3 commerce hands

[FoxwoodsFiend]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
TWP, you're wrong that "9-1" is meaningless

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
it's easy to see the implied odds being there

[/ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't a number I've ever memorized because it's rarely relevant, but I think you flop two pair about once in every 22 times or so. If so, you only have to make up another 12 small blinds in equity to make "two-pair mining" from the sb with K6 fine. In just about every live game I've played this is almost never a problem.

I don't get your confused emoticon ever: did you think I was thinking the 9:1 was the implied and not pot odds? If so, sorry: just meant to show that the 9:1 gives us a good jump-start to neutral EV so that the implied odds don't have to be too large to play the hand.

[TheWorstPlayer]

My point was that the 9-1 number IS completely meaningless. It really doesn't matter whether you're getting 9-1 or 5-1 or whatever. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that K-6 will be more profitable against 1-3 opponents than it would be against 6-9 opponents, even though you're getting better odds on your preflop completion in the latter case. That's because short-handed you'll be able to steal the pot more often. K-6 is NOT an implied odds type hand. It's a REVERSE implied odds type hand. Especially in worst position. I just don't see how it can be played profitably in worse position against a bunch of opponents. Let alone when you have to pay to play it.

[FiSheYe]

Well I think there can be a good debate for both opinions. Nonetheless my point is a combination of both.
a) we're OOP and in a multiway pot this is very bad if we consider the fact that we have definately no good read on this table. So even if we flop big, all might fold, some might trap us with a better holding and so on. We are stepping into a field of mines without a map and could easily end up on a cheese trips board, beeing dominated and clueless.
b) we're getting very good odds for this hand but I wouldn't overrate the implied odds unless we're playing 2pair/trips only and even then we might end up beeing dominated so it's a correct statement to say K6o is more of an reverse implied odds hand than the other way around.

I think the postflop edge is a valid point towards playing this hand and I think the better the player the more he can complete in this spot. I will still fold in the given situation, let's assume Strassa is the best player at this table then look at the 3hands played. I still think you're the best but your reads are "ok" at best. You cannot put those opponents on a good range and this leak of information turns the marginal K6o into a guessing hand. If you know player A is a nit, player B payoffwizzard and so on I assume completing an even broader range might be okay. Would love to hear opinions from players such as Genius, Aba and so on who seem very sound with the math in those cases.

[locutus2002]

Hand 1: Fold.

Hero has played the hand like a top pair hand. Given your read on villain, I doubt he is going to float the flop without two clubs. Villain probably plays a 7 faster on the turn, and the K didn't seem to bother him, but he didn't want to raise. I like villain for KcJc.

IF villain is capable of floating the flop with two overs that are not clubs then you beat: ak,kq,kj 21 hands, and you lose to a dozen quality 7s, 4s - 3ways; 5c6c ; 3 flushes with the Kc; or ~19 hands, making it a call. However I cannot give this villain credit for calling the flop without drawing to a flush OOP against an opponent who has probably been showing aggression with this many chips.