|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 88 playing against no overcards
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] We already have over 50% pot equity against two players. [/ QUOTE ] Wow that really surprises me. How did you derive that figure? [/ QUOTE ] I'm too lazy to do math, I Pokerstove'd it. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 88 playing against no overcards
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] We already have over 50% pot equity against two players. [/ QUOTE ] Wow that really surprises me. How did you derive that figure? [/ QUOTE ] I'm too lazy to do math, I Pokerstove'd it. [/ QUOTE ] Did you actually put them on a range of hands or did you just hit the "random" button? Not saying we don't have alot of equity here, I'm just trying to prevent a bad habit forming of not putting opponnents on a range of hands |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 88 playing against no overcards
[ QUOTE ]
Not saying we don't have alot of equity here, I'm just trying to prevent a bad habit forming of not putting opponnents on a range of hands [/ QUOTE ] I put the SB on a range of decent hands to complete the SB with. I put BB on random hands considering he got a free play from the BB. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 88 playing against no overcards
[ QUOTE ]
I put the SB on a range of decent hands to complete the SB with. I put BB on random hands considering he got a free play from the BB. [/ QUOTE ] Good point about the BB getting a free play. But doesn't that the fact that the SB bet and the BB called mean random/semi-random holdings are a little less likely? Overall though when you put it that way I think we've got enough equity to raise. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 88 playing against no overcards
[ QUOTE ]
But doesn't that the fact that the SB bet and the BB called mean random/semi-random holdings are a little less likely? [/ QUOTE ] I don't think it does. I think these players are capable of betting/calling with as little as a pair, an overcard, a gut shot straight draw, etc. I believe there is a large range of hands SB and BB could have at this time. |
|
|