73 suited in big blind revisited

Many of you probably missed my answer to the question of whether you should call a raise in the big blind with 73s if the original raiser gets one call behind him. Most correctly answered that you should if you were somehow all in for that last bet (its not even close). However almost everyone was rather adamant that you shouldn't otherwise.

Why were you so adamant? Based on what? Did you run any numbers? Obviously not. Because if you did, you would see that the answer is close but almost definitely is right to call, even with a big stack. And skp is wrong that it necessary that you be a great player to make the call right. Now naughty children, your homework assignment is to tell me why you should call.


PS When I asked Daniel Negreneau what he would do he said "You are joking right?" He knew.

Heh. I'm remembering my computer science classes at Duke where the professor would say, "Now, there's a nice simple way to implement this algorithm. Would somebody like to stand up and tell us what it is?"


I'll take a chance and raise my hand...


73s has a tad better than 26% equity against two random hands, and almost exactly the same even if you make one of the hands AKs (as long as the suits don't match). So as others have mentioned, it's an easy call if you're all-in, getting 5:1 or 5.5:1.


The reason you can play it with a big stack is that it'll be fairly obvious how to play it after the flop - it's kind of like a baby pair. You're not likely to treat a pair of 7's or 3's as the best hand. So either flop a big hand (two pair, trips, flush draw) or you're done. And you'd probably be getting the right price to hit a gutshot if the flop comes K-4-5 or thereabouts. Maybe a pair and a three-flush. But other than that you're done.


So you won't have to make difficult (i.e. potentially expensive) decisions after the flop.


Also, your cards are probably unaligned with those held by your opponents, so your two pairs, trips and straights are almost surely good.


Bottom line: it's a piece of cake to play after the flop, and 11:2 is the right price to take a shot at that.


Regards, Lee

"Sits back down. Waits for prof to answer."

Lee,


How do you play it when the flop comes K72 or Q76 or A75?


Puggy

"How do you play it when the flop comes K72 or Q76 or A75?"


K72: outta there!


Q76 and A75: consider taking one off if you can get in for one sb, you close the action, both of the other players are still in, and there's one of your suit on the flop.


if im wrong id appreciate it if someone uses numbers to tell me so. telling me "what if he has a set and you hit your 7? then what big guy?" just wont cut it guys..

David,


You ask the questions, and give the answers, but rarely show your work. Why?


Good Luck


Mark

Bet the K72 flop, check and call (one bet only)

on the others.

No written persuasion could get me to call.

There's a story about theoretical physicist Wolfgang Pauli. In the course of giving a lecture and writing equations on the blackboard as he talked, he said, "Now, it is obvious that ... no, wait, let me see now...." After a moment's thought, he abruptly turned, left the lecture hall, and walked back to his office.


Not long after that, before the class ended, Pauli reentered and returned to the blackboard, with just a bit of swagger as he walked. "I was right," he told his students. "It *is* obvious."

David Sklansky appeals to authority(why he has chosen this path is beyond me):


PS When I asked Daniel Negreneau what he would do he said "You are joking right?" He knew.


In regards to appeals to authority, some quotes:


Good point. Under 3 players I see value in the 7-2, and over 6

players I see a great price. Anything in between is hard to overcome.

At the same don't, I don't thinks it ever horrible to complete the

other half of the bet. I usually base my decision on how my opponents

percieve me and of course how I want them too.

If I want them to think I've tightened up, I'll be very vocal about

throwing away my SB for a bet. On the other hand if I've been running

hot and am in control of the table, I'll go ahead and call.

It has nothing to do with superstition mind you, it's simply a case

of table image.


Daniel Negreanu




Specifically,


7-2, and over 6

players I see a great price.


I'll let others elaborate for themselves what implications this appeal to authority might have.


ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ


If one were to state the assumptions more clearly, I could make short work of this question, via sims. (Short because I have already have done it- blind defense has been a pet project of mine).


And I might even be pursuaded to post them if I see signs of Malmuth posting in a more civilised manner.


Regards.


(i can provide links to DN who is unequivocally a great player, the quotes on RGP if requested.)

backdoor,


I am very interested in your thinking about playing the in the blinds. If you ever have the time and inclination, I would greatly appreciate some sort of summary of your findings in either a post or an email. I only mention the email, because I realize that you may not want to get involved in long and sometimes tedious arguments. So anything that you would be willing to share I'd be eager to hear. For instance, if the button open raises and the SB folds, your fulcrum hands for playing in the BB should be..., or any other situations that you have put thought into.


Thanks,

Dan

David,


First of all let me thank you for elaborating on your previous post. I and most likely most of the other posters here really appreciate more than a one word answer to your hypothetical posted scenarios.


The reason I was so adamant about folding without being all in was that I personally do not play 7/3 suited well post flop with anything other than a monster flop to the hand. Ergo I am normally simply throwing away an extra bet if I choose to call. Therefore if then as you say "you would see that the answer is close but almost definitely is right to call, even with a big stack", why would I want to make a close but correct call then be forced with making 3 or more close but correct decisions to win with a marginal hand?


Please explain this to me with an answer other than work on my post flop play with weak holdings after calling a raise.


Thanks In Advance,


Jimbo


ps: Oft times the mathmatically correct decision is not the best decision.

Jimbo,


Where is the mathematical work? I asked David the same question, but I'm not going to pay him $300 for the answer.


Good Luck


Mark

backdoor,


It's pretty pointless reading all these posts, yet no one shows the math? I don't think I'm going to waste my time reading these posts anymore. I want to see the math to prove if it is write or wrong.


I'm just an average joe with average intelligence. If someone would show me how to do the problem I would.


Good Luck


Mark

Good point Mark, I suppose if I can make the $300 back by playing 7/3s correctly it may be worth it!! /images/smile.gif


Jimbo

Tommy,


But, what if, by some miracle, David actually showed us how to do the mathematics, so an average person like me could solve the problem to prove if its wrong or right?


Good Luck


Mark

Alan,


When these guys do the same stuff for 20 or more years that can't understand why we don't understand. I might as well try and talk to dolphins, at least they would let me know when they are hungry.


Good Luck


Mark

Mark,


After 20 years playing master-level chess, I

must admit that I'd have a hard time explaining

basic concepts to a beginner, or even in many cases, an average tournament-level player. A lot of that can be explained, I think, by the fact that after playing so long, a lot of the decision-making is done, to a certain extent, on an unconscious level. There will be moves during a game whose conscious reasoning I can't explain to

others, much less myself. Put another way, sometimes I sleep-walk through parts of a game! /images/smile.gif


perfidious

I've been mostly off-line for a while, so I missed the original thread, but I don't see why SO MANY PEOPLE would SO ADAMATELY say that you should FOLD. Am I just too loose in the BB? I admit I have NOT run any numbers, simulations, or consulted any "experts" on this matter. So perhaps my opinion is just bull-pucky. But I would look at it like this:


Your call closes the action.


you are getting about 5:1 to call


the flops that help you will usually not help the pre-flop raiser more than they will help you. i.e. you are not likely to have a catastrophic flop with this hand like you would if you had AQ and I had AK


you are SOOTED


the hand is in fact pretty weak though, and I would tend to think of this as a very marginal call. Still, the possibility of the call having a positive EV exists. Therefore you should not AUTOMATICALLY fold here.


Against two tough players in this situation, I would fold. Against a tough raiser and a very loose player, I would call. Against a loose raiser and a tight caller, I would lean towards folding. Against two loose players, I would call.


I would estimate that I would probably fold more than I would call in the long run, but after seeing this thread, and after seeing the responses, I may be forced to re-evaluate my position on the matter. I don't think you could possibly be making a CATASTROPHIC mistake by calling, if calling is wrong, it can't be wrong by very much.


Dave in Cali

Mark,


Sklansky posted:


Posted By: David Sklansky

Date: Monday, 29 April 2002, at 8:46 p.m.


In Response To: Re: Preflop Question ,Will call all In. (Jimbo)


If you are against an overpair you will win about 19%. If not, you win about 27% given you will sometimes be against duplicated cards. Your overall win rate is about 23% which is an easy all in call.


When not all in you will win at least 15% of the time. When you do, you should win about 12 small bets including the one you put out as the blind. About 55% of the time you lose your one small bet call. About 30% of the time you lose about four small bets. These assumptions are all shaded against the 73s. Thus while close, you should call here too.


Now, you are asking that he show his math.


you are against an overpair you will win about 19%. If not, you win about 27% given you will sometimes be against duplicated cards. Your overall win rate is about 23% which is an easy all in call.


When not all in you will win at least 15% of the time.


These percentages can be derived through math, but it is a tedious process. It is likely Sklansky used Poker Probe or another simulator to get hot and cold #s, although he likely used some adjustments for the 15% winning when not all in. My "full action" simulations confirm this percentage.


The other way to do it is to consult tables on how often you will flop certain hands, such as a pair, how often you will have the odds to continue, etc. A book like Mike Petriv's odds book will give you lots of percentages and how they are derived that would allow you to closely approximate these numbers. By memory, I think a hand like 73s should flop a pair or better about 33% of the time or so.


Now for the other aspects of his answer.


He estimated that one would win 12 small bets on average those 15% of the times you win. This is done by anticipating how much money will go into the pot. This isn't really a math thing (the math is grade school math). It's educated estimating. Keep in mind, you already have 5 bets in, so even if you estimate one bet per round from there on out, its at least 10 small bets.


About 55% of the time you lose your one small bet call.


This is because you will check fold on the flop about 55% of the time. Again, this is done by knowing how often you will hit a hand, a hand that has the odds to continue, etc. Again, the best way to do this is with known tables, or sims, to my knowledge.


About 30% of the time you lose about four small bets.


This represents the hands that you continue past the flop with, but don't get beat. Notice this estimate approximates one small bet on the flop and one big one on the turn (as well as the initial call).


So if you want the "math", I suspect you will have to go to a source such as Petriv's book or another math source. The math is all high school level stuff.


Give me my sims anytime.


Regards.

daniel,


With regards to that speficic question of button vs Big blind, I think Abdul's site handles that well (HPFAP is not far off this).


An update version of this is contained below. I personally think you can go a bit lower with the offsuit kings, provided you are a good HU player in relation to the raiser, and I think the TTHE might be overestimating slightly the small suited connectors. But otherwise, the EV is going to be decided on the turn and river anyway...




Re: Holdem Preflop...Abdul

Posted by: Abdul Jalib (AbdulJ@PosEV.com)

Posted on: Tuesday, 9 January 2001, at 6:24 p.m.


1. For 3-6, use the loose game advice, probably even if you think the game is "tight," because a tight 3-6 is not my idea of a tight game. Drop the plays that are made for the sake of balance/camouflage.


2. Yes, I do try to maximize expected value, but note that the best way to lower your variance is to fold preflop, especially reverse implied odds hands like JT that I advise against playing. In low stakes games, you don't want respect, because you are going to get callers, so you might as well get a lot of callers. You really want people to think you're a maniac, so that they will all call when you jam with draws. So I don't suggest being too conservative, though again, do dump those trouble hands.


3. I tried to gloss over the big blind advice for the sake of brevity, because there are a zillion different situations. I'll try to summarize here. Facing a raise in the big blind, the basic idea is that you've got big implied odds to flop something, but you don't want to flop a dominated hand and pay off all the way. Heads up against a late raiser, you can just play to flop any pair, pretty much, but add in another player and suddenly any pair (or a weak ace high) is no good. Heads up against an early raiser, flopping a low pair is usually no good, so you must play very tight. With lots of players in, you can play for straights or flushes.


More precisely... Assuming there is no rake, versus a steal raise, call with 22, any two suited, any ace, K7+, and connectors 53+, but make sure you fold hands like Q3 and J3. You can reraise with hands like 66/KJs/AJ. Versus a steal raise and a cold caller, it bumps the requirements up to maybe 22/54s/A9/T9, and you need maybe 99/KQs/AQ to consider a reraise. Versus a tight early raiser, you need a very strong hand to call, maybe 88/KQs/AQ. Versus a raise and many cold callers, play any pair and any two suited and medium to big connectors, but make sure you muck A9, K9, and their friends. Reraise here with AA, KK, and AKs for sure, but also a lot of other suited aces and medium to big suited connectors; QQ and JJ can go either way, so I suggest just calling versus a tight raiser, 3-betting versus a loose raiser. Finally, if there is a rake or a risk of an early limp-reraise, you have to play tighter, particularly versus late raises.


Now for me:


In the small blind vs a steal raise, I vote for always three betting or folding. A case can made for coldcalling with some hands, especially if the big blind is weak, but then we get into a balancing conundrum, that isn't worth the mental energy.


Against a typical button raise, three bet with A9o, any two j or up, 77 and up. You can throw in KTs.


These can be adjusted for, but I think its a good start. I have been using the above for a long while.


More of the controversial stuff comes with three or more players in. I think where the bet comes from the on the flop, how often people checkraise and such very much swing the marginal hands. Conventional wisdom has not adequately addressed this.


But that takes a lot of writing to explain.


Regards.

Calling against two loose players is IMO worse than calling a tight UTG raiser and a sane late position coldcaller. This is because loose players are harder to read postflop plus they will make you pay to chase a flush draw. The one exception is if the guys are loose enough that they will go absolutely nuts when *YOU* hit a hand i.e. they play so poorly that your are bound to get paid off huge if you hit i.e. you will make more than 12 small bets small profit which is Sklansky's estimate of how much you will approximately 15% of the time that you call here.

AS the only one who answered the first time with an "I would call with chips in front of me", my reasoning is as stated pot odds on the call almost demand a easy call here plus as the BB I have bluff options and a well hidden hand if I hit the flop. I don't know what the % of time the hand wins but its an easy call.

backdoor,


I have Petrov's book and Caro's Poker Probe. What I really want to know is how to do this procedure step-by-step for any hand with this situation. To me it seems overwelming, but with the tools I have there must be a way I can do it.


Good Luck


Mark