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)

- - 999 vs LAG (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=404510)

5 handed, villain is 74/24/1.5 and opens in the cutoff, folds to me in the BB with red nines and I make it three, villain caps and I call.

flop [8.5sb]
9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]
I bet, he calls

turn [5bb]
6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]
I bet, he raises, I 3bet, he caps

river [13bb]
J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

so what's the plan now kids

blah, thought board paired on river. Dunno what I do. Probably check/call but I think that is wrong.

True

I like the bet/call a lot more than check/call.

For the bet/call, if villain raises every time he has a straight, we lose 2 BB. On the other hand, we win 1 BB if he doesn't have it. I'm arbitrarily setting villain folding 10% of the time. I'm not taking into account getting raised by a lesser hand for simplicity. Also I'm assuming villain will raise with a straight, which makes sense.

Let p be the probability of villain holding a straight.

p * (-2BB) + (0.9-p) * (+1BB) + 0.1 * (+0BB) > 0
-2p + 0.9 - 0.9p > 0
0.9 - 2.9p > 0
1 > 2.9p
p > 0.345

Villain needs to have a straight more than 34.5% of the time to make a bet unprofitable. I believe villain will have a straight less than 34.5% of the time, so I bet/call based on the EV calculations.

---

For the check/call, villain is a lag. Does this mean he will bet anything when checked to? I'll set the probabilty of villain betting a lesser hand to 25%, meaning 75% of the time he'll bet when we're beat. I'm unsure on these values I used here, some input would be great.

0.25 * (+1BB) + 0.75 * (-1BB) = -0.5BB

That was easy. Check/calling is -EV if villain is value betting over half the time with a hand that beats us.

This seems to go against the norm of check/call replies, I'll be double checking this.

[ QUOTE ]
I like the bet/call a lot more than check/call.

For the bet/call, if villain raises every time he has a straight, we lose 2 BB. On the other hand, we win 1 BB if he doesn't have it. I'm arbitrarily setting villain folding 10% of the time. I'm not taking into account getting raised by a lesser hand for simplicity. Also I'm assuming villain will raise with a straight, which makes sense.

Let p be the probability of villain holding a straight.

p * (-2BB) + (0.9-p) * (+1BB) + 0.1 * (+0BB) > 0
-2p + 0.9 - 0.9p > 0
0.9 - 2.9p > 0
1 > 2.9p
p > 0.345

Villain needs to have a straight more than 34.5% of the time to make a bet unprofitable. I believe villain will have a straight less than 34.5% of the time, so I bet/call based on the EV calculations.

---

For the check/call, villain is a lag. Does this mean he will bet anything when checked to? I'll set the probabilty of villain betting a lesser hand to 25%, meaning 75% of the time he'll bet when we're beat. I'm unsure on these values I used here, some input would be great.

0.25 * (+1BB) + 0.75 * (-1BB) = -0.5BB

That was easy. Check/calling is -EV if villain is value betting over half the time with a hand that beats us.

This seems to go against the norm of check/call replies, I'll be double checking this.

[/ QUOTE ]

When we win with check/call we win the whole pot, not just some part of a BB.

True

I'm evaluating the EV of the river play.

Yes but that doesn't matter. You have to take in account what you win when you win and what you lose when you lose.

The size of the pot doesn't matter here. We're figuring out the best play to maximize EV on the river, alone.

[ QUOTE ]

p * (-2BB) + (0.9-p) * (+1BB) + 0.1 * (+0BB) > 0
-2p + 0.9 - p > 0
0.9 - 3p > 0
0.9 > 3p
p > 0.3

[/ QUOTE ]

This needed to be fixed badly.

Based on the notion that the entire size of the pot being relevant here, the river going check/check and us winning has an EV of +1.3BB, which is wrong.

bet call. Check call ain't horrible.

Krishan

[ QUOTE ]
Yes but that doesn't matter. You have to take in account what you win when you win and what you lose when you lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you can calculate the EV of a river bet without including the pot. He isn't folding you know.

Krishan

True is right. The Ev of the river player still depends on the pot size.

And villian doesn't just need a straight. He could also have a bigger set.

[ QUOTE ]
True is right. The Ev of the river player still depends on the pot size.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm while my actual "expected value" depends on the pot size, the question is whether bet/call makes more money than check/call. assuming I never fold and villain never folds a better hand (pretty damn safe assumption) the pot size will have the same effect on overall EV for both lines. am I missing something?

Why so many study?
If you think you are likely beaten just check/call if not bet/call river play is not that complicated thing

[ QUOTE ]
Why so many study?
If you think you are likely beaten just check/call if not bet/call river play is not that complicated thing

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi, welcome to 2+2.

river play is a very, very complicated thing. I'll give you a huge piece of wisdom right here: if you're heads up on the river and first to act, whether or not you are have the best hand +/-50% of the time has almost nothing to do with whether to bet or check.

[ QUOTE ]
bet call. Check call ain't horrible.

Krishan

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't think based on the pf and turn action that we are behind a lot?