Loose games when you can almost never protect your hand - Page 4

#31 10-23-2005, 01:15 PM

Unless the pot is somewhat large, correct?

blackaces13 · #32 10-23-2005, 01:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
And AA does do better short-handed than multiway, I'd imagine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. AA's winrate drops and oppoonents add but its profitablilty rises even faster.

numeri · #33 10-23-2005, 01:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Unless the pot is somewhat large, correct?

[/ QUOTE ]
I know you're trying to understand here, but you really need to read some of these posts more carefully. Having the best hand now does not guarantee you will win the pot. In the examples, as has been stated several times already, you will win more than your fair share, so you don't care if others call along.

Let's be more specific. In this post, I used your example with AK on a K75 board vs Kx, middle pair, a GSD, and 3 other random hands. You have 38% equity in this pot. Since there are 7 people in this pot, your "fair share" is 1/7 = 14%. So you will win this pot 38% of the time while only putting in 14% of the money if everyone calls. That's what we mean by betting for value, even if you can't protect.

That's why we bet flush draws on the flop if we expect at least two callers. (Flush draws come in 35% of the time, and 3-handed you have 33% equity. If we bet in that case, why wouldn't we when we have 38% equity 7-handed?)

Again, I know you're trying to learn, but read some of these posts more carefully. There are posters here who really do have a lot to offer if you take the time to read them carefully.

Good luck.

Catt · #34 10-23-2005, 05:17 PM

Aaron made the point, but it required clicking a link to another thread. So I am going to repeat it: "Protecting your hand" DOES NOT mean folding out others -- it means betting / raising in such a way that a player behind you will not have correct odds to call for his draw. When they call incorrectly, you have protected your hand (and made money).

Rev. Good Will · #35 10-23-2005, 05:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Aaron made the point, but it required clicking a link to another thread. So I am going to repeat it: "Protecting your hand" DOES NOT mean folding out others -- it means betting / raising in such a way that a player behind you will not have correct odds to call for his draw. When they call incorrectly, you have protected your hand (and made money).

[/ QUOTE ]

wow, I like this view on protecting your hand.

#36 10-23-2005, 05:45 PM

Ok, I see what you mean there. Count my outs, find my equity, and if it's larger than the proportion i put in the pot, bet or raise.

As I asked before, If i expect to get the same amount of callers whether I call or raise, well raising always give me a higher EV than calling?

For example if it's down to HU after the turn, and my equity is greater than 50%, I should always try for a raise? And if my equity is below, I should fold. So why do some people just call down?

blackaces13 · #37 10-23-2005, 06:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
For example if it's down to HU after the turn, and my equity is greater than 50%, I should always try for a raise? And if my equity is below, I should fold. So why do some people just call down?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. You should not fold HU pots because you are less than 50% likely to win at showdown. If that were the case then no one would ever play draws. You have to compare the chances that you have the best hand, or will have the best hand on the river, to the current pot odds and figure out if you win more than the odds the pot is offering you.

Examples:

If you are facing a bet on the river and think you have the best hand only 10% of the time then you should call if the pot is greater than 9BBs.

If the pot is 20 BBs then you need to win only 5% of the time for a call to be profitable.

On the turn if you are committed to calling 2 bets, 1 on the turn and 1 on the river, then you have to adjust these odds accordingly but in all but the smalllest of pots you shouldn't be folding with anywhere near 50% equity.

#38 10-23-2005, 07:37 PM

Oh, yeah that's where it gets confusing for me, not just looking at the pot for the current card but the pot overall.

I think I might have made an error.. For pot equity do you look at your bet compared to the total bets for that round, or to the total bets in the pot overall? It must be the latter, so I think I got confused. Thanks for the clarification. Obviously under my thinking no one would ever call a bet HU because one of the two would be < 50%.

I take it in your example, if the pot is 20BB's, then I can safely go in for 2 bets, hence I would raise. With a 10BB I would call (since I'm only good for 1 bet) and fold to a raise (since calling 2 bets is now -EV)?

milesdyson · #39 10-23-2005, 07:48 PM

i think you're still confused, based on your last couple sentences.

when you're deciding to bet/raise, the size of the pot does not matter as much as your pot equity. if your equity is larger than your share of the bets being put into the pot, you should bet/raise.

when you're deciding to call, you look at the size of the pot. is it offering you profitable odds to draw to however many outs you have? also, is your hand good enough now on the river to invest a single bet for a chance to win 20 bets? if so, you call.

#40 10-23-2005, 08:29 PM

No I think I understand you, If it's +EV to put in 2 bets, I should raise a single bet to 2 bets. However if it's only +EV to put in 1 bet, I should call 1 bet but if it's raised to 2 bets, fold because then that is -EV.