![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yes, button could have J10S, but there are only 4 combinations of that hand, which is why I stated that holding as "unlikely". Think of all the other hand combinations button will raise with in this spot, and divide 4 by that number. Very small percentage I think.
-Andrew |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
that would be pretty freakin' out of line.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
well i keep thinking the answer might be call but then i think: no, that's wrong. i can't see why calling is better than raising here.
cap it up. (i'm assuming since the BB is there on the turn he called the flop?). i think there's a very, very minute chance BB has JT and we're behind, but it's a possibility. but then, so is 33. i think the button almost certainly has AQ here. BB is saying he can beat two-pair here, but I find it unlikely he has KK or QQ for obvious reasons, and there are a helluvalot more combinations of JT than 33. so perhaps that's the reason for a call. but our equity is pretty ginormous. against a river blank if we capped and assuming the button called if we're bet into perhaps we just call and go for the overcall. this seems a little weak, particularly with the button padding the pot... so perhaps that's the argument for just calling the turn. because button might fold his AQ to a cap here (although that seems unlikely) and bb's range of hands, however unlikely, include a fair portion that beat us. however, i'm relatively certain that with our outs to improve if behind, plus the possibility that bb is finally getting out of hand make this a cap and proceed actively on the river. now, to read the responses. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
isn't it pretty clear he has AQ here a vast majority of the time?
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I agree with you that we should not be worried about the button beating us.
I do not think AQ is most likely, though, since there are only three of those combinations left. I am guessing KQ or some sort of semi-bluff flush/straight draw. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
at some point bayesian analysis of his possible hands is overridden by the play. AQ is a far more likely cold-calling hand in general, regardless of how many aces are left.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
at some point bayesian analysis of his possible hands is overridden by the play. AQ is a far more likely cold-calling hand in general, regardless of how many aces are left. [/ QUOTE ] It's not "far more" likely when you have to discount AQ to 3 possible combinations, and discount them some because AQs is more likely for coldcalling than AQo. You can't do this one purely by combinatorial math, but you can't do it just by saying that it's "far more likely." The reason we call rather than capping ourselves is we get much more pure information about the river and our best action on it, and we don't hurt ourselves equity-wise by raising with the worst hand while we're drawing to 8-10 outs. Rob |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I've yet to hear compelling evidence in support of the assertion that we reaceive much more information about the river if we call.
I think mathematical analysis is definitely needed, and my point about believing the button is more likely on AQ than KQ, wrong or right (and I'm certainly open to being wrong) has nothing to do with it. I don't think you should play this turn looking for information from the button. I'm simply not concerned. I think cold-calling JTs is far enough out of line that we'd know it about this guy by now. Maybe that's being too close-minded of the situation. I think for other reasons the call may be correct. Because there's a slim (if unlikely) chance we fold the button. Because I haven't done the math and our equity might not be as large as I think it is. However, if we check and improve and the board pairs we're either going to war with the button (or less likely, both) regardless of the turn action. I think this is a simple "is our equity great enough to raise" issue. I'm inclined to believe that it is, and not inclined to believe we gain any extra information by calling. Other than, perhaps "gee, I was right! button doesn't have the most unlikely hand he could have played this way that beats me!" |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I haven't given the hand enough thought yet, it is very interesting.
But my first instinct is to call, as it will make the river less expensive when behind and more profitable when ahead or improved, imo. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The turn looks like a cap to me. If there is an 'x' probability one of them has JT and we know for a fact the other has 2-pair/set hero's equity is: [.167x + (1-x)]*100%
In order for a cap to be profitable this must be greater than 34%. Solving for 'x' tells us that one of the two must have JT 79% or more for capping to not be profitable. Capping also makes the river easier to play. |
![]() |
|
|