Razz - Thin value bets on 6th and 7th

[ChipsAhoya]

[ QUOTE ]
I only call because I will sometimes call with a T down too. If I always raise with 3 low cards and always call with a semi-bad hand I am giving away too much information.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because the r/r is so profitable; calling w/ a semi-bad hand is not a good way to open your range vs. a possible stealer because of the information it does betray. Maybe reraise w/ a hidden 9 vs. a very aggro stealer.

-ChipsAhoya

[Sp00n]

calling 3rd is fine, I would do the same around 10-15% of the time. Raising should be standard though.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
He doesn't say "the player definitely needs to be stealing". It actualys says "if your opponent MAY be stealing".

[/ QUOTE ]
Rusty, you really shoulda been a rabbi.
[ QUOTE ]
As the only remaining low card on the board except you, this is a steal kind of a lot.

[/ QUOTE ] Gosh, ya think? And when there are 5 players, no matter what the position, this is a real hand, kind of a lot. Fun, isn't it? Everyone gets to use their best judgment in situations and not have to do something in a book written by one guy who can't even walk on water. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
[ They really mean "+EV" and "-EV" but saying "correct" and "incorrect" instead is just part of poker-speak at this point, so I would try to get used to it.

[/ QUOTE ]Then I believe you are making a big mistake as a teacher. Language is the most powerful invention in the history of humankind. And the connotations of language are as meaningful, and sometimes more meaningful, to a person as the "literal" intended, situational meaning.

If you want to breed a generation of poker players trapped inside a box of rules, just keep supporting the "correct" and "incorrect" language. The issue in poker, the largest issue, is always psychological and it feels quite safe to believe one can always knows what to do in every situation. And so we could do what is "correct" and then, as we lose and lose to those not being so correct, we can tell ourselves it was OK to lose because I did the CORRECT thing.

Language is everything and this language is dangerous to anyone wanting to really become a player. IMH, linguistically erudite, O. I'll keep fighting it, SG, else these threads may just become a fish farm of well-trained and perfectly predictable future victims.

[RustyBrooks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He doesn't say "the player definitely needs to be stealing". It actualys says "if your opponent MAY be stealing".

[/ QUOTE ]
Rusty, you really shoulda been a rabbi.


[/ QUOTE ]

Look, if you're going to invoke Sklansky, and claim that he tells you you shouldn't always raise here, I'm going to refer to the same work, and show that he does.

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
As the only remaining low card on the board except you, this is a steal kind of a lot.

[/ QUOTE ] Gosh, ya think? And when there are 5 players, no matter what the position, this is a real hand, kind of a lot. Fun, isn't it?

[/ QUOTE ]

What's the ratio of times that this is a steal, compared to a raise? Or here's another question, how often would you expect the person with the 2nd to last low card to fold here? This appears to be the crucial distinction (sort of). I have an idea of what the ratio is (I'd say steal:realhand is somewhere between 1:1 and 2:1) but personally I don't think the ratio matters because raising is never -ev and calling sometimes is.

[SGspecial]

[ QUOTE ]
What's the ratio of times that this is a steal, compared to a raise? Or here's another question, how often would you expect the person with the 2nd to last low card to fold here?

[/ QUOTE ]
I was just playing some 5-handed 30/60, and the frequency of the 2nd to last low card doing anything but raising (Pokerstars, FTW) was 0. Maybe -1% actually.

[SGspecial]

[ QUOTE ]
The issue in poker, the largest issue, is always psychological and it feels quite safe to believe one can always knows what to do in every situation. And so we could do what is "correct" and then, as we lose and lose to those not being so correct, we can tell ourselves it was OK to lose because I did the CORRECT thing.

[/ QUOTE ]
QFT

[RustyBrooks]

At larger games I am sure it's almost 0. In small stakes I would bet 2nd to last low card folds 50% of the time. I'll check some time when I'm not (as) busy.

Oh - and it's a bit less on pokerstars because the ante is smaller. I don't auto-steal as fragrantly there as on full tilt.

[RustyBrooks]

Heh, fragrantly. I meant flagrantly.

[SGspecial]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh - and it's a bit less on pokerstars because the ante is smaller. I don't auto-steal as fragrantly there as on full tilt.

[/ QUOTE ]
So you're the one...