|
|
#51
11-15-2005, 03:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A hand Entity and I talked about
If villain is going to put any money in on this river with any hand, he should probably be check-raising. In other words, game-theoretically, if villain is going to check this river, he needs to be checking with the intent of raising a one-pair hand reasonably often.
If by reasonably often...you really mean one time in 36 that he has AA. The pot will be 18 BB after the check/raise and our only two hands here are AA and KK. So for everytime that we check/raise with one pair, we need to check/raise with the top set eighteen times. For every 18 times that we check/raise KK, we will have AA 36 times. Therefore we need to check/raise one time in 36. If you check/raised AA here everytime, you would be in a world of trouble. It is probably a fold anyway, but it is much better to fold AA here then check/raise with it a large % of the time. If we are playing well, it makes no difference what Jason does with his 3 jacks. He will catch us with AA one time in 19 (the exact pot odds he is getting to call here). Brad 
|
|
#52
11-15-2005, 03:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A hand Entity and I talked about
[ QUOTE ]
um...arent you a LAG? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] only some of the time, the rest of the time I'm a confused TAG [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]
|
|
#53
11-15-2005, 03:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A hand Entity and I talked about
[ QUOTE ]
If villain is going to put any money in on this river with any hand, he should probably be check-raising. In other words, game-theoretically, if villain is going to check this river, he needs to be checking with the intent of raising a one-pair hand reasonably often. If by reasonably often...you really mean one time in 36 that he has AA. The pot will be 18 BB after the check/raise and our only two hands here are AA and KK. So for everytime that we check/raise with one pair, we need to check/raise with the top set eighteen times. For every 18 times that we check/raise KK, we will have AA 36 times. Therefore we need to check/raise one time in 36. If you check/raised AA here everytime, you would be in a world of trouble. It is probably a fold anyway, but it is much better to fold AA here then check/raise with it a large % of the time. If we are playing well, it makes no difference what Jason does with his 3 jacks. He will catch us with AA one time in 19 (the exact pot odds he is getting to call here). Brad [/ QUOTE ] Game theory like this is extremely useful against experts. Unfortunately for this problem, the average 2/4 TAG simply doesn't fit into that category.
|
|
#54
11-15-2005, 03:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A hand Entity and I talked about
[ QUOTE ]
I know this is a remote consideration given the board and how bad it is to use this line with AA here, but the fact that villain may/may not be aware of the concept of checkraising the river to save bets adds a bit of weight to bet-calling the river. [/ QUOTE ] I was hoping you could elaborate on the concept of checkraising the river to save bets.
|
|
#55
11-15-2005, 04:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A hand Entity and I talked about
But that is the beauty of it. If we play as game theory would suggest, Jason would never win on the end. Even if he called us everytime...he would still lose. If he folded everytime he would lose as well as he gives us the pot that one time in 19. Now obviously there would be a better strategy if he called everytime (don't check/raise with AA) and a better strategy if he folded everytime (check/raise AA everytime), but if you don't know what he will do it is always best to play according to game theory. If you never checked/raised AA on the end, you would only be playing "correctly" if he always payed off. Look at our EV when we play well...
If he calls everytime: EV = 18/19 * 1BB - 1/19 * 2 BB = + 16/19 BB If he folds everytime: EV = 1/19 * 16 BB = + 16/19 BB That value is just too good to give up on a hunch. You can't go wrong by playing this way. Brad This river is very complex, but here are my thoughts. Don't bet if you can't fold to a check/raise. At best you will breakeven. If he will fold AA to a river bet some big % of the time, you would again check. I don't think that any opponent will check/raise AA enough to make bet-folding wrong here (if it never folded), so I like a bet-fold if you think AA will payoff and a check if you don't.
|
|
#56
11-15-2005, 04:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A hand Entity and I talked about
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I know this is a remote consideration given the board and how bad it is to use this line with AA here, but the fact that villain may/may not be aware of the concept of checkraising the river to save bets adds a bit of weight to bet-calling the river. [/ QUOTE ] I was hoping you could elaborate on the concept of checkraising the river to save bets. [/ QUOTE ] 4 is less than 5 [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] (count the bets going in on the big streets based on a turn 3-bet vs a river c/r)
|
|
#57
11-15-2005, 04:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A hand Entity and I talked about
[ QUOTE ]
I don't like the preflop cap given the situation. If your read is correct on the SB you aren't gaining anything w/the other two players in the hand. Given the SBs range and the other two with the frequency of overcards on the flop, just call the 3-bet w/JJ. [/ QUOTE ] I use to not cap preflop in this spot and got criticized pretty heavily for it by some people that I have a lot of respect for. I use to argue with a pretty simple combinatorial analysis that capping here isn't right but they would mumble stuff about metagame etc.
|
|
#59
11-15-2005, 04:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A hand Entity and I talked about
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I know this is a remote consideration given the board and how bad it is to use this line with AA here, but the fact that villain may/may not be aware of the concept of checkraising the river to save bets adds a bit of weight to bet-calling the river. [/ QUOTE ] I was hoping you could elaborate on the concept of checkraising the river to save bets. [/ QUOTE ] 4 is less than 5 [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] (count the bets going in on the big streets based on a turn 3-bet vs a river c/r) [/ QUOTE ] Gotcha. So b/c turn + c/r river = 4. Bet/3bet is 3 on turn at least and that bars Jason's capping. The fact that you could get raised on river means that it would cost 5 to showdown, minimum. Thanks, good to know.
|
|
#60
11-15-2005, 04:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A hand Entity and I talked about
[ QUOTE ]
I use to argue with a pretty simple combinatorial analysis that capping here isn't right but they would mumble stuff about metagame etc. [/ QUOTE ] There are definately times for it and quite often I will recommend it but this is not one of them.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
