f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 1 just out of curiosity, did this comparion with 3, 4, 5 "loose" or "weak
tight" hands that could call $10, and possibly $10 and then $20 with odds. | W********m
发帖数: 7793 | 2 54.31%*90=48.87
43.51%*120=52.21
37.23%*150=55.84
They have odds to call does not mean when they call it reduce your ev. On the contrary it increase your ev.
Why is this so hard to see? because we normally only see that we win the pot less, but we didn't see that we actually win more money over long term. | f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 3 no, your EV calc is flawed because you over simply the situations and don't
take implied odds into account at all.
your model is based on all bettings are done preflop, then KK win xx.xx% in
situation A, and yy.yy% in B, ... etc.
remember long time ago i asked a question from alan's book (poker winners
are different), if you got AA and go all-in pre-flop, how many callers do
you want? the rationally correct answer, 9 or all of them. your EV calc is
exactly based on the same theory.
but implied odds are the real reason we play hands like small PPs or SCs,
even when we're slightly under odds. in the one, we're over, so even better.
with only $100 behind, KK is doomed on a 5-way flop, $150 pot, and out of
position. he's committed like a sitting duck, while others have all kinds
of options behind him. when they miss, KK wins nothing more or little, when
they hit, KK can't lay down and lose $100 (this changes the whole profit
picture a lot).
he's lucky he hits a nut flush draw here.
the contrary it increase your ev.
pot less, but we didn't see that we actually win more money over long term.
【在 W********m 的大作中提到】
: 54.31%*90=48.87
: 43.51%*120=52.21
: 37.23%*150=55.84
: They have odds to call does not mean when they call it reduce your ev. On the contrary it increase your ev.
: Why is this so hard to see? because we normally only see that we win the pot less, but we didn't see that we actually win more money over long term.
| W********m
发帖数: 7793 | 4 now you want to pull in the magic implied odds.. hehe..
first of all, the stack size which I emphasized again and again is shallow. the implied odds is not as significant. Second of all, your opponents does not know you have KK. they can't possibly play perfect against you. What if A10 hit 10 on the flop? can't they fold there? with a 100$ pot with a 100$ bet? so sometimes, they hit trash two pair and suck out, but "more often" they end up with 7 or less odds get all in on the flop. Why "more often" is important? Because "more often" is where you can make money off long run but hard to see with mortal eyes. | f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 5 if the betting is not done preflop, of course implied odds is the key here (
or in poker) and why i said in the beginning his $30 limp raise is very
fishy, you never invite 4 guys behind you with KK here with great odds, and
the winning % pics i posted exactly explained why.
30$ and $100 behind, he causes troubles to himself with bad sizing.
.
if
is
you
【在 W********m 的大作中提到】
: now you want to pull in the magic implied odds.. hehe..
: first of all, the stack size which I emphasized again and again is shallow. the implied odds is not as significant. Second of all, your opponents does not know you have KK. they can't possibly play perfect against you. What if A10 hit 10 on the flop? can't they fold there? with a 100$ pot with a 100$ bet? so sometimes, they hit trash two pair and suck out, but "more often" they end up with 7 or less odds get all in on the flop. Why "more often" is important? Because "more often" is where you can make money off long run but hard to see with mortal eyes.
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 6 again, you're now against 4 other hands (not HU), AT is the last thing you
need to worry about on a Txx flop, to be honest.
. the implied odds is not as significant. Second of all, your opponents does
not know you have KK. they can't possibly play perfect against you. What if
A10 hit 10 on the flop? can't they fold there? with a 100$ pot with a 100$
bet? so sometimes, they hit trash two pair and suck out, but "more often"
they end up with 7 or less odds get all in on the flop. Why "more often" is
important? Because "more often" is where you c: an make money off long run
but hard to see with mortal eyes.
【在 W********m 的大作中提到】
: now you want to pull in the magic implied odds.. hehe..
: first of all, the stack size which I emphasized again and again is shallow. the implied odds is not as significant. Second of all, your opponents does not know you have KK. they can't possibly play perfect against you. What if A10 hit 10 on the flop? can't they fold there? with a 100$ pot with a 100$ bet? so sometimes, they hit trash two pair and suck out, but "more often" they end up with 7 or less odds get all in on the flop. Why "more often" is important? Because "more often" is where you can make money off long run but hard to see with mortal eyes.
| W********m
发帖数: 7793 | 7 I don't know what I can do here to make it more clear. Do you really understand what this % mean in the graph you posted?
does
if
$
is
run
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: again, you're now against 4 other hands (not HU), AT is the last thing you
: need to worry about on a Txx flop, to be honest.
:
: . the implied odds is not as significant. Second of all, your opponents does
: not know you have KK. they can't possibly play perfect against you. What if
: A10 hit 10 on the flop? can't they fold there? with a 100$ pot with a 100$
: bet? so sometimes, they hit trash two pair and suck out, but "more often"
: they end up with 7 or less odds get all in on the flop. Why "more often" is
: important? Because "more often" is where you c: an make money off long run
: but hard to see with mortal eyes.
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 8 hehe, of course, in case 1, 5 handed, KK wins 37.23% times, right?
you're assuming NO more betting post flop, just like alan's example, AA vs.
9 all-in hands preflop is the optimal case in the long term.
but here, KK is doomed to lose ANOTHER $100 post flop in 5-way most of time
(if not more), this changes the whole thing.
compared with $30 preflop, $100 is not small money at all that can be
ignored.
understand what this % mean in the graph you posted?
【在 W********m 的大作中提到】
: I don't know what I can do here to make it more clear. Do you really understand what this % mean in the graph you posted?
:
: does
: if
: $
: is
: run
| s*********k
发帖数: 1989 | 9 at one Poker After Dark, three handed, two limpin and Chen at BB raise ~3BB.
Flop 6JJ. All check on flop, and turn (blank). River is blank also. SB bet
1/2- pot. Chen fold and btn fold. SB has 66.
It is hard to say where the implied odd stands. Chen even did not CBet there
. And fold on river without any hesitation. | f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 10 i remember that hand right, chen folded AA and he's not short stack. they're
all very deep.
video can be found on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnexYvPtYew
3BB.
bet
there
【在 s*********k 的大作中提到】
: at one Poker After Dark, three handed, two limpin and Chen at BB raise ~3BB.
: Flop 6JJ. All check on flop, and turn (blank). River is blank also. SB bet
: 1/2- pot. Chen fold and btn fold. SB has 66.
: It is hard to say where the implied odd stands. Chen even did not CBet there
: . And fold on river without any hesitation.
| | | s*********k
发帖数: 1989 | 11 ye, that is the hand/video. My memory is alittle off on position.
re
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: i remember that hand right, chen folded AA and he's not short stack. they're
: all very deep.
: video can be found on youtube.
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnexYvPtYew
:
: 3BB.
: bet
: there
| s*******o
发帖数: 4896 | 12 这手感觉seed有live leak吧
re
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: i remember that hand right, chen folded AA and he's not short stack. they're
: all very deep.
: video can be found on youtube.
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnexYvPtYew
:
: 3BB.
: bet
: there
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 13 they're levels above ours, hehe.
but frankly, AA on that board, not really much value on river and if seed
has a hand, he has a hand.
【在 s*******o 的大作中提到】
: 这手感觉seed有live leak吧
:
: re
| p**********1
发帖数: 1458 | 14 first I don't know about the commitment threshold here, my guess is
that we are not committed yet. if that is the case, then we can play
it in a simple way and still win some money.
consider the ATdd KK 99 77 case, if KK fold on Axx flop and get it in
on any other flops, ATdd get it in on Axx flop and fold otherwise,
99/77 only get it in if flop a set; then KK show a decent profit,
assuming every1 has $100 left, the pot is $120 preflop. I am not sure
my number is right, anyway here it goes:
Axx ～19%, we lose $30
7xx ～13%, we lose $130
9xx ～13%, we lose $130
others 55%, we win $90
overall, we win $10 (set over set, AKx cases are not included) | s*********k
发帖数: 1989 | 15 calc. is right. That is not valid with implied odds.
You never know what the implied odds is. says, you win 40$ there, but
if you have $100 left, you are to loose that $100 if you lead out and
get called. If you check and all other check, then you need # on
turn/river.
【在 p**********1 的大作中提到】
: first I don't know about the commitment threshold here, my guess is
: that we are not committed yet. if that is the case, then we can play
: it in a simple way and still win some money.
: consider the ATdd KK 99 77 case, if KK fold on Axx flop and get it in
: on any other flops, ATdd get it in on Axx flop and fold otherwise,
: 99/77 only get it in if flop a set; then KK show a decent profit,
: assuming every1 has $100 left, the pot is $120 preflop. I am not sure
: my number is right, anyway here it goes:
: Axx ～19%, we lose $30
: 7xx ～13%, we lose $130
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 16 small correction, 77/99 could get in on 456 or 678 flops too, with a pair+OE
, they got enough odds.
the core problem here is KK's awkward commitment, like you said, we're
actually committed on almost any non Axx flops and we only got $100 left for
a $150 pot.
out of position, what should we do then? we expose ourselves to all 4
opponents by acting first:
1) we check, they all check, free cards. on the turn, same awkward situation;
2) we check, they bet. like it or not, we're in and then pray;
3) we bet, we don't have good betting size at all. they have all options
open to call it or not. if they don't, we win nothing more, if they do,
pretty sure we're in bad shape.
【在 p**********1 的大作中提到】
: first I don't know about the commitment threshold here, my guess is
: that we are not committed yet. if that is the case, then we can play
: it in a simple way and still win some money.
: consider the ATdd KK 99 77 case, if KK fold on Axx flop and get it in
: on any other flops, ATdd get it in on Axx flop and fold otherwise,
: 99/77 only get it in if flop a set; then KK show a decent profit,
: assuming every1 has $100 left, the pot is $120 preflop. I am not sure
: my number is right, anyway here it goes:
: Axx ～19%, we lose $30
: 7xx ～13%, we lose $130
| W********m
发帖数: 7793 | 17 why are we assuming that people are playing perfect against us? they never
get it in behind after flop? really? 99 folds to a bet post flop on a 10 2
3 board with pot is 120$? This calculations is way off because you never
considered that we get it all in after flop ahead. Even under this condition where people play perfect against us, we STILL make 10$ over long run. The real ev
vs 3 or 4 fish in the pot are much higher.
You might think you understand what 37% means, but I don't think you do.
This 37% is UNCONDITIONAL odds that you win in the end facing random 5 cards
. You are right, once the flop was dealt this number is no use. But
probability works in a mysterious way. You put a lot of money in preflop
with a better odds, as long as they don't have significant edge (play
perfectly) against you post flop, you are bound to make money. You can't use
special case (people flopping set and two pair ) to discount these 37%
unconditional odds. How do I not let them play perfect against you post
flop? Keep their whole range in post flop. Fryking, do you remember the
hand where your KK facing a JJ9 board post flop? You lead push all in on
the flop and called by a J. If you push there 130$, now your preflop odds
are severely impaired because you leave only the hands that beats you
continue post flop. Now you are in shit, because ou let them play perfect against you. If you bet gradually, keep all his range in including paired hand or evenpossibly A high. Now your actual ev will be as close as what can give you with that unconditional ev preflop. This is just
one way to look at it.
I am not saying that raising to 40$ is wrong. If you raise to 40$ and gets
two caller, your gain in ev is higher than raise to 30$ with 3 caller,
because you have the same size pot and your odds is higher. In fact, the
most ev you can gain is push all in and gets everyone to call. But we have
no way to know what is the threshold that we will get them to call. All I am
saying is that you can easily stack an one pair hand post flop already
given the stack size with this 30$ raise. So the sizing is really not that
big of an issue.. the bottom line is that we raise to get callers not folders.
Something else to think about, when people are limping trash in live game,
should we raise with AJo? A lot of fish would say, "no, since I never hit a
pair post flop" I should not have put more money in before flop. Well this
is pretty much the same concept here. AJ is ahead of most of their limp
range. But even with the slightest edge like 60% vs 40% unconditional odds,
we should raise despite of the fact that once the card dealt and if you don'
t hit a pair, you suddenly become a non-favorable to win the hand. Maybe
thinking through why we should raise with AJo here can help you understand
more why we raise KK and we want more people to call instead of fold preflop. | f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 18 no, the biggest problem with your "unconditional" calc is you're trying to
see your EV PREFLOP and BEFORE the hand is over. you're using a static model
with no more bettings. however, your remaining $100 and 4 callers are the
"conditions" in your "unconditional" calc.
i highly suggest you read alan's question and you'll see. a lot of
discussions on 2+2 too, actually the optimal number of callers is 8, not 9,
some math guy proved, but it's trival.
yes, if we got all-in preflop with KK, we want everyone to call (if they
will and don't hold AA). we may lose quite some but if we repeat 100, 1000,
10000 times, we'll win a ton in the end.
but here, the hand is NOT over yet and you still have $100 for an awkward
pot of $150 created by you in 5-way. you have high chance to lose this $100,
which can't compensate in the long term.
how could you "solve" a 2-step decision issue with 1-step "ideal" calc at
all?
2
where
ev
cards
【在 W********m 的大作中提到】
: why are we assuming that people are playing perfect against us? they never
: get it in behind after flop? really? 99 folds to a bet post flop on a 10 2
: 3 board with pot is 120$? This calculations is way off because you never
: considered that we get it all in after flop ahead. Even under this condition where people play perfect against us, we STILL make 10$ over long run. The real ev
: vs 3 or 4 fish in the pot are much higher.
: You might think you understand what 37% means, but I don't think you do.
: This 37% is UNCONDITIONAL odds that you win in the end facing random 5 cards
: . You are right, once the flop was dealt this number is no use. But
: probability works in a mysterious way. You put a lot of money in preflop
: with a better odds, as long as they don't have significant edge (play
| W********m
发帖数: 7793 | 19 when you calculate your ev preflop, you should not consider special cases of
which cards will be dealt. The unconditional odds is useful there because
there is no condition exit yet (the cards has not been dealt yet). You
should have a plan post flop for different board texture and action, but
that should not impact your way of thinking preflop. When you change your
play because you are worried about certain board texture, you are doing it
wrong. Because the unconditional odds already covered all possible outcomes. If it tell you that it is more ev to make certain plays, it is more ev regardless what will be dealt on the board.
As for how to play on the flop, that is an entirely different story. But
like I said, this is close to the perfect situation you can have when you
are holding KK with 100$ left facing a 120$ pot with 3 fish before the card
is dealt. The stack size is not awkward at all. if you don't think this a
good situation, I don't know what else is. 4 way all in preflop while you
holding KK does not come often. Everytime you try to make that happen, you
lose out all the other times where you could have made more with your KK.
Anyway i am done arguing this basic stuff. Like I said, I am not against raising more. Actually i am all for it if you can get them to call, because it is more +ev to raise more preflop. The real question is whether you are thinking of this problem in the correct way. if anyone think what I try to say in this thread is helpful to you, take what you can. If you don't think it is helpful, ignore it~~~~ | M********g
发帖数: 717 | 20 I think I learned so much just by reading these two kk threads.
At first i totally agreed with you. I thought windstorm was totally off in
this spot. Just as you said, he created a so hard situation for himself by
raising so little. After reading all these posts, i started to realize what
he meant, though I am still not sure if his theory matches everyone's style
here. I would say he tangos with a little very thin ev here. I think both
strategies have merits, as far as they suit your style.
A think windstom understands your 2 step decision theory here. He is just so
confident with his postflop play. I would say his +ev would be mainly from
his skill vs villain's possible faults postflop.
One thing I wanna add: we still over simplify the situation here. We are
discussing KK strategy vs 4 villains here. So this A10, 99, 77 situation is
just one scenario. We need add more villain's ranges to optimize the
discussion.
model
,
,
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: no, the biggest problem with your "unconditional" calc is you're trying to
: see your EV PREFLOP and BEFORE the hand is over. you're using a static model
: with no more bettings. however, your remaining $100 and 4 callers are the
: "conditions" in your "unconditional" calc.
: i highly suggest you read alan's question and you'll see. a lot of
: discussions on 2+2 too, actually the optimal number of callers is 8, not 9,
: some math guy proved, but it's trival.
: yes, if we got all-in preflop with KK, we want everyone to call (if they
: will and don't hold AA). we may lose quite some but if we repeat 100, 1000,
: 10000 times, we'll win a ton in the end.
| | | M********g
发帖数: 717 | 21 from "shihouzhugeliang", Huck stared at Chan after check in flop, that could
be the tell.
re
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: i remember that hand right, chen folded AA and he's not short stack. they're
: all very deep.
: video can be found on youtube.
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnexYvPtYew
:
: 3BB.
: bet
: there
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 22 no, you are telling whether it's a good play only by the preflop winning %
and EV.
the logic is flawed because it's like you want to pick up (as many as
possible) apples pre flop, but totally run yourself into the risk of losing
a watermelon post flop.
also, you forgot you're the first one to act post flop! $100 into $150, pls
tell us what you would do with 4 guys behind you? check or bet?
and guess what? it's not others "suddenly" play perfect against you, you let
them do so in the first place. they have EVERY weapon in poker to play
perfect: odds, position, information (your pre and post flop action).
you make yourself a sitting duck on the flop against them.
of
outcomes. If it tell you that it is more ev to make certain plays, it is
more ev regardless what will be dealt on the board.
card
【在 W********m 的大作中提到】
: when you calculate your ev preflop, you should not consider special cases of
: which cards will be dealt. The unconditional odds is useful there because
: there is no condition exit yet (the cards has not been dealt yet). You
: should have a plan post flop for different board texture and action, but
: that should not impact your way of thinking preflop. When you change your
: play because you are worried about certain board texture, you are doing it
: wrong. Because the unconditional odds already covered all possible outcomes. If it tell you that it is more ev to make certain plays, it is more ev regardless what will be dealt on the board.
: As for how to play on the flop, that is an entirely different story. But
: like I said, this is close to the perfect situation you can have when you
: are holding KK with 100$ left facing a 120$ pot with 3 fish before the card
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 23 yes, i agree, there're more situations to cover, here is just for discussion
purpose.
why odds and position are so important in poker? because in the long term,
all your winnings come from them. even ivey admits, if he had to play with
his grandma out of position in each hand, he'll lose for sure.
the worst thing we could do is to let our opponents have BOTH on us. they
have all options/time to make a better decision, and we "have to" make a lot
of crying hero calls.
what
style
so
from
【在 M********g 的大作中提到】
: I think I learned so much just by reading these two kk threads.
: At first i totally agreed with you. I thought windstorm was totally off in
: this spot. Just as you said, he created a so hard situation for himself by
: raising so little. After reading all these posts, i started to realize what
: he meant, though I am still not sure if his theory matches everyone's style
: here. I would say he tangos with a little very thin ev here. I think both
: strategies have merits, as far as they suit your style.
: A think windstom understands your 2 step decision theory here. He is just so
: confident with his postflop play. I would say his +ev would be mainly from
: his skill vs villain's possible faults postflop.
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 24 very dry or polarized flop actually, JJ6.
i guess this hand is kind of exaggerated to the general poker-fan-like
audience, "wow, how could you lay down AA?"
but if we rewind and review flop, turn and river, all very dry. chan would
be more like a 1/2NL player if he checked down and suddenly acted on river.
could
【在 M********g 的大作中提到】
: from "shihouzhugeliang", Huck stared at Chan after check in flop, that could
: be the tell.
:
: re
| p**********1
发帖数: 1458 | 25 very good point about keeping villain's whole range when we are ahead. I
oversimplified the betting rounds to make the calc easier. so, by betting
gradually on non-ace flops, we could possibly get 99/77 to stack off.
therefore, we got much more than $90 in the "others 55%" case. villains will
not hit a set ott/otr often enough to offset it.
In other words, this is practically KK/99/77 go all in on non-ace flops, so
our payoff is:
Axx ～19%, we lose $30
～53.5%, we win $290, /when KK hold up on non-ace flop till showdown
～27.5%, we lose $130, /when KK lose to a set of 999/777 by the river
overall, we win $113.7, assuming we fold on Axx flop, AT fold to a bet otf
(if AT come along we can expect to win a little more), and 99/77 call all
bets on non-ace flop till all in by the river.
2
condition where people play perfect against us, we STILL make 10$ over long
run. The real ev
cards
【在 W********m 的大作中提到】
: why are we assuming that people are playing perfect against us? they never
: get it in behind after flop? really? 99 folds to a bet post flop on a 10 2
: 3 board with pot is 120$? This calculations is way off because you never
: considered that we get it all in after flop ahead. Even under this condition where people play perfect against us, we STILL make 10$ over long run. The real ev
: vs 3 or 4 fish in the pot are much higher.
: You might think you understand what 37% means, but I don't think you do.
: This 37% is UNCONDITIONAL odds that you win in the end facing random 5 cards
: . You are right, once the flop was dealt this number is no use. But
: probability works in a mysterious way. You put a lot of money in preflop
: with a better odds, as long as they don't have significant edge (play
| p****r
发帖数: 9164 | 26 yeah. I disussed that hand with my live poker friends a few times. I do
not mind checking flop, turn, the amazing thing is that Chan fold AA quickly
on river. that is mainly based on tells. There was interview with Chan
about that hand, Chan said" with the way he was checking , I do not want to
waste my money. "
Another amazing hand is this one played by two poker masters.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fasssBgF0kw
Interesting thing is Andy Bloch 's comment. "It must be AQ.". You know
nothing, dude, compared with these two masters. lol.
yeah, these old school players are far behind in certain areas compared
with guys like durrr and Phil Golfond, but none of them can get decent edge over
Chan and Dolye in live poker.
【在 s*******o 的大作中提到】
: 这手感觉seed有live leak吧
:
: re
| p**********1
发帖数: 1458 | 27 windstormm, what do you think about against one aggro villain with KK on Axx
flop when SPR so low? suppose it is full ring, heads up against an aggro.
villain is 28/20 and 3bet 10%, pot is $60, effective stack is $100, you are
OOP and flop comes AT7r, check/call??
2
condition where people play perfect against us, we STILL make 10$ over long
run. The real ev
cards
【在 W********m 的大作中提到】
: why are we assuming that people are playing perfect against us? they never
: get it in behind after flop? really? 99 folds to a bet post flop on a 10 2
: 3 board with pot is 120$? This calculations is way off because you never
: considered that we get it all in after flop ahead. Even under this condition where people play perfect against us, we STILL make 10$ over long run. The real ev
: vs 3 or 4 fish in the pot are much higher.
: You might think you understand what 37% means, but I don't think you do.
: This 37% is UNCONDITIONAL odds that you win in the end facing random 5 cards
: . You are right, once the flop was dealt this number is no use. But
: probability works in a mysterious way. You put a lot of money in preflop
: with a better odds, as long as they don't have significant edge (play
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 28 this is only the ideal calc.
(only called pre) 99/77 would hardly pay KK off without some good draws to
go together with their pair.
even you bet gradually, say $50, everyone gets 1:4, 1:5, 1:6, 1:7, they're
mathmatically correct to call with open ended, flush draw, pair+gutshot, etc
., let alone made hands.
a thin lioness can't beat 4 wolves most of time, hehe.
will
so
【在 p**********1 的大作中提到】
: very good point about keeping villain's whole range when we are ahead. I
: oversimplified the betting rounds to make the calc easier. so, by betting
: gradually on non-ace flops, we could possibly get 99/77 to stack off.
: therefore, we got much more than $90 in the "others 55%" case. villains will
: not hit a set ott/otr often enough to offset it.
: In other words, this is practically KK/99/77 go all in on non-ace flops, so
: our payoff is:
: Axx ～19%, we lose $30
: ～53.5%, we win $290, /when KK hold up on non-ace flop till showdown
: ～27.5%, we lose $130, /when KK lose to a set of 999/777 by the river
| p**********1
发帖数: 1458 | 29 I think the SPR is very good for our KK in this hand. If we are a lot deeper
stack, then implied odds make our life harder.
windstormm's approach of gradually building the pot to keep villain's whole
range makes it pretty much a preflop all-in situation, which is very +EV. I
think this is why he keeps saying it is like unconditional probability. the
pot is so big, it is hard for villains to fold to your $30ish small bet otf,
especially if their 99/77 is second pair or something otf.
losing
pls
let
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: no, you are telling whether it's a good play only by the preflop winning %
: and EV.
: the logic is flawed because it's like you want to pick up (as many as
: possible) apples pre flop, but totally run yourself into the risk of losing
: a watermelon post flop.
: also, you forgot you're the first one to act post flop! $100 into $150, pls
: tell us what you would do with 4 guys behind you? check or bet?
: and guess what? it's not others "suddenly" play perfect against you, you let
: them do so in the first place. they have EVERY weapon in poker to play
: perfect: odds, position, information (your pre and post flop action).
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 30 but with $100 remaining and out of position, it's not unconditional...
yes, it's hard for them to fold "only" another $20 here, so as happened,
they all come on board behind us. not only them (or so-called fish), anyone
who knows odds should know 1:4, 1:5, 1:6, 1:7 are like gold, even any 2, let
alone their selected ranges (called a $10 already).
but what do we do now on the flop with $100, act first? how often do 77/99
hero call behind you with only a lonely pair? in our calc, we need them to
call 100% no matter what to compensate us, which is not the reality.
deeper
whole
I
the
otf,
【在 p**********1 的大作中提到】
: I think the SPR is very good for our KK in this hand. If we are a lot deeper
: stack, then implied odds make our life harder.
: windstormm's approach of gradually building the pot to keep villain's whole
: range makes it pretty much a preflop all-in situation, which is very +EV. I
: think this is why he keeps saying it is like unconditional probability. the
: pot is so big, it is hard for villains to fold to your $30ish small bet otf,
: especially if their 99/77 is second pair or something otf.
:
: losing
: pls
| | | W********m
发帖数: 7793 | 31 This is a tough situation for anyone. rule of thumb, if you are never
folding, you need to keep as many hands that you beat as possible in the
play. check/call is fine. small bet/call is fine too. try your best to put
all the money in the pot by river without fold out any weaker hands. Not
easy by any means with second pair.
Normally I don't think we can fold here heads up vs an aggressive fish/donk.
On the other hand, if it is multiway pot with bunch of weak tight players,
I think check fold is not that bad. you can also bet 10$-15$ and see what
they do to protect your hand just in case that they didn't have an A. You
can safely shut down as soon as a weak tight guy call or raise you. These
weak tight guy rarely make a move on you without having A at this spot even
if you show weakness.
Axx
are
long
【在 p**********1 的大作中提到】
: windstormm, what do you think about against one aggro villain with KK on Axx
: flop when SPR so low? suppose it is full ring, heads up against an aggro.
: villain is 28/20 and 3bet 10%, pot is $60, effective stack is $100, you are
: OOP and flop comes AT7r, check/call??
:
: 2
: condition where people play perfect against us, we STILL make 10$ over long
: run. The real ev
: cards
| W********m
发帖数: 7793 | 32 fryking i don't think you take much what I said in this post. But I will
give you a live example I played to answer this question.
I was holding 120$ on 1$/2$ table. (don't ask me why I am short stack.
Everyone run bad once a while. lol.. luckily, I am no fish playing short
stack either)
Right before i was heading home. I caught KK on bb. 1 limper ep one guy
button raise 7$. I reraise to 21$. both of them called. out of position. 63$
pot with 100$ left.. OMG sitting duck? yeah both of them were sitting
ducks.
flop is 556r. how do I play?
I bet 35$, ep fold, button tank. He studied me for a while when I was
watching espn indifferently. He shoved. I instantly called.
Turn 7, river 8. He took the pot with pocket 4s while mumbling "i put you on AK"
that is how it is done baby. lol..
but what do we do now on the flop with $100, act first? how often do 77/99
hero call behind you with only a lonely pair?
【在 f*****g 的大作中提到】
: but with $100 remaining and out of position, it's not unconditional...
: yes, it's hard for them to fold "only" another $20 here, so as happened,
: they all come on board behind us. not only them (or so-called fish), anyone
: who knows odds should know 1:4, 1:5, 1:6, 1:7 are like gold, even any 2, let
: alone their selected ranges (called a $10 already).
: but what do we do now on the flop with $100, act first? how often do 77/99
: hero call behind you with only a lonely pair? in our calc, we need them to
: call 100% no matter what to compensate us, which is not the reality.
:
: deeper
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 33 by pure "ages" in poker, actually i think old guns and new internet kids are
about the same.
old schools play 20 years in live and little online. internet kids play X
tables everyday in last 5 years.
david oppenheim is a good example, he's a long time live big pro who only
started to play a little online 7-mix games. he has beaten live high stake 1
/2K games a lot. he adjusted a little online and now i'd say he's more than
competent with all those kids.
without online, hard to believe any small-roll kids could have a good chance
to learn those non-popular games at all.
quickly
to
【在 p****r 的大作中提到】
: yeah. I disussed that hand with my live poker friends a few times. I do
: not mind checking flop, turn, the amazing thing is that Chan fold AA quickly
: on river. that is mainly based on tells. There was interview with Chan
: about that hand, Chan said" with the way he was checking , I do not want to
: waste my money. "
:
: Another amazing hand is this one played by two poker masters.
:
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fasssBgF0kw
: Interesting thing is Andy Bloch 's comment. "It must be AQ.". You know
| f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 34 dude, are you really saying these 2 situations are the same???
1) KK, limp raised, vs. 4 callers, flop $100 into $150, first to act post
flop;
2) KK at BB, last one to act pre, vs. 2 callers, flop $100 into $63.
really?
or put in this simpler way:
in 1), you have double enemies (4) with only half ammo (2/3 pot).
or in 2) you have half enemies (2) with double ammo (1.6 pot).
do you know how your winning %, equity and EV drop in these?
do you have the luxury to bet (not shove) in 1?
and i don't even want to point out 556r is one of your ideal flops too in
this case.
63$
【在 W********m 的大作中提到】
: fryking i don't think you take much what I said in this post. But I will
: give you a live example I played to answer this question.
: I was holding 120$ on 1$/2$ table. (don't ask me why I am short stack.
: Everyone run bad once a while. lol.. luckily, I am no fish playing short
: stack either)
: Right before i was heading home. I caught KK on bb. 1 limper ep one guy
: button raise 7$. I reraise to 21$. both of them called. out of position. 63$
: pot with 100$ left.. OMG sitting duck? yeah both of them were sitting
: ducks.
: flop is 556r. how do I play?
| W********m
发帖数: 7793 | 35 i am just trying to answer your question :
"but what do we do now on the flop with $100, act first? how often do 77/99
hero call behind you with only a lonely pair?"
does it answer your question?
for your other questions, i already answered them in previous posts.. not going to repeat~~~~ These two hands have
very similar patterns. If you fail to see them. I can't help you~~~~ Little hint: what comes on the flop is not important for
your preflop action. But my example should tell you what you should do on a favorable board which should be most of
the time based on the magic unconditional preflop odds. (the only board you would hate is A high board. Other than
that 556, q23, 10107, do they really make a difference?) my hand also has higher spr which should cancel out a bit the
difference between a 3 way pot and a 4 way pot. | f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 36 lol, dude, i guess i couldn't be more clear about bet size, field size, odds
and position, all the basic stuff.
if you don't understand why 4 guys behind you, and you have only half ammo
would change the whole picture, i'm done with this, guess we'll never agree
with each other, hehe.
did you answer my questions at all? i asked you or any one:
1) "how often do 77/99 hero call behind you with only a lonely pair? (on
flop)"
(let's even ignore all other important factors like field/pot size etc. for
a min)
you gave me one specific exmaple 44 guy re-shoved you on 556r because he
thought you only got naked AK, does this answer "how often"? or to be honest
, how often do you do yourself or see it from others? give us a rough %, and
care to justify your EV? (you don't have to)
2) "what do you do with $100, KK, first to act, 5-way, $150 pot?"
still waiting for your answer (if i missed it, sorry)...
99
going to repeat~~~~ These two hands have
Little hint: what comes on the flop is not important for
a favorable board which should be most of
you would hate is A high board. Other than
【在 W********m 的大作中提到】
: i am just trying to answer your question :
: "but what do we do now on the flop with $100, act first? how often do 77/99
: hero call behind you with only a lonely pair?"
: does it answer your question?
: for your other questions, i already answered them in previous posts.. not going to repeat~~~~ These two hands have
: very similar patterns. If you fail to see them. I can't help you~~~~ Little hint: what comes on the flop is not important for
: your preflop action. But my example should tell you what you should do on a favorable board which should be most of
: the time based on the magic unconditional preflop odds. (the only board you would hate is A high board. Other than
: that 556, q23, 10107, do they really make a difference?) my hand also has higher spr which should cancel out a bit the
: difference between a 3 way pot and a 4 way pot.
| W********m
发帖数: 7793 | 37 I was hoping you could answer these questions yourself after I explained the
thinking process | f*****g
发帖数: 15860 | 38 yeah, this i agree, case closed, hehe.
【在 W********m 的大作中提到】
: I was hoping you could answer these questions yourself after I explained the
: thinking process
| D*A
发帖数: 1169 | 39 interesting discussion, from what i see, two ways were reprented here:
middle EV with small swing, require less desicion and judge.
max EV with big swing, require more skills and thinking.
what
style
so
from
【在 M********g 的大作中提到】
: I think I learned so much just by reading these two kk threads.
: At first i totally agreed with you. I thought windstorm was totally off in
: this spot. Just as you said, he created a so hard situation for himself by
: raising so little. After reading all these posts, i started to realize what
: he meant, though I am still not sure if his theory matches everyone's style
: here. I would say he tangos with a little very thin ev here. I think both
: strategies have merits, as far as they suit your style.
: A think windstom understands your 2 step decision theory here. He is just so
: confident with his postflop play. I would say his +ev would be mainly from
: his skill vs villain's possible faults postflop.
|
|
