|
|
#41
07-12-2007, 09:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Half the table to the flop w AK, flopped ace played weak, this ok?
[ QUOTE ]
A made straight is rather - for not to say complete -unlikely. Why? The board is two-suited, would anyone slowplay his straight here, giving a freecard to five opponents? A two-pair is even more unlikely - for the same reason. Button could bet any Ace and any J here to evaluate where he stands. If somebody just calls, it is nearly certain that he is against a draw. Said this - I assume OP to be ahead! A push would be the only clear reaction imho - to punish any drawing hands by the hardest. [/ QUOTE ] QFT. Check folding is horrible abd worse than bet/call. It's a 4/180. And even without that being the case... check fold is weak passive and a horrible way to play poker. you should lose sleep being bullied around like that and feel bad about yourself. clear enough? Bet the fricken flop. 
|
|
#42
07-12-2007, 10:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Half the table to the flop w AK, flopped ace played weak, this ok?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] A made straight is rather - for not to say complete -unlikely. Why? The board is two-suited, would anyone slowplay his straight here, giving a freecard to five opponents? A two-pair is even more unlikely - for the same reason. Button could bet any Ace and any J here to evaluate where he stands. If somebody just calls, it is nearly certain that he is against a draw. Said this - I assume OP to be ahead! A push would be the only clear reaction imho - to punish any drawing hands by the hardest. [/ QUOTE ] QFT. Check folding is horrible abd worse than bet/call. It's a 4/180. And even without that being the case... check fold is weak passive and a horrible way to play poker. you should lose sleep being bullied around like that and feel bad about yourself. clear enough? Bet the fricken flop. [/ QUOTE ] The lack of logic here is ridiculous. Seriously people. Think...think with your freaking heads. Stop looking at your cards and the board and saying, "I have TPTK." Just stop it. Think about your opponents. Think about their ranges. Think about your reverse implied odds in this situation. How much can you really expect to win on this board on average? How much can you really expect to lose on this board on average? It is very obvious that you can expect to lose more than you win on this board with your hand. Seriously folks. In the comments quoted above we hear one player say that a made straight is unlikely because a good player would not slowplay it on a board with a flush draw. He says the same about two-pair. Then another player quotes him (for truth mind you) and says, "Yeah, it's a 4/180 and players are terrible!" Does anyone else see the logical fallacy here? It is exactly because they are terrible that a straight and two pair a very very possible. WTF??!
|
|
#43
07-12-2007, 10:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Half the table to the flop w AK, flopped ace played weak, this ok?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] A made straight is rather - for not to say complete -unlikely. Why? The board is two-suited, would anyone slowplay his straight here, giving a freecard to five opponents? A two-pair is even more unlikely - for the same reason. Button could bet any Ace and any J here to evaluate where he stands. If somebody just calls, it is nearly certain that he is against a draw. Said this - I assume OP to be ahead! A push would be the only clear reaction imho - to punish any drawing hands by the hardest. [/ QUOTE ] QFT. Check folding is horrible abd worse than bet/call. It's a 4/180. And even without that being the case... check fold is weak passive and a horrible way to play poker. you should lose sleep being bullied around like that and feel bad about yourself. clear enough? Bet the fricken flop. [/ QUOTE ] The lack of logic here is ridiculous. Seriously people. Think...think with your freaking heads. Stop looking at your cards and the board and saying, "I have TPTK." Just stop it. Think about your opponents. Think about their ranges. Think about your reverse implied odds in this situation. How much can you really expect to win on this board on average? How much can you really expect to lose on this board on average? It is very obvious that you can expect to lose more than you win on this board with your hand. Seriously folks. In the comments quoted above we hear one player say that a made straight is unlikely because a good player would not slowplay it on a board with a flush draw. He says the same about two-pair. Then another player quotes him (for truth mind you) and says, "Yeah, it's a 4/180 and players are terrible!" Does anyone else see the logical fallacy here? It is exactly because they are terrible that a straight and two pair a very very possible. WTF??! [/ QUOTE ] Lets look at this step by step. You may have me convinced after this. After button bets 200 and is called by one. What do you think the odds of a push being called?
|
|
#44
07-12-2007, 11:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Half the table to the flop w AK, flopped ace played weak, this ok?
Ok, here it is
pushing and taking it down gives hero 2440 pushing and beating button gives hero 3340 pushing and beating floater gives hero 3520 pushing and beating both gives hero 4520 pushing and losing gives hero 0 depending on your percentages here the play is either bad or good. Your range for getting called would have to be verrrry tight to make it a poor play. My guess at the odds respectively are 25% *2440 15% *3340 15% *3520 2% *4520 43% *0 EVchips = 1719 not bad. This is also giving the villains calling ranges pretty tight. I gave them winning a showdown often. I also only gave us taking it down only 25% of the time. The only way to really get the numbers against you is if you think you are being called something like 80% of the time and are behind almost every time you are called. That I think is unrealistic.
|
|
#45
07-12-2007, 11:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Half the table to the flop w AK, flopped ace played weak, this ok?
[ QUOTE ]
Ok, here it is pushing and taking it down gives hero 2440 pushing and beating button gives hero 3340 pushing and beating floater gives hero 3520 pushing and beating both gives hero 4520 pushing and losing gives hero 0 depending on your percentages here the play is either bad or good. Your range for getting called would have to be verrrry tight to make it a poor play. My guess at the odds respectively are 25% *2440 15% *3340 15% *3520 2% *4520 43% *0 EVchips = 1719 not bad. This is also giving the villains calling ranges pretty tight. I gave them winning a showdown often. I also only gave us taking it down only 25% of the time. The only way to really get the numbers against you is if you think you are being called something like 80% of the time and are behind almost every time you are called. That I think is unrealistic. [/ QUOTE ] You can't do it like this. You just can "guess" as to how often you get called and lose. You have to assign hand ranges to both villains. You then have to determine what % of those hand ranges will villains fold to a shove. Then you have to determine how often you get called by 1 villain, then the other, then both (again in terms of hand range percentages). Then you have to determine your equity against those hands that call you (only villain 1 calls, only villain 2 calls, both villains call). Then at the end you add it all up. The way you do it the numbers are relatively arbitrary and biased by your own personal opinion. That being said, I'm not going to do the math for two reasons: 1) I know I'm right (especially given that some well respected posters also agree). 2) It's long, complicated, and I just don't care that much.
|
|
#46
07-12-2007, 11:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Half the table to the flop w AK, flopped ace played weak, this ok?
[ QUOTE ]
Does anyone else see the logical fallacy here? It is exactly because they are terrible that a straight and two pair a very very possible. WTF??! [/ QUOTE ] Saying "a straight and two pair" are possible says nothing about the profitability of the play. Again, I ask -- for perhaps the fourth time now in this thread: since when did 4/180 players become nut peddlers? Since when are they only calling us with KQ/TT/AJ here? And getting it in against AT/JT here isn't *that* bad, so if one of the villains has two pair like AT/JT, it's not the end of the world, given how big the pot is. In this thread, nath explains to ItalianFX why he can't beat micro stakes: "You're too nitty and your ranges for other people are entirely too tight. You will continue to be like this because psychologically it allows you to keep getting money in ahead and tell yourself you only lose because you get outdrawn, when the real problem is you're not pressing our edges hard enough and finding other ways to win pots. This is true of many people." Now I'm not claiming I know how nath would play here, but I think you guys who are automatically assuming we only get called with KQ/TT/two pair need to consider if his advice to ItalianFx doesn't apply to many of you suggesting check/fold is a profitable line here. The reason why it's important to note that these players are terrible is to indicate that we're getting called here alot with worse hands. Remember -- because these players are terrible. I'd be happy to search my 4/180 HHs to show you some absolutely, positively crazy calls players are willing to make at this level if there's some question as to whether or not we'll get paid off by a worse hand here. Speaking of logical fallacies: "Stop looking at your cards and the board and saying, "I have TPTK." Just stop it." This is a patent strawman. Plenty of posters have given alot of good reasons for not check/folding here that are much less inane than "I have TPTK". Maybe you want to consider addressing them instead of hand-wavingly asserting you're right and the math backs you up, but you're entirely too lazy to do it. Now, I'm not entirely confident check/folding is wrong, but you haven't posted anything in this thread to make a compelling case.
|
|
#47
07-12-2007, 11:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Half the table to the flop w AK, flopped ace played weak, this ok?
Oh sherman settle down. The QFT was Quite f'n true. As in Ya right on brother I get ya...I agree that the 2P and STR if held by players to our right, should have bet.
This time I just don't get you. Usually I do. And I am using my head. Maybe if he posts it without the action behind him you think differently? I didn't see the UTG caller but that changes nothing. I bet out at this with TPTK and an ISD. There is no other way to play it except fold the flop which I hate. Check calling is bad because you learn nothing. Bet calling maybe bad... but it's the better of two evils. No reads I Bet this flop. Reads and I bet this flop and evaluate easier after. And dude... I AM a 4/10/180 player as well ... not disparaging.. just from pratical experience that this is early on with blinds at 20 ....and if there's 5 players in, a good 3 of them called with garbage. That YOU know too. given that and some tables i've been at it is debatable in this situation that you shouldn't just shove!!!
|
|
#48
07-12-2007, 11:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Half the table to the flop w AK, flopped ace played weak, this ok?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Ok, here it is pushing and taking it down gives hero 2440 pushing and beating button gives hero 3340 pushing and beating floater gives hero 3520 pushing and beating both gives hero 4520 pushing and losing gives hero 0 depending on your percentages here the play is either bad or good. Your range for getting called would have to be verrrry tight to make it a poor play. My guess at the odds respectively are 25% *2440 15% *3340 15% *3520 2% *4520 43% *0 EVchips = 1719 not bad. This is also giving the villains calling ranges pretty tight. I gave them winning a showdown often. I also only gave us taking it down only 25% of the time. The only way to really get the numbers against you is if you think you are being called something like 80% of the time and are behind almost every time you are called. That I think is unrealistic. [/ QUOTE ] You can't do it like this. You just can "guess" as to how often you get called and lose. You have to assign hand ranges to both villains. You then have to determine what % of those hand ranges will villains fold to a shove. Then you have to determine how often you get called by 1 villain, then the other, then both (again in terms of hand range percentages). Then you have to determine your equity against those hands that call you (only villain 1 calls, only villain 2 calls, both villains call). Then at the end you add it all up. The way you do it the numbers are relatively arbitrary and biased by your own personal opinion. That being said, I'm not going to do the math for two reasons: 1) I know I'm right (especially given that some well respected posters also agree). 2) It's long, complicated, and I just don't care that much. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, I'm too lazy to go through ranges, especially since to do it accurately they would need to be weighted towards more likely hands than others. My percentages are just guesses. Do really think they are way off? You are positive you are right! haha! Well, I am not positive my play is right.
|
|
#49
07-12-2007, 11:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Half the table to the flop w AK, flopped ace played weak, this ok?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Does anyone else see the logical fallacy here? It is exactly because they are terrible that a straight and two pair a very very possible. WTF??! [/ QUOTE ] Saying "a straight and two pair" are possible says nothing about the profitability of the play. Again, I ask -- for perhaps the fourth time now in this thread: since when did 4/180 players become nut peddlers? Since when are they only calling us with KQ/TT/AJ here? And getting it in against AT/JT here isn't *that* bad, so if one of the villains has two pair like AT/JT, it's not the end of the world, given how big the pot is. In this thread, nath explains to ItalianFX why he can't beat micro stakes: "You're too nitty and your ranges for other people are entirely too tight. You will continue to be like this because psychologically it allows you to keep getting money in ahead and tell yourself you only lose because you get outdrawn, when the real problem is you're not pressing our edges hard enough and finding other ways to win pots. This is true of many people." Now I'm not claiming I know how nath would play here, but I think you guys who are automatically assuming we only get called with KQ/TT/two pair need to consider if his advice to ItalianFx doesn't apply to many of you suggesting check/fold is a profitable line here. The reason why it's important to note that these players are terrible is to indicate that we're getting called here alot with worse hands. Remember -- because these players are terrible. I'd be happy to search my 4/180 HHs to show you some absolutely, positively crazy calls players are willing to make at this level if there's some question as to whether or not we'll get paid off by a worse hand here. Speaking of logical fallacies: "Stop looking at your cards and the board and saying, "I have TPTK." Just stop it." This is a patent strawman. Plenty of posters have given alot of good reasons for not check/folding here that are much less inane than "I have TPTK". Maybe you want to consider addressing them instead of hand-wavingly asserting you're right and the math backs you up, but you're entirely too lazy to do it. Now, I'm not entirely confident check/folding is wrong, but you haven't posted anything in this thread to make a compelling case. [/ QUOTE ] I [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] DVaut
|
|
#50
07-12-2007, 11:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Half the table to the flop w AK, flopped ace played weak, this ok?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Ok, here it is pushing and taking it down gives hero 2440 pushing and beating button gives hero 3340 pushing and beating floater gives hero 3520 pushing and beating both gives hero 4520 pushing and losing gives hero 0 depending on your percentages here the play is either bad or good. Your range for getting called would have to be verrrry tight to make it a poor play. My guess at the odds respectively are 25% *2440 15% *3340 15% *3520 2% *4520 43% *0 EVchips = 1719 not bad. This is also giving the villains calling ranges pretty tight. I gave them winning a showdown often. I also only gave us taking it down only 25% of the time. The only way to really get the numbers against you is if you think you are being called something like 80% of the time and are behind almost every time you are called. That I think is unrealistic. [/ QUOTE ] You can't do it like this. You just can "guess" as to how often you get called and lose. You have to assign hand ranges to both villains. You then have to determine what % of those hand ranges will villains fold to a shove. Then you have to determine how often you get called by 1 villain, then the other, then both (again in terms of hand range percentages). Then you have to determine your equity against those hands that call you (only villain 1 calls, only villain 2 calls, both villains call). Then at the end you add it all up. The way you do it the numbers are relatively arbitrary and biased by your own personal opinion. That being said, I'm not going to do the math for two reasons: 1) I know I'm right (especially given that some well respected posters also agree). 2) It's long, complicated, and I just don't care that much. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, I'm too lazy to go through ranges, especially since to do it accurately they would need to be weighted towards more likely hands than others. My percentages are just guesses. Do really think they are way off? You are positive you are right! haha! Well, I am not positive my play is right. [/ QUOTE ] I have no idea how close they are. Like I said, the math is complicated (mostly because any ranges we assign are based off of no reads and are complete guesses) and I don't care much about it. All I know is this. I check/call here and check the turn. Someone said we don't gain information this way. That is just so wrong. Yes we do. I said in an earlier post that this board should look just as scary to villains as it does to us (unless they have a big hand). Also, knowing that one player bet at it and that two people called should be scary as well. If anyone continues to play the hand strongly on a blank turn, folding is perfectly acceptable. If everyone checks we can go ahead and make a value bet or check/call on a blank river. I like my line because it keeps the pot small while we are OOP and vulnerable to reverse implied odds. Others like a shove because they don't think the reverse implied odds are that great. I'm obviously not going to be convinced to agree with others, who are obviously not going to be convinced to agree with me. And that's fine by me. Next thread. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
