Hand vs Sklansky

[Michael Davis]

"remember aggressive play always gets the money against anyone weather a joe shmoe or a world clsss player."

It's about time somebody had the guts to tell Schneids what's up.

-Michael

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
I had two kings. Both players played correctly. (Raising on the turn is close but probably wrong, especially if a 23 year old woman is watching.) Why is this hand interesting?

[/ QUOTE ]

Among other things, I find two points interesting.

If David raises the river, what percentage of the time should Schneids call with his hand?

What percentage of time should David play the hand as he did and then raise the river, when he has AK instead of KK?

The interesting part of this hand is that we have two players who presumably play well and have multiple levels of thought involved in their play, and thus must each consider their and their opponent's play with that in mind.

[J.A.Sucker]

[ QUOTE ]
(Raising on the turn is close but probably wrong, especially if a 23 year old woman is watching.) Why is this hand interesting?

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe you hit the nail on the head, David. Nice work!

[Subfallen]

[ QUOTE ]
If David raises the river, what percentage of the time should Schneids call with his hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

I never thought I would question a strategy post from The Devil Himself, but for the life of me it doesn't make sense why you would ever call just some percent of the time.

Three options I see:
(1) Sklansky's river raise is more often made to get value from middle pair than it is to bluff out middle pair, so always fold.
(2) Sklansky's river raise is more often made to bluff out middle pair than it is to get value from middle pair, so always call.
(3) Sklansky is using game theory to make our decision with middle pair 0 EV, so always call since there's a 23-year-old woman watching and we will look cool picking off David's bluff.

I suspect El Diablo has me on ignore, so can somebody please explain?

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If David raises the river, what percentage of the time should Schneids call with his hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

I never thought I would question a strategy post from The Devil Himself, but for the life of me it doesn't make sense why you would ever call just some percent of the time.

Three options I see:
(1) Sklansky's river raise is more often made to get value from middle pair than it is to bluff out middle pair, so always fold.
(2) Sklansky's river raise is more often made to bluff out middle pair than it is to get value from middle pair, so always call.
(3) Sklansky is using game theory to make our decision with middle pair 0 EV, so always call since there's a 23-year-old woman watching and we will look cool picking off David's bluff.

I suspect El Diablo has me on ignore, so can somebody please explain?

[/ QUOTE ]

BTW, I should have said "call or re-raise."

Why would I have you on ignore? Should I?

[Jeff W]

[ QUOTE ]
(3) Sklansky is using game theory to make our decision with middle pair 0 EV, so always call since there's a 23-year-old woman watching and we will look cool picking off David's bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sklansky factored in the EV of the chick seeing you pick off his bluff when he calculated his optimal bluffing frequency.

[Subfallen]

[ QUOTE ]
BTW, I should have said "call or re-raise."

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah-hah...now THAT makes sense, and is indeed very interesting...I'm adding this to my list of hands to do comprehensive range-analysis on this weekend.

[ QUOTE ]
Why would I have you on ignore? Should I?

[/ QUOTE ]

I dunno, maybe that's Clarkmeister who's constantly ignoring stupid people. Well thanks for replying despite my intellectual deficiencies. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[DMBFan23]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If David raises the river, what percentage of the time should Schneids call with his hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

I never thought I would question a strategy post from The Devil Himself, but for the life of me it doesn't make sense why you would ever call just some percent of the time.

Three options I see:
(1) Sklansky's river raise is more often made to get value from middle pair than it is to bluff out middle pair, so always fold.
(2) Sklansky's river raise is more often made to bluff out middle pair than it is to get value from middle pair, so always call.
(3) Sklansky is using game theory to make our decision with middle pair 0 EV, so always call since there's a 23-year-old woman watching and we will look cool picking off David's bluff.

I suspect El Diablo has me on ignore, so can somebody please explain?

[/ QUOTE ]

wouldn't sklansky's raise be made to solicit any of these actions against your range of hands on the river? and thus, if A8o falls somewhere in the split between percentages that you perform each action, couldn't you conceivably perform different actions some percentage of the time and have that be optimal (beyond just randomizing your play)

also, I like El D's mention of AK, I thought about that in the grocery store today. then I always ask myself "but then shouldn't schneids 3 bet like 1 time in X (X = large) so Sklansky will fold?" then I keep shopping.

[Subfallen]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(3) Sklansky is using game theory to make our decision with middle pair 0 EV, so always call since there's a 23-year-old woman watching and we will look cool picking off David's bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sklansky factored in the EV of the chick seeing you pick off his bluff when he calculated his optimal bluffing frequency.

[/ QUOTE ]

D'oh!

nh [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[bigfishead]

There is nothing interesting at all about the play of this hand. If DS raises the turn you fold. He looses 1 bet. If he raises the river you only call with hands that he cannot beat and may get re-raised. No + value to raise the river.

But DS knows that in THIS game, you young whipper snappers will bet any pair on the turn, as well as often check-raising any pair on the flop. So the 9 could hit you on the turn. He also knows you will call any pair on the flop. giving more reason to just call the turn. AND he knows you young whipper snappers will OFTEN bet a draw on the turn as well, hoping for a fold. Hell, I think David played a Tommy on ya. And DS can be one of TA's biggest critics!

All +'s are on Davids side this time in playing you perfect
Schneids.

ps. I predict numerous of these same regular young guys will go broke when more DS's infiltrate this game and play you acordingly. This game is like an ULTRA aggro 4-8 with a tight side preflop in terms of multi-way action, and calling stations after the flop. IMO. However, there seem to be fish tourist taking shots at it enough that even these guys with no reading skills whatsoever can take large chunks out of the game at times too.