View Single Post
  #28  
Old 12-29-2005, 03:23 AM
StellarWind StellarWind is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 704
Default Re: 3-bet J10s against good player?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Of course taking the highest EV action is the best policy but that is beside the point.

[/ QUOTE ]

Although this may seem like an obvious statement, I think it is a debate that we engage in every time we advocate a line that is immediately incorrect mathematically because of metagame reasons. A frequent example of this is the recommendation to peel the flop and fold unimproved on the turn even when this is immediately -EV so that we don't get run over.

[/ QUOTE ]
I disagree with your interpretation of this example.

It sometimes happens that I make a play with a metagame purpose. Like a humiliating sexy whose purpose is partially to instill fear and intimidate an opponent into incorrect passive play on future hands. But "metagame" is actually a code name for psychology in this case.

But the loose flop peel is something else entirely. Just as there is tension between bluffing and bluffcatching, there is also tension between loose flop calls and marginal turn bets. A flop call that is slightly -EV on paper becomes +EV when you factor in the reality that sometimes you get a free card. So mathematically correct strategy is to rely on this and make a few extra calls with the "best of the rest". Never making these calls is exploitable because it allows Villain to take too many free cards and thereby avoid paying off my better hands.

But I absolutely am not trying to change the way Villain plays. Instead I exploit whatever I see. If Villain bets the turn too much then I fold more flops, pound him with turn value checkraises, and checkcall turns I would otherwise feel the need to bet.

On the other hand if Villain is a free card addict then my loose peels multiply like rabbits because one bet buys two cards.

But against a good player I cannot sustain a strategy of exploitation because he will adjust. I make whatever "loose" peels I think is the correct number for a given flop structure and opposing hand range.

Note that I have structured the discussion around the case where Villain is autobetting the flop with position. I could just have easily written an analogous explanation of loose flop calls versus OOP autobets, versus checkraises of our autobet, versus stabs at unraised pots, or whatever. The details vary but the underlying concept is the same. There is a right amount for him to be aggressive and a right amount of loose calls. Anyone who deviates can be exploited, but if Villain is messing up in a predictable way you can adjust your own play to exploit him.
Reply With Quote