Re: AA
 

"I also think its important not just to state "WA/WB" as a justification for passive play. If "WA" is 98% of the time, and "WB" is 2% of the time, clearly a raise is needed. Not to say that that is necessarily the case here, but I think the "WA/WB" gets overused around here on occasion."

I think the chances of UTG having me beat are extremely slim. I also think there is a significant chance his hand can't call a raise at anytime. There is some slight chance that one of the blinds has me beat, probably more of a chance than UTG, but this is very unlikely.

-Michael

Re: AA
 

"what i dont get is how you are playing 20/40 one moment and then 5/10 another. thats confusing."

I play 20-40 because I've had 100 bet downswings six of nine days and it's better than playing blackjack.

-Michael

Re: AA
 

i am still confused...so you play the 20 because you like the variance there?

Re: AA
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why not raise the river?

I also think its important not just to state "WA/WB" as a justification for passive play. If "WA" is 98% of the time, and "WB" is 2% of the time, clearly a raise is needed. Not to say that that is necessarily the case here, but I think the "WA/WB" gets overused around here on occasion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree, WA/WB should be used as a justification to be less worried about free cards. you don't have to be worried about free cards as much if you're either way ahead, or way behind, but not in the middle. if you have the nuts, for example, then it's vacuously true that you're WA or WB and you don't care about free cards.

there aren't many hands that could exist where you're either WAY ahead 98% of the time, but WAY behind 2% of the time. the best thing I can think of is a flush on a low double paired board. a lot of the time you aren't sure whether you're WA or WB (the percentages are close to even, as in the classic weak A versus a PF 3-bet on an A high board example), and that's when the passive line comes in, to max wins/min losses. but the concept of not caring as much about free cards comes into play whenever you're WA/WB, regardless of the percentage that you're either.

But of course, the EV of how you play the hand depends on so much more than whether you're WA/WB, especially multiway where you have so many more options...will they call two cold? will they 3 bet a worse hand? will they fold straightaway but continue to bluff me? can I trap anyone?

now you would want to raise in this hand for two reasons:
1) protect your hand
2) maximize the money that goes into the pot

all that WA/WB means is that 1) is not as much a concern, and I don't think anyone here could argue that we need to charge any draws on this flop, even pocket pairs aren't getting odds if we don't spew like a maniac on the turn + riv.

so now we need to decide if not raising accomplishes 2). I think this was the point you had in mind when you mentioned overuse of WA/WB, that WA/WB has nothing to do with this aspect of the hand. I don't think it necessarily means that a raise is needed, that's a seperate issue IMO. I will agree with you that it doesn't necessarily dictate passivity, though it does lessen your vulnerability to free cards

Re: AA
 

"i am still confused...so you play the 20 because you like the variance there?"

After about six hours of 8-tabling the drag of being even or slightly down every day is too much, but I still need to put in two more hours. Luckily I win 80% of my showdowns in the 20 so my tilt is paying off.

-Michael

Re: AA
 

[ QUOTE ]
"I also think its important not just to state "WA/WB" as a justification for passive play. If "WA" is 98% of the time, and "WB" is 2% of the time, clearly a raise is needed. Not to say that that is necessarily the case here, but I think the "WA/WB" gets overused around here on occasion."

I think the chances of UTG having me beat are extremely slim. I also think there is a significant chance his hand can't call a raise at anytime.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not so sure you won't get a crying call if the river is raised.

Re: AA
 

[ QUOTE ]
"what i dont get is how you are playing 20/40 one moment and then 5/10 another. thats confusing."

I play 20-40 because I've had 100 bet downswings six of nine days and it's better than playing blackjack.

-Michael

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, play blackjack!

Re: AA
 

"I'm not so sure you won't get a crying call if the river is raised."

Neither am I, but what are we putting him on? Honestly, most guys will give up and check that river with an 8 or something like 77. I don't know why, but they do (this is 5-10). Especially guys who limp UTG. So I think when he bets the river it's even more likely he's completely bluffing.

-Michael

Re: AA
 

you 8 table for 8 hours ??!?!

Re: AA
 

[ QUOTE ]
you 8 table for 8 hours ??!?!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, this is absurd and likely unhealthy and with a high chance of burnout. Go get shock therapy for blackjack and you'll only have to play 4 hours a day.

Krishan