|
|
#51
02-28-2006, 05:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Result
Yeah, I just don't think that's likely that they're calling with Q8-QJ here. I think QJ-Q8 might get to the turn hoping to add a draw to MP, but I don't think QJ-Q8 calls a turn bet often. Don't have pokerstove at work, or I'd run the numbers myself, but I think it's something like...
Range we beat that will call: AQ, KJ, KT, K9 Maybe add in 1 extra hand like QJ to cover for the times where a donk calls with any sort of terrible Kx or Qx hand. Range we lose to that will call: QQ, KK, AA, 22, 77, 66, KQ Range we chop: AK 
|
|
#52
02-28-2006, 05:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Result
Dude, you can't include AA/ KK/ QQ/ and 66/77 as likely as KJ (which is the most likely hand imo). Those hands are so absurdly rare in this spot, that I don't think we can weigh them the same. Disagree or no?
|
|
#53
02-28-2006, 05:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Result
[ QUOTE ]
Dude, you can't include AA/ KK/ QQ/ and 66/77 as likely as KJ (which is the most likely hand imo). Those hands are so absurdly rare in this spot, that I don't think we can weigh them the same. Disagree or no? [/ QUOTE ] Absolutely not equally likely. You'd have to weight it. I think KQ is only slightly less likely than KJ, which I agree is the most likely hand. But I think it goes something like... KJ >> KQ >>>>> KT/K9 >>>>>> lots of hands that beat you >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>> anything else Villain could have I, uh, can't convert those greater than signs to percentages easily at work without wasting too much time [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#57
02-28-2006, 05:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Result
I agree, I think where we are disagreeing, is that I just think almost all hands that beat us are VERY unlikely, as well as the fact that I think almost all queens call because there just isn't enough money left.
|
|
#58
02-28-2006, 05:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Result
Fair enough. I don't think a lot of queens call us unless they just made two pair with Q7. I'm guessing the difference between whether or not you include the Q's in Villain's likely push-calling range probably make up for the difference in whether this is clearly +EV or marginally +EV.
At this point, I think we've argued this one out, anyway. I'm still not value betting this river, and you can call me weak/tight for it and I won't mind [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#59
02-28-2006, 05:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Result
How much if any are u taking into consideration the buy in towards the donk factor, i find it harder to believe that someone at that buy in would call a losing hand on a river bet than if it were say a 5$ tourney even though i know there are donks at all levels.
|
|
#60
02-28-2006, 05:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Result
[ QUOTE ]
How much if any are u taking into consideration the buy in towards the donk factor, i find it harder to believe that someone at that buy in would call a losing hand on a river bet than if it were say a 5$ tourney even though i know there are donks at all levels. [/ QUOTE ] The fact that he bet 200 on the end makes it pretty likely that he's a donk.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
