PDA

View Full Version : fish equity vs. tight equity, a couple hands.


mike l.
12-14-2003, 07:52 PM
there were a couple hands last night that really had me thinking a certain way. mason discusses it in his recent card player article as well. the idea is that a tight image forces opponents into costly ftop errors. in mason's article he focuses on opponents making errant checks and flat-calls against tight players.

however, with both a tight image and a fish image, it can work the opposite way. one obvious instance is where semi-skilled players automatically put tight players on AK or AQ when they raise preflop and then value bet or even bluff at them with raggedy boards. weve all seen that and most of have done it, and had it done to us. now im not trying to get into a discussion of how to counter that or something, im just using it as an example.

similarly a player with a fish image can make plays every once and a while that over-represent a certain hand and force a thinking player to fold. they can do this because they generally play weak and passive and check-call when they have little or are chasing a longshot, but come to life only when they hit their hand.

so there is some real overlap in how the winning tight player can lose a bit of an edge with an ABC image and the losing fish can pick up some extra bets. last night a couple hands came up that i was involved in that seem worth discussion in this light:

hand 1: i have AhTh in the cutoff. generally fishy type limps utg, folded to me and i raise. heads up.

the flop is Td8d7d. fish peeks at his cards (he does not act) and then checks. i bet, he calls.

the turn is 3c. he bets, i raise, he 3 bets, i fold. he flashes 3d3h. he had fish equity here. he sometimes is slightly tricky which is why i raised the turn. i could see him stop and go with A9 or something on the turn. but when he 3 bets i know he is not messing around. against a different player i may be tempted to play on, but his fish equity cost him bets. but should he ever shift gears and for whatever reason 3 bet w/ less i lose the whole pot! fish equity.

hand 2: i have QQ in the cutoff. i openraise. dumb player calls from the sb and good player from the bb calls. they are good friends, not sure if that matters.

the flop is K62 rainbow. checked to me and i bet, sb checkraises, bb cold calls. i 3 bet. they both think and call.

the turn is an 8. checked to me and i bet. sb thinks and folds. bb thinks even longer and flashes a K and folds.

here i had tight equity (a rare con for mike l.). by simply ignoring the sb's checkraise and the bb's cold call (which screams sketchy K) on the draw-free flop and 3 betting anyways, i convinced both of them (im pretty sure sb had something like A6) to fold when the turn bricked. here's the conversation that ensued after the hand:

sb: you folded a K? what the hell?!

bb: what did you have that you were raising with?

sb: (silence)

bb: he knew i had a K. he had AK. what did you think he was raising the flop with?

sb: (frowning, silent)

so in that case i had tight equity. but how different was it really than the fishes equity in hand 1?

Clarkmeister
12-14-2003, 08:29 PM
I wouldn't call hand 2 tighty equity. Its "he's not a moron" equity. As in, "With that action on that board there's no way he can bet with less than AK. He's not a freaking moron, its obvious he's not scared of a measley pair of kings. Screw him, I fold."

mike l.
12-14-2003, 08:49 PM
i see exactly what youre saying and i think that's a vegas vs. so cal thing. many less players in vegas would have less than K big kicker in my seat. see what im saying? you guys play more straight forward out there. and good players respect other good players more.

andyfox
12-15-2003, 02:25 AM
Mason feels that tight is right because A) they give you credit for more than you have and may fold a hand they wouldn't have had they knew what you had (your hand 2); and B) they fear you and thus check when they shouldn't, giving you more chances than you should have to improve your hand.

Snakehead (and, if memory serves, Coilean too) disagrees. He feels that you make the money from the other players calling when they shouldn't (not folding when they shouldn't) and he wants to be called by the inferior hands (your hand 1).

On your hand 1, are you sure this guy wouldn' be tricky in his 3-bet? If yes, you'd have to put him precisely on pocket 3s with the 3 of diamonds. Since he looked back on the flop, he was looking for a diamond; I wouldn't think he was looking for a 9, players generally remember their ranks and forget their suits. Since he called, he found a diamond. Unless he'd not 3-bet pre-flop with a a big pocket pair, there's nothing else he could have that beats you, unless, I guess, it was J-9 (or 9-6) and wanted to see if one of those was a diamond.

elysium
12-15-2003, 03:23 AM
hi mike
i like how you won hand 2. i would have folded knowing that i was up against the K and wouldn't think that the opponent would lay it down.

i've never played in vegas or california before, and don't have the experience that you and many others have, but occasionally i make plays like this one, but never this same exact type play. i've never reraised knowing that i was up against K's with QQ or JJ and tried to fold the kicker. i usually play those to the opponent.