Everyone playing the board, but I want the whole pot...

PokerSparky · #1 10-10-2005, 04:03 PM

This hand probably isn't that interesting. I post it, because I don't think I make this bet on the river when I was a noob.

I was also thinking that it may have actually been a bad play. Is it really worth it to try and steal a 2 BB pot?

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is SB with 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
UTG calls, MP calls, 2 folds, Hero completes, BB checks.

Flop: (4 SB) A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (4 players)
Hero checks, BB checks, UTG checks, MP checks.

Turn: (2 BB) A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (4 players)
Hero checks, BB checks, UTG checks, MP checks.

River: (2 BB) 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (4 players)
Hero bets, BB folds, UTG folds, MP folds.

Final Pot: 3 BB

#2 10-10-2005, 04:11 PM

If you ask yourself if it work at least once in three times, and I believe the answer is yes. Nice hand.

Aaron W. · #3 10-10-2005, 04:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
This hand probably isn't that interesting. I post it, because I don't think I make this bet on the river when I was a noob.

I was also thinking that it may have actually been a bad play. Is it really worth it to try and steal a 2 BB pot?

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is SB with 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
UTG calls, MP calls, 2 folds, Hero completes, BB checks.

Flop: (4 SB) A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (4 players)
Hero checks, BB checks, UTG checks, MP checks.

Turn: (2 BB) A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (4 players)
Hero checks, BB checks, UTG checks, MP checks.

River: (2 BB) 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (4 players)
Hero bets, BB folds, UTG folds, MP folds.

Final Pot: 3 BB

[/ QUOTE ]

Your 'share' of the pot is .5 BB. You are wagering 1 BB to win some extra portion of the pot:

If 1 person folds, you win an extra .17 BB.
If 2 people fold, you win an extra .5 BB.
If all fold, you win an extra 1.5 BB.

So the only time your return is larger than your investment is if everyone folds. Otherwise, your return on investment is 50% or less.

You lose if someone holds an ace, four, queen, king, or a pocket pair bigger than fours. It is highly unlikely that any of those hands will fold to a bet.

I dislike the bet, but I don't *HATE* it.

Aaron W. · #4 10-10-2005, 04:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If you ask yourself if it work at least once in three times, and I believe the answer is yes. Nice hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not how you should be looking at this bet.

Eeegah · #5 10-10-2005, 04:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If you ask yourself if it work at least once in three times, and I believe the answer is yes. Nice hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not even one in three times, as if anyone bails you'll profit if it's an all-way split.

Of course if it doesn't work and they all call you'll likely be feeding the rake.

And that's if no one has a King. Interesting question, really.

PokerSparky · #6 10-10-2005, 04:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I dislike the bet, but I don't *HATE* it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. The risk:reward ratio on this hand was not +EV. If the pot were a bit larger then I think you could justify the bet.

Weatherhead03 · #7 10-10-2005, 04:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If the pot were a bit larger then I think you could justify the bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or if it were HU or even just two players that would change things a lot as well.

Paxosmotic · #8 10-10-2005, 04:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So the only time your return is larger than your investment is if everyone folds. Otherwise, your return on investment is 50% or less.

[/ QUOTE ]
You are confusing ROI with profit. The percent figures are not interchangable (ROI is profit plus 100). This bet is profitable as long as no one holds a king, queen, ace, or four. I endorse this bet.

Edit : Correction, I shouldn't say that ROI is profit plus 100, that's blatantly wrong. But your post seems to be saying that betting actually loses money, that's what I'm trying to say is incorrect.

Eeegah · #9 10-10-2005, 05:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
This bet is profitable as long as no one holds a king, queen, ace, or four. I endorse this bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's 11 cards, and there are six cards out there. There's only a 12% chance that no one has {KQA4} assuming they're holding any two. Obviously they're not of course but even if we throw out the A and Q's and only count the 4 kings and 2 4's we're still only good here 28% of the time.

Then there's the rake (we're increasing the pot from $4 to $12 if everyone calls). Then there's someone holding 55-99.

Aaron W. · #10 10-10-2005, 06:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So the only time your return is larger than your investment is if everyone folds. Otherwise, your return on investment is 50% or less.

[/ QUOTE ]
You are confusing ROI with profit. The percent figures are not interchangable (ROI is profit plus 100). This bet is profitable as long as no one holds a king, queen, ace, or four. I endorse this bet.

Edit : Correction, I shouldn't say that ROI is profit plus 100, that's blatantly wrong. But your post seems to be saying that betting actually loses money, that's what I'm trying to say is incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought ROI was the ratio of "net return" to "investment". So if you invested $1000 in the stock market and it was worth $1100 at the end of the year, then you have a 10% ROI (+100/1000). Do I have the terminology wrong?