|
|
#11
10-12-2005, 07:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Appropriate PF raise?
Although Buzz seems pretty F*ing sharp, I think he got this one wrong for 3-handed play. I suspect AcKh5d5d is better than Adkd5d4d. With 3 players, the size of the flush is probably not very important, but having 4 diamonds in the hand makes it a lot harder to make a flush (and marginally makes it easier for the other 3 flushes to come out). It would be interesting to see a simulation with both examples vs. random opponents or (if possible) against a button limper who has discretion and a BB who does not have a hand worth a PFR.
Jim 
|
|
#12
10-12-2005, 03:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Appropriate PF raise?
Thanks Jim. I'll run the sims for you.
hand........high...low...scoop...total random #1...818....399....1640...2857 random #2...841....386....1646...2843 Ad4d5dKd....519...1259....2492...4270 random #1...831....376....1657...2864 random #2...782....403....1557...2742 Ac4d5dKs....537...1237....2621...4295 You should focus on the 4270 and 4295. If you divide these by 10000, I think you get what two dimes would report as “E.V.” (0.4270 and 0.4295). It's close, but you’re right. Three handed, the hand with two diamonds, even though not having the ace, does better than the hand with four diamonds. Actually, those bottom lines are close enough so that if I ran the sims again they might change places, but I try not to introduce a bias into my experimental data. Thus you won, fair and square. 10000 runs each is a good enough trial for me. The total for the second sim is 10001 rather than 10000 because of the way I rounded. (Wilson gives the values to two decimal places and I regularly round to whole numbers). A problem is that when you start with more than two opponents, you’re not really up against two random hands. There has been some selectivity on the part of the opponent who has voluntarily chosen to play the hand. However, before the flop, in terms of diamonds that are available, I think it’s close to random. Maybe a better indicator is flushes made and flushes won 329/370 with the four diamond hand and 449/706 for the two diamond hand (about half as many flushes for the four diamond hand as for the two diamond hand). When three handed, you do win a higher percentage of the time when you make your flush, 89% for the four diamond hand as compared to 64% for the two diamond hand, but having only two diamonds does contribute more to the value of the hand than having the ace as part of four diamonds. (The losses for the 89% hand are to full houses and higher. The losses for the 64% hand are to full houses and higher, and also to higher flushes). I hope it’s all clear. If not, ask and maybe I can clear it up for you. Buzz
|
|
#13
10-12-2005, 03:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Appropriate PF raise?
As per this hand, the ace and the king can be called off-suit black cards. My apologies, I was looking for a quicker way to write an Omaha hand, but it seems that only resulted in confusion.
Intuitively, A45K seems better than A55K, because you increase your odds at the low half of the pot wihtout significantly effecting your odds at the high half esp. when the 45 is suited. Indeed, in this particular hand, there would have been no low and a split high had I not had the 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]5[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]. (The BB had AKT2 and the board was AK269 (3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img])). Indeed, the 2nd nut low, 2pair high, allowed me to juice the turn. I found it interesting that you believe that it is a better hand to have 4 nut flush cards than it is to have a 5 high flush draw.
|
|
#14
10-12-2005, 03:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Appropriate PF raise?
Card Sharp - Jim's A55K was a typo. He meant A45K. That's my interpretation.
The question was, is it better to have only two cards in the flush suit, but have them both be babies - or is it better to have the ace in the flush suit, but to have it along with three other cards in the flush suit (thus decreasing the number of possible flush cards available for the board). After a flop seen by five or more opponents, I think I'd rather have the ace plus three other cards in the flush suit, even though the chance of making a flush is reduced (about 49%, as I recall from calculations made a while back, although it didn't turn out exactly that way in the sims) when you have four, rather than two, cards in the flush suit. But Jim's right. After a flop seen by two opponents, although it's close, I think holding only two baby cards in a suit is slightly better than holding four cards in a suit including the ace. That's assuming the cards are the same ranks in the two hands, here ace, four, five, and king. Buzz
|
|
#15
10-12-2005, 04:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Appropriate PF raise?
A45K better than A278 in a full game? I dont know about that. When you hit a low hand with A278 you are also very likely to hit 2 pair or a straight. (example 456 flop, your A2 has the nut low and 78 has the straight, a very possible occurance) This is not the case with a hand like AK45, A4QT, etc. When you hit 3 low cards with A4K5 you will have nothing but a vulnerable nut, 2nd nut, or 3rd nut low with no potential for high. I didnt even include how the A2 combo in the one hand is much better than the A4 combo, but I think you get the point. This is much more of truth in PL Omaha, but I think it goes for Limit as well.
Therefore, I would much rather have A278 in a full ring game then AK45. Especially with the fools I play with.
|
|
#16
10-12-2005, 07:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Appropriate PF raise?
[ QUOTE ]
A45K better than A278 in a full game? I dont know about that. [/ QUOTE ] Dyess Man - You don’t really ignore the possibility of flushes in a real game, do you? (I can’t believe you do). Yet you make no mention of the suitedness of these hands. The hand I was writing about was A45K-<font color="red">with the four and five both diamonds</font> and the other hand was a rainbow hand. However, even if both hands are rainbows, yes, I think A45Kn is a better starting hand than A278n. That’s true for a full ring game and it’s even truer for one-on-one play. [ QUOTE ] When you hit a low hand with A278 you are also very likely to hit 2 pair or a straight. [/ QUOTE ] Pooh, pooh. The straight is possible, but not very likely. It’s a probable loser if you do hit it. Two pair with A278 generally stinks in a full game. [ QUOTE ] This is not the case with a hand like AK45, A4QT, etc. When you hit 3 low cards with A4K5 you will have nothing but a vulnerable nut, 2nd nut, or 3rd nut low with no potential for high. [/ QUOTE ] It’s not quite true that A45Ks= has no potential for high. Indeed it has more potential for high than A278n. That’s especially true one-on-one. Yes, I agree you’re more likely to have a non-nut low, but I think the high possibilities with AK45n are better than with A278n. A4QTn is quite a different hand from AK45n. I have A4QTn rated as “marginal” and AK45 rated as “playable.” The distinction between “marginal” and “playable” is for my own purposes and is purely arbitrary. The point is that I think AK45n is distinctly better as a starting hand than A4QTn. Thus I’ll probably play AK45n from any position. I’ll probably raise myself with the hand, but whether I do or not, although I don’t want a raise behind me, a raise behind me does not seem horrid. I really don’t want a raise behind me with A4QTn, and thus will probably tend to only play A4QTn from late position, maybe only from the button, depending. I might tend to raise before the flop with the hand, depending. (Rightly or wrongly, whether I’ll play a hand and how I’ll tend to play a hand are highly dependent on who my active opponents are, where they’re sitting relative to me and each other, and how they’re playing). At any rate, AK45n is, in my humble opinion, a better starting hand than A4QTn. It’s also, IMHO, a better starting hand than A278n. [ QUOTE ] I didnt even include how the A2 combo in the one hand is much better than the A4 combo, but I think you get the point. [/ QUOTE ] Well... you may not have included it in your thinking before, but now you are. At any rate, obviously the A2 combo is much better than the A4 combo for low. But the 78 combo is horrid, maybe especially when combined with an A2 combo. Having the seven and eight rather than two high cards cuts down on the low cards available for the board. And there’s no counterfeit protection. And you’re more likely to get quartered or sixthed for low with ace-deuce than with ace-four, ace-five, or four-five. And I’m not just playing for low. [ QUOTE ] This is much more of truth in PL Omaha, but I think it goes for Limit as well. [/ QUOTE ] The last pot limit post I read, some poor devil, with a very nice but not fantastic starting hand, put four bucks in a pot, then called a twenty dollar raise, and then was facing a raise of over a hundred bucks. All this before the flop. If that sounds like fun to you, go for it. It just sounds stressful to me. I used to thrive on pressure. I was creative and productive under pressure. But now I’m not supposed to put myself in stressful situations. I read these posts about pot limit and realize a pot limit game would be pure stress for me - very bad for my cardiovascular system. Thus pot limit is out of the picture for me. It would simply be too stressful for me. Thus I’m purely a limit Omaha-8 player. My thinking here is for limit Omaha-8. [ QUOTE ] Therefore, I would much rather have A278 in a full ring game then AK45. [/ QUOTE ] Fair enough. I prefer A45Kn to A278n in a full ring game. Just my opinion. Buzz
|
|
#17
10-12-2005, 07:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Appropriate PF raise?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] A45K better than A278 in a full game? I dont know about that. [/ QUOTE ] Dyess Man - You don’t really ignore the possibility of flushes in a real game, do you? (I can’t believe you do). Yet you make no mention of the suitedness of these hands. The hand I was writing about was A45K-<font color="red">with the four and five both diamonds</font> and the other hand was a rainbow hand. However, even if both hands are rainbows, yes, I think A45Kn is a better starting hand than A278n. That’s true for a full ring game and it’s even truer for one-on-one play. [ QUOTE ] When you hit a low hand with A278 you are also very likely to hit 2 pair or a straight. [/ QUOTE ] Pooh, pooh. The straight is possible, but not very likely. It’s a probable loser if you do hit it. Two pair with A278 generally stinks in a full game. [ QUOTE ] This is not the case with a hand like AK45, A4QT, etc. When you hit 3 low cards with A4K5 you will have nothing but a vulnerable nut, 2nd nut, or 3rd nut low with no potential for high. [/ QUOTE ] It’s not quite true that A45Ks= has no potential for high. Indeed it has more potential for high than A278n. That’s especially true one-on-one. Yes, I agree you’re more likely to have a non-nut low, but I think the high possibilities with AK45n are better than with A278n. A4QTn is quite a different hand from AK45n. I have A4QTn rated as “marginal” and AK45 rated as “playable.” The distinction between “marginal” and “playable” is for my own purposes and is purely arbitrary. The point is that I think AK45n is distinctly better as a starting hand than A4QTn. Thus I’ll probably play AK45n from any position. I’ll probably raise myself with the hand, but whether I do or not, although I don’t want a raise behind me, a raise behind me does not seem horrid. I really don’t want a raise behind me with A4QTn, and thus will probably tend to only play A4QTn from late position, maybe only from the button, depending. I might tend to raise before the flop with the hand, depending. (Rightly or wrongly, whether I’ll play a hand and how I’ll tend to play a hand are highly dependent on who my active opponents are, where they’re sitting relative to me and each other, and how they’re playing). At any rate, AK45n is, in my humble opinion, a better starting hand than A4QTn. It’s also, IMHO, a better starting hand than A278n. [ QUOTE ] I didnt even include how the A2 combo in the one hand is much better than the A4 combo, but I think you get the point. [/ QUOTE ] Well... you may not have included it in your thinking before, but now you are. At any rate, obviously the A2 combo is much better than the A4 combo for low. But the 78 combo is horrid, maybe especially when combined with an A2 combo. Having the seven and eight rather than two high cards cuts down on the low cards available for the board. And there’s no counterfeit protection. And you’re more likely to get quartered or sixthed for low with ace-deuce than with ace-four, ace-five, or four-five. And I’m not just playing for low. [ QUOTE ] This is much more of truth in PL Omaha, but I think it goes for Limit as well. [/ QUOTE ] The last pot limit post I read, some poor devil, with a very nice but not fantastic starting hand, put four bucks in a pot, then called a twenty dollar raise, and then was facing a raise of over a hundred bucks. All this before the flop. If that sounds like fun to you, go for it. It just sounds stressful to me. I used to thrive on pressure. I was creative and productive under pressure. But now I’m not supposed to put myself in stressful situations. I read these posts about pot limit and realize a pot limit game would be pure stress for me - very bad for my cardiovascular system. Thus pot limit is out of the picture for me. It would simply be too stressful for me. Thus I’m purely a limit Omaha-8 player. My thinking here is for limit Omaha-8. [ QUOTE ] Therefore, I would much rather have A278 in a full ring game then AK45. [/ QUOTE ] Fair enough. I prefer A45Kn to A278n in a full ring game. Just my opinion. Buzz [/ QUOTE ] Thanks for arguing my point in a civil manner. I didnt feel the 2 small diamonds were enough to shift my thoughts, thats why I left it out. (chances of making it are slim, and the chances that it will hold up as the best flush is even slimmer. I mainly see small suited cards as "defensive" cards) However, my thought process was mainly on PLO8, not so much Limit. I can see that in Limit the edge would probobly go to the AK45. But I felt given the structure of PLO8, which is a game of 3/4 and facing big bets or big decisions every street, that the A278 was more profitable. I should have clarified that. Either way, thanks for the response.
|
|
#18
10-13-2005, 08:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Appropriate PF raise?
I agree that A45K ns is better than A278 ns, especially heads up.
In addition to better high potential, A45K has better counterfeit protection. Lets look at what happens when one of your primary low cards get counterfeited. Say an Ace comes on the turn. The first hand would have 45 for low and the second hand would have 27. A hand like A4QT has no counterfeit protection, which makes it marginal in my book.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
