|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
If you're getting 2-1 odds, why wouldn't you call?
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
[ QUOTE ]
If you're getting 2-1 odds, why wouldn't you call? [/ QUOTE ] |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
If you are willing to coinflip the first hand of an STT, why not just play roulette instead? Less rake.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
gh Bazuul.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
No it isn't. Taking gambles early means more early bustouts, which can raise your hourly rate. Continuous play means more per hour, sets mean less tables running = better decisions.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
[ QUOTE ]
If you're getting 2-1 odds, why wouldn't you call? [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] If you are willing to coinflip the first hand of an STT, why not just play roulette instead? Less rake. [/ QUOTE ] I hope the thinking members of the audience can figure this one out for themselves. Suppose you have a coinflip game where you win $10 when you win and lose $5 when you lose. After a hundred "games" how much money do you have ? First hand is crazy land. How you choose to play this hand is up to you. For those opposed to the call, how do you play this hand ?? As for gambling early. It can be nice to get some of the total idiots chips before someone else does. Also we lose half of our tournies in the long run anyhow. So if you are going to lose it is best to do it early. [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img] |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
I want to say insta call but i see AA-KK sOOOO often come out of this line. It's so obvious. That said, since AA-KK is shown so often, is 2-1 really a good price here? Don't get me wrong, I will usually call, but your gonna get shown AA-KK most of the time, from my observations. I'd say about 65% at the most conservative estimate. I dont know though, its seems more like 80% of the time to me.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
does anyone have sufficient data to determine the amount of times you are shown AA-KK out of this line?
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
[ QUOTE ]
I want to say insta call but i see AA-KK sOOOO often come out of this line. It's so obvious. That said, since AA-KK is shown so often, is 2-1 really a good price here? Don't get me wrong, I will usually call, but your gonna get shown AA-KK most of the time, from my observations. I'd say about 65% at the most conservative estimate. I dont know though, its seems more like 80% of the time to me. [/ QUOTE ] Dude, are we playing at the same site ?? Do you have PokerTracker? Can you post some data to support this wild hypothesis that the players are good ?? I have hand histories of all-ins in the first level with K-4. These can not be the same players. You remember the AA-KK and confirmation bias clouds your judgement perhaps? -- tjh |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party $20+2: AKs first hand - Do we gamble?
I think he's talking specifically about the limp-push line taken here by the villain. But I've seen it often enough by mid-pairs to say it's probably not AA/KK 80%.
As for this hand, I dunno...with your line I think I would go ahead and call after committing 1/4 of my stack. However, I think there could be an argument to just limping with all the preflop limps infront and play this as a drawing hand. |
|
|