Common Knowledge Question: WA/WB line [Archive]

View Full Version : Common Knowledge Question: WA/WB line

USDaniels

10-12-2005, 10:21 PM

I hate asking a question this super stupid, but I couldn't find the answer with the search function.

I see WA/WB line referenced a lot but have never seen a "definition" of it. I mean, I know it stands for Way Ahead/Way Behind, but don't know the definition of the moves in the line itself.

Question 1:
So what exactly is the WA/WB line?

Question 2:
When exactly do you use it?

While searching for the answer I read that you use it when there are the same number of hands that beat you as you beat in the range of hands on which you put villian. Is that the only time, or can you use other times (such as when you think you are dominated) also?

I thank you in advance for putting up with this thread.

McGahee

10-12-2005, 10:50 PM

Search function...

Usually a HU situation where either you or your opponent has 3 or fewer outs and there's roughly an equal chance of being ahead or behind. Play is designed to lose the least when behind and win the most when ahead.

istewart

10-12-2005, 10:52 PM

I'm doing some work now but I will give you the example that has become standard here.

Shillx has a really good post in a thread from awhile back, I will try and look later but it was just recently bumped.

Anyway, here:

You open AJo UTG, MP 3-bets and it's heads-up.

Flop comes A95r. You check, he bets, you call.

Turn 7. You check, he bets, you call.

River 2. You bet.

Given the likely 3-betting hands that you are up against here (depending on opponent), this can serve to be a good line since he either has a big pair that you do not want him to fold, or he has an ace that is typically bigger than yours (and you do not want to go to war with him in this case).

VoraciousReader

10-12-2005, 10:57 PM

If you are out of position and heads up, WA/WB is:
check/call
check/call
bet

When you are WB, you lose the least. When you are WA, you win the most because you don't indicate to your opponent that you have a hand that he should fold to. It's good for hands like Ax with an ace on the board where you think you may be dominated. If you are winning, you are in great shape. If you are losing, you are likely drawing to 3 outs.

It should be used on a relatively drawless flop, because you risk giving free cards.

If you are WA of 32 hands and WB 3 or vice versa, obviously you don't want to use this.

Hope this helps. Someone else may do a better job explaining this.

USDaniels

10-12-2005, 11:17 PM

That's helpful, thanks a lot guys.

I should have probably posted that over in the "beginners" forum.

I appreciate your time.

xenthebrain

10-13-2005, 09:00 AM

This is WA/WB for example.

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (9 max, 10 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx (http://www.zerodivide.cx/converter)

Preflop: Hero is UTG+2 with A/images/graemlins/club.gif, T/images/graemlins/club.gif.
2 folds, Hero raises, 1 fold, MP2 3-bets, 5 folds, Hero calls.

Flop: (7.50 SB) 5/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, A/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 6/images/graemlins/club.gif (2 players)
Hero checks, MP2 bets, Hero calls.

Turn: (4.75 BB) 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif (2 players)
Hero checks, MP2 bets, Hero calls.

River: (6.75 BB) 4/images/graemlins/spade.gif (2 players)
Hero bets, MP2 calls.

Final Pot: 8.75 BB

Results:
Hero has Ac Tc (one pair, aces).
MP2 has Kh Ks (one pair, kings).
Outcome: Hero wins 8.75 BB.

10-13-2005, 09:43 AM

I don't understand the final river bet, though. I understand the theory behind it, it's just that the players I'm used to don't play the way the theory says they will.

If they're behind, they won't know or care, and having bet the flop and turn, they'll bet the river too if I were to check it. If I bet, they'll call, unless they have no pair and were completely bluffing or on a draw that didn't come through. Or they might raise, if the hand they're behind with seems good enough to them.

If they're ahead, they will probably raise my river bet. Or maybe they'll just call.

Since I'm gonna have to put in a bet to see the showdown one way or another, I might as well just check it, and call the bet which they are 90% likely to make after I check.

Taxmanrick

10-13-2005, 09:52 AM

On the river, are you folding to a raise?

xenthebrain

10-13-2005, 10:00 AM

[ QUOTE ]
On the river, are you folding to a raise?

[/ QUOTE ]
no, but even AK would rarely raise here.
That's why this line is so succesful.

Disconnected

10-13-2005, 02:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm doing some work now but I will give you the example that has become standard here.

Shillx has a really good post in a thread from awhile back, I will try and look later but it was just recently bumped.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is the thread: Instances of WA/WB (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2206499&page=1&view=c ollapsed&sb=5&o=14)

Aaron W.

10-13-2005, 02:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand the final river bet, though. I understand the theory behind it, it's just that the players I'm used to don't play the way the theory says they will.

If they're behind, they won't know or care, and having bet the flop and turn, they'll bet the river too if I were to check it. If I bet, they'll call, unless they have no pair and were completely bluffing or on a draw that didn't come through. Or they might raise, if the hand they're behind with seems good enough to them.

If they're ahead, they will probably raise my river bet. Or maybe they'll just call.

Since I'm gonna have to put in a bet to see the showdown one way or another, I might as well just check it, and call the bet which they are 90% likely to make after I check.

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt that your perception of these players is actually accurate. I would challenge you to go through and find a bunch of hands where some villain bets the flop and turn. Then tally up the times villain bets the river and the times villain checks the river. I suspect that you'll find the ratio to be quite far from 90-10.

Furthermore, those 10% of the times that the river gets checked through, villain is almost certainly checking behind with the worst hand, so there are missed value bets on at least 10% of those situations.

cold_cash

10-13-2005, 03:37 PM

Think about this:

Against a reasonable opponent in a heads up pot, how you would like the action to go when you're fairly certain that (based on previous action) either:

A) You have your opponent dominated

or

B) Your opponent has you dominated

(By dominated I don't mean stricly in the sense of AK vs. AQ, but rather any hand where one of you is drawing to 3 outs or fewer. AA vs. KK, for example.)

?

How would you prefer the action go?

Tell us why.

What's your best line when you have position to make that happen?

What about when you're out of position?

Shillx

10-13-2005, 03:47 PM

Wa/Wb is the best way to slowplay hands in small short handed pots. So if you have KK on an A63 board, it figures to be a good time to use a wa/wb line.

- If he has an ace you lose more by betting.
- If he has to hit runners he will fold if you bet and you hope he will take mindless stabs when you check.

There are lots of other good wa/wb times (top example can also be applied to multiway pots)

Q /images/graemlins/diamond.gif J /images/graemlins/heart.gif on a board of J /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 8 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 6 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 4 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

Q /images/graemlins/spade.gif 9 /images/graemlins/spade.gif + A /images/graemlins/heart.gif K /images/graemlins/heart.gif J /images/graemlins/heart.gif T /images/graemlins/heart.gif

10-13-2005, 05:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand the final river bet, though. I understand the theory behind it, it's just that the players I'm used to don't play the way the theory says they will.

If they're behind, they won't know or care, and having bet the flop and turn, they'll bet the river too if I were to check it. If I bet, they'll call, unless they have no pair and were completely bluffing or on a draw that didn't come through. Or they might raise, if the hand they're behind with seems good enough to them.

If they're ahead, they will probably raise my river bet. Or maybe they'll just call.

Since I'm gonna have to put in a bet to see the showdown one way or another, I might as well just check it, and call the bet which they are 90% likely to make after I check.

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt that your perception of these players is actually accurate. I would challenge you to go through and find a bunch of hands where some villain bets the flop and turn. Then tally up the times villain bets the river and the times villain checks the river. I suspect that you'll find the ratio to be quite far from 90-10.

Furthermore, those 10% of the times that the river gets checked through, villain is almost certainly checking behind with the worst hand, so there are missed value bets on at least 10% of those situations.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to try this, but there is no easy way to do this using pokertracker. I'd have to check every hand individually.

Greg J

10-13-2005, 05:19 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I think this is the thread: Instances of WA/WB (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2206499&page=1&view=c ollapsed&sb=5&o=14)

[/ QUOTE ]
There is absolute gold in that thread. Thanks for linking.

USDaniels

10-13-2005, 06:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm doing some work now but I will give you the example that has become standard here.

Shillx has a really good post in a thread from awhile back, I will try and look later but it was just recently bumped.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is the thread: Instances of WA/WB (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2206499&page=1&view=c ollapsed&sb=5&o=14)

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent thread, I don't know how I missed this in my searches (maybe I didn't go back more than a month although I thought I had).

Thanks all! Very helpful.

bozlax

10-13-2005, 07:16 PM

Linky (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2208008&page=&view=&s b=5&o=&vc=1)

That's a good "definition" post from Aaron.