Tossing AK

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (10 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is CO with A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">5 folds</font>, MP3 calls, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, SB calls, BB calls, MP3 calls.

Flop: (8 SB) 5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
SB checks, <font color="#CC3333">BB bets</font>, MP3 folds, Hero folds, SB folds.

Final Pot: 4.50 BB

[/ QUOTE ]

Gotta peel one off here with 2 overs and a BD flush draw.

[TomBrooks]

Folding looks best. Edit: Nah, don't fold. The two best overs and a BDF. Calling looks OK. Raising might be better. I realized after reading the thread that BB could be betting a flush draw also... hmmm...possible.

If you wanted to continue, I'd raise rather than call and try for a free card on the turn. If BB reraises the Flop or bets out on a Non-Ace, King or Heart Turn, I'd lay it down, it looks like trips. If a Heart comes, your going to take a look at the River, of course.

[MrEngenic]

[ QUOTE ]
Not really. Define "some players".

If you assume that he's a fish who will never play trips this way, then I think it's also safe to assume that he's the type of player who isn't going to fold a 5 or PP in this spot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't assume he's a fish. I assume he is equally likely to have a 9, a 5, a low pocket pair, a complete bluff or a flush draw and that he will sometimes fold a 5 or a lower pocket if I raise turn. If he has a flush draw he will call my raise.
If you had a low pocket and bluffed, would you call down a turn raise against a tag? Would you 3 bet with anything but a 9 or a set?

[McGahee]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not really. Define "some players".

If you assume that he's a fish who will never play trips this way, then I think it's also safe to assume that he's the type of player who isn't going to fold a 5 or PP in this spot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't assume he's a fish. I assume he is equally likely to have a 9, a 5, a low pocket pair, a complete bluff or a flush draw and that he will sometimes fold a 5 or a lower pocket if I raise turn. If he has a flush draw he will call my raise.
If you had a low pocket and bluffed, would you call down a turn raise against a tag? Would you 3 bet with anything but a 9 or a set?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know if those were supposed to be rhetorical questions or not and I'm not sure how relevant this is to the hand, but...
If I'm villian in this hand and hero (who I read to be a solid TAG) raises me on the turn I am certainly not folding any pair. I don't believe he has a 9 and since he raised 1 limper PF I'm not convinced he has an overpair either. It reeks of a semi-bluff/free showdown play.
Of course, I'm probably insta-mucking against a typical passive Party fish and giving him credit for a slowplayed 9.

Of the range of hands you mentioned, a flush draw and a complete bluff are the ONLY hands it makes since to raise here (this is a rare situation where you want to raise a bluff since he still has 6 outs when he holds 2 rags). I think more often he has a 9, 5, or PP. And you have to have a really good read on him to think he's going to fold a 5 or PP - because it won't work against a fish or a TAG.

[kapw7]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How are we increasing out chances a lot by going heads up?

[/ QUOTE ]

3- handed 33.33% avg equity
HU - 50%

Thus a 33% increase.

[/ QUOTE ]

This statement makes no sense and shows quite a disturbing understanding of pot equity.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only thing I find diturbing is someone pretending not to understand that
100/ 3 players = 33.33%
100/ 2 players = 50%

Going from 33.33% to 50% you get an increase of 33.333333%

Now if you don't like the name average equity replace it with something else.

What is wrong with you guys? Why all this agression?
If it's only testosterone then play poker less and get laid more!

[McGahee]

[ QUOTE ]
The only thing I find diturbing is someone pretending not to understand that
100/ 3 players = 33.33%
100/ 2 players = 50%

Going from 33.33% to 50% you get an increase of 33.333333%

Now if you don't like the name average equity replace it with something else.

What is wrong with you guys? Why all this agression?
If it's only testosterone then play poker less and get laid more!

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I think I need more of both.
A little defensive?

Your math is correct if everybody held the same 2 cards, but when Player A likely has us beat and we have Player B beat, we're not improving our equity all that much by knocking out Player B; but rather we're putting more $ in with the worse hand. Clearly, a raise does not clean up any of our outs in this hand, nor does it protect us from anything. The only reason to raise is that it "might" get us a free card which we may or may not take presuming we don't get 3-bet...yippee.

[davelin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How are we increasing out chances a lot by going heads up?

[/ QUOTE ]

3- handed 33.33% avg equity
HU - 50%

Thus a 33% increase.

[/ QUOTE ]

This statement makes no sense and shows quite a disturbing understanding of pot equity.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only thing I find diturbing is someone pretending not to understand that
100/ 3 players = 33.33%
100/ 2 players = 50%

Going from 33.33% to 50% you get an increase of 33.333333%

Now if you don't like the name average equity replace it with something else.

What is wrong with you guys? Why all this agression?
If it's only testosterone then play poker less and get laid more!

[/ QUOTE ]

The 33% and 50% numbers just say how much equity you at least need in order to make a bet/raise for equity's sake. Just because a hand goes from 3-handed to 2-handed doesn't mean you've increased your equity magically.

[kapw7]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The only thing I find diturbing is someone pretending not to understand that
100/ 3 players = 33.33%
100/ 2 players = 50%

Going from 33.33% to 50% you get an increase of 33.333333%

Now if you don't like the name average equity replace it with something else.

What is wrong with you guys? Why all this agression?
If it's only testosterone then play poker less and get laid more!

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I think I need more of both.
A little defensive?

Your math is correct if everybody held the same 2 cards, but when Player A likely has us beat and we have Player B beat, we're not improving our equity all that much by knocking out Player B; but rather we're putting more $ in with the worse hand. Clearly, a raise does not clean up any of our outs in this hand, nor does it protect us from anything. It "might" get us a free card which we may or may not take if we don't get 3-bet...yippee.

[/ QUOTE ]

I used very simplistic maths just to show how you can increase your chances to win.
TOP has a nice chapter on this: "Raising to drive out worse hands when your own maybe second best"

The interesting thing here is that we are not sure that we are behind. Player A might be betting a draw or he might be bluffing maybe with A-high that we beat. If we raise a lot of nice things can happen: B might fold a smaller pocket pair. He might be on a flush draw and we'll charge him double for this. He might be in a gutshot as well. If we let him call with a gutshot we can lose to a pair of sixes or something. Not very nice. A few times we can just win the pot if A is on a flat bluff and B folds. Additionally if it goes HU we'll have an excellent position and a lot of times we can have the choice to get a free card on the turn or the river.
And one more small piece is that we can get info. If we go to the turn with 2 opponents calling then we can be sure that we are most likely beat and save 1-2 bets. Not very reliable info and certainly not worth the raise by its own but it is a small bonus.

And I hope I was not too harsh but I don't get the agressive replies when everyone here is trying to have a good discussion, express their opinion and become better players.

[kapw7]

[ QUOTE ]
Just because a hand goes from 3-handed to 2-handed doesn't mean you've increased your equity magically.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not magically. You earn part of the equity of the player who folded.

Anyway I did not use the word "average equity" in the context of SSHE "pot equity". If I may try to make it simpler:

If you play 100 hands 3-handed you win the pot 33 times
If you play the same 100 hands heads-up you win the pot 50 times.
That's again with the simplistic assumption that each player has the same chances of winning the pot.

[aces_dad]

That's again with the simplistic assumption that each player has the same chances of winning the pot.


This is the statement that people are not agreeing with here. Depending on what villian has you may be moving from winning 10% to winning 15%, or from 60% to 70%. Based upon the action it is hard to imagine you're still not way behind and thus not increasing to the 50% mark.

Edit: I'm actually not convinced you're way behind given this action.