WA/WB? All The Time!

[00Snitch]

[ QUOTE ]

Two pair is almost always WA


[/ QUOTE ]

With bottom two pair, especially as low as 72, I very much disagree.

[Xhad]

[ QUOTE ]
Part of what makes WA/WB is that the odds are roughly equal that we're either WA or WB.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know where this conception comes from but this isn't true at all. WA/WB is exploiting how villain will play the winning and losing hands in his range, it doesn't actually require that we be ahead or behind any specific amount of the time (assuming we're ahead often enough to make folding wrong).

(I don't think shillx is being serious btw)

[Shillx]

I voted 2nd so I know exactly what Zeldark has in mind. I only picked #1.

Your equity with AA is probably similar (assume you are HU) on boards reading

K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] K [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Though you are certianly aren't going to give the same amount of action to an interested party in both scenarios.* So no WA/WB doesn't require that you are ahead/behind roughly the same % of the time. It usually works that way though. If you have KK against someone playing AQ+/99+ and the flop is

A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 7 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 4 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

You have just about 50% equity and it is probably correct to go into WA/WB mode. But you might want to go into that same mode when you have A [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] against a flop caller when the board comes down

A [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 3 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [T [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]]

Even if you suspect that you have the best well over 50% since you figure to have a good amount of bluff equity by going WA/WB

* - The KK2 board plays more like a WA/WB then the K22 board eventhough you expect to be way ahead on both boards. It should be pretty easy to see why.

[marchron]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Part of what makes WA/WB is that the odds are roughly equal that we're either WA or WB.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know where this conception comes from but this isn't true at all. WA/WB is exploiting how villain will play the winning and losing hands in his range, it doesn't actually require that we be ahead or behind any specific amount of the time (assuming we're ahead often enough to make folding wrong).

[/ QUOTE ]
It has to be somewhat close, though, because otherwise WA/WB could be something like KK on a K727 board, because if we're ahead Villains have two outs at best, and if we're behind to quads we have one out. But calling that WA/WB is ridiculous, because we're way ahead a ridiculous amount of the time.

Similarly, the closest hand to WA/WB there is Hand 1, and I'm not going to shut down to WA/WB mode until I have reason to believe I am WA/WB.

[Xhad]

This is drifting somewhat into semantics, but the criteria for taking a WA/WB type line are:

-You are ahead too often to fold
-Whoever is behind has few to no outs
-Villain will tend to play perfectly or close to it if you show aggression (in other words folding worse hands but continuing with better ones).

(in your example 3 doesn't apply because there are a ton of worse hands that give substantial action; 22, 7x, K7, 72, AA, Kx, or a flush draw if there's one showing. Obviously those won't ALL be in a typical opponent's range but usually a few of them will be)

All of these things point to passively calling regardless of how often you're actually ahead. It can even apply if you have the nuts which is why I've often said the "WA/WB" line is really just a special case of slowplaying.

[00Snitch]

[ QUOTE ]

I voted 2nd so I know exactly what Zeldark has in mind. I only picked #1.


[/ QUOTE ]

oic.

I feel so leveled. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[marchron]

[ QUOTE ]
This is drifting somewhat into semantics, but the criteria for taking a WA/WB type line are:

-You are ahead too often to fold
-Whoever is behind has few to no outs
-Villain will tend to play perfectly or close to it if you show aggression (in other words folding worse hands but continuing with better ones).

(in your example 3 doesn't apply because there are a ton of worse hands that give substantial action; 22, 7x, K7, 72, AA, Kx, or a flush draw if there's one showing. Obviously those won't ALL be in a typical opponent's range but usually a few of them will be)

All of these things point to passively calling regardless of how often you're actually ahead. It can even apply if you have the nuts which is why I've often said the "WA/WB" line is really just a special case of slowplaying.

[/ QUOTE ]
Given that, I still don't think #1 applies, because hands that are behind will still pay off. KK and QQ aren't going anywhere, AK and AQ will probably peel one, and even TT-88 (or even lower) might still think they have the best hand.

[Xylocain]

Hand 1 is not a WA/WB situation but not because we are not WA/WB.

The problem is that we can't define WA/WB based on hole cards and flop, hand 1 is not WA/WB if we get raised by a LPP, and nobody is folding anytying on this flop since they put us on UI overcards.

[edit] well everybody else is editing...[/edit]

[Zeldark]

The ironic thing about making a thread that people see WA/WB in too many places is when they aren't anywhere.

Hand 1, is WA/WB. 22 is unlikely, and we have 4 outs. Jx can be held by a many people at the microstakes, and still sane to hold some jacks at higher stakes. If we meet resistance, we must at least recognize and consider that we could be behind (and way behind). How likely that is and how we'll respond will change on the situation obviously.

I define WA/WB to be a situation where they have few outs if we're ahead, we have few outs if we're behind. There can be subtle variations to it sure, but again some of the hands that have been labeled WA/WB weren't WA/WB no matter which way you cut it. A good point brought up in the debate is that just because it may be WA/WB doesn't mean you need to lock up into a calldown mode immediately. Shift the flop on hand one to J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] and now we're in much better shape.

[TarHeel100]

I only voted for hand 1