PDA

View Full Version : Clark's Theorem counter...stolen from SSHE

DcifrThs
10-31-2005, 01:46 AM
Reged: 02/24/04
Posts: 2344
Loc: San Diego!! 9/18 live hand vs Bakku
10/29/05 09:28 AM Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply



9/18 at Commerce. One horrible limper and Bakku raises in the CO, I 3 bet on the button with 9h 9c limper calls, Bakku calls.

Flop is Ad 8d 7c checked to me, I bet, limper folds, Bakku checkraises, I call.

Turn is 9d Bakku bets, I raise, Bakku 3 bets, I call.

River is 3d Bakku hesitates for like 5 seconds and then bets, I call.

-DeathDonkey

what is your preferred river action given that bakku is a good player very capable of employing clark's theorem?

dont vote if you dont know so as not to currupt the data. i.e. dont guess.

Barron
NLSoldier
10-31-2005, 01:49 AM
Why no turn 4bet?
DcifrThs
10-31-2005, 01:51 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Why no turn 4bet?

[/ QUOTE ]

dont you DARE change the subject...i took it from SSHE...i dont care about the turn. dont make me turn you pink!

Barron
imported_stealthcow
10-31-2005, 01:51 AM
wow i just saw this post in ss. you need to show the suits
sthief09
10-31-2005, 02:02 AM
he certainly could have aces up or a set and I don't think he folds a diamond to a raise (and it's unlikely he has a small diamond), so it seems like a pretty simple call
newhizzle
10-31-2005, 02:05 AM
what is exactly is clarkmeister's theorem?
DcifrThs
10-31-2005, 02:14 AM
[ QUOTE ]
what is exactly is clarkmeister's theorem?

[/ QUOTE ]

clark proved that the highest EV on average is to bet any 4 flushed board that become 4 flushed on the river when OOP no matter what your holding. ive found 1 or 2 exceptionsa nd have been working on a counter strategy. (or at least when to employ it)

anyways. thats it.

Barron
baronzeus
10-31-2005, 02:17 AM
[ QUOTE ]
ive found 1 or 2 exceptions

[/ QUOTE ]


can someone point us to the thread where clark proved this? because honestly if there are counter-examples then the proof is flawed and we need to see why.
DMBFan23
10-31-2005, 02:38 AM
it wasnt a proof so much as a concept...he's quoted in the archives somewhere as saying "you should bet the river dang near 100% of the time. this is one of those times".

Enough people used it, posted about it, and asked about it, that by the time I found it it was just called clarkmeister's theorem
Victor
10-31-2005, 02:39 AM
i see no reason to do anything other than call.

with a worse hand i suppose we can employ the rever clarky as you are clearly hinting at. but with a set we are ahead of a ton of hands that bakku has given the action. so a raise will only fold those hands. call call call call call.
sthief09
10-31-2005, 02:48 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ive found 1 or 2 exceptions

[/ QUOTE ]


can someone point us to the thread where clark proved this? because honestly if there are counter-examples then the proof is flawed and we need to see why.

[/ QUOTE ]



it's not proven. he just thinks (or thought) that it's best under any circumstance, but I have found exceptions where I'm pretty sure betting isn't best. the fact that everyone uses it blindly makes me want to put out sthief's "think for yourself" theorem
NLSoldier
10-31-2005, 03:26 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ive found 1 or 2 exceptions

[/ QUOTE ]


can someone point us to the thread where clark proved this? because honestly if there are counter-examples then the proof is flawed and we need to see why.

[/ QUOTE ]



it's not proven. he just thinks (or thought) that it's best under any circumstance, but I have found exceptions where I'm pretty sure betting isn't best. the fact that everyone uses it blindly makes me want to put out sthief's "think for yourself" theorem

[/ QUOTE ]

who is stheif?
TStoneMBD
10-31-2005, 03:27 AM
considering that hero didnt think his hand was good enough to cap the turn doing anything but calling or folding the river seems foolish since his pot equity just became worse. only exception would be if you put your opponent on JT and think he would fold it without a diamond. folding seems foolish because a good player could easily have 2 pair at this point. i really dont see the importance of this hand and i dont see why clarks theory applies to this hand from the heros persepective unless you think raising will allow villain to fold a better hand which just really isnt plausible at this point.
baronzeus
10-31-2005, 04:45 AM
[ QUOTE ]
"think for yourself"

[/ QUOTE ]


how can this be +EV when all the better players have already thought for me?
PokerBob
10-31-2005, 07:56 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Why no turn 4bet?

[/ QUOTE ]
PokerBob
10-31-2005, 08:05 AM
isn't Clark's Theorem based in part on the fact that a river bluff here almost never happens? Couldn't Baku have a hand like Ace-Td or Jd here? I kinda like a raise, but i play bad.