Two Plus Two Older Archives

Two Plus Two Older Archives (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/index.php)
-   Small Stakes Shorthanded (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   84s in the SB.call call (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=390504)

pokerstudAA 12-03-2005 12:37 PM

84s in the SB.call call
 
Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (6 max, 5 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

Preflop: Hero is SB with 8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].
UTG calls, MP calls, [color=#666666]1 fold</font>, Hero completes, BB checks.

Flop: (4 SB) 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [color=#0000FF](4 players)</font>
Hero checks, [color=#CC3333]BB bets</font>, UTG calls, MP calls, Hero calls.

Turn: (4 BB) 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [color=#0000FF](4 players)</font>
Hero checks, [color=#CC3333]BB bets</font>, UTG calls, MP calls, Hero calls.

River: (8 BB) K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] [color=#0000FF](4 players)</font>
Hero checks, [color=#CC3333]BB bets</font>, UTG calls, MP calls, Hero folds.

Final Pot: 11 BB

call call call good?

numeri 12-03-2005 12:39 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
That's a bit loose with the 1/3 blind structure, isn't it? Seems close but OK after that.

Oh, and use 2+2 format next time. It should be "color:" instead of "color=".

pokerstudAA 12-03-2005 12:49 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
[ QUOTE ]
Oh, and use 2+2 format next time. It should be "color:" instead of "color=".

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks. I could not figure out WTF was wrong w/ converter


You think 48s is too loose? did i mention they were soooted?

J. Stew 12-03-2005 12:52 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
I fold the flop most of the time and overcall the river never.

Cumulonimbus 12-03-2005 12:53 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
Why call the flop when you can bet it instead?

pokerstudAA 12-03-2005 12:57 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
[ QUOTE ]
I fold the flop most of the time and overcall the river never.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was thinking 5 outs to trips or two pair. Probably wrong. But this board looks really dirty for that. with that board there straights, over two pair, etc..

looks like preflop was a bit loose and the flop call was junk

river fold was elementary

Spicymoose 12-03-2005 01:05 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
[ QUOTE ]
Why call the flop when you can bet it instead?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your folding equity is not all that high. Getting raised would suck.

Spicymoose 12-03-2005 01:07 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
Hand looks fine.

Avatar looks great.

livinitup0 12-03-2005 01:07 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
I probably wouldn't have completed. If I did I would lead out, fold is raised, Turn I may have been a little more aggressive with, but the river is an obvious c/f.

pokerstudAA 12-03-2005 01:07 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why call the flop when you can bet it instead?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your folding equity is not all that high. Getting raised would suck.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. Betting into the field with that board is just asking for trouble.

Spicymoose 12-03-2005 01:10 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
To everyone who advocates folding preflop....

Although this blind structure kinda sucks for completing in the SB, we are still getting 5:1, plus good implied odds. With our suited 3 gapper, plus the opportunity to play in a hand with these awful players, I think you can do it if you play post flop good.

livinitup0 12-03-2005 01:10 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why call the flop when you can bet it instead?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your folding equity is not all that high. Getting raised would suck.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. Betting into the field with that board is just asking for trouble.

[/ QUOTE ]

Trouble that would give us a better idea of where we're at here. But could have avoided the whole close thing by not paying 2/3 of a SB with these rubbish cards.

numeri 12-03-2005 01:11 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
[ QUOTE ]
You think 48s is too loose? did i mention they were soooted?

[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, they were soooooted? [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Preflop, you're getting.... what - 5:1? 3 1/3 : 2/3, or something like that. You only have two others with you. You're not connected. I doubt it's +EV. You just end up in situations like this!

Spicymoose 12-03-2005 01:12 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why call the flop when you can bet it instead?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your folding equity is not all that high. Getting raised would suck.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. Betting into the field with that board is just asking for trouble.

[/ QUOTE ]

Trouble that would give us a better idea of where we're at here. But could have avoided the whole close thing by not paying 2/3 of a SB with these rubbish cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

We already have decent information of where we are at just by check calling. We are most likely drawing when there is a bet here, and certainly drawing when so many people call. Betting and getting raised gives this same information with more certainty, but it is way too costly.

Furthermore, if they just call our flop bet, we actually don't have any good information, and don't know where we stand.

Yes, you can always avoid close situations by folding, but if we want to maximize our winrates, we must learn to loosen up in the blinds in slightly EV situations. If you can't handle the variance, folding is fine, but I do think this is EV+.

pokerstudAA 12-03-2005 01:20 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
[ QUOTE ]


Trouble that would give us a better idea of where we're at here. But could have avoided the whole close thing by not paying 2/3 of a SB with these rubbish cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

We know where we are at once the flop hits. Behind. Thats why no bet. I dont really care to bet to "find out where I am at" because I already know. If I bet I am putting more money into a pot I am probably not going to win.

I still have 2 8's and 3 4's to make a hand + runner runnner flush. If it comes back 2 bets I can easily fold. When it came back only 1 bet closing the action I had to consider my options.

Preflop is close but I am calling most of the time here.

numeri 12-03-2005 01:26 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
Interesting. I'm still don't think that it's +EV, but that doesn't mean I can't be convinced otherwise.

Chance of getting a Straight Flush on the flop: 0.01%
Chance of getting 4-of-a-kind on the flop: 0.01%
Chance of getting a Full House on the flop: 0.09%
Chance of getting a Flush on the flop: 0.84%
Chance of getting a Straight on the flop: 0.32%
Chance of getting 3-of-a-kind on the flop: 1.57%
Chance of getting 2 Pair on the flop: 3.03%

Chance of getting a Four Flush on the flop: 10.94%
Chance of getting 1 Pair on the flop: 28.96%

The last two mean we'd have to keep drawing, so we'll weight them by how often the draws come in. The flush comes in ~35%, so (0.1094)(0.35) = 0.038 = 3.8%. The pair improves to trips or 2pr about 20% of the time, so (0.2896)(0.2) = 0.058 = 5.8%

If we add those up, we get around 15.5%, or around 5.5:1 odds. Since many of those hands won't hold up even if we hit, and we'll have to fold the flop or turn sometimes, I think the implied odds we have for the hidden hand aren't enough.

Again, I could be convinced. Am I missing anything important?

12-03-2005 01:30 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
[ QUOTE ]
Interesting. I'm still don't think that it's +EV, but that doesn't mean I can't be convinced otherwise.

Chance of getting a Straight Flush on the flop: 0.01%
Chance of getting 4-of-a-kind on the flop: 0.01%
Chance of getting a Full House on the flop: 0.09%
Chance of getting a Flush on the flop: 0.84%
Chance of getting a Straight on the flop: 0.32%
Chance of getting 3-of-a-kind on the flop: 1.57%
Chance of getting 2 Pair on the flop: 3.03%

Chance of getting a Four Flush on the flop: 10.94%
Chance of getting 1 Pair on the flop: 28.96%

The last two mean we'd have to keep drawing, so we'll weight them by how often the draws come in. The flush comes in ~35%, so (0.1094)(0.35) = 0.038 = 3.8%. The pair improves to trips or 2pr about 20% of the time, so (0.2896)(0.2) = 0.058 = 5.8%

If we add those up, we get around 15.5%, or around 5.5:1 odds. Since many of those hands won't hold up even if we hit, and we'll have to fold the flop or turn sometimes, I think the implied odds we have for the hidden hand aren't enough.

Again, I could be convinced. Am I missing anything important?

[/ QUOTE ]
Where did you those stats?

numeri 12-03-2005 01:34 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
Can you say "lazy"? [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

pokerstudAA 12-03-2005 01:35 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
[ QUOTE ]
If we add those up, we get around 15.5%, or around 5.5:1 odds. Since many of those hands won't hold up even if we hit, and we'll have to fold the flop or turn sometimes, I think the implied odds we have for the hidden hand aren't enough.

Again, I could be convinced. Am I missing anything important?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I play good. I can get more bets when I hit and lose less when I miss. I am convinced a hand like 64s or 79s would be an easy call. 84s is stretching a bit.

What about 92s or T3s? Could/would you complete those in the SB here?

numeri 12-03-2005 01:37 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
I'll complete 64s or 79s all day. 92s or T3s are no good IMO. But I tend to avoid those really marginal ones since I suck post-flop.

Spicymoose 12-03-2005 01:37 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
[ QUOTE ]
Interesting. I'm still don't think that it's +EV, but that doesn't mean I can't be convinced otherwise.

Chance of getting a Straight Flush on the flop: 0.01%
Chance of getting 4-of-a-kind on the flop: 0.01%
Chance of getting a Full House on the flop: 0.09%
Chance of getting a Flush on the flop: 0.84%
Chance of getting a Straight on the flop: 0.32%
Chance of getting 3-of-a-kind on the flop: 1.57%
Chance of getting 2 Pair on the flop: 3.03%

Chance of getting a Four Flush on the flop: 10.94%
Chance of getting 1 Pair on the flop: 28.96%

The last two mean we'd have to keep drawing, so we'll weight them by how often the draws come in. The flush comes in ~35%, so (0.1094)(0.35) = 0.038 = 3.8%. The pair improves to trips or 2pr about 20% of the time, so (0.2896)(0.2) = 0.058 = 5.8%

If we add those up, we get around 15.5%, or around 5.5:1 odds. Since many of those hands won't hold up even if we hit, and we'll have to fold the flop or turn sometimes, I think the implied odds we have for the hidden hand aren't enough.

Again, I could be convinced. Am I missing anything important?

[/ QUOTE ]

5:1 means we need to be able to have a situation where we can continue on the flop profitably 1 in 6 times. Hard to figure out the math exactly, but you did give some numbers. Flopping a flush draw is awesome, flopping a single pair is good, but not great, but if it comes with a backdoor flush, it is good. Furthermore, since we are paying 2/3 of a SB to play, rather than the normal 1 SB, our implied odds are bigger than usual. 50% bigger than usual.

jba 12-03-2005 02:48 PM

Re: 84s in the SB.call call
 
[ QUOTE ]
I fold the flop all of the time and overcall the river never.

[/ QUOTE ]

same here. I complete pf too.

getting 7-1 on the flop isn't that great when drawing to 2 good outs and 3 bad ones. two pair is ugly enough but this bottom two can easily lose to a better two pair on this board, also considering all the flush/straight redraws I would say bottom two pair no good a lot here.

edit: i thought the flop was twotone for some reason but I still stick with fold, other 2pr and straights, reverse implied, etc


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:39 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.