Question about hand ranges & equity (calling vs. raising, yada yada)

el_dusto · #1 12-29-2005, 06:56 AM

I was completely confounded by the OP... I had to read it aloud a couple of times before it sunk in. I had a reply formulated, but I deleted it and started over a couple of times because it didn't make sense. Luckily, curtains came in with a post that made me feel better, and not like I wasn't getting some deep element of poker theory.

If I had a choice of which hand to make the move with, I'd pick ATo just for the A, but the difference is so tiny that I would make the same move with KQs if I got that, instead. I think trying to determine which hand is more powerful is slicing this tomato just a little too thinly.

Bigwig · #2 12-29-2005, 06:59 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I was completely confounded by the OP... I had to read it aloud a couple of times before it sunk in. I had a reply formulated, but I deleted it and started over a couple of times because it didn't make sense. Luckily, curtains came in with a post that made me feel better, and not like I wasn't getting some deep element of poker theory.

If I had a choice of which hand to make the move with, I'd pick ATo just for the A, but the difference is so tiny that I would make the same move with KQs if I got that, instead. I think trying to determine which hand is more powerful is slicing this tomato just a little too thinly.

[/ QUOTE ]
Again, the question isn't whether or not you would do something differently. I wouldn't either. The question is which you'd rather have, and why. You say, "Cause of the A." Okay. I was hoping for more, but if that's it, so be it.

el_dusto · #3 12-29-2005, 07:27 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Okay. I was hoping for more, but if that's it, so be it.

[/ QUOTE ]

How about this: I play the 11s and 22s, and it is not surprising at all for people to call with random aces, especially late in the game. When Donkey McDonkerstien calls my bet with A9, I don't want to be chasing kings or queens.

It goes back to what Lori was saying about playing the other guy's range. There may be an argument to be made for betting with KQs vs. KQo, but a slight equity advantage over 1000 situations isn't really enough for me to give up my love affair with the bullet.

Bigwig · #4 12-29-2005, 07:59 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Okay. I was hoping for more, but if that's it, so be it.

[/ QUOTE ]

How about this: I play the 11s and 22s, and it is not surprising at all for people to call with random aces, especially late in the game. When Donkey McDonkerstien calls my bet with A9, I don't want to be chasing kings or queens.

It goes back to what Lori was saying about playing the other guy's range. There may be an argument to be made for betting with KQs vs. KQo, but a slight equity advantage over 1000 situations isn't really enough for me to give up my love affair with the bullet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, no no no. Dismissing slight equity edges is an enormous mistake. In fact, the difference between a losing player and a 20% ROI is identifying these slight equity edges. Literally. Over 1000 hands being suited will win you 40 extra hands. That's hardly too slight to ignore.

Incidentally, I just recalculated it, and KQs is better than ATo for a tight calling range. ATo is better for a looser calling range, since more weak A's will be involved.

#5 12-29-2005, 08:08 AM

I think you guys underestimate the strength of suited hands in SnG's.

For example (checked with SNGPT) if there are 6 players left, you are in CO, 1000 chip game. You have 1000 chips and the players behind you cover you and are pretty tight. (the details are not important here), you can push: Push hands: 22+,A2+,K7o+,K2s+,Q8o+,Q4s+,J8o+,J6s+,T8o+,T6s+,98 o,96s+,86s+,76s,65s (45%)

The range includes 65s! That means 65s is better than K6o.

Bigwig · #6 12-29-2005, 08:09 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I think you guys underestimate the strength of suited hands in SnG's.

For example (checked with SNGPT) if there are 6 players left, you are in CO, 1000 chip game. You have 1000 chips and the players behind you cover you and are pretty tight. (the details are not important here), you can push: Push hands: 22+,A2+,K7o+,K2s+,Q8o+,Q4s+,J8o+,J6s+,T8o+,T6s+,98 o,96s+,86s+,76s,65s (45%)

The range includes 65s! That means 65s is better than K6o.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you, Don. Always helps when I'm not the only one saying it.

lorinda · #7 12-29-2005, 08:10 AM

The original poster specifically mentioned that we were talking about raises in general, not just pushes.

Lori

Bigwig · #8 12-29-2005, 08:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
The original poster specifically mentioned that we were talking about raises in general, not just pushes.

Lori

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, but I think his point is applicable.

#9 12-29-2005, 10:59 AM

[ QUOTE ]
The range includes 65s! That means 65s is better than K6o.

[/ QUOTE ]
Better at what? I'll take my K6o against your 65s heads up.

I think OP's point is that opponents' calling ranges affect the value of a hand. A point against which it seems hard to argue. (I know you weren't disagreeing with OP.)

#10 12-29-2005, 11:14 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The range includes 65s! That means 65s is better than K6o.

[/ QUOTE ]
Better at what? I'll take my K6o against your 65s heads up.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's true, but my point is that suited connectors are surprisingly good compared to high cards with low kickers against people with calling ranges that are not extremely loose. I just thought that was surprising anyway. Never mind. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]