|
|
#21
11-20-2006, 06:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Rethinking big draws - Part 1
[ QUOTE ]
I [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Pokey. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, me too. Thanks, Pokey, for yet another detailed post. They really are helpful. In honesty though, I think I asked my question incorrectly in my follow-up post. To be more accurate I should have asked, "Is there a way to recognize when villain has a set WITHOUT compromising our winnings during those times when he doesn't." However, based in part on your post, I've concluded that there isn't a way. We can't have our cake and eat it too. Either we minimize or losses when villain has a set - and likewise minimize our wins when he doesn't. Or we maximize our wins, and take it in the shorts when the set is there. And as often as I took it in the shorts this weekend, I think I'd probably better stop off at the store on the way home today. Otherwise things are going to be a bit drafty [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]. 
|
|
#22
11-20-2006, 06:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Rethinking big draws - Part 1
Nice thread - excellent posts.
In regards to recognizing a set, I'm NEVER giving villian credit for that in a blind battle.
|
|
#24
11-22-2006, 10:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Rethinking big draws - Part 1
wow, sticky-material right here.
|
|
#25
11-22-2006, 11:20 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Rethinking big draws - Part 1
I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, so can somebody explain how we're a dog against a set when we have the nut flush draw? The way I see it, on this board we have 9 outs to the nut flush, but one out (5 of hearts) could fill up a boat, so that's really 8 outs just for the flush. Add in the 6 other outs for the straight, and we're ahead.
Assuming the turn is a blank (such as offsuit Jack), that takes away another out on the river (Jack of hearts) that could result in a boat. We still have 7 outs to the nut flush and 6 outs to the straight. After the turn, we're an underdog, but not if we push on the flop. Is that right? I've always wanted to have it explained in words rather than pokerstove type analysis, so any help would be appreciated. Bottom line, it's better to shove on flop if we're going to push our draws, isn't it? By the way, great thread.
|
|
#26
11-22-2006, 12:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Rethinking big draws - Part 1
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, so can somebody explain how we're a dog against a set when we have the nut flush draw? The way I see it, on this board we have 9 outs to the nut flush, but one out (5 of hearts) could fill up a boat, so that's really 8 outs just for the flush. Add in the 6 other outs for the straight, and we're ahead. Assuming the turn is a blank (such as offsuit Jack), that takes away another out on the river (Jack of hearts) that could result in a boat. We still have 7 outs to the nut flush and 6 outs to the straight. After the turn, we're an underdog, but not if we push on the flop. Is that right? I've always wanted to have it explained in words rather than pokerstove type analysis, so any help would be appreciated. Bottom line, it's better to shove on flop if we're going to push our draws, isn't it? By the way, great thread. [/ QUOTE ] The OESD + FD is still behind because of redraws - villain fills up on the river or the board will pair on the turn and hero is drawing dead. Basically % that one of hero's draws comes in * % that villain doesn't fill up.
|
|
#28
11-22-2006, 01:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Rethinking big draws - Part 1
Pokey, I really [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] your posts. But this time I'm not agreeing 100%.
I really believe that you're too optimistic about villain's range. Considering the fact that he called a pfr and raised a flop bet makes me, at the very least, doubt that he's doing that with the full 45 combinations you've mentioned. In my opinion he'll do that with 100% with the 10 combos of sets, but only about 20-30 combinations of weaker made hands (some of the overpairs, two pair hands that may have survived the pfr). We know that villain should raise with just about any made hand, but villains usually don't know that and flat call cbets with some of the overpairs. Neither does the typical villain raise this flop with any draw, especially not straight draws. Maybe (with plenty questionmarks) with Kx[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] or Qx[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] and 77. Against those hands that we're not afraid against, we'll only get called by the stronger ones if we push, but on average, I'd guesstimate that we earn about $10-12 (haven't crunched numbers, no pokerstove @ work) if they do call us. Against the 10 dreadful combos, though, we're losing around $28 (60/40 dog rate). So, for this to be about breakeven we'd need villain to fold/call weaker hands around 3x as often as he has the set here. Havning said all that, it still seems to me that pushing is +EV here, but in my opinion not by such a big margin as your post is making it sound.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
