|
|
#11
08-12-2007, 08:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 1/2 set
[ QUOTE ]
You understand that if you bet $55 and he always folds that its a lot worse than betting even $2 and him always calling right? It doesn't matter that its ok for him to call, its still +EV for you to bet. [/ QUOTE ] Unless he regularly bluffs the river with a missed draw, that must be wrong. Let's say he has A9 or Ac9c - 8 or 13 outs (I think). If you force him out 100%, you take the $55. If you bet $2 and he always calls (as he would), you have the best hand on the river in a $59 pot 70-82% of the time; but you are outdrawn the other 18-30% and lose the $55 you would have had by potting the turn and more if/when you pay him off. He would have to bluff the river a serious % of the time for betting $2 on the turn to be better than potting it. While it is true that getting a call is +EV compared to pushing him out, it is not worth risking losing $$$$$$$ to gain $ worth of EV 
|
|
#13
08-13-2007, 05:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 1/2 set
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] You understand that if you bet $55 and he always folds that its a lot worse than betting even $2 and him always calling right? It doesn't matter that its ok for him to call, its still +EV for you to bet. [/ QUOTE ] Unless he regularly bluffs the river with a missed draw, that must be wrong. Let's say he has A9 or Ac9c - 8 or 13 outs (I think). If you force him out 100%, you take the $55. If you bet $2 and he always calls (as he would), you have the best hand on the river in a $59 pot 70-82% of the time; but you are outdrawn the other 18-30% and lose the $55 you would have had by potting the turn and more if/when you pay him off. He would have to bluff the river a serious % of the time for betting $2 on the turn to be better than potting it. While it is true that getting a call is +EV compared to pushing him out, it is not worth risking losing $$$$$$$ to gain $ worth of EV [/ QUOTE ] 100% correct
|
|
#14
08-13-2007, 06:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 1/2 set
[ QUOTE ]
Interested in giving results, did you call??? [/ QUOTE ] he had AcTc i do think i should have bet more on turn. also, i think a solid argument for a fold can be made on the river, all we really beat is a stone cold bluff. 666 would not have waited until river then push. it is so much more likely that he actually hit than is on a stone cold bluff.
|
|
#15
08-13-2007, 08:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 1/2 set
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] You understand that if you bet $55 and he always folds that its a lot worse than betting even $2 and him always calling right? It doesn't matter that its ok for him to call, its still +EV for you to bet. You don't want to force him out just because you play scared. [/ QUOTE ] This is absolutely wrong. Yes, it's +EV to bet $2. That is, it's better to bet $2 than fold a set. But we aren't trying to make any +EV play, we're trying to make the most +EV play. And its more +EV to make him fold instantly, and claim everything currently in the pot, than to give him a shot at a draw (and therefore effectively give him a proportion of the pot). [/ QUOTE ] You'd need to estimate what that proportion is in order to make the decision. Also, the thing I love about NL is how you can charge them so much to draw. A card or two to come against some opponents is all they need to get a lot in.
|
|
#17
08-13-2007, 08:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 1/2 set
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Interested in giving results, did you call??? [/ QUOTE ] he had AcTc i do think i should have bet more on turn. also, i think a solid argument for a fold can be made on the river, all we really beat is a stone cold bluff. 666 would not have waited until river then push. it is so much more likely that he actually hit than is on a stone cold bluff. [/ QUOTE ] So, he called 2.5:1 with 4 outs on the flop, and ~3:1 with 10 outs on the turn. You 2 mistakes (a big flop mistake and a small turn mistake), but then apparently paid him off which compensated his poor pot odds with sufficient implied odds. He thinks he has 12 outs on the turn, so he probably would have called a bigger turn bet.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
