling 6%.

[ QUOTE ]
(The things most people get surprised at is how much set-over-set cuts into equity, as well as how much the sucking-out-equity an overpair has even when the underpair flops a set.)


[/ QUOTE ]

This is one of the reasons I stopped short on mathing-out the equation earlier. There is a lot (distribution %, winning %, etc.) that goes into a problem of this sort. Maybe I'll get bored and work on it.