|
|
#21
10-10-2007, 04:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Hand from deep in 6 max wcoop
I would fold.
|
|
#22
10-10-2007, 04:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hand from deep in 6 max wcoop
[ QUOTE ]
I've decided to call, because I think raising or jamming are super -cEV. If we raise or jam, we definitely fold out smaller pairs, and even though it's 6-handed, I think we're probably folding out AK as well. [/ QUOTE ] Wait. If we fold out AK you think a shove is -EV?
|
|
#26
10-10-2007, 06:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hand from deep in 6 max wcoop
[ QUOTE ]
I would fold TT and JJ here and I would only call with QQ if you are also calling with AA/KK [/ QUOTE ] What we are doing with AA/KK is irrelevant here.
|
|
#27
10-10-2007, 06:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hand from deep in 6 max wcoop
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I've decided to call, because I think raising or jamming are super -cEV. If we raise or jam, we definitely fold out smaller pairs, and even though it's 6-handed, I think we're probably folding out AK as well. [/ QUOTE ] Wait. If we fold out AK you think a shove is -EV? [/ QUOTE ] You're right, it's actually a lot closer than I thought it was based on intuition. Ignoring the UTG raiser for a second, {AA,KK} has to be greater than 29.6% of 3bettor's range for shoving to be -cEV. Thus, if his range is as tight as {TT+, AK}, it's cEV neutral. Then you have to consider that the initial UTG raiser is going to have {AA,KK} some small percentage of the time, which makes shoving more -cEV. Obviously, if the 3bettor, described as a TAG, is 3betting a fairly wide range as he should be playing 6-handed, shoving is going to be slightly +cEV. That being said, I still hate shoving for 9x the 3-bet when if we get called we're going to be an 81-19 dog. You'd have to make a lot of assumptions, but I think 4betting to 270K/folding is going to be more +cEV than shoving, because I think the 5bet range for Villains is going to be {AA,KK} only. Therefore, 4betting takes down the pot without a fight the same amount of times that shoving does, but loses a lot less when Villain has {AA,KK}. Edit: Why would we ever fold here rather than at least calling and trying to flop a set? 90K is virtually meaningless to us (which is why I don't care at all if UTG pushes us off the hand preflop), and do we really think that Villain is getting away from AA or KK on a Q-high flop?
|
|
#28
10-10-2007, 07:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hand from deep in 6 max wcoop
todd terry, i liked ur post a lot as its well thought out, however keep in mind that the 3-better wasnt really a TAG he was more of an old nit type player who is happy that he has made it this far in such a big tournament which makes me think that his mp three bet range over utg raiser is tighter then we normally assume it would be in a 6 max tourney
also if 4betting to 270k / folding is more +cEV then shoving, are we then 4 betting this spot with any two cards? 7 2 off?
|
|
#30
10-10-2007, 08:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hand from deep in 6 max wcoop
[ QUOTE ]
todd terry, i liked ur post a lot as its well thought out, however keep in mind that the 3-better wasnt really a TAG he was more of an old nit type player who is happy that he has made it this far in such a big tournament which makes me think that his mp three bet range over utg raiser is tighter then we normally assume it would be in a 6 max tourney also if 4betting to 270k / folding is more +cEV then shoving, are we then 4 betting this spot with any two cards? 7 2 off? [/ QUOTE ] 4betting with 7 2 off is significantly worse in this situation. In the previous post, I ignored the possibility that Villain had QQ, because you had QQ, and therefore there was only 1 combination of QQ left. But I really think Villain's 5betting range is QQ+, not KK+, so if we don't have 72o, he has 18 combinations of hands where he's shoving, which is 38% more often than the 13 combinations of hands he's shoving when we have QQ. If he's only 5betting range is KK+, 4betting ATC is profitable if there is enough of a gap between his 3- and 5-betting ranges.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
