Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Two Plus Two > MOD DISCUSSION

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-07-2007, 11:32 AM
BruceZ BruceZ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,078
Default drzen

Reply by drzen to pzhon, removed from Poker Theory.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Please specifiy what you mean. For example, which tournaments do you think are comparable with NL $100? (Someone actually said NL $1-$2 with a $2 big blind is comparable with $1-$2 limit with a $1 big blind. I guess they look the same if you don't think about it.)

[/ QUOTE ]
No, I think he actually said that the dollar values are the same regardless how they play, which was all that counted when you are discussing which game has the bigger *dollar swings*.


[/ QUOTE ]
Well, you'll have to be the one to tell us what he was thinking when he said, 'You are simply comparing oranges with pears, dude. 1/2 NL should be compared with 1/2 limit.' On the surface, it looks remarkably stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me take you through this step by step, because I know how you struggle with actually reading what people write.
...
Poster C sighs and points out that if you are comparing dollar values, you have to compare the same size of blinds,

[/ QUOTE ]
Did the part

[/ QUOTE ]

Fast train to yawnsville. If anyone is getting banned, it'll be you, you boring [censored]. Give yourself a week off. Come back with the idea that you're here to help, within your limitations. If you can't do that, just [censored] off.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-07-2007, 11:40 AM
BruceZ BruceZ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,078
Default Re: drzen

another one...:


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There are more ways to win than by making the best hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

correct.

Against any reasonable opponent, playing your hands purely based on pot equity and showdown value would be grossly -EV. Unless you're playing against uberdonks, you're going to have to scrape out equity from your low-medium pps and scs when you miss.

[/ QUOTE ]

Playing small pairs on the assumption that you will be able to "scrape out" equity with them is -EV for most players,

[/ QUOTE ]

lol wtf [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Sir, you are making alot of assumptions.


[/ QUOTE ]
You're giving him too much credit. You said something that disagreed with him, so of course he had to post that you were wrong. No new assumptions were necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed.

[ QUOTE ]
Here is a way to express what you said more mathematically when you have a pair.

Calling is better than folding if your expected return is greater than the size of your call. Your expected return is the sum of the expected return from two cases.

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Case 1 is that at least one card of your rank is on the flop. This is fun, although you only win about 80% of the time, given that your opponent started with an overpair.
[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Case 2 is when you miss. This is usually uncomfortable, but you might miss with a straight-flush draw and 17 outs against an overpair without a card of that suit.
[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Case 3 is that you don't get to see a flop, perhaps because there is a big reraise after you. Your return should be 0 for this case, but it can't be ignored because its probability affects the probabilities of Cases 1 and 2. This slightly decreases the return from a speculative call when you are not last to act, particularly in an aggressive game.

The expected return from Case 2 is not negative if you play properly, since you can do at least as well as folding to no bet, 0. So, if your expected return from Case 1 is greater than the amount you invest by calling, then you know that you can profitably call. Quite commonly, the expected return from Case 1 is not enough, so you either need to find enough equity in Case 2, or the hand isn't profitable.

How you go about extracting some equity is from Case 2 is complicated. Some opponents will check the flop through, giving you more chances to spike a set, pick up a big draw, or determine that your hand is good. Against some opponents, you can profitably call the continuation bet on some boards, then check it down or find a value/protection bet. Against some, you might find many profitable raises, sometimes as a semi-bluff with 6+ outs, such as 44 on a board of 763. In some circumstances, you may find profitable floats. None of these are as easy as flopping a set, but they are a normal part of playing winning poker when your opponents stop mindlessly stacking off against sets.

To answer the OP, sometimes you make a call which is profitable on average, and your opponent pays off less than average. However, if this keeps happening, you should review how much you expect to get paid off when you hit. You may be overestimating it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, yawn. But the bottom line is that if you call with small pairs trying to "scrape out" equity, you'll tend to lose money. Maths that, you [censored].
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.