|
|
#21
12-10-2004, 03:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Dan Harrington on Volatility
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] He just means he wants to limit how much he could either win or lose on this given hand. [/ QUOTE ] If that's all he means then why doesn't he say so? Why does he feel the need to mention all the other players at the table? [/ QUOTE ] This whole topic will become clear once people read the book. The OP was asking mostly about the volitility term, but that's a small part of a larger point Harrington makes when talking about that hand. I don't have the book in front of me here at work, but will reference it when I get home. I finished reading it last night, and it's pretty dang good, certainly made me excited for volume two. 
|
|
#22
12-10-2004, 03:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dan Harrington on Volatility
He is at the final table with seven players left. If he put in a normal raise, he would be betting about 20% of his stack pre-flop on an uncertain hand. He may have to bet a lot more after the flop. If poker gods are with him, he wins the hand. Othewise he loses it.
As he considers himself one of the better players, he would rather reduce the swings (volatility) and depend more on his skill to outplay the others. So he calls. I think he would play this way with any initial raiser (it does not depend on Farha's style). Other players would view it diffently. Raymer, based on his posts here,seems to always make plays with when he sees a positive EV, regardless of volatility, so he would raise here.
|
|
#24
12-10-2004, 03:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dan Harrington on Volatility
If you are raising bc you have postion and can just bet out when Farha checks (a bluff with AK when a ragged flop falls) then it really doesnt matter what you hold it could be 66 and it would be proper to reraise.
it isn't a bluff if you think AK is the best hand. plus, may have 6 outs with AK vs 2 outs with 66. no doubt, playing for a pair when stacks are deep is tricky... you get scared if it comes A Q x or A J x or A T x or so many others... I understand there are good reasons to not go to war with a pair. But Sammy faces the same problem with whatever he has. If he outflops you, so be it -- you lose some chips but you don't have to lose em all just because you have AK. Passing on AK with position for a 3x raise seems really tight to me (dare I say weak-tight)... now I am officially psyched to dive into this book
|
|
#27
12-10-2004, 03:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dan Harrington on Volatility (Clarification)
In the original post, I should have mentioned that he did in fact call Farha's raise.
I guess my real question is, why is it beneficial for a good player to reduce volatility in this situation and an out classed player to increase volatility by raising here?
|
|
#29
12-10-2004, 03:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dan Harrington on Volatility (Clarification)
[ QUOTE ]
I guess my real question is, why is it beneficial for a good player to reduce volatility in this situation and an out classed player to increase volatility by raising here? [/ QUOTE ] In essense, an outclassed player would be better off taking a chance with their hand when they think they have the best of it. This means not only playing the hand, but being willing risk all of your chips on it, because you might not be a strong enough player to take advantage of the marginal EV chances that you'll have against strong players. But pushing a hand against someone like Farha where you could possibly be ahead, you're eliminating his advantage of being able to outplay you when you push with all of your chips. Essentially the odds take over. Conversely, for someone like Harrington, it's the opposite. He doesn't want to risk a large portion of his stack before the flop against someone like Farha, because he's an aggressive player who Harrington can win a lot of chips from post-flop if he hits his hand. If he doesn't hit it, he can throw his hand away and wait for a better opportunity. Another reason just calling limits his volitility, is that his call gives him some flexibility if someone like Moneymaker - who may be willing to risk all of his chips with a small edge - goes all-in behind him. He then has a chance to decide whether a call is worth the risk.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
