NL Preflop Question #2

[Shandrax]

The fold in question number 1 was so clear, that just adding 9-9 should not change much.

Let's remember: A or Q flop in only 32,4% of the cases. That means in 67,6% of the cases we lose $80 on the flop.

Over 100 cases:
(67,6)(-80) + (32,4)(300x-280y) = 0
x + y = 1

x ~ 0,77
y ~ 0,23

We need to be a 77% favorite on the flop in order to show profit and in order to be that we need to add many more hands than just 9-9.

I hope that I didn't completely fumble math here [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Shandrax]

I should add that it is simply too expensive to look at the flop in this scenario (even adding all pairs down to 2-2 would not help). If it would only cost $20 to look at the flop for example, then we would only have to be a 50,3% favorite on the flop to break even!

[Jordan Olsommer]

[ QUOTE ]

The simple fact is that you hit the flop with AQ 1 out of 3 times on average. And when you do, you get it all in, period. There is no folding when you hit your A or Q.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even on flops like AKJ or QJT, both of which have you either way behind or drawing dead more than half the time? I don't think that's optimal strategy.

[Pov]

[ QUOTE ]
I should add that it is simply too expensive to look at the flop in this scenario (even adding all pairs down to 2-2 would not help). If it would only cost $20 to look at the flop for example, then we would only have to be a 50,3% favorite on the flop to break even!

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe if you add the pairs down to 22 we would raise Villain all-in pre-flop since Villain will fold all pairs TT and below and never see a flop.

edit:
Nevermind - This doesn't appear to be correct now that I actually think it through. (Nice post, Mr. Sklansky) It would seem our Villain will now fold pre-flop to our all-in re-raise something like 64% of the time while holding TT or lower, but we are so crushed when he calls us that this fails to make up for it.

[Beavis68]

by my calcs, it is neutral EV if you add all pairs. So from a tournament perspective, it may be worth it to get someones chips.

[muckdumper]

i think one should call and see the flop then go from there. since on short stack and player not going all in,it might get check behind you if flop did'nt help. or get rest of money in

[Vincent Lepore]

I answered the first question the way I did because my buddy smoothcall told me it was a clear fold - tournament or not. I didn't want him to be right even after he explained it to me so I said move in.

To this question my answer is that if you find a player that plays this badly and is this predicatable always fold close decisions. You'll get him eventually. This UTG fellow sounds a bit like a guy following Sklansky's Tournament advice.

Another subject. There was a post up here in which someone asked if the poster "maturbated" to the sound of Mike Sexton's voice. Well, I think masturbation is too important an activity to be dealt with in such an unhealthy, lighthearted manner. Besides I think that Sklansky's last two questions pose a much better venue of contemplation to jerk ones self off to. So please do not mention Sexton and wanger beating in the same breadth. (I'm assuming the poster was referring to males masturbating) Yes, please refrain from this ANALogy while I am reading this forum.

Well, I see that discussions on this forum have eponentially improved since Smoothcall was suspended. It's good that we both took a break. But now I think that I'll talk to my buddy and tell him that 2 + 2 needs our help again. See ya.

Vince [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]