08-29-2001, 03:39 PM
I believe that the answers to q's 2 & 16 are closely related. Here's #16:
"16. Why is it very dangerous when your opponent pairs his doorcard on an early round?
... in my experience, players will show you a set about half the time if you play the hand all the way to the end.
But what most people don't realize is that the other half of the time that players don't make a set, they can still have a fairly good hand - such as two pair or *something like a pair and a three-flush*. Thus, if you start with a big pair, you will discover that sometimes you are a big dog (if they have a set), sometimes you are a small dog (if they have two pair), and sometimes you are only a small favorite (if they have a hand like a pair and a three-flush). *But the bottom line is that you are, on average, in big trouble, even though there is some chance that you have the best hand*." [asterisks added by me for emphasis]
Here is #2:
"2. Suppose that you start with a big pair and have one opponent who starts with a medium card up. On fourth street you catch a blank, but he catches a straight-flush card. What is your play?
Answer: Your play is to check and call even if you think that you have the best hand. There are basically two reasons for this:
(1). If you check, the money will almost always go in there anyway.
(2). By betting, the only hands your opponent will fold are hands that you would want him to play.
..For instance, if you bet, your opponent might throw away a hand like 2s2c7d8d, which he perhaps played hoping to get lucky on fourth street. By betting, he might fold, but by checking, he will be inclined to bet, representing a stronger hand than he really has, and you will theoretically make money. "
Mason IMO left out an important part on this question: Would your opponent have called a raise on 3rd w/22/7(assuming you'd raise w/K3/K)? I don't think so. I've run a bunch of probe scenarios of K3/K2r v. the likely holdings of xx/(78)s and it's not pretty. IMO you're usually a tiny fave(1.2-1 over T(T87), for example), but an add'l problem is that they're plenty of scare cards(in addition to good cards) opponent can catch on 5th.
Assuming you're playing 15-30, raised on 3rd, and the other six people folded irrelevant cards, you're getting 4.2-1 on your call on 4th as a 4-1 dog to improve, w/no guarantee opponent doesn't improve.
In the particular scenario Mason describes, I think check-fold is a viable option. A lot depends on the opponent, ante size, and dead cards, but an opponent catching a strtflsh card on 4th is almost as bad as him pairing his doorcard, IMO.
"16. Why is it very dangerous when your opponent pairs his doorcard on an early round?
... in my experience, players will show you a set about half the time if you play the hand all the way to the end.
But what most people don't realize is that the other half of the time that players don't make a set, they can still have a fairly good hand - such as two pair or *something like a pair and a three-flush*. Thus, if you start with a big pair, you will discover that sometimes you are a big dog (if they have a set), sometimes you are a small dog (if they have two pair), and sometimes you are only a small favorite (if they have a hand like a pair and a three-flush). *But the bottom line is that you are, on average, in big trouble, even though there is some chance that you have the best hand*." [asterisks added by me for emphasis]
Here is #2:
"2. Suppose that you start with a big pair and have one opponent who starts with a medium card up. On fourth street you catch a blank, but he catches a straight-flush card. What is your play?
Answer: Your play is to check and call even if you think that you have the best hand. There are basically two reasons for this:
(1). If you check, the money will almost always go in there anyway.
(2). By betting, the only hands your opponent will fold are hands that you would want him to play.
..For instance, if you bet, your opponent might throw away a hand like 2s2c7d8d, which he perhaps played hoping to get lucky on fourth street. By betting, he might fold, but by checking, he will be inclined to bet, representing a stronger hand than he really has, and you will theoretically make money. "
Mason IMO left out an important part on this question: Would your opponent have called a raise on 3rd w/22/7(assuming you'd raise w/K3/K)? I don't think so. I've run a bunch of probe scenarios of K3/K2r v. the likely holdings of xx/(78)s and it's not pretty. IMO you're usually a tiny fave(1.2-1 over T(T87), for example), but an add'l problem is that they're plenty of scare cards(in addition to good cards) opponent can catch on 5th.
Assuming you're playing 15-30, raised on 3rd, and the other six people folded irrelevant cards, you're getting 4.2-1 on your call on 4th as a 4-1 dog to improve, w/no guarantee opponent doesn't improve.
In the particular scenario Mason describes, I think check-fold is a viable option. A lot depends on the opponent, ante size, and dead cards, but an opponent catching a strtflsh card on 4th is almost as bad as him pairing his doorcard, IMO.