|
|
|
|
#1
10-12-2005, 10:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Common Knowledge Question: WA/WB line
I hate asking a question this super stupid, but I couldn't find the answer with the search function.
I see WA/WB line referenced a lot but have never seen a "definition" of it. I mean, I know it stands for Way Ahead/Way Behind, but don't know the definition of the moves in the line itself. Question 1: So what exactly is the WA/WB line? Question 2: When exactly do you use it? While searching for the answer I read that you use it when there are the same number of hands that beat you as you beat in the range of hands on which you put villian. Is that the only time, or can you use other times (such as when you think you are dominated) also? I thank you in advance for putting up with this thread. 
|
|
#2
10-12-2005, 10:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Common Knowledge Question: WA/WB line
Search function...
Usually a HU situation where either you or your opponent has 3 or fewer outs and there's roughly an equal chance of being ahead or behind. Play is designed to lose the least when behind and win the most when ahead.
|
|
#3
10-12-2005, 10:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Common Knowledge Question: WA/WB line
I'm doing some work now but I will give you the example that has become standard here.
Shillx has a really good post in a thread from awhile back, I will try and look later but it was just recently bumped. Anyway, here: You open AJo UTG, MP 3-bets and it's heads-up. Flop comes A95r. You check, he bets, you call. Turn 7. You check, he bets, you call. River 2. You bet. Given the likely 3-betting hands that you are up against here (depending on opponent), this can serve to be a good line since he either has a big pair that you do not want him to fold, or he has an ace that is typically bigger than yours (and you do not want to go to war with him in this case).
|
|
#4
10-13-2005, 09:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Common Knowledge Question: WA/WB line
I don't understand the final river bet, though. I understand the theory behind it, it's just that the players I'm used to don't play the way the theory says they will.
If they're behind, they won't know or care, and having bet the flop and turn, they'll bet the river too if I were to check it. If I bet, they'll call, unless they have no pair and were completely bluffing or on a draw that didn't come through. Or they might raise, if the hand they're behind with seems good enough to them. If they're ahead, they will probably raise my river bet. Or maybe they'll just call. Since I'm gonna have to put in a bet to see the showdown one way or another, I might as well just check it, and call the bet which they are 90% likely to make after I check.
|
|
#5
10-13-2005, 02:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Common Knowledge Question: WA/WB line
[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand the final river bet, though. I understand the theory behind it, it's just that the players I'm used to don't play the way the theory says they will. If they're behind, they won't know or care, and having bet the flop and turn, they'll bet the river too if I were to check it. If I bet, they'll call, unless they have no pair and were completely bluffing or on a draw that didn't come through. Or they might raise, if the hand they're behind with seems good enough to them. If they're ahead, they will probably raise my river bet. Or maybe they'll just call. Since I'm gonna have to put in a bet to see the showdown one way or another, I might as well just check it, and call the bet which they are 90% likely to make after I check. [/ QUOTE ] I doubt that your perception of these players is actually accurate. I would challenge you to go through and find a bunch of hands where some villain bets the flop and turn. Then tally up the times villain bets the river and the times villain checks the river. I suspect that you'll find the ratio to be quite far from 90-10. Furthermore, those 10% of the times that the river gets checked through, villain is almost certainly checking behind with the worst hand, so there are missed value bets on at least 10% of those situations.
|
|
#6
10-13-2005, 05:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Common Knowledge Question: WA/WB line
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I don't understand the final river bet, though. I understand the theory behind it, it's just that the players I'm used to don't play the way the theory says they will. If they're behind, they won't know or care, and having bet the flop and turn, they'll bet the river too if I were to check it. If I bet, they'll call, unless they have no pair and were completely bluffing or on a draw that didn't come through. Or they might raise, if the hand they're behind with seems good enough to them. If they're ahead, they will probably raise my river bet. Or maybe they'll just call. Since I'm gonna have to put in a bet to see the showdown one way or another, I might as well just check it, and call the bet which they are 90% likely to make after I check. [/ QUOTE ] I doubt that your perception of these players is actually accurate. I would challenge you to go through and find a bunch of hands where some villain bets the flop and turn. Then tally up the times villain bets the river and the times villain checks the river. I suspect that you'll find the ratio to be quite far from 90-10. Furthermore, those 10% of the times that the river gets checked through, villain is almost certainly checking behind with the worst hand, so there are missed value bets on at least 10% of those situations. [/ QUOTE ] I'd like to try this, but there is no easy way to do this using pokertracker. I'd have to check every hand individually.
|
|
#7
10-13-2005, 02:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Common Knowledge Question: WA/WB line
[ QUOTE ]
I'm doing some work now but I will give you the example that has become standard here. Shillx has a really good post in a thread from awhile back, I will try and look later but it was just recently bumped. [/ QUOTE ] I think this is the thread: Instances of WA/WB
|
|
#8
10-13-2005, 05:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Common Knowledge Question: WA/WB line
[ QUOTE ]
I think this is the thread: Instances of WA/WB [/ QUOTE ] There is absolute gold in that thread. Thanks for linking.
|
|
#9
10-13-2005, 06:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Common Knowledge Question: WA/WB line
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I'm doing some work now but I will give you the example that has become standard here. Shillx has a really good post in a thread from awhile back, I will try and look later but it was just recently bumped. [/ QUOTE ] I think this is the thread: Instances of WA/WB [/ QUOTE ] Excellent thread, I don't know how I missed this in my searches (maybe I didn't go back more than a month although I thought I had). Thanks all! Very helpful.
|
|
#10
10-12-2005, 10:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Common Knowledge Question: WA/WB line
If you are out of position and heads up, WA/WB is:
check/call check/call bet When you are WB, you lose the least. When you are WA, you win the most because you don't indicate to your opponent that you have a hand that he should fold to. It's good for hands like Ax with an ace on the board where you think you may be dominated. If you are winning, you are in great shape. If you are losing, you are likely drawing to 3 outs. It should be used on a relatively drawless flop, because you risk giving free cards. If you are WA of 32 hands and WB 3 or vice versa, obviously you don't want to use this. Hope this helps. Someone else may do a better job explaining this.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
