5CD: what would happen if i only ever drew one?

Big Limpin · #1 01-22-2007, 04:42 PM

Pro: Nobody has a clue how strong i am.
Con: Lessened chance of improvement.

Could i earn extra bets by being unreadable, enough to cover not improving very often?

Even drawing 3 to a AA, i've still got one pair 7 times out of 10. Even worse odds with trips and 2pairs. I'm not sure its too much to give up. Alot of the times you improve it doenst matter anyways (unimproved was good), or you improve and its still no good. Plus drawing one, you'll still hit once in a while.

Could drawing one to ALL your hands work?

*and could this be part of an overall winning strategy that includes raising draws? i'm thinking in therms of limit draw, including semi-bluffs, showing down the odd busted draw, but getting alot more calls on my monsters.

kurto · #2 01-22-2007, 07:00 PM

Its an interesting question.

If I have notes that someone opens any pair, I call raises with AA. I find that if I draw 3, they almost always autobet post draw. But if I draw 1 or 2, then I seem to get checked to quite a bit more.

I'm afraid I don't have an answer except to say that I find deception MORE valuable against looser/aggressive players (I think I buy a lot of cheap showdowns) where against tighter players (and limpers) I tend to go for less deception with an increased chance of improving.

greenage · #3 01-22-2007, 08:02 PM

It would be very interesting to see how the other players react.

I dunno, seems like you would be giving up too much with your single pair hands.

Murakawa · #4 01-22-2007, 09:34 PM

i've pulled this move in late games a tourney occasionaly.

greenage · #5 01-22-2007, 09:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
i've pulled this move in late games a tourney occasionaly.

[/ QUOTE ]
Was the table short handed or full? How did the table react.

Notjitsu · #6 01-23-2007, 12:47 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Could i earn extra bets by being unreadable, enough to cover not improving very often?

[/ QUOTE ]

You aren't making yourself unreadable. The range is just wider, but the statistical likelihood of your holdings still exists and is identifiable, and people who notice what you are doing will respond accordingly. And when they do, you will be forced to make decisions with your betting that will clue them in on what you have.

Al Mirpuri · #7 01-23-2007, 11:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Could i earn extra bets by being unreadable, enough to cover not improving very often?

[/ QUOTE ]

You aren't making yourself unreadable. The range is just wider, but the statistical likelihood of your holdings still exists and is identifiable, and people who notice what you are doing will respond accordingly. And when they do, you will be forced to make decisions with your betting that will clue them in on what you have.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with Notjitsu's analysis. Though, I could not have put it so well.

Big Limpin · #8 01-23-2007, 08:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Could i earn extra bets by being unreadable, enough to cover not improving very often?

[/ QUOTE ]

You aren't making yourself unreadable. The range is just wider, but the statistical likelihood of your holdings still exists and is identifiable, and people who notice what you are doing will respond accordingly. And when they do, you will be forced to make decisions with your betting that will clue them in on what you have.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would hope that i get the image of "crazy guy raised and drew 1 again...bet he's got QQ again". i hope they would remember those times better, cause i drew "wrong".

My range doesn't include alot of one-pair hands anyways, but they don't know that. I would be betting postdraw when i had trips/2pairs, and usually checking down with KK. So they'd see more of my weak hands.

I just feel that i could really mess with fishs minds, and they'd make a ton of other mistakes trying to outhink me- the "draw 1 guy". So they call me too much, and i'm betting when i had a big hand all along.