|
|
#61
10-09-2007, 10:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
[ QUOTE ]
The range Timo used is too tight IMO. And as he also says; not enough hands to know anything. Second. Metagame is an issue even against an idiot. We cant just c/r Tx on this flop. If we want him to fold when we c/r 87 we need to c/r our pairs as well. If we want him to give us action with 99 when we flop trips we need to c/r pairs and bluffs as well. I dont hate c/c c/c bet at all. This is just a spot were I like to make a close value raise to balance of my game. [/ QUOTE ] sure metagame and balance are factors in this game, but in the beginning of the thread it was a "standard hand". I was the only one that didn't think it was an obvious c/r on the flop. Now Timo is backing me up, and the reasons for c/r is much more vague than before. Off course you pick different lines in the same situation some times, but in the beginning of the thread noone said "c/r for metagame and balancing purpose", the arguments was that we should c/r for value and to make him fold incorrectly. Noone has shown any reasonable calculation of how c/r has greater EV than calling in this hand. If we choose to play a less EV strategy for metagame reasons it can't be a "standard play" right? 
|
|
#62
10-09-2007, 10:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
[ QUOTE ]
The range Timo used is too tight IMO. [/ QUOTE ] dude, I maybe spew and tilt but I know extreme much about stove, equity and PT stats and stuff. with the SB folded villain needs to raise 32% of his hands to give you 55% equity on the flop... he is 40/19... check your PT most aggressive people (whos Vpip is near their PFR) has an UTG+1 PFR pretty near or slightly under their total PFR... with other words: if you see this 26/22-timoK guy at stars and he raises first in from UTG+1 better calc with a range of top20% of the hands
|
|
#63
10-09-2007, 10:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
[ QUOTE ]
Noone has shown any reasonable calculation of how c/r has greater EV than calling in this hand. [/ QUOTE ] An EV calculation would rely on a bunch of assumptions. According to Timo's calculations we dont have much if any eq edge. I think his range is a bit too tight and I think there are more Ax hands and pp's and less high card hands like JTs. [ QUOTE ] If we choose to play a less EV strategy for metagame reasons it can't be a "standard play" right? [/ QUOTE ] Agreed. But I think that c/r has more EV than c/c. But its close. I wont deny it. And I am not refusing the fact that c/c might be better. Timo's calcs certainly surprised me. I wonder where ILP is. he is usually the king of passive. If he c/r'es this one I would be more confident in c/r'ing.
|
|
#64
10-09-2007, 10:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
[ QUOTE ]
If we choose to play a less EV strategy for metagame reasons it can't be a "standard play" right? [/ QUOTE ] well, it depends on your style. if you try to push every little edge you better c/r here because will will c/r like most of your hands. you might have to solve difficult borderline situations which you cant handle properly while 12 tabling... you can also say: [censored] the little edge, I just pilot my spaceship through 12 tables and betbetbet my good hands and my marginal hands I just let go and do some value-checking. I guess both ways will work out fine. For myself the second way work quiet fine 
|
|
#65
10-09-2007, 10:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
lets see how this turns out if the USA guys wake up
if i change villains range to top 20.7%: 44+,A2s+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,T9s,A5o+,KJo+ hero has 54% equity on the flop and 53 on the turn. this will make the c/r line better if villins WTS is high. but if we calc with a more realistic range of 18.3% 44+,A5s+,KTs+,QJs,JTs,A7o+,KTo+ your equity on the flop is 51.2% and turn equity is 52.6% still a rather low edge for beeing out of position. but you might see the problem: the c/r line should know the WTS and the hand-distribution of the PFR-hands (like if he raises many Axo hands) c/c line just sits back and let villain spew
|
|
#66
10-09-2007, 10:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I am pretty sure we don't need to be right over 50% of the time for this still to be correct. [/ QUOTE ] Why? You don't expect to fold out any hands and you have no edge? Why is it still correct to raise? [/ QUOTE ] More of a meta-game consideration I guess. [/ QUOTE ] it's not metagame, it's the fact that we are out of position. say we artificially restrict his range to 55-99 and AK. we are a 27:16 dog but c/r is correct if the pairs will always value bet down (they will) and the AK will check behind the turn or river half the time (in reality this is closer to 100%).
|
|
#67
10-09-2007, 11:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
[ QUOTE ]
say we artificially restrict his range to 55-99 and AK. we are a 27:16 dog but c/r is correct if the pairs will always value bet down (they will) and the AK will check behind the turn or river half the time (in reality this is closer to 100%). [/ QUOTE ] c/c c/c c/f seems right here
|
|
#68
10-09-2007, 11:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
miles I'm just explaining why you don't have to be good >50% in order to raise for value. in the OP hand you can't c/c c/c c/f because taking that flop and turn line leaves a whole bunch of hands like 87 in his range.
|
|
#70
10-09-2007, 11:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
[ QUOTE ]
miles I'm just explaining why you don't have to be good >50% in order to raise for value. in the OP hand you can't c/c c/c c/f because taking that flop and turn line leaves a whole bunch of hands like 87 in his range. [/ QUOTE ] No 87 hands should be in his range jba...
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
