|
|
#41
02-11-2005, 11:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: John Feeney\'s AQ test on Party
What about the dead money in the blinds? 10% of the average pot? Add that in! You can't add that in. Or to be more precise, there are so many things to add in (implied odds, betting, folding, other players who may have AA, etc...) that the only way to properly account for them all is to use something like TTH to run simulations. - Andrew www.pokerstove.com 
|
|
#42
02-11-2005, 11:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: John Feeney\'s AQ test on Party
[ QUOTE ]
I doubt that anyone who makes a habit of playing 88 or QJs UTG is a winning player. Not saying that it isn't common in online games, just that these people can't be long-term winners. [/ QUOTE ] Bwahahahahahahahahahaha. -ActionBob
|
|
#43
02-11-2005, 11:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: John Feeney\'s AQ test on Party
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I doubt that anyone who makes a habit of playing 88 or QJs UTG is a winning player. Not saying that it isn't common in online games, just that these people can't be long-term winners. [/ QUOTE ] Bwahahahahahahahahahaha. -ActionBob [/ QUOTE ] Really brilliant comment, ActionBob. I look forward to more pearls of wisdom from you. In the meantime, take a look at skp's reply to my post. Its a good example of the thought processes of someone who actually has a brain.
|
|
#44
02-11-2005, 12:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: John Feeney\'s AQ test on Party
[ QUOTE ]
Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I doubt that anyone who makes a habit of playing 88 or QJs UTG is a winning player. Not saying that it isn't common in online games, just that these people can't be long-term winners. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bwahahahahahahahahahaha. -ActionBob -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Really brilliant comment, ActionBob. I look forward to more pearls of wisdom from you. [/ QUOTE ] You're certainly right its a bit childish, I just couldnt think of anything else to say to such an obviously ridiculous and incorrect statement. How's this: I can assure you that your comments about QJs and 88 are wrong. I (and I'm certain many other players here) win a signifcant amoount with both of these hands UTG. -ActionBob
|
|
#45
02-11-2005, 12:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: John Feeney\'s AQ test on Party
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I doubt that anyone who makes a habit of playing 88 or QJs UTG is a winning player. Not saying that it isn't common in online games, just that these people can't be long-term winners. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bwahahahahahahahahahaha. -ActionBob -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Really brilliant comment, ActionBob. I look forward to more pearls of wisdom from you. [/ QUOTE ] You're certainly right its a bit childish, I just couldnt think of anything else to say to such an obviously ridiculous and incorrect statement. How's this: I can assure you that your comments about QJs and 88 are wrong. I (and I'm certain many other players here) win a signifcant amoount with both of these hands UTG. -ActionBob [/ QUOTE ] After I made this post I realized that the tone of it was very heavy-handed, like I was stating an opinion as if it were an absolute. That's not the case. I put up a another reply to those people who took me to task on it and I tried to clarify what I was saying. There are many good players whose opening hand requirements are a little looser than mine. I myself used to limp in EP with the hands we're talking about and I've stopped doing it. In fact I am not open-limping period. If I'm opening I'm raising, and in EP I can't reconcile doing this with 88 or QJs. In many cases I will, however, open-raise with these hands in MP. There's a reply to my post from Skp that I think is worth reading. Hope you'll take a look at it.
|
|
#46
02-11-2005, 12:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: John Feeney\'s AQ test on Party
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps, someone has some pokertracker data on how they have done with these hands UTG. [/ QUOTE ] The data for each specific hand is going to be very limited, but FWIW here's mine (filtered for full games). 88: .06 BB QJs: 1.19 BB -ActionBob
|
|
#47
02-11-2005, 12:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: John Feeney\'s AQ test on Party
[ QUOTE ]
Unknown player raises UTG. I have AQo. There's a very good chance that I'm either in a coinflip situation or a big underdog. I fold and move on to the next hand. [/ QUOTE ] Unknown player raises UTG. I have AQo. There's a very good chance that I'm either in a coinflip situation or a big favorite. I three-bet and play out the hand. -ActionBob
|
|
#48
02-11-2005, 01:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: John Feeney\'s AQ test on Party
[ QUOTE ]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What do you do with AQ off in MP and on button when an unknown UTG raises. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fold [/ QUOTE ] 3-bet. [ QUOTE ] Against a winning player like you skp it's an easy 3 bet. There are too many hands in your range from 77-AA, KQ offsuit or suited and up to make AQ offsuit an easy 3 bet. [/ QUOTE ] If I knew it was SKP, i would fold for sure. In general, we disagree on some basic things Lawrence. In this instance, we are exactly opposite.
|
|
#49
02-11-2005, 04:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: John Feeney\'s AQ test on Party
Unknown player raises UTG. I have AQo.
There's a very good chance that I'm either in a coinflip situation or a big favorite. I three-bet and play out the hand. -ActionBob Maybe it's because I don't play in the 15/30 at party, ever. But I just don't see how you are going to be a big favorite versus a random player who is raising UTG at a full table very often. Sure they might be raising with a smaller ace, but most of the UTG raising hands have you in bad shape. Maybe random players there really do raise UTG with more than 15% of their hands in that game. I really don't know. While you do have position, you'll also have to face being 4-bet. And what do players 4-bet there with? AK, and any pair they raise UTG with? - Andrew www.pokerstove.com
|
|
#50
02-11-2005, 04:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: John Feeney\'s AQ test on Party (requesting Poker Tracker stats)
I'm curious to see people's stats with AQ who have a large database. I'm certainly a proponent of 3-betting AQ in most spots on the Party 15 games including against most early raisers. I had spent a lot of time specifically discussing AQ and AQs once with a solid player (who was in the camp who would fold AQ often against early raisers as well as one who did not raise it as often from the blinds as I felt was correct) and we compared some numbers. I was winning nearly twice as much with AQ as he was. Now it could certainly be a statistical anomoly, but if we had more numbers to compare to it might tell us more. Of course this will be far from a perfect study as there's certain many other AQ variables involved, but it may at least help. So if you do choose to post them, giving a general idea of your standard line of play with AQ may help as well.
Anyway here's what I've got filtered for 7-10 handed games (111,000 hands). AQs 1.31 BB/hand AQo .54 BB/hand -ActionBob
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
