Way ahead or way behind? - Page 4

ike · #31 04-26-2005, 04:10 PM

I agree, check/call, check/call, lead is very often a line that plans to fold to a raise and this an obvious (and against many opponents highly profitable) bluffing opportunity.

magithighs · #32 04-26-2005, 04:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
All you are really saying is that this line is lackluster and boring. If you want a more interesting pokerlife go ahead and make the moves. If you want to maximize EV you sometimes have to play passively (something that seems to have very little apreciation on this board).

[/ QUOTE ]

I know it sounds like that's what I'm saying, when I haven't really expressed myself well enough. I really want a good reason to take the check-call line, rather than I may be ahead or I may be behind. We have some much experience, tools, information, I'd rather make a mistake than to say "hmmm....I can't decide." After all, it's how we learn.

If I have a good reason to take the check-call line with tptk, then I would take the same line holding an overpair like KK or even AA. I'm not advocating aggression at every opportunity. Rather, I want to use the information at my disposal, to make the most accurate assessment and go from there. I may be wrong, but I'd rather be wrong instead of undecided.

As I mentioned in my response to Eldiablo, I like the check-call line if I know I will get bet into by a worse hand, by a strong player who will do that more often than not.

It's been my experience that opponents who "can't decide" are easier opponents. I'm not saying all of you who advovate the check-call line would be easy to play against, but in general this is what I find.

Cheers
Magi

rigoletto · #33 04-26-2005, 04:14 PM

[ QUOTE ]

The times he does raise, how often is it a worse hand? for a passive player that number is close to 0% of the time. for an overaggressive player, the number is still pretty low.

[/ QUOTE ]

I beg to differ. Most overagressive players has a tendency to just call with a legitimate but not superstrong hand and only raise with a weak hand, a pure bluff or the near nuts. Once the flush comes on the river even agressive players will often check behind with medium pairs, so you have to bet here and call a single raise from the agressive types. The times you get called with a worse hand and raised with a worse hand, will more than make up for the times you get raised with a better hand.

rigoletto · #34 04-26-2005, 04:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'd rather make a mistake than to say "hmmm....I can't decide."

[/ QUOTE ]

I honestly think you need to read this whole thread again carefully. Nobody is advocating this line becausej 'they don't no what else to do'. I'll let you figure out the rest on your own....

magithighs · #35 04-26-2005, 04:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The "Way ahead or way behind" logic is fine. Situations frequently arise, and I think this is a good example, where you have little to gain by getting more aggressive as it will only cause the worse hands to fold and cost you money against the better ones. In these situations theres often no good way to know if you're ahead or not and trying to decide which you think it is and play accordingly is not aspiring to play better poker, its misunderstanding the situation and playing worse.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I believe there are many ways to figure out if you're ahead or behind.

1) what's your table image
2) what range of hands will your opponent three-bet pre-flop
3) have you folded to the three-bet pre-flop pressue on previous hands
4) if you have gametime, what %age of rivers will your opponent bet without tp, what's his aggression factor
5) is your opponent weak tight?
6) is your opponent on a tear, or have they not played any hands for the last two oribits -- if it's the latter, they are more likely to keep firing with the worst hand

Those are just some of the things which are available and you really don't have to bet/raise to get that information. I think there are many more tidbits that are available. I don't always use this information, but I aspire to. It's there, so why not use it.

Cheers
Magi

SinCityGuy · #36 04-26-2005, 04:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If you want to maximize EV you sometimes have to play passively (something that seems to have very little appreciation on this board).

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent point. For many 2+2'ers, it's virtually impossible to ever get them out of the raise/reraise mentality.

magithighs · #37 04-26-2005, 05:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd rather make a mistake than to say "hmmm....I can't decide."

[/ QUOTE ]

I honestly think you need to read this whole thread again carefully. Nobody is advocating this line becausej 'they don't no what else to do'. I'll let you figure out the rest on your own....

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I usually like your advice, so I reread the thread carefully. I like the suggestion to bet the river. I like it because there's some good thinking about why to bet, how it's +EV and how it forces your opponent to make a decision. Hence, you become more difficult to play against.

Yes, my suggestion on turn aggression wasn't really thinking through the whole problem. It's just that check-call, sends shivers up my spine, and I usually only do it when I'm very confident I'm ahead and will continue to make bets. It HAS back-fired the last two times, where my opponent made their two-outer on the river (stars $100 limit tourney on sunday). So, I'm still a bit over-senstivie.

Thanks for indulging me.

Cheers
Magi

brick · #38 04-26-2005, 05:34 PM

I found it interesting how far ahead/behind this flop/turn will put you against a reasonably tight opponent.

Equity on:
Flop_____Turn
0.1______0.05______3 combinations AA
0.22_____0.12______6 combinations KK
0.9______0.95______12 combinations JJ, TT
0.8______0.9_______12 combinations AK
0.02_____0_________1 combination of QQ

34 combinations.

ike · #39 04-26-2005, 07:37 PM

The point is that sometimes its actually inconclusive after a exhaustive analysis of the available information. Sometimes your opponent has a broad range of hands and you can't narrow it down.

Jdanz · #40 05-01-2005, 08:27 PM

You're thinking about this incorrectly, you say you don't want to check/call unless you have a specific reason. This is incorrect.

You shouldn't make ANY play without a specific reason, and the reliance on bet/raise when unsure is a (very useful) cruch.

It's a crutch because of the way poker works, it is right more often then its wrong, and if you can't understand how to apply situatonal reasoning you'll do better with that mindset than by choosing random actions.

It is a crutch to get the player that can't think through all the posibilities as close to optimal EV as possible. Again, it's a useful crutch.

However the CORRECT way to look at a play is with no bias towards any action and figuring out what action leads to OPTIMAL EV vs an opponents ENTIRE range of hands. It's not an art its assesing what they could have, how they'll react with what they have, and playing accordingly. Hence in a game of uncertain information you have to accept that you don't know what their hand is, it's costly and uncertain to find out, so you need to take the most plus EV line.

There is no absolute value to raise/fold/check/call, only situational value that gets you as close as possible to optimal EV in an enviornment of incomplete information.

If you had complete and perfect information and knew they'd bet a worse hand but fold if you bet check/call, check/call, check/call is STILL the best line.