Math Problem with 77 (from the archives)

[Paxosmotic]

[ QUOTE ]
All I have to contribute is that I miss the original poster of this hand tremendously.

[/ QUOTE ]
Where'd he go?

[brettbrettr]

In the original thread you'll find one of the best posts you'll ever read on these boards. It answers your question...

[callmedonnie]

best....post......ever.

Hobbs, I missed the original so thanks much for posting this. I might just retype it to soak it all in later. And I hope I can find a spot against a solid player where this can come in handy, though I'll probably choose the wrong spot, post it, and find out why it was the wrong spot. Thanks again.

[W. Deranged]

Big time bump...

This [censored] rules...

[NA_kicker]

Yeah, what happened to nate after July 2nd? (his last post)

[mtdoak]

Getting 8.5 to 1, you have a backdoor straight (1 out) and 2 outs. So, roughly, 3 outs. You usually need 13-1 pot odds here. But, given the fact that a) you can dump the turn quicky if you miss and b) you'll collect 3 BB (6 SB) if you hit your hand.

[golfboy7]

Without doing the math...

Few reason why:

1. Hero might spike a 7 and other guy's hand range being AK-AQ and PP's >8's might not lay it down so implied odds.

2. Hero could pick up a scare card for the semi-bluff (like a heart)

3. It might get checked through to the river where Hero could take the pot down with a single bet.

Like i said tho, without doing the math.

[BigBrother]

[ QUOTE ]
Getting 8.5 to 1, you have a backdoor straight (1 out) and 2 outs. So, roughly, 3 outs. You usually need 13-1 pot odds here. But, given the fact that a) you can dump the turn quicky if you miss and b) you'll collect 3 BB (6 SB) if you hit your hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a brilliant thread. So much to think about when we are close to the edges.

I think you have to discount your implied odds here by the negative-implied odds of:

a) catching the oesd on the turn (4/47), calling a turn-bet (15/16) and missing (38/46)...

b) or hitting and losing to the flush (very small).

c) spiking your set and losing to 88's straight or TT's runner-runner straight, or a random runner-runner heart flush.

d) thinking TAG checking through a turn blank with a big hand (stop-n-go) so you pay her off on the river.

Individually each negative-implied scenario is a low probability, but collectively they add up to make this a closer EV decision against a tough opponent IMO.

Nate the Great was better as Uma.

Entity was better as the chimp.

[mr magoo]

What happend to Nat?