|
|
#11
07-13-2005, 02:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Finally figured out AK in early rounds....
This play is definitely -EV in the long run.
It's a coin flip against a pocket pair, and you are only a 65-35 favorite against any two cards heads up. Main deal here is the blind levels. In HOH2, Harrington had a good example I believe which was in the structured hand analysis section. QQ is -Ev in the long run in the first set of blind levels as well. You simply stand to lose more than you stand to gain. 
|
|
#12
07-13-2005, 02:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Finally figured out AK in early rounds....
[ QUOTE ]
Not a bad play but I hate getting called by TT or JJ or QQ this early. [/ QUOTE ] I don't mind...yea it sucks that it's a coinflip early on but even when this does happen and I win I can bully the [censored] out of people. I am much better with big stack than with middle stack, and I have a much better chance as well to build 1600 chips into 3000 on the bubble through putting other people all in and stealing like crazy.
|
|
#13
07-13-2005, 02:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Finally figured out AK in early rounds....
[ QUOTE ]
This play is definitely -EV in the long run. It's a coin flip against a pocket pair, and you are only a 65-35 favorite against any two cards heads up. [/ QUOTE ] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] You listed one even money situation and one situation wherein we are the favorite, and call it a -EV situation?
|
|
#14
07-13-2005, 02:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Finally figured out AK in early rounds....
Read the post again, I specified in more detail.
|
|
#15
07-13-2005, 02:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Finally figured out AK in early rounds....
[ QUOTE ]
This play is definitely -EV in the long run. It's a coin flip against a pocket pair, and you are only a 65-35 favorite against any two cards heads up. [/ QUOTE ] I am positive it is not -EV at the 20s and 30s, especially if you factor in Feq and the fact that donks call with KQ (DONKeq??)...and the odds of going against AA or KK are greatly reduced since you hold one of each. I would also say 70-80% of the time people will lay down their hands to this all-in...you have HUGE Feq here against solid players who understand to avoid situations like this with JJ and below and a solid play against the donks who will call with marginal hands. What's not to like?
|
|
#16
07-13-2005, 02:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Finally figured out AK in early rounds....
[ QUOTE ]
This play is definitely -EV in the long run. It's a coin flip against a pocket pair, and you are only a 65-35 favorite against any two cards heads up. Main deal here is the blind levels. In HOH2, Harrington had a good example I believe which was in the structured hand analysis section. QQ is -Ev in the long run in the first set of blind levels as well. You simply stand to lose more than you stand to gain. [/ QUOTE ] Harrington is one of my favorite players but Harrington doesn't play the 20s and 30s and really doesn't understand that you can't lay down QQ here (which is an entirely different topic that has been covered a thousand times).
|
|
#17
07-13-2005, 02:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Finally figured out AK in early rounds....
[ QUOTE ]
Main deal here is the blind levels. In HOH2, Harrington had a good example I believe which was in the structured hand analysis section. QQ is -Ev in the long run in the first set of blind levels as well. You simply stand to lose more than you stand to gain. [/ QUOTE ] having not read HOH2, could you shed some more light on this? Also, is HOH2 geared towards fast-structured, SNG-style tournaments, or deeper stacked, longer level MTTs? Because if its the latter, I would have to wonder whether many of its examples, especially something advocating tighter play in early levels, apply in SNGs.
|
|
#18
07-13-2005, 02:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Finally figured out AK in early rounds....
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Not a bad play but I hate getting called by TT or JJ or QQ this early. [/ QUOTE ] I'm ok with it. I'll know that I am a coinflip, and that I had at least some fold equity, which makes it a +EV play in the hand. And I can deal with making +EV plays all day. I hate getting called by KK or AA though. Those donks just won't lay those hands down. [/ QUOTE ] But is it really though? Let's say that it is the 1st hand and you have AKo on the button. UTG pops it to T85 and gets one coldcaller. You move in, blinds fold, UTG calls and the coldcaller folds. What does ICM say about it when he turns up 77... You win 45% (T1710) - 19.5% $EV You lose 55% - 0% $EV Net - 8.8% $EV I'm not super thrilled about this situation. Brad Edited due to wrong figures. It is still not a good idea to race in this spot, even with T110 of dead money.
|
|
#19
07-13-2005, 02:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Finally figured out AK in early rounds....
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Main deal here is the blind levels. In HOH2, Harrington had a good example I believe which was in the structured hand analysis section. QQ is -Ev in the long run in the first set of blind levels as well. You simply stand to lose more than you stand to gain. [/ QUOTE ] having not read HOH2, could you shed some more light on this? Also, is HOH2 geared towards fast-structured, SNG-style tournaments, or deeper stacked, longer level MTTs? Because if its the latter, I would have to wonder whether many of its examples, especially something advocating tighter play in early levels, apply in SNGs. [/ QUOTE ] The majority of Harrington's advice is geared towards MTT which he is a specialist at (and is my hero). However, some of his advice for STT is pretty wonkish (see Adanthar's post on it in the MTT forum). Can we get off HOH2?
|
|
#20
07-13-2005, 02:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Finally figured out AK in early rounds....
Shillx further proves my point.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
