T7o in SB, flop trips against turn 3 bet

[DeucesNeverLoses]

Thanks for all of the replies...I probably should have dumped pre. Anyways, river is a trey and I crying call his 66.

[Oink]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a sense that OP's preflop call would be -EV for him as well as for many winning players.


[/ QUOTE ]


I have a sense that senses dont matter in poker, but math do and empirical results do.

I still believe its close. For two reasons

a) You will see some really good players do it in coaching videos. Albeit in shorthanded online games not full ring live games - which prolly matters.

b) I have good results with it. Both in full ring games and shorthanded games - sample size issues. But again in online games.


Dunno how much it matters that this is live. But I am close to 100% sure that this is never an awful call online. And untill I see convincing evidence that it is an awful play I am going to trust the good players I see make the play and my own empirical reults.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have a sense that OP's preflop call would be -EV for him as well as for many winning players.


[/ QUOTE ]


I have a sense that senses dont matter in poker, but math do and empirical results do.

I still believe its close. For two reasons

a) You will see <font color="blue">some really good players</font> do it in coaching videos. Albeit in <font color="green"> shorthanded</font> online games not full ring live games - which prolly matters.

b) <font color="red"> I </font> have good results with it. Both in full ring games and shorthanded games - sample size issues. But again in online games.


Dunno how much it matters that this is live. But I am close to 100% sure that this is never an awful call online. And untill I see convincing evidence that it is an awful play I am going to trust the good players I see make the play and my own empirical reults.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do see how the key words I colorized and italicized prove that your hypothesis has very little to do with my opinion?

[HoneyBadger]

grunch, I'd fold preflop. OOP offsuit two-gapper just isn't worth it, ever. I'd 3-bet the flop, keep betting on all streets, and go into calldown mode as soon as he shows further aggression.

(I don't usually buy these hot and cold equity stoves. I'm a fan of that whole realizable equity concept, which is closely tied to implied odds and RIO. Hot and cold equity is like immediate pot odds: a good indication, but overall worthless.)

[gobbledygeek]

[Hijack]

[ QUOTE ]
immediate pot odds: a good indication, but overall worthless.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm curious, what do you mean by that?

[Ricks]

[ QUOTE ]

(I don't usually buy these hot and cold equity stoves. I'm a fan of that whole realizable equity concept, which is closely tied to implied odds and RIO. Hot and cold equity is like immediate pot odds: a good indication, but overall worthless.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. Showing that this hand has 17% equity is not meant to be justification for a call here. 17% equity for a hand that will often have to be folded on the flop, thus not being able to realize all of its equity, as well as having to play it OOP, is more of an argument for a fold.

Hot and cold equity simulations are still very useful when they are interpreted correctly, unfortunately, I am far from being able to do this any better than most.

[Scarmiglio]

[ QUOTE ]
(I don't usually buy these hot and cold equity stoves. I'm a fan of that whole realizable equity concept, which is closely tied to implied odds and RIO. Hot and cold equity is like immediate pot odds: a good indication, but overall worthless.)

[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly! What it comes down to is that if completing the bet in the sb puts you all in this is a no-brainer call. Having to actually play poker post flop with these cards is -ev.