Knowing your math. Basic draws.

[Novles]

[ QUOTE ]
~4 combos of flushdraws that do not bet/fold, 9 set combos, and ~18 combos of JJ-99 (6 each) which may not fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

ime, a nit is not b/cing a shove getting 2:1 on the turn in hand 3 with a naked flush draw, and certainly not with an underpair.

hand 1 and 2 i agree with completely. awesome post.

[***]

I'm not sure if I understand hand 2. Are you saying that check/calling is better than firing a second barrel because we lose the same amount against made hands, but make some money allowing him to bluff and also give ourselves a chance to suckout against a hand that would raise the turn if we bet?

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure if I understand hand 2. Are you saying that check/calling is better than firing a second barrel because we lose the same amount against made hands, but make some money allowing him to bluff and also give ourselves a chance to suckout against a hand that would raise the turn if we bet?

[/ QUOTE ]
for the most part, yes. Against this type of player I think inducing the float rather then fighting it is the better strat, for the reasons you mention.

[ArturiusX]

I call all 3 pretty quickly, might slightly hesitate for hand 2. Depends a little bit on context. I think pushing in hand 3 is better than bobbo thinks too [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[josh_x]

Bobbo,

Is the following concept legitimate: Say the pot is 80 and he bets 20. We have a draw that is good enough that we can't fold. If we raise to 100, are we effectively betting 80 into a $120 pot? If so this improves our odds a fair bit, from 1:1 to 4:3, right?

[DonButtons]

first off, nice post

normally I would

hand 1- call

hand 2- c/f and cbet..not sure frequency..but depends on player. vs guy you mentioned I would lean toward cbet, didnt realize c/r had so much merit, even a call

though you betting 12 might get you floated more often maybe then if you bet 15-19

hand 3- call

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
Bobbo,

Is the following concept legitimate: Say the pot is 80 and he bets 20. We have a draw that is good enough that we can't fold. If we raise to 100, are we effectively betting 80 into a $120 pot? If so this improves our odds a fair bit, from 1:1 to 4:3, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure i follow you. But no, if we raise, we're laying more money to pickup the pot, so if we have an underdog hand (a hand which is 1:1 to win is 50%, so any money put in at this juncture is 0EV) then we're technically making a mistake, unless that raise forces them to fold.

[josh_x]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bobbo,

Is the following concept legitimate: Say the pot is 80 and he bets 20. We have a draw that is good enough that we can't fold. If we raise to 100, are we effectively betting 80 into a $120 pot? If so this improves our odds a fair bit, from 1:1 to 4:3, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure i follow you. But no, if we raise, we're laying more money to pickup the pot, so if we have an underdog hand (a hand which is 1:1 to win is 50%, so any money put in at this juncture is 0EV) then we're technically making a mistake, unless that raise forces them to fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

my example kind of sucked, how about this:

on the river, the pot is 80 and he bets 20, your hand is weak but too good to fold. You have $100 and villain covers. If you push are you laying yourself 1:1, meaning he has to fold >50% to be +ev, or are you laying yourself 120:80 (because you have gotta at least call, so your call might as well already be in the pot), meaning he has to fold >43% of the time?

edit: also, if the 2nd case is true, and then he folds 44% of the time, is our ev slightly greater than zero, or slightly greater than the ev of a call? this is all very fuzzy in my mind..

edit2: if so, this has plenty of implications in a variety of situations, right?

[Sweir]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
*GRUNCH*

1: We probably have 9 outs, maybe less if he has a set which is possible considering he c/r the flop which isn't all that dry (maybe to charge draws). So there is 120 in the pot and we need to call 40 so were getting 3 : 1. We are 9/37 to make our hand or 4.1 : 1. We are calling 40 so need to win 165 on average to make it breakeven which means on the river we need to win 45. The pot will be 160 with 120 effective stacks. IMO we will be able to win more than 45 on average making it a +EV call.

2: I think villains range is pretty wide on the flop here because the board is pretty dry, he also seems like the kind of player that likes to float. I would probably c/r the turn here sometimes as I think he folds quite a lot, and c/c it sometimes too. This may be off though....

3: We have 8 outs so are 4.9 : 1 to make our hand. We have to call 44 so need to win 215 to make it +EV. There is 120 in the pot so we need to win 95 on the river. The pot will be 164 and the effective stacks 163. IMO villain isn't bluffing here very often and I don't think he has a draw either, unless he had something like KQss. So considering we need only to win just over a 1/2 psb on the river I think that given his range we should be able to do this, therefore I call.

Thoughts??

[/ QUOTE ]

Sweir, you win the prize (although there is none =) ) bc largely you intuited (is that a word?) the right answers - grats

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Nice thread btw, i'll have to read your reply over again some time to properly digest everything.

[Unknown Soldier]

[ QUOTE ]
Most nits are quite dumb, so I find that they don't have a strong hand in that spot as often as you are indicating.

[/ QUOTE ]