|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 2/4 NFD deep vs scary c/r
like i said u cant write in every possible combo since u run out of space.
make your own range instead then and post it. now i took away AAxx because we have an A and took away 66 as well, hell prob play most QQxx but just very good 66xx(like doublepairs or 3straights) so its QQ and a lot of draws, even some weaker ones. Omaha Hi Simulation 600,000 trials (Randomized) board: AdQs6s Hand Pot equity Wins Ties AsJsJc8c 46.15% 276,118 1,544 QQ**,KsJTs*,KsJT9s,KJTs8s,KJTs9s,AKsQTs,KJT* 53.85% 322,338 1,544 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 2/4 NFD deep vs scary c/r
chaning the KJTx without spades for 66xx changs things considerably though:
Omaha Hi Simulation 600,000 trials (Randomized) board: AdQs6s Hand Pot equity Wins Ties AsJsJc8c 36.15% 216,609 525 QQ**,KsJTs*,KsJT9s,KJTs8s,KJTs9s,AKsQTs,66** 63.85% 382,866 525 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 2/4 NFD deep vs scary c/r
If we all agree that a call's bad, a shove and a fold are breakeven at 41.6% equity. Considering the range with 46% equity looks more correct than the range with 36% equity and we do get a fold at least occasionally, I think a shove's the play, but it's close enough that I couldn't fault a fold too much.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 2/4 NFD deep vs scary c/r
[ QUOTE ]
If we all agree that a call's bad, a shove and a fold are breakeven at 41.6% equity. Considering the range with 46% equity looks more correct than the range with 36% equity and we do get a fold at least occasionally, I think a shove's the play, but it's close enough that I couldn't fault a fold too much. [/ QUOTE ] I like your argument, but the deciding factors for me were that (1) I thought I had close to zero fold equity and (2) I thought, due to him possibly not being a regular, that he might "overplay" his made hands ignoring the fact that I could easily have the nuts. So, I ended up folding. I still think it's very very close, and I sort of wish I had pushed so that I would have seen his hand (and hopefully suck out). |
|
|