|
|
#31
08-13-2005, 06:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Math shows folding is correct.
What the other posters said. FWIW on the WPT show,
"Poker by the Book" where David and several other famous poker book authors (Brunson, Caro, Helmuth, TJ, etc.) played (David won), they kept asking David what the odds were on various all in's. David was in the ball park, but I don't think he got very many exactly right. 
|
|
#32
08-13-2005, 07:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL Preflop Question
"Why is this thread in this forum?"
Because its not just for a bunch of gossipping old ladies.
|
|
#33
08-13-2005, 07:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL Preflop Question
[ QUOTE ]
But that would make AQ fold. If I am shortstacked and have a range of hands from AA-TT, AK, why would I want AQ to fold? [/ QUOTE ] Because you're apparently an idiot that pushes absolutely any flop. IRL, you probably wouldn't, but the question is supposed to be aimed at the concept of implied odds and of course 90% of this forum missed it. It is likely that DS posted it here in order for the level of discourse to rise somewhat above 'OMG he called with QTo'. (edit: hah)
|
|
#36
08-13-2005, 11:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
in other words,
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I've always been curious how one figures all this math out in the heat of the moment. I can understand putting people on hands and knowing if you are a favorite, but all the EV weighted calcs seem a lot harder to do a the table. Does one get better as situations repeat???? Do yo study common structured hand problems and as the closest ones come up say "oh that's that one" - fold Someone enlighten me. [/ QUOTE ] Yes. I think "all this math" is mostly useful for figuring out common situations away from the table, so you have some mathematical point of reference when making decisions at the table. I know that's how I treat these kinds of analysis. Since poker is a game of incomplete information, most decisions come down to trying to determine what's going on in the hand and basically making an educated guess. Studying these kinds of hands is just one of the disciplines that helps you guess correctly more of the time. [/ QUOTE ] hypothesize! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#38
08-13-2005, 11:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL Preflop Question
[ QUOTE ]
(This may be a repeat post. If so I apologize.) 10 20 Blinds. You are in the Big Blind with AQ. You have plenty of chips. A tight player starting with a short stack of 300 makes it 100 to go in early position. All fold. 80 to you. He has 200 left. You somehow are almost positive about his play. He has two tens or higher or AK. If you move in he will fold only the two tens. If you call he will always move in 200 on the flop and call if you move in. Preflop you should call, fold or move in? [/ QUOTE ] My initial minute of thought points towards cold calling and taking a flop. Thanks to diminishing marginal utility 100 chips is really insignificant at this level, but more significant is making the most mathmetically optical move with the focus on eliminating a tight player. I don't know if you equate tight with solid, but I'd like to get the tight player off the table in the hopes (or rather the educated gamble) that he will get replaced by some more dead money. So either call or push. Leaning towards calling and folding unless you hit a good flop. Definitely not folding, because you want this guy off the table.
|
|
#39
08-13-2005, 11:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL Preflop Question
i hate that people like paul phillips never post in MHNL. Maybe that is why you would post this here, because maybe those type of people will respond. But I would like if you posted in MHNL as well, so the fact that this is here makes me very sad.
Please give a real reaosn for posting this here. The responses will be 95% morons like all the other posts in this forum.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
