Taking Marginal -EV Spots to Set Up a Profitable Image - Page 3

BobboFitos · #21 05-26-2005, 05:27 PM

the call is awful

gomberg · #22 05-26-2005, 05:28 PM

ok - lets figure out around how -ev this is. You'll win this pot roughly 25% (probably a little high) vs his range lets say.

So 25%($881 + $150 + $150 + $130) - 75%($881) = 327.75 - 660.75 = -$333. If you can make up this plus more EV because of that play in the next 15 minutes, it'd be a good play. Being 6-handed party, there's a lot of turnover and a lot of players won't / can't adjust because they don't pay attention and / or are multitabling.

ZeeJustin · #23 05-26-2005, 05:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]
the call is awful

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for adding absolutely nothing to this thread. Obviously I realize this post will create a lot of controversy, but if you fully understand my line, it's a great start to thinking on the next level. However, you'd be better off back in the small stakes forum posting about ABC strategy.

BobboFitos · #24 05-26-2005, 05:30 PM

The story you refer to is about chip reese, and does not apply because he ran out of money he physically brought with him. online you can just click those chips in the tray. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

LuvDemNutz · #25 05-26-2005, 05:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
ok - lets figure out around how -ev this is. You'll win this pot roughly 25% (probably a little high) vs his range lets say.

So 25%($881 + $150 + $150 + $130) - 75%($881) = 327.75 - 660.75 = -$333. If you can make up this plus more EV because of that play in the next 15 minutes, it'd be a good play. Being 6-handed party, there's a lot of turnover and a lot of players won't / can't adjust because they don't pay attention and / or are multitabling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gomberger makes good points - it just seems a bit too expensive of an image builder to me.

creedofhubris · #26 05-26-2005, 05:33 PM

Yay, you got your money in as a 6:1 dog.

The only hands that go in on flops like this are two small pair and big draws, either of which are big favorites against you.

Counting a 3 as a runner flush draw is rationalization.

If you had ace high with an A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], and thus might be ahead and might have REAL flush outs, then I think some of your points might be more valid. For instance, an A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] has .41 EV against his holding. A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] is +EV.

Atropos · #27 05-26-2005, 05:35 PM

I would not call this spot marginally -EV but you know this as well.

I think much depends on the game you play and your opponents. If you play against multi-table monsters, I think this play is not so good. Because:
a) They do not notice at all. If that is the case, you would not need such fancy image plays to beat them, otherwise you should not be playing them.

b) They notice, but have a large database from datamining on you. They probably know you are good and get confused. If I am confused, I most often try to play smaller pots against the opponent who made me confused, since I know I dont have a good read on him.

But I see this working good against bad weak-tight players, who dont know you are not a fish. I see this working even better against a player that is very likely to go on tilt after being sucked out on with 43o. Against such an opponent you could easily make up the money very fast.

BobboFitos · #28 05-26-2005, 05:35 PM

ZJ, I dont think you are awful, but this play is. You can argue about metagame / pot odds / image / whatever you want, things that "I wouldn't know about playing such low stakes compared to you", (which may be true, also) but I cant see any way to defend the play...

I read through the replies after (and your take) and it's very interesting, but... there are a bunch of hands which you are drawing dead against. EVen if he wouldn't fastplay a monster he could still have a pair+draw which has you crushed. Also...

[ QUOTE ]
f you fully understand my line

[/ QUOTE ]

You know what, i dont. I dont understand open limping 43o utg. I dont understand calling a raise. I dont understand (even though you eloquently argued why it's good) caling the all in. Maybe that makes you better then I do. But Im interested in knowing why you think these plays are great.

As for arguing ABC style, I do prefer textbook plays, but this is so unorthodox by me asserting my point I think it's bad hardly proves I only like one way to play a hand / etc.

ZeeJustin · #29 05-26-2005, 05:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
ok - lets figure out around how -ev this is. You'll win this pot roughly 25% (probably a little high) vs his range lets say.

So 25%($881 + $150 + $150 + $130) - 75%($881) = 327.75 - 660.75 = -$333. If you can make up this plus more EV because of that play in the next 15 minutes, it'd be a good play. Being 6-handed party, there's a lot of turnover and a lot of players won't / can't adjust because they don't pay attention and / or are multitabling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for making this post. Your point is very good, but again, I think you are vastly underestimating how +EV an image change can be. When you see someone make a call like this with 43o, you aren't thinking, "that was a bad play." Be honest. Your gut reaction will say, "wow, this guys a complete moron. He's an ATM." That's what I want!

The next time someone finds top pair with no kicker, it's very likely that I'll be able to take his entire stack. I can even stack people with ahnds worse than that. Even if I only have a 1/3 chance of stacking someone before the realize they've been duped, this is +EV given the math above. Since a ton of my edge will also come from pots where I don't stack people, and it will take more than a few solidly played hands to make players realize that I'm actually TAG, all of those small pots I play along with the few big pots I play should be more than enough to counterract my -ev from this specific hand.

dtbog · #30 05-26-2005, 05:38 PM

I appreciate your metagame/image points, as well as your pot equity analysis -- but I think you simply out-thought yourself here.

I agree with your sentiments -- he probably doesn't have anything good, you have outs, and this will set up a profitable image -- but can't you apply this knowledge next time you're in a hand against this guy? When you at least have ace high?

If you make this play for image reasons, then you clearly plan to play more hands against these same players.
... so, if you're going to be playing many more hands with the same players, then you can wait until next time this guy bluffs the flop -- and call his bluff with ace high or one pair.

-dB