|
|
#12
11-07-2005, 07:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Interesting turn decision
Check. You're going to need the best hand at SD to win this pot a huge % of the time and it's doubtful you currently have it. I think the chances of being C/Red are better than your bet protecting your A-high equity. Take the free look at the river and hope you catch your flush and get bet into by SB.
|
|
#13
11-07-2005, 07:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Interesting turn decision
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] possibly drawing to 8 outs [/ QUOTE ] Possibly the world could end tomorrow. Possibly libertarians might take the White House in 2008. Possibly, possibly, whatever. I'm drawing to my full set of outs a huge portion of the time. I also have the best hand a small, but nonetheless significant portion of the time, thus... [ QUOTE ] checking is clearly best. [/ QUOTE ] ...is a clearly wrong statement because it is clearly exaggerating how clear this play is. Will [/ QUOTE ] The possibly 8 outs statement actually doesn't hold much weight in the argument, but anyway. Let’s give you all 14 outs and look at the various situations: Assumptions: FE = 0 (we can changes this, but it's hard to imagine anybody is ever going to fold a better hand here) outs = 14. % time we have the best hand = 0 (this is not completely accurate, but we will use it as a starting assumption and we can always just add a little to the EV in the various cases to account for the times we actually have the best hand). Cases: -The times that we are not check raised we need to be called in all three spots for our bet to EV+ (EV with 3 callers = 0.21 and EV with 2 callers = -0.09). -The times we are check/raised our amount of outs we have to improve to the best hand will go down (lets just say 9 as a check/raise doesn't necessarily indicate a 9, but it is the most likely holding). Even if all 3 players call a check/raise by the villain our EV = -0.46 and this is clearly a losing situation, although it could be argued that we will have increased implied odds for the times our flush does get there. Furthermore, your hand is fairly well disguised and thus checking behind on the turn will not appear to obviously be a flush draw to thinking opponents thus making it more probable your opponents will pay off on the river. So basically since we will be check/raised some non-zero portion of the time, ever time we are check/raised our EV is < 0, and combined with the fact we need all three callers to make a bet EV+ the times we are not c/r'ed points to checking being the clear favorite.
|
|
#14
11-07-2005, 07:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Interesting turn decision
[ QUOTE ]
% time we have the best hand = 0 [/ QUOTE ] OBVIOUSLY if this is the case then we should check behind. But this isn't the case. Not by a longshot. Will
|
|
#15
11-07-2005, 08:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Interesting turn decision
I vote bet. You're usually going to have between 9 and 15 outs here. Let's say you have 12 on average. I think this is very reasonable if we include implied odds which are clearly in your favor. A 12 outer is a 2.9:1 dog with one card to come. So assuming you get more than one caller and you need to hit an out to win , a bet here is close to neutral value. I think this "value deficit" can clearly be offset by the other advantages to betting (note that these advantages don't need to occur incredibly frequently because of the value described above):
1) These guys are loose passive and could have limped in with AJ or AQ or something. Getting one of these hands to fold would be great. 2) A hand like A8 has 2 outs to a win but 6 outs to a tie. Let's call this 5 outs. A bet could get a hand like this to fold incorrectly, or at least charge a hand that you are ahead of. 3) You sometimes still have the best hand! These guys are loose passive so they probably peel the flop with close to anything. Thus, a small but significant percentage of the time, your bet will be for value/protection. These guys are loose/passive so you won't be checkraised here too often. The fact that you will be checkraised some percentage of the time does detract from the advantages above, but not enough to make it a check IMO. I think these factors definitely outweigh the difference between average number of callers you get with a bet and 2.9 (the number of callers that yield neutral value for a 12 outer). Furthermore, I think if we're playing in a loose passive game where any pair and ace high often pay off, our implied odds on average make our hand more than a 12 outer. If there are any problems with my logic please point them out.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
