Re: The Peter_rus Test (Low Content)
 

how about fold the flop since you arent closing the action and 2 of your outs are super tainted and even if you hit your hand is easily counterfeited?

Re: The Peter_rus Test (Low Content)
 

[ QUOTE ]

how about fold the flop since you arent closing the action and 2 of your outs are super tainted and even if you hit your hand is easily counterfeited?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, I never fold this. You have an oesd. It a multiway pot with loose passives. I think you are overestimating the chance that someone has a flush draw and that if we hit the 8 we still lose.

On the turn, I think bet/fold is the second worse line possible to check/fold. I think bet/raise is a better line, although it is still quite terrible (ok maybe this is hyperbole). I would check/call, and if I didnt I would bet/call. Unless someone has a flush or a straight with a higher heart, which happens very rarely, you have a ton of outs.

Maybe 10/20 has turned me too lag.

Re: The Peter_rus Test (Low Content)
 

i bet this.

Re: The Peter_rus Test (Low Content)
 

I think it would be really interesting to see what PokerStove says our equity is here. I don't think it would be very hard to give some broad hand ranges to these opponents, it would just take a while to enter in all the information in PokerStove (ie, allowing for a lot of suited cards, but only suited hearts, and stuff like that).

Does anyone have any clue what percentage our equity is even close to?

Re: The Peter_rus Test (Low Content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
id bet this. these players arent going to raise their pair hands after theyve just called the flop and if you check they will bet their pairs for you. betting allows you to protect your hand when you happen to be ahead and may clear up flush draw outs. whether i call or fold once raised depends on which player it is and my read on them if i have one, but i certainly lean towards calling if its heads up because my flush outs will be good very often along with my straight outs.

[/ QUOTE ]


this is why you play better than me [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: The Peter_rus Test (Low Content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think it would be really interesting to see what PokerStove says our equity is here. I don't think it would be very hard to give some broad hand ranges to these opponents, it would just take a while to enter in all the information in PokerStove (ie, allowing for a lot of suited cards, but only suited hearts, and stuff like that).

Does anyone have any clue what percentage our equity is even close to?

[/ QUOTE ]

This only took me 2-3 minutes to whip up, and I was generous with the holdings. Hero's equity is slightly higher than I would have guessed.

My impulse says c/c one, c/f two. However, b/f might work on this board because someone raising screams a made hand (flush) and since we're folding to any two-bet, why not take initiative?

---
Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

7,000,630 games 19.516 secs 358,712 games/sec

Board: Th 5c 7h 4h
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) / tie (%)

Hand 1: 27.0588 % [ 00.25 00.02 ] { 6h4d }
Hand 2: 24.8624 % [ 00.24 00.01 ] { AA-22, AKs-A2s, KQs-K2s, QJs-Q4s, JTs-J6s, T9s-T7s, 98s-96s, 87s-86s, 76s-75s, 65s, 54s, 43s, 32s, AKo-A2o, KQo-K7o, QJo-Q8o, JTo-J8o, T9o-T8o, 98o, 87o, 76o }
Hand 3: 25.0072 % [ 00.24 00.01 ] { AA-22, AKs-A2s, KQs-K2s, QJs-Q4s, JTs-J6s, T9s-T7s, 98s-96s, 87s-85s, 76s-75s, 65s, 54s, 43s, 32s, AKo-A2o, KQo-K7o, QJo-Q8o, JTo-J8o, T9o-T8o, 98o, 87o, 76o }
Hand 4: 23.0716 % [ 00.22 00.01 ] { random }

---

Re: The Peter_rus Test (Low Content)
 

I think the reason it only took you 2-3 minutes is because your estimates are way off (or is it the other way around). All of the big cards like TT-AA are extremely unlikely given the action. Similarly two-pair hands are not likely, and any hand with a ten is not likely.

I would guess however that since you are including a lot of better hands, that when you remove them our equity goes up even further.

Re: The Peter_rus Test (Low Content)
 

It is good to see someone taking the time to do this kind of analysis. At the time I really was not sure where I stood EV-wise and it is interesting to see I may well be the EV-leader. I will run some hand ranges myself and see what comes out.

I kinda feel I should bet here but obviously I am behind SB a lot of the time. That said, I have outs against any better pair but my flush outs are unlikely to be good. The other LPs though will certainly call with almost any [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. There is no T out, with almost 100% certainty. IMO a 6 or 4 is a valid out (presuming no flush) as well as the straight cards. A problem is distinct possibility of a semi-bluff raise . Peter_rus would talk of the need for deep reads to play such marginal holdings, and he is right.

Re: The Peter_rus Test (Low Content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
id bet this. these players arent going to raise their pair hands after theyve just called the flop and if you check they will bet their pairs for you. betting allows you to protect your hand when you happen to be ahead and may clear up flush draw outs. whether i call or fold once raised depends on which player it is and my read on them if i have one, but i certainly lean towards calling if its heads up because my flush outs will be good very often along with my straight outs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was just going to type all this up...then I decided to read the replies and found that mbd had been nice enough to do so for me, now I get to save myself a few minutes and use the nifty quote feature.

Surf

edit: Nap! Why are you posting "lc" threads with tons of strategy in them?! You're making my job harder!