![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
That's a huge sacrifice. This is one hand. It doesn't define our strategy. You have a tremendous edge on this hand pre-flop that you can't sacrifice. But I wouldn't want to get all-in pre-flop with 77 even though it is ahead of his range, because then my edge is small. See what I'm getting at? Uhhh... so AK is better than 77 because....? [/ QUOTE ] Dude, if you're going to be snide, you should try to be right. Seriously? Assume his range is wide. Vs. a wide range, AK is a big favorite. Vs. a wide range, 77 is only a marginal favorite. If his range is wide, AK dominates far more hands than 77, and is dominated by far fewer hands than 77. I really have to spell this out? If you get all in and he flips over AJ (or KQ, or AQ, or QJ), which would you rather have, AK or 77? How about if he flips QQ or KK? Which one you want now? Before you point out AA, I say, a) wtf cares if you have 77 or AK vs. that hand and b) We have an A, so AA is less likely So, 300BBs deep this is kind of sick, since I did not notice that OP says he doesn't 3-bet light. But irrespective of this, I wasn't arguing whether to get all-in here, I was arguing against the general sentiment that you shouldn't worry about pre-flop edges vs. this guy simply because he sucks post-flop. Pre-flop edges can still matter a lot. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I wasn't trying to be snide at all. Sorry you took that way. You answered my question. However, I would want to play post flop with this guy and push on made hands of 99 - AA preflop.
I thought you were arguing to get it all in with AK. Suppose he flips QJ or 99. does a skilled player want to risk deep stacks on 60/40s? I don't. 4 betting thinking opps is a much different game then drunk maniacs. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
I wasn't trying to be snide at all. Sorry you took that way. You answered my question. However, I would want to play post flop with this guy and push on made hands of 99 - AA preflop. I thought you were arguing to get it all in with AK. Suppose he flips QJ or 99. does a skilled player want to risk deep stacks on 60/40s? I don't. 4 betting thinking opps is a much different game then drunk maniacs. [/ QUOTE ] Let's think in terms of average return per hand. AK vs. QJ, you are a 65:35 favorite. On 100BBs, that's a return of 30BBs. No way is your post-flop edge good enough to *average* a 30BB return, and you'd be insane to pass up that edge. Sure he stacks off light, but he still has to flop SOMETHING to keep going. Of course, if you could see his cards, you'd do things differently (take a cheap flop with AK vs. 99, get all in with AK vs. QJ, etc). But you can't do that. It's just ranges. And if his range is very wide for getting it in pre-flop, AK is a premium with an edge that you simply should not pass up. 77 does not have a huge edge vs. a wide range and you'd rather take a flop cheap. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
And if his range is very wide for getting it in pre-flop, AK is a premium with an edge that you simply should not pass up. 77 does not have a huge edge vs. a wide range and you'd rather take a flop cheap. [/ QUOTE ] Given the OP's description, what do you think is the villain's range in this hand? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Couple of points:
(1) AK has a pretty big equity edge if we assume he is 3betting a lot of his broadway holdings. It wouldn't shock me if the guy is 3betting Ax with x going down pretty far (x = 9, x = 7s?). The wider you think his 3betting range is, the more you have to just get it in with AK. (2) I'm completely mystified about the aversion to taking 60/40 flips. I assume that our hero is properly bankrolled and can rebuy if he loses. If this is live and he can buy-in up to 1/2 the big stack, he can immediately buy-in for $500 if he loses, so we don't sacrifice any future edge. If his next buy-in will be restricted to $200, then that gives some reason to pass on pushing very marginal edges. But you don't want to take that idea too far. (3) It's irrelevant that the villain will "bleed off his chips relatively soon." If he does that before we get a good opportunity to put our money in, that's too bad for us. Yes, it does mean we will have to take some high variance gambles because we can't sit back and wait for AA, but otherwise it doesn't affect our decision at all. (4) This is basically a math problem. For any given hand range you assign him, calculate your equity if you push preflop (assuming that he calls his whole range, which seems reasonble based on OP's description) versus taking a flop and folding if you don't flop an A, a K, or a monotone flop giving you a high flush draw plus overs. Again, you can assume that he's willing to get it all-in everytime you don't fold the flop. I don't know the answer in advance, but you'll find that taking the flop fares better the higher the percentage of paired hands are in his 3betting range. The more Ax, Kx, suited connectors, etc. that you add to his range, the better pushing preflop becomes. It would be interesting to get a rough idea of where the cutoff is where pushing becomes better than calling. I feel pretty confident that calling is significantly better if his range is {22-AA, AQ}, but that getting all-in preflop is much better if his range is {22-AA, A8+, KT+, QT+}. (FWIW, the first range isn't completely ridiculous. Some bad players think that 44 is a better hand than AJ because it would win if no community cards were dealt.) |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
(1) AK has a pretty big equity edge if we assume he is 3betting a lot of his broadway holdings. [/ QUOTE ] Given OP's read, I don't think that this is a good assumption. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
given your opponent's history, isn't that a pretty easy shove?
|
![]() |
|
|