Clarkmeister for Straights

[unterfish]

Happy New Year all!

So, I read an article about Clarkmeisters Theorem two days ago (yeah, I know I am a bloody newb), and I remembered one hand from about 3 months ago. Dont ask me why I played 2c/4c.
Here we go:
Villain1 is 30/1.8/0.4 around 200 hands. Villain2 and 3 fishes who call down everything (Ten
high or something).


Poker Stars
Limit Holdem Ring game
Limit: $0.02/$0.04
8 players
Converter

Pre-flop: (8 players) Hero is BB with 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]
UTG calls, 2 folds, MP2 calls, CO calls, Button folds, SB calls, Hero checks.

Flop: K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (5SB, 5 players)
SB checks, <font color="#cc0000">Hero bets</font>, <font color="#cc0000">UTG raises</font>, MP2 calls, CO calls, SB folds, Hero calls.

Turn: 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (6.5BB, 4 players)
Hero checks, <font color="#cc0000">UTG bets</font>, MP2 calls, CO calls, Hero calls.

River: 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (10.5BB, 4 players)
<font color="#cc0000">Hero bets</font>, 2 folds,
... CO is disconnected and Villain1 writes in the chatbox:
"im gonna smack u of u have the 7 fish".
CO reconnected and called.

Results:
Final pot: 12.5BB

After the showdown, UTG writes "VNH" which I respond with "TY".
Unfortunately, these boards dont happen very often. But if they do, Ill bet it as much as I will bet a four flush OOP.

[kerowo]

They are going to happen more often than a 4 flush board and I don't know if I would do a lot of research on the .02/.04 tables. CO should be smacked for calling every street.

[unterfish]

CO sucked. He called with T4o. And yes, 2c/4c tables suck.
But Im not sure if these occasions do happen more often than 4-flushes. Too drunk and too lazy to do the maths right now.

[kerowo]

Which hand beats which hand? A flush beats a straight which means that straights are more common than flushes.

[unterfish]

Thats true. But the occasions where you only need one card to complete the straight in comparison to one card to complete the flush are rarer.
That said, in this case 4 cards make the straight. With a four-flush on board, 9 cards make the flush.
Plus, you prolly need an unflushed, unpaired board for that play. Huh?

[kerowo]

It is much more difficult for the people this play is going to work on to see the straight than it is to see the flush. Especially if it is a one gapper. What this comes down to is if it is alright to bluff a coordinated board, and that is always going to depend on the players involved.

[unterfish]

Again: youre right. Its a very coordinated board which is also in a 4-flush situation.
And finally: Yeah. Thats what it comes down to: to bluff when the board is coordinated.
Well, Clarkmeisters "Theorem" states that it works plusEV.
I dont think theres any minusEV in this play unless I play against you, kerowo [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[marchron]

Clarkmeistering a 4-straight board is a little more dangerous than on a 4-flush board because one of the benefits to the Clarkmeister bet is that very very occasionally, you'll get someone to fold a deuce-high flush. (Shut up you nits; you know what I mean.)

But with a 4-straight board, if anyone has the straight, they're simply not folding, no matter how bad it is. Even if they have the one-card idiot end, they'll call you for one bet.

That said, you picked a good time to do this; one Villain is fairly tight (relatively, for 2¢/4¢) and very passive, and another who's uber-loose and uber-passive, and the weak player is sandwiched between you and the fish. He figures one of you is hanging around with the one card that crushes him.

[unterfish]

Damn. My reply wasnt sent. So heres the short version:
Lol. I like your post although I dont agree with them all the time (for instance the AA vs. triple donk thing... I would have commented it, but alas, this forum world is going way too fast).
So... Yes: 2c/4c is ridiculous.
On the other hand, how probable is it to have a 7 here? Not very. And if it works, why not try it at 1$/2$?
I mean: just try it. It is rare I admit. But when it occurs just try it. It is probably the same reasoning Clarkmeister did because its not a mathematical fact, its just... Poker!

Anyway, have a happy new year!

[marchron]

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, how probable is it to have a 7 here? Not very. And if it works, why not try it at 1$/2$?
I mean: just try it. It is rare I admit. But when it occurs just try it. It is probably the same reasoning Clarkmeister did because its not a mathematical fact, its just... Poker!

Anyway, have a happy new year!

[/ QUOTE ]
Happy 2007 to you, too.

At any rate, I never said it was a bad idea, just that it will work less often than Clarkmeistering a 4-flush board. And I said OP picked the right time to do it, too.

"On the other hand, how probable is it to have a 7 here? Not very." That's entirely the reason why it will work less often. If you have AK on a board of A9865, betting all the way, nobody's going to put you on a 7. But on a board of A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 10[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], if you bet all the way, someone might give you credit for having AxK[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] even if you don't have it.