#21
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Too aggro 3rd/4th?
[ QUOTE ]
I'm confused, I muck this on 3rd... are you advocating a call? I dont play Stud as often, what am I missing here? TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] I muck this too. Seems like you're intentionally getting in with the worst of it, and I'm not a fan of that. Obviously, my opinion would change if for some reason I needed to play more hands - antes were high, the complete is a suspect steal, the table was short, or my game was too ABC and needed some deception. I see this hand as "the best of the rest" that I wouldn't play by choice. But what do I know? I've never read 7CSFAP and probably never will. As a side note, I believe this hand has some inaccessible "fake equity" in it. For example, of of the ways you win against a suspected KK is to two-pair on 7th, but I don't see how you get there if you don't improve. All-in, you wouldn't be much the worst of it, but with betting still to come I can't really like it. The raise is just getting more money in with the worst of it, and I think that's spewey. I don't play here, but if I did, I would play for a call. I don't care what 7CSFAP says. Ditto the raise on 4th. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Too aggro 3rd/4th?
[ QUOTE ]
7csfap says to raise here to try and get it heads up. This is how it runs against 2 over pairs on 3rd. Because with the over card to the opps suspected pair you are nearly even money 7-card Stud Hi: 500000 sampled outcomes cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV Ac 4c 4d 172083 34.42 327913 65.58 4 0.00 0.344 8s Kc Kd 188047 37.61 311936 62.39 17 0.00 0.376 Ts 8c Th 139851 27.97 360132 72.03 17 0.00 0.280 And this is how it runs against 1 opp pokenum -mc 500000 -7s 4c 4d ac - kd 8s kc 7-card Stud Hi: 500000 sampled outcomes cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV Ac 4c 4d 218975 43.80 281020 56.20 5 0.00 0.438 8s Kc Kd 281020 56.20 218975 43.80 5 0.00 0.562 [/ QUOTE ] Why would you want to be heads-up? Multi-way, you own more than your fair share of the equity. Heads-up, you don't. TTxx has no reason to bet or raise 4th, so he's not going to cost you money, and just gets an extra bet (or more) in if he hits. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Too aggro 3rd/4th?
[ QUOTE ]
Why would you want to be heads-up? Multi-way, you own more than your fair share of the equity. Heads-up, you don't. TTxx has no reason to bet or raise 4th, so he's not going to cost you money, and just gets an extra bet (or more) in if he hits. [/ QUOTE ] Because Heads-up you win 40 percent of the time, with dead money in the pot. That's better than 30 percent of the time with everybody else drawing live. The pot would have to be huge for 30 percent of it to be worth more than 40 percent of the final pot heads-up. How do you make it huge? Well, you probably have to raise somewhere, which might turn it into a heads-up pot. So, either way, you'd better like it heads-up. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Too aggro 3rd/4th?
[ QUOTE ]
Because Heads-up you win 40 percent of the time, with dead money in the pot. That's better than 30 percent of the time with everybody else drawing live. The pot would have to be huge for 30 percent of it to be worth more than 40 percent of the final pot heads-up. How do you make it huge? Well, you probably have to raise somewhere, which might turn it into a heads-up pot. So, either way, you'd better like it heads-up. [/ QUOTE ] This analysis assumes more dead money than you actually get, I think. Also, 30% and 40% aren't that far off. Assuming 1 opponent vs. 2 and those win percentages, the extra guy only has to commit 24.8% of the pot to pay his way, but in reality is committing 33%. I'm not sure how I don't like this. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Too aggro 3rd/4th?
[ QUOTE ]
This analysis assumes more dead money than you actually get, I think. Also, 30% and 40% aren't that far off. Assuming 1 opponent vs. 2 and those win percentages, the extra guy only has to commit 24.8% of the pot to pay his way, but in reality is committing 33%. I'm not sure how I don't like this. [/ QUOTE ] You'll win the pot 25 percent more often heads up. You get this at the cost of a single raise. Sounds like a good deal. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Too aggro 3rd/4th?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] This analysis assumes more dead money than you actually get, I think. Also, 30% and 40% aren't that far off. Assuming 1 opponent vs. 2 and those win percentages, the extra guy only has to commit 24.8% of the pot to pay his way, but in reality is committing 33%. I'm not sure how I don't like this. [/ QUOTE ] You'll win the pot 25 percent more often heads up. You get this at the cost of a single raise. Sounds like a good deal. [/ QUOTE ] It's actually 33% more likely with his made-up numbers. But the cost is far more than 1 bet - it's also 30% of any bets that the extra guy(s) may put in, and those may be big bets or multiple bets. I think this all comes down to a real-word number of expected pot size for 2-way vs. 3 way vs. 4-way pots when aces up is the winning hand. And that number is probably a function mostly of how loose your opponents are on 5th. On your side of the argument, raising 3rd (and 4th?) gives you increased fold equity later in the hand against perceptive & tight players since you door card is abysmal and therefore you can represent trips or a big wired pair more easily. Also, it's not yet been made clear that ANY of these pot size / player number / line on 3rd combinations are +EV. I know my first choice here is fold. I think essentially half of the your equity is bogus since you won't likely see past 5th without improving and roughly half that equity represents draws that don't hit until 6th or 7th. Probably more, actually, since you're drawing to 2 pair. The only question in my mind is whether my second choice is call or raise. And I'll admit the raise is starting to grow on me. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|