83s

[Peter_rus]

Hello ,

Instead of debating of why my work was shoddy - i'll answer you with calculations, that assume your 1.33SB gain from flush-draw.

So it's 3-way and we have 5-1 with our 3-8 in our BB.
0.84% we will hit complete flush. We will win 3BB's.

3.47% we will have two pairs/trips. We will win in average 2.5BB with such holdings.

10.94% we will hit 4-flush to net 0.66BB's as you said

28.85% we will hit a pair to net -0.3BB's

1.6% we will hit 245,456,567,679,79T to net -0.1BB

54.3% we will hit nothing to get -0.99BB (occasional checking out the flop and hitting on turn or river)

If we add 0.84*3+3.47*2.5+10.94*0.66-28.85*-0.3-1.6*0.1-54.3*0.99=-44.16BB. It's -0.442bb/hand and it's higher than -0.5BB/h if we just fold.


Btw: You can agree or disagree with me. But saying someone's work is shoddy without any meaningfull reasons isn't way good in meta-game purposes at least for such somewhat respectfull poster as you are.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]
Hello ,

Instead of debating of why my work was shoddy - i'll answer you with calculations, that assume your 1.33SB gain from flush-draw.

So it's 3-way and we have 5-1 with our 3-8 in our BB.
0.84% we will hit complete flush. We will win 3BB's.

3.47% we will have two pairs/trips. We will win in average 2.5BB with such holdings.

10.94% we will hit 4-flush to net 0.66BB's as you said

28.85% we will hit a pair to net -0.3BB's

1.6% we will hit 245,456,567,679,79T to net -0.1BB

54.3% we will hit nothing to get -0.99BB (occasional checking out the flop and hitting on turn or river)

If we add 0.84*3+3.47*2.5+10.94*0.66-28.85*-0.3-1.6*0.1-54.3*0.99=-44.16BB. It's -0.442bb/hand and it's higher than -0.5BB/h if we just fold.


Btw: You can agree or disagree with me. But saying someone's work is shoddy without any meaningfull reasons isn't way good in meta-game purposes at least for such somewhat respectfull poster as you are.

[/ QUOTE ]

I meant no offense and I apologise for the wording above. You are a hell of a player and theorist and I respect the time and energy you have given to the forums.

When you did your 5-1 calculations you grouped all the hands together. As I remember there were hands like K3s all the way to 43s. I think the analysis was a little flawed simply because some of the hands with high card power might have been carrying some of the weaker hands in terms of EV. For instance if you group all suited combinations together you would get a skewed view because hands like AKs or KQs are obviously profitable. Just because the group as a whole performs well doesn't mean each member of the group is +EV. If you can point me in the direction of your post (or repost it here) I can elaborate further on the hands I don't believe you have proven are +EV getting 5-1.

For what it's worth, I'm looser in the blinds with suited hands that most HUSHers due in part to the analysis you've done.

The analysis you have provided is very nice. I think this is the only calculation that might be off. All the other estimates look solid but I'm not sure about this one.

[ QUOTE ]

28.85% we will hit a pair to net -0.3BB's

[/ QUOTE ]

It's just tough for me to estimate. Clearly it depends a large part on the skill of the player. I don't disagree, I just can't come up with a number on my own.

Krishan

[Peter_rus]

[ QUOTE ]
For instance if you group all suited combinations together you would get a skewed view because hands like AKs or KQs are obviously profitable. Just because the group as a whole performs well doesn't mean each member of the group is +EV. If you can point me in the direction of your post (or repost it here) I can elaborate further on the hands I don't believe you have proven are +EV getting 5-1.

[/ QUOTE ]

No need to elaborate. My results are just my results, which don't show anything. I used to defend any suited after i come to the need of this after made calculations above.

Calculations were based on overall profitability of all 3-way BB hands in a raised pot in terms of flop holdings. Some of them i counted after posting this http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/show...rue#Post1722923

[cartman]

[ QUOTE ]
I used to defend any suited after i come to the need of this after made calculations above.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Peter,

I defended with any two suited regardless of the number of players in the pot and the position of the raiser for my last 150K hands of 5/10 (even heads up). My results indicate that even the very worst "families" of hands perform no worse than the -.50BB that we lose by folding, and all the rest perform better. The group about which I am uncertain are those that yielded almost exactly the same -.50BB that I would have lost by folding them. This group includes all suited hands that contain a 2, 3, or 4 except for A2s, A3s, and A4s. They have collectively lost -.51BB. I am curious whether these are the hands that you expect to be the weakest performers.

Since I certainly don't consider myself an expert at postflop play from the blinds, I am continuing to play these "toss up" hands because I hope that as I continue to improve in this area that the results for these hands will climb into profitable territory as well.

I have a few questions for you:

1) Did you also defend with any two suited when there was no one else in the pot besides the raiser (it will be heads up) and what is your opinion on defending with them heads up?

2) As I progress to higher limits, the impact of the rake and the blind structure will become more favorable to looser defense standards, but the increased ability of my opponents will encourage tighter play. Which of these forces, if either, prevails over the other?

3) What is your current opinion about defending with these trashy suited hands as the limits move higher: 10/20, 15/30, 20/40, 30/60?

Thanks,
Cartman

[Peter_rus]

[ QUOTE ]
I am curious whether these are the hands that you expect to be the weakest performers.

[/ QUOTE ]

No.

[ QUOTE ]
1) Did you also defend with any two suited when there was no one else in the pot besides the raiser (it will be heads up) and what is your opinion on defending with them heads up?


[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's quite probably my leak.

[ QUOTE ]
2) As I progress to higher limits, the impact of the rake and the blind structure will become more favorable to looser defense standards, but the increased ability of my opponents will encourage tighter play. Which of these forces, if either, prevails over the other?

[/ QUOTE ]

Players mean more for me.

[ QUOTE ]
3) What is your current opinion about defending with these trashy suited hands as the limits move higher: 10/20, 15/30, 20/40, 30/60?

[/ QUOTE ]

I defend any cards i defend 2-way - 3-way. I do not defend any2 against steal.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
I defend any cards i defend 2-way - 3-way.

[/ QUOTE ]


I think this might be a mistake. while I have nothing to back this up, and am not even sure how to utilize this theory, but there are some hands that play much better 3 way and vice versa. the hand that comes to mind for me is A2o. headsup it is an ok hand to defend with because you can go to showdown on some favorable boards. 3 ways the likelihood that you get to showdown with A high AND it's good are minimal. the other problem is 3-way, if neither player has an A and you flop one, they will both be suspicious that one of the other players has one, and you won't get much action unless you're drawing to 3 outs. I think this probably goes for most of the weaker offsuit aces. when you don't hit, they're no good. when they do hit, you get no action or you find out a few bets later they're no good