|
|
#31
08-14-2007, 07:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 50NL- QQ 3bet with interesting flop
Ok how I see this is the following.
Unless villain is a total 5/3 nit, no matter how tight he plays, his 3betting range includes at least AK. I think its much wider, something like AQ+, TT+. Folding queens is totally not an option I dont even want to talk about it [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Now, if we 4bet we certainly fold most of his light range out. 4beeting we represent AA/KK. Its a bluff. When we have a strong made hand, and QQ is a bloody strong hand, we don't want to bluff, we want value. As we see, folding and 4betting both are not very good. What bout calling. Calling for a set is certainly nonsense. Again, I don't even want to talk about it [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] So I just put my opponent on AK and call to see a safe flop. No A or K comes, I go broke. Simple and effective [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] If he shows me AA or KK I put it into variance column and move on. 
|
|
#32
08-14-2007, 08:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 50NL- QQ 3bet with interesting flop
At 50NL, what I see of it, 3betting light is a way of life for positionally aware tags on the button. I reraise will all sorts of hands. I really don't see how we can narrow his range down to AA KK.
When the flop comes, we are behind so many of the hands in his range and ahead of only a few that I have to fold.
|
|
#33
08-14-2007, 10:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 50NL- QQ 3bet with interesting flop
[ QUOTE ]
Traz ma man. Ship 50 to moneybookers please and I will tell you what to do here [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] sent [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] I'm pretty surprised preflop has gotten so much attention. I figured it was 100% standard. I figured his range was relatively wide. I run at 20/12, and I'm open to 3betting TT+, AK/AQ in that spot against a tight player. Against someone who raises frequently that opens up hugely to include sc's and all sorts of pp's. But I assumed it was the former, making his perceived range TT+, AK/AQ to me. I wasn't calling for pure set value, I was calling because I thought I may have been head but I wasn't willing to stack off preflop to find out. Flop's an easy check fold? Looks like we're a 30/70 underdog and getting nowhere near those odds. Yea? No one tries anything different?
|
|
#34
08-15-2007, 09:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 50NL- QQ 3bet with interesting flop
[ QUOTE ]
dude, even if you get all in every time you flop a set, its still a -EV call with 22 here [/ QUOTE ] If we get all in every time we flop a set, your statement is incorrect. I took a look at your original calculations that came up with the stack/bet ratio of 11.7 to 1, and there's a couple of adjustments that need to be made. I put them in this post. For this hand, assuming you lose 18% of the time you flop a set or better, you profit...a whopping 14.82 cents! Not huge, but not -EV either.
|
|
#35
08-15-2007, 09:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 50NL- QQ 3bet with interesting flop
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] dude, even if you get all in every time you flop a set, its still a -EV call with 22 here [/ QUOTE ] If we get all in every time we flop a set, your statement is incorrect. I took a look at your original calculations that came up with the stack/bet ratio of 11.7 to 1, and there's a couple of adjustments that need to be made. I put them in this post. For this hand, assuming you lose 18% of the time you flop a set or better, you profit...a whopping 14.82 cents! Not huge, but not -EV either. [/ QUOTE ] I'm not gonna go into details, but your math is off as you leave out a lot of factors and calling purely for set value is unprofitable.
|
|
#36
08-15-2007, 10:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 50NL- QQ 3bet with interesting flop
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] dude, even if you get all in every time you flop a set, its still a -EV call with 22 here [/ QUOTE ] If we get all in every time we flop a set, your statement is incorrect. I took a look at your original calculations that came up with the stack/bet ratio of 11.7 to 1, and there's a couple of adjustments that need to be made. I put them in this post. For this hand, assuming you lose 18% of the time you flop a set or better, you profit...a whopping 14.82 cents! Not huge, but not -EV either. [/ QUOTE ] I'm not gonna go into details, but your math is off as you leave out a lot of factors and calling purely for set value is unprofitable. [/ QUOTE ] Feel free to respond to my new post. Keep in mind that the calculations assume that you and villain get all in every time you flop a set or better, and DBitel's reply above also makes that same assumption, so if one of your objections is "villain will fold sometimes when you flop a set", we're not talking about that in this case.
|
|
#37
08-15-2007, 10:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 50NL- QQ 3bet with interesting flop
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] dude, even if you get all in every time you flop a set, its still a -EV call with 22 here [/ QUOTE ] If we get all in every time we flop a set, your statement is incorrect. I took a look at your original calculations that came up with the stack/bet ratio of 11.7 to 1, and there's a couple of adjustments that need to be made. I put them in this post. For this hand, assuming you lose 18% of the time you flop a set or better, you profit...a whopping 14.82 cents! Not huge, but not -EV either. [/ QUOTE ] I'm not gonna go into details, but your math is off as you leave out a lot of factors and calling purely for set value is unprofitable. [/ QUOTE ] Feel free to respond to my new post. Keep in mind that the calculations assume that you and villain get all in every time you flop a set or better, and DBitel's reply above also makes that same assumption, so if one of your objections is "villain will fold sometimes when you flop a set", we're not talking about that in this case. [/ QUOTE ] 22 vs AA 61.51 + 0.75 + 2 = 64.26 64.26 - 3 = 61.26 6 to win 61.26 4.3% + 9.2% = 13.5%, -8 86.5%, +53 53 - 8 = 45 89% -5.34 11% +4.95 Final answer -5.34 + 4.95 = -0.39 I cant believe you made me count this.. this is stupidest [censored] [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] ps Homework - try to decode what these numbers mean otherwise this is the last time I reply to your post. pss My math sucks too. It does not even take into account when when 4 flush comes or flop is 2KQ or 2KK. These make EV even worse.
|
|
#38
08-15-2007, 11:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 50NL- QQ 3bet with interesting flop
You left out two overcalls (one flat call, and the call by the raiser). More importantly, as I point out in my new post, since you know villain doesn't have either of the other two cards of your rank, the probability of you hitting a set on the flop is 12.25% instead of 10.75%
Here's corrections to your numbers (I wasn't sure what your 4.3% + 9.2% meant, but I'm using DBitel's less optimistic 18% anyway): 22 vs AA 62.51 + 0.75 + 2 + 2 + 2 = 69.26 69.26 - 2 = 67.26 6 to win 67.26 18%, -10.89 82%, +55.15 55.15 - 10.89 = 44.26 87.75% -5.265 12.25% +5.42185 Final answer -5.265 + 5.42185 = +0.15685
|
|
#39
08-15-2007, 12:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 50NL- QQ 3bet with interesting flop
Ok, topic revisited [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
I admit I missed out on 12.25 and the overcaller. But. Villains call is acknowledged. Hero's stack is still only 61.51. Rake is still 3. And after a short pm with DBitel, it turns out the chances to loose with 22 here are actually 19% [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] So. 22 vs AA 61.51 (eff stack) + 0.75 (blinds) + 2 (our raise) + 2 (caller) = 66.26 66.26 - 3 (rake) = 63.26 6 to win 63.26 53.51 behind 19% we loose, 53.51 * 0.19 = - $10.1669 81% we win, 63.26 * 0.81 = + $51.2406 Difference: +$41.0737 87.25% * $6 = - $5.235 12.25% * $41.0737 = + $5.032 Final answer - $0.203. Thats still almost a small blind. Villain does not have AA all the time. Even when he does, he does not stack off all the time.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
