$3/$6 interesting Razz hand.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
Who are you referring to?

[/ QUOTE ]

Matthew82's post was initially in response to the HH here but then seems to segue into a blanket condemnation of defending bring-ins.

[RustyBrooks]

Well, he said

[ QUOTE ]

This approach of defending the bring in and only continuing when you do outflop him is a completely fallacious idea and is a serious leak because you know he has a 3 card hand and he knows you have a 2 card hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

(emphasis mine)

So he's talking about non-steal situations here. I don't agree 100% with what he said, though, but there are some good points in there.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
If you're so inclined to do so, here's how:

Go to your General Info tab
Halfway down select the Categories tab
Maintain Categories...
Click Add and give it a name like "Paint in the Door"
Check off all the cards for your hole cards and only JQK for your door card.
Click Build Hand Patterns to make sure you're getting the right examples.
Click save, then close.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, shoot. OK, I withdraw my idea of doing this, it all comes out odd. I still have to go thru the individual hands because a lot of them are not defending but just being in the hand when I was bring-in because no one raised. Common in micro razz. When I take those out, it looks like I am actually winning more than half the bring-ins I defend.

Then I found out, I only defend about 5% of the time someone does raise, so even if I am winning half of those, it's like a really small number. The only thing I know for sure is that I am losing about .33 cents per bring-in hand I defend on purpose and netting 1.43 on average the ones I win. But this is just .50/1 and only on PStars.

I find it all confusing and it gave me a headache. Anyway, I think I'll just keep doing what I'm doing until I find some compelling reason not to. I believe the way I defend does make me money in the long run. Not defending at all is a 100% loss.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, he said

[ QUOTE ]

This approach of defending the bring in and only continuing when you do outflop him is a completely fallacious idea and is a serious leak because you know he has a 3 card hand and he knows you have a 2 card hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

(emphasis mine)

So he's talking about non-steal situations here. I don't agree 100% with what he said, though, but there are some good points in there.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think he is, I think he's talking about any time you defend HU against a raiser. He is making a false premise. His hypothesis depends on the raiser having three cards better than the bring-in. You know, some people steal from UTG, right? Some from the middle, some just always raise with two wheel cards and any J or better from any position. Some of these people are donkeys and some are pros. And sometimes, even if I assume three good cards, I will still defend the bring-in. And I think that's what he's saying is always a leak.

But unless the post-er wants to come in here and tell us just exactly what he did mean, I guess it's all moot, anyway.

[RustyBrooks]

If you know enough about a player to put him on a steal from early position, that's one thing. Against an unknown it's safe to assume he has a three card hand. Anyway I feel his math is based on the premise that the bettor has a 3 card hand - you can be much more liberal with your defense if there is a good chance he has paint or a pair in the hole, obviously.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway I feel his math is based on the premise that the bettor has a 3 card hand -

[/ QUOTE ]Right! And this is his "always a bad idea a big leak don't do it" scenario. I disagree. With him, not you.

I always assume they have three cards, anyway. Because as soon as I don't, they will.

[Mathew82]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who are you referring to?

[/ QUOTE ]

Matthew82's post was initially in response to the HH here but then seems to segue into a blanket condemnation of defending bring-ins.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't mind defending the bring in under the correct circumstances. People lose alot defending their bring-in and it is completely unnessesary.

You cannot play catch up for one street when you KNOW he has a good 3 card hand and he knows you have a 2 card hand. You are just throwing away good money attempting to get to a place where you are even money...

Now in this particular hand, the fact that he made an early position raise into that board, he needed a pretty good three card hand with no chance to be on a steal because of the cards behind him to act. Even for a complete donk it is almost a complete certainty that he has at least a 'fair' 3 card hand...

However if there was a situation where you are not sure the player has a 3 card hand this changes alot and you only call when your hand value justifies a call when the hand is played out... not playing for a single street.

You need to ask yourself questions like -

What is the chance of him having a decent 3 card hand?
What is my chances against a good 3 card hand?
What is my chances against a two card hand?
How much will I gain if he bricks and is forced to fold?
How well does my opponent play?

You have to factor in all these things and more....if you really wanted to do a full analysis - it would get very complex.

Another factor which no one has even touched apon is that on heads up hands, you actually prefer a board with a few more high cards showing in place of cards that pair yours except for your doorcard. Hidden pairs have value because under certain circumstances they can win you pots and give you free cards. The fact that two fives are out and that is his doorcard is a major disadvantage to you. Ok your unlikely to pair your five but this not an advantageous situation for you.

[SGspecial]

[ QUOTE ]
If you start with a wheel draw and brick on 4th, you should often play if you have any reasonable suspicion someone started light.

[/ QUOTE ]
Regardless of what you should do, this is what 90% of players will do, and if hero's 8 is in the door then 99% of villains are calling a bet on 4th (it might be 100% since TT doesn't play online). Thus, you can't figure on taking down the pot on 4th like ever in this hand.

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
If you know enough about a player to put him on a steal from early position, that's one thing. Against an unknown it's safe to assume he has a three card hand. Anyway I feel his math is based on the premise that the bettor has a 3 card hand - you can be much more liberal with your defense if there is a good chance he has paint or a pair in the hole, obviously.

[/ QUOTE ]
You can't put a player on a steal in early position. A straight steal may be possible, but he usually has a real hand, so you can't call in the bringin, as you could someone in steal position.

[SGspecial]

[ QUOTE ]
You know, some people steal from UTG, right? Some from the middle, some just always raise with two wheel cards and any J or better from any position. Some of these people are donkeys and some are pros.

[/ QUOTE ]
In razz, these categories are not mutually exclusive