Jman article in Bluff

[NLSoldier]

sweet article jman, thx to eagles for the link.

[MDMA]

Good article Jman. TStone, while your second paragraph is correct (i.e it makes no sense to check AK since it's a valueshove in this case), it mostly proves that the example was perhaps not the best one in terms of describing a realistical situation, but that is of no great concern.

However, your first paragraph is wrong imo. You see, the range Jman set for hero was one that fired all three streets, and thus a lot of hands that beat AJ and fires turn but CHECKS BEHIND river is not included, and thus he cannot make the turncall given he can't reasonbly assume that hero is ALWAYS gonna fire river, and thus he really isn't any 70% against his turnfiring range, he's only 70% against his turn+river firing range, which was what Jman was focusing at.

[jkkkk]

Very good article, one of the best I have read without a doubt, nice work.

[MDMA]

And who the [censored] are you ekky? This was a very good article, why the [censored] do retards like you that I've never seen go ahead and act like [censored] for no reason?

[TStoneMBD]

mdma, you seem to always be on the ball mathematically with these sort of things, so i may be overlooking something but i strongly disagree with you here. jman rated villains AJ to have 54% pot equity on the turn, making the turn call immediately +EV. jman says that villain should fold AJ on the turn however because he will be put in a difficult spot on the river. however, that simply isnt true because when hero shoves on a blank river, AJ has over 70% equity according to jman. even if a straight completing card hits, AJ still has over 50% equity, making the river call directly profitable.

[Daut44]

I have been asked to write an article for bluff this month.
After reading this, I dont know what to do because this is without a doubt the best article ive ever read on poker

great job.

I guess ill do something complimentary like thinking about the range of hands your opponent can have at any given time. a lot simpler concept, but also necessary

[MDMA]

Sorry, I skimmed it through too fast and missed a few points, you are correct in that the hand range given didnt exclude anything, and I missed a few part. Either way, at point of turncall, has no percect knowledge of our rivershove range, and thus he has no idea whether we will always fire with all our range on river, and thus the 70% equity is of no real consequence. If he somehow knew that we would always fire our whole range all the time, then yeah, calling turn and river will show an immediate profit, but since he cannot, should we fire with an optimal frequency (with 30% equity it would turn out we can fire 45% of the time obviously), and thus he would gain the 9000 in the pot 55% of the time (when we check), and lose 4500 the times we bet, so with this particular range he'd still win móney even if he folded all the times on river, only when Jman changes his range for turnbet does it become wrong to call both streets, this whole example granted we are clairovoyant so we can bet the times we hit just a pair with a suited connector as well for value, and even so, him calling turn becomes automatically correct. If Jman starts bluffing more than 15% of the time hes no longer playing optimally and we could resort to calling all the time, and even if we continue to fold all the time he'd need to be able to fire more than 67% on the river which simply isn't happening in reality since we'd just obviously all the time at that point.

So yeah, jmans assumption in this case is actually wrong given the handrange, but I felt you didn't express it that much in detail [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ahnuld]

love the article, and I suggest next one be about changes you make in your game when playing with a constant 3 bettor who is tag, and one who is lag postflop for like 150bb and for 300bb

[restrikt]

Jman, I think what would also be good for each edition of the magazine, is for you to go through your thought process for a 200/400+ NLHE hand against a tough opponent... as long as it doesn't reveal too much personal info.

[Jman28]

Thnaks for the comments and critiques guys.

I just woke up so I may not be thinking straight, but...

[ QUOTE ]

first, he says that AJ shouldnt call the turn because its a reverse implied odd situation. well, if its correct to call the river shove because your equity is 70%, then its actually an implied odd situation and so the turn call is hugely correct.


[/ QUOTE ]

The reason I don't like a turn call is because of the river cards that could hit. If any diamond hits the river, you may pay off a flush or fold the best hand. If an Ace hits, you made top pair, but not the opponent will check behind KK, bet his KJ straights and bet missed flushdraws. You don't know which rivers improve his drawing hands. So, while a 5o river made a call easy for you, you aren't usually going to get a river that good.

[ QUOTE ]

next, when he tries to repair your hand range to make it incorrect for the opponent to call the river shove with AJ, he tells you to check behind with AK and AJ. well that is VERY wrong. its much better to shove with AK and AJ here then it is to shove with weaker bluffs because sometimes you get called by AJ which increases your EV significantly.you should instead check behind with 8h7h, 9h7h and shove AK and AJ instead. you lose nothing by shoving with AK/AJ and not shoving with 87/97.

[/ QUOTE ]

This seems wrong to me intuitively. Hmmm. You're making it seem like AK is a vb, when it isn't. We expect to have the best hand when shoving AK here and getting called like 5% of the time. So it's not a value bet, but we're bluffing with a hand with showdown value. I'll try to think of a better argument. Thoughts?