According to the Fundamental Theorem of Poker.... (hand hist.)
 

I posted this hand(without my flop decision first) on the NL/PL forum, and received many responses to fold PF here after being re-re-raised(is that even a word?)..... I thought about this a long time before I called, and I'd like to know about this hand in terms of the fundamental theorem of poker......


PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.50 BB (9 handed) converter

UTG ($$14.45)
UTG+1 ($$36.45)
MP1 ($$27.60)
Gomez22 ($$43.40)
MP3 ($$13.65)
CO ($$46.20)
Button ($$13.40)
SB ($$23.60)
BB ($$61.60)

Preflop: Gomez22 is MP2 with K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
UTG folds, <font color="CC3333">UTG+1 raises to $1</font>, MP1 calls $1, <font color="CC3333">Gomez22 raises to $5</font>, MP3 folds, CO folds, Button folds, SB folds, BB folds, <font color="CC3333">UTG+1 raises to $36.45</font>, MP1 folds, Gomez22 calls $31.45.

Flop: ($74.65) 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="blue">(2 players) </font>

Turn: ($74.65) 5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="blue">(2 players) </font>

River: ($74.65) T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="blue">(2 players) </font>

Final Pot: $74.65
<font color="#990066">Main Pot: $74.65, between UTG+1 and Gomez22.</font> &gt; <font color="white">Pot won by Gomez22 ($74.65).</font>

Results in white below: <font color="white">
UTG+1 shows Qs Qd (two pair, queens and nines).
Gomez22 shows Kc Ac (two pair, aces and nines).
Outcome: Gomez22 wins $74.65. </font>


According to twodimes(thanks to AL Capone for the info):

pokenum -h ac kc - qd qs
Holdem Hi: 1712304 enumerated boards
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
Ac Kc 787966 46.02 917606 53.59 6732 0.39 0.462
Qs Qd 917606 53.59 787966 46.02 6732 0.39 0.538

So, basically, if I KNEW his hole cards, I'm a 1.15-1 dog here, and am getting 1.40-1 ($44.20-$31.45) on my pot odds to call here(granted, nowhere near the best of it, but within the realms of making this a VERY small +EV play).

With odds as they are above, is this a case where in the fundamental thoerem of poker, I made the right decision, but in the "real world" I made a wrong decision???

This hand is still bugging me, and I can't figure 1 way or another if I played it right or wrong.....

Re: According to the Fundamental Theorem of Poker.... (hand hist.)
 

Yes.

According to the fundamental theorem your call was good. The fundamental theorem says that your call should have been made if you knew what his hole cards were. The problem, as many pointed out in the NL forum, is that pretty much the only hands you were possibly up against unless you thought he was making a play were AA, KK, and QQ. He could also have AK, JJ, or maybe even AQs so we can even include those if you want.

Because of those holdings you are either a slight favorite, a slight dog, or a huge dog. That's why you should have folded.

Re: According to the Fundamental Theorem of Poker.... (hand hist.)
 

The final call is justified by the FTOP, but this would only apply if you discovered his hand AFTER your first raise. If you knew he had QQ from the outset, the FTOP indicates a fold BEFORE you put any money in the pot.

Re: According to the Fundamental Theorem of Poker.... (hand hist.)
 

against competent players, it's a fold. you have to take 2+2 er's responses with a grain of salt sometimes though - I think many are too far from the Party 25NL to remember that ATo (or Q9o) is a possible hand for this guy to turn over.

Re: According to the Fundamental Theorem of Poker.... (hand hist.)
 

It's basically a proplem of what hands you're opponent would make this play with. The more hands he'd do this with the better a call looks. But it's almost always a fold with AKs.

AK is not a calling hand in NL holdem. It's frequently okay to move in with it (and make better hands fold as well as sometimes win if called), but rarely okay to call an all-in bet. In short stack situations late in tournaments calling would be okay in many situations, as you will frequently be leading or a small dog.

Re: According to the Fundamental Theorem of Poker.... (hand hist.)
 

Yes. If you know he's got QQ then call according to the FTOP. Then again, if you knew that you wouldn't have reraised.

But you cannot see his cards. Lest suppose he'll always ReReRaise with JJ, QQ, KK, or AA and never raise otherwise. There are 12 ways to have QQ/JJ and 6 ways for AA/KK (since you have AK). That will make you a 2:1 favorite to be getting your 1.4:1 as a 1.15:1 dog; and a 1:2 dog to be seriously dominated by AA or KK. I'm not going to do the math but I'm sure this will end up making you an overall underdog and should fold. Its a clear fold if he'll raise with QQ or better. So in "real life" if he raises with JJ or better then you should fold.

You played it "wrong".

ReRead the FTOP section again. Sklansky talks about the difference between making an FTOP "mistake" and "playing poorly", using a situation where you have the K-straight-flush.

- Louie

Re: and I used to think you respected the NL/PL forum feedback...
 

(sniff, sniff) [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: and I used to think you respected the NL/PL forum feedback...
 

I just thought the theory section would be the place to discuss this in relation to the FTOP..

No offense, Richie.... I always apprecciate yer advice. Just didn't want some windbag telling me that this crap belonged in the Theory forum.....