|
|
#31
12-02-2006, 07:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 600NL, The Little Things, 63s bottom pair
[ QUOTE ]
. Why are you not folding more then 50% of your hands? From a limit perspective, such as immediate odds, villain is laying you such a bet in which you should not be folding as much as67% of the time. (depending on the bet, i think in this particular hand the pot size was messed up by the convertor) [/ QUOTE ] 50% is just approximation I dont mind being slightly exploitable. I just dont fold pairs, any draws (including overcards) on the flop. I think its enough to kill their bluffs. [ QUOTE ] 2. 63 is in the top 50%? Well... on this flop, vs a random range: Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Board: Ad Kd 3s Dead: equity (%) win (%) tie (%) Hand 1: 54.2487 % 52.09% 02.15% { 6c3c } Hand 2: 45.7513 % 43.60% 02.15% { random } -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That is true. However, villain called a raise pf - his range WITHOUT A DOUBT is > 50% of the estimated equity - I gave this guy like... the biggest rang in the world, and: [/ QUOTE ] Its my range which matter not his. 63 is much better than 99 there because it has 5 outs and 99 only 2 and all the hands below KK will fold before showdown anyway. [ QUOTE ] Calling isnt a semibluff [/ QUOTE ] "calling" was a typo I meant raising (as in my first post in that thread). 4. [ QUOTE ] My argument for folding, being that "poker on the simple level is best," pretty much means you have bottom pair vs a dude who called OOP and is now leading into the pfr. Some times they are weak, sometimes very strong, but in my estimation folding is > raising or calling, because both of those are EV, albeit (depending on villain) slight. [/ QUOTE ] I dont agree with your estimations. I think raising here with no cards at all is better than folding. [ QUOTE ] If you raise the flop, and money is put into the pot, it's tough to give yourself more then ~20% equity. What follows from that, then, is this question: Is this a flop where a raise w/ ATC is profitable? Certainly if that is the case, a raise here with 36 is, too. (although I feel ATC is not profitable to raise here) [/ QUOTE ] Forgive me noobish question but what is ATC ? 
|
|
#34
12-02-2006, 07:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 600NL, The Little Things, 63s bottom pair
[ QUOTE ]
Wow dude [/ QUOTE ] Actually I am sure I am right here. Its because all the hands worse than 99 (for exampel) will fold anyway. and 63 has more equity vs say KK or AA than 99. So when we are raising we prefer to have 63 than 99. Anything you disagree with here ?
|
|
#35
12-02-2006, 07:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 600NL, The Little Things, 63s bottom pair
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Wow dude [/ QUOTE ] Actually I am sure I am right here. Its because all the hands worse than 99 (for exampel) will fold anyway. and 63 has more equity vs say KK or AA than 99. So when we are raising we prefer to have 63 than 99. Anything you disagree with here ? [/ QUOTE ] lol what the [censored] dude? Both hands are drawing dead to running quads vs AA or KK... Your whole argument is based on assuming we have the worst hand. Which might be true for 63s but not for 99.
|
|
#36
12-02-2006, 07:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 600NL, The Little Things, 63s bottom pair
[ QUOTE ]
lol what the [censored] dude? Both hands are drawing dead to running quads vs AA or KK... [/ QUOTE ] hint : when you see something that doesnt make sense to you try to think what you are missing. AA and KK was short for pair of aces or pair of kings. for AA in hand it would be AAA in that notation...
|
|
#37
12-02-2006, 07:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 600NL, The Little Things, 63s bottom pair
Right.. but like I said, you're assuming villain has us beat here and are hoping to bluff him off a better hand or that we suck out. But 99 is a better hand here than 63 because it stands to be better more of the time
|
|
#38
12-02-2006, 07:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 600NL, The Little Things, 63s bottom pair
[ QUOTE ]
Right.. but like I said, you're assuming villain has us beat here and are hoping to bluff him off a better hand or that we suck out. But 99 is a better hand here than 63 because it stands to be better more of the time [/ QUOTE ] 99 is better if you plan to call and check/call down. 63 is better if you raise (now or later) Right ?
|
|
#39
12-02-2006, 07:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 600NL, The Little Things, 63s bottom pair
Blonde, punter's talking about turning your hand into a bluff. 63 is a better bulffing hadn than 99 because it has more outs. The actual chance of your hand being good doesn't matter, because you are never seeing showdown here vs. a hand that 99 beats. Either your opponent will get you to fold (both hands) before you can bluff, or you will raise him out of the pot, or he calls your bluff (never with a hand worse than 99).
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
