For some of the newwer players: a winning attitude

[DavidC]

Gosh, humility doesn't seem to be my strong suit. Sorry about the title. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

I live at home: cheap rent, free utilites, and my funds right now are being directed towards either saving for a car or saving for a bankroll sufficient to hop up through the limits... it works for me for now. Plus my mother's a good cook and I'm lazy. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Anyways, my dad was in my room for a bit while I was playing, just chatting with me:

---

Two loose limpers in ep, then a TAA raises. I'm to his direct left ( [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] ), there's two loose players behind me, one in the co, one in the sb, and a loose bb, there's a TAA on the button, who's likely to call with a lot of hands in this pot.

I have A8s, and I call, but I'm a little nervous, because this isn't a play that I made too often: if it works, it's great, if not, you're not getting the right price on your hand.

I call, and two more people call, and I shout, "Yes!" I then flop the nut flush.

My dad looks over at me, but can't see the screen, so I explain to him that I'd just made a little bit of a risky pf call and that it had worked. (Edit: given the table conditions, this is a standard call.)

He says, "So you were trying to draw these guys in and now you've got their money?"

I reply, "Well, the hand isn't over yet. I'm just happy that I got correct odds to play my hand here."

---

So, the "right attitude" here is that you're looking to make correct plays, regardless of what happens. Sometimes you flop the nuts, sometimes you don't, but that's not really where you get your rewards in poker.

I admit that my attitude isn't 100% correct here either. When evaluating the merits of that call, I can't look at what happened as my guide for determining if it's correct, either. Sometimes everyone to my left will have played all their hands for hte last 10 hands, and hten when I call this one, they'll all fold. It's rare, but it happens. It would still be a good call in that case.

[MrWookie47]

[ QUOTE ]
I admit that my attitude isn't 100% correct here either. When evaluating the merits of that call, I can't look at what happened as my guide for determining if it's correct, either.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I give you a gold star for a lot of your posts for being the guy in the micro forum most likely to think outside the box, this one is too far outside. Your own evaluation hits the biggest issue on the head.

[MrWookie47]

David C sent me a PM for clarification, so here goes.

Now, talking in terms of pot odds preflop is not always the best thing to do, but it's a decent place to start. So, you're about 12% to flop a 4 flush or flush. You're about 2% to flop 2 pair, and you're somewhat worse than that to flop trips. You're a little better than 25% to flop one pair, but you can't be too happy with just one pair against a PFR unless the flop is 8 high. You're likely to find yourself with a pair that's actually a 5 or 3 out draw. I'll say that you're only really happy with the flop about 15% of the time, but you're going to be compelled to continue on more flops than that. The "right price," then, is about 5.5:1. You don't need quite that because of implied odds, but keep in mind that your implied odds are half as good as they would be in an unraised pot. You're also facing some reverse implied odds because you'll frequently be showing down a 2nd best hand when an A flops and you have no other draw.

In this hand, best case, you're getting about 3.75:1, and you can get as good as 6:1. The proper approach is to calculate your odds in terms of the likelihood of the other players coming along. Since you say they're loose, I'll give the CO 25% to call, the SB 30%, and the BB 40%. Thus, you're getting 3.75+(0.25*1)+(0.30*0.75)+(0.40*0.5):1, which is 4.43:1, less than what I'd want to play this hand, considering both the halved implied odds and the bad reverse implied odds. Just because you got two others along doesn't make this correct. It means you lucked out. Sure, you ended up getting a better price, but it cost you some Sklansky bucks. This same line of reasoning is rather similar to peeling on the flop with only a BDFD in a small pot and then saying, "Yes! I had odds to see the river!"

I should also mention that by hoping these players call the raise, the hands they call with will be from a set of hands that is more likely to have you dominated, or is more likely to beat your flush or 2 pair (PP's catching sets/boats), making the reverse implied odds that much worse.

[DavidC]

[ QUOTE ]
David C sent me a PM for clarification, so here goes.

Now, talking in terms of pot odds preflop is not always the best thing to do, but it's a decent place to start. So, you're about 12% to flop a 4 flush or flush. You're about 2% to flop 2 pair, and you're somewhat worse than that to flop trips. You're a little better than 25% to flop one pair, but you can't be too happy with just one pair against a PFR unless the flop is 8 high. You're likely to find yourself with a pair that's actually a 5 or 3 out draw. I'll say that you're only really happy with the flop about 15% of the time, but you're going to be compelled to continue on more flops than that. The "right price," then, is about 5.5:1. You don't need quite that because of implied odds, but keep in mind that your implied odds are half as good as they would be in an unraised pot. You're also facing some reverse implied odds because you'll frequently be showing down a 2nd best hand when an A flops and you have no other draw.

In this hand, best case, you're getting about 3.75:1, and you can get as good as 6:1. The proper approach is to calculate your odds in terms of the likelihood of the other players coming along. Since you say they're loose, I'll give the CO 25% to call, the SB 30%, and the BB 40%. Thus, you're getting 3.75+(0.25*1)+(0.30*0.75)+(0.40*0.5):1, which is 4.43:1, less than what I'd want to play this hand, considering both the halved implied odds and the bad reverse implied odds. Just because you got two others along doesn't make this correct. It means you lucked out. Sure, you ended up getting a better price, but it cost you some Sklansky bucks. This same line of reasoning is rather similar to peeling on the flop with only a BDFD in a small pot and then saying, "Yes! I had odds to see the river!"

I should also mention that by hoping these players call the raise, the hands they call with will be from a set of hands that is more likely to have you dominated, or is more likely to beat your flush or 2 pair (PP's catching sets/boats), making the reverse implied odds that much worse.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the clarification. I have a few comments.

The actual post was less about the hand and more about my goals in the hand (not to flop the nuts, but to get the right odds to flop the nuts), but your technical advice here is appreciated.

You're absolutely right about discounting the likelihood of players coming into the pot. I alluded to this in my last paragraph or so. People that say that the TAAs will always fold and the LPPs always call are wrong.

The think that the honesty of the PFR betting in EP on an ace-high flop is related to the number of people that call. If it's 6-ways, and he bets into the ace, he's got an ace, or a set, or both. If there's three of us only, then that makes it a hell of a lot more difficult, though. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] Luckily, in this case, it's not as big of an error to fold because of the pot not being as large (but it's a bigger error to call down with the worst hand, and a bigger error for him to semi-bluff to the river with two outs if he held KK or something).

Edit: Other than that, this post appears to be right-on, although it's a little unfair to compare what I did to peeling with a BDF in a small pot, as that's a pretty obvious mistake. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Your points about the halved implied odds are great. One thing that we might consider is trying to figure out what % of hands will have me dominated here. If the CO is calling with 25%, for example, and less than 25% of hands dominate me, then there's some opportunity for me not to be crippled when someone calls. Also, some of the hands that have me dominated: A9, for example, may not win outright as often as others (AK).

The only conclusion that I can make here is that in order for me to minimize my reverse-implied odds, I have to play bloody perfectly, which I can't really do. I'm curious as to how much the effects of halving the implied odds have on this hand's eV, because that makes a big difference on the "pot odds" that I require to play it. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]