|
|
#31
11-06-2005, 02:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Amusing AKs hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Betting is bankroll suicide. Even if UTG cooperates and raises, there are a large number of draws out there for the other players to have, and I don't expect to get heads up with the whole family involved. [/ QUOTE ] B/R suicide - meh. Even if UTG doesn't "cooperate" what is the risk? You're still paying 1 SB to see the turn when you check/call. Am I being results-oriented? I don't think so - isn't an unknown, likely passive 1/2 player much more likely to bet when checked to than he is to raise a flop bet from a PFR who raised 4 limpers from the BB? If UTG does cooperate and raise, do we care much if gutshots call? Is it not worth "maybe" risking 1 SB in a big pot to "maybe" fold a reverse dominating hand? [/ QUOTE ] You're thinking about it wrong. The point of betting was to hope UTG raises and shuts everyone else out. But then you're putting in two bets on this street. Check-calling one bet is half the price, and check-folding if it's bet and raised before it gets to you is a beautiful thing. [/ QUOTE ] Umm, well I seem to be the only one who wants to bet, so I understand the point of betting. I'm just saying that the "worst case scenerio" of UTG not raising our bet isn't nearly as disastrous as people are making it out to be. 
|
|
#32
11-06-2005, 02:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Amusing AKs hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Check-calling one bet is half the price, [/ QUOTE ] I don't really agree with betting this flop, but if you were to bet it would be for hand protection in a growing pot. So check/calling one bet is just 1 SB, but if you succeed in protecting your hand here you may win a few pots that you would have lost otherwise, so it's not just "half the price." There are other considerations as well. [/ QUOTE ] It won't be for hand protection because you don't have a hand worth protecting. In a 5-handed pot, ace-high is generally not the strongest hand.
|
|
#33
11-06-2005, 02:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Amusing AKs hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Betting is bankroll suicide. Even if UTG cooperates and raises, there are a large number of draws out there for the other players to have, and I don't expect to get heads up with the whole family involved. [/ QUOTE ] B/R suicide - meh. Even if UTG doesn't "cooperate" what is the risk? You're still paying 1 SB to see the turn when you check/call. Am I being results-oriented? I don't think so - isn't an unknown, likely passive 1/2 player much more likely to bet when checked to than he is to raise a flop bet from a PFR who raised 4 limpers from the BB? If UTG does cooperate and raise, do we care much if gutshots call? Is it not worth "maybe" risking 1 SB in a big pot to "maybe" fold a reverse dominating hand? [/ QUOTE ] You're thinking about it wrong. The point of betting was to hope UTG raises and shuts everyone else out. But then you're putting in two bets on this street. Check-calling one bet is half the price, and check-folding if it's bet and raised before it gets to you is a beautiful thing. [/ QUOTE ] Umm, well I seem to be the only one who wants to bet, so I understand the point of betting. I'm just saying that the "worst case scenerio" of UTG not raising our bet isn't nearly as disastrous as people are making it out to be. [/ QUOTE ] Maybe I'm phrased my original comment in a confusing way. Let me use your words and turn this thing around a bit. The "worst case scenario" is actually having the plan work! (That is, having the action start check-bet-raise.) You don't want UTG to raise in a futile attempt to shut out the rest of the field. You don't want to bet-call and have a 3-handed pot with 16 SB in it going to the turn. It doesn't do much for you because on the turn you're *STILL* OOP with what will probably continue to be a weak hand. Are you going to lead again? Will you check-call with ace-high and hope lag is on a bluff on cold-caller is on a draw? If you were lucky enough to be heads up, you're still playing ace-high OOP, which is a tough situation. Betting and getting called all around is (in some sense) the same as checking and calling one bet back to you. But betting opens the door for bad things to happen, whereas checking opens the door for good things to happen.
|
|
#34
11-06-2005, 03:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Amusing AKs hand
[ QUOTE ]
The "worst case scenario" is actually having the plan work! (That is, having the action start check-bet-raise.) You don't want UTG to raise in a futile attempt to shut out the rest of the field. You don't want to bet-call and have a 3-handed pot with 16 SB in it going to the turn. It doesn't do much for you because on the turn you're *STILL* OOP with what will probably continue to be a weak hand. Are you going to lead again? Will you check-call with ace-high and hope lag is on a bluff on cold-caller is on a draw? If you were lucky enough to be heads up, you're still playing ace-high OOP, which is a tough situation. [/ QUOTE ] C'mon, you're reaching straw-man territory. Nobody said UI AK is going to take this down. Yeah, if the turn card doesn't help us we're not in a great spot. Oh well - we're in the same spot if we check/call the flop. But what if we hit on the turn? As I've alluded to twice already, I think pair/gutshot hands like 96 are more likely to call 2 cold on this flop, but A5 and K7 will fold pretty often and those are the hands that are bigger threats to our hand.. So yeah, I'm not afraid of a coldcaller and I have no problem check/calling a brick turn with the idea that my overcard outs are more likely to be good. [ QUOTE ] Betting and getting called all around is (in some sense) the same as checking and calling one bet back to you. [/ QUOTE ] That was kinda my point. Anyay, I gotta get to bed. Big day of crappy football games tommorow.
|
|
#35
11-06-2005, 03:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Amusing AKs hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The "worst case scenario" is actually having the plan work! (That is, having the action start check-bet-raise.) You don't want UTG to raise in a futile attempt to shut out the rest of the field. You don't want to bet-call and have a 3-handed pot with 16 SB in it going to the turn. It doesn't do much for you because on the turn you're *STILL* OOP with what will probably continue to be a weak hand. Are you going to lead again? Will you check-call with ace-high and hope lag is on a bluff on cold-caller is on a draw? If you were lucky enough to be heads up, you're still playing ace-high OOP, which is a tough situation. [/ QUOTE ] C'mon, you're reaching straw-man territory. Nobody said UI AK is going to take this down. Yeah, if the turn card doesn't help us we're not in a great spot. Oh well - we're in the same spot if we check/call the flop. But what if we hit on the turn? As I've alluded to twice already, I think pair/gutshot hands like 96 are more likely to call 2 cold on this flop, but A5 and K7 will fold pretty often and those are the hands that are bigger threats to our hand.. So yeah, I'm not afraid of a coldcaller and I have no problem check/calling a brick turn with the idea that my overcard outs are more likely to be good. [/ QUOTE ] You're still missing the point. The plan with a flop bet is to hope that UTG raises to help you knock out some players. My point is that the plan is critically flawed from the start. If you pursue the plan it's in your best interest for it to fail! Besides the fact that you're likely going to see hands like A5 and K7 coldcall on the flop (if you expect gutshots to call with 4 outs, then it's not hard to imagine pairs calling with 5 outs), you simply don't want to put in two bets on the flop OOP with no pair and 4 villains in the pot - That's a clear case of spewing. Of all the possible hand combinations out there, you are reverse dominated by very few of them (those few hands which you're arguing we should knock out) and you're trailing many many more of them (most of which you simply can't fold out). Furthermore, I don't know why you're pursuing the "what if we hit on the turn" question? We hit the turn 6/47 = 13% of the time. Do the benefits of putting in two bets on the flop really help us out enough for the 13% of the time we hit on the turn? 87% of the time, you've got ace-high OOP, a bloated pot, and a very little chance of winning it. (By the way, I'm ignoring the flush fears and the fact that if you managed to fold out a hand that reverse dominates you that you really have only 5 outs.) [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Betting and getting called all around is (in some sense) the same as checking and calling one bet back to you. [/ QUOTE ] That was kinda my point. [/ QUOTE ] You shouldn't have cut out the next sentence, because it adds the perspective which is missing when betting out: [ QUOTE ] But betting opens the door for bad things to happen, whereas checking opens the door for good things to happen. [/ QUOTE ] You've narrowed your focus to the one case where you bet and get called instead of broadening your view to encompass *ALL* of the reasonable possibilities. By betting, your best case scenario is the same as the worst case scenario of checking. If this is the case, why do you want to bet?
|
|
#36
11-06-2005, 03:54 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Amusing AKs hand
[ QUOTE ]
*grunch* agree with the others, [/ QUOTE ] hahahahahahha. Oh this was brilliant.
|
|
#37
11-06-2005, 04:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Amusing AKs hand
flop, yeah check, but it doesn't matter too much whether you bet or check. betting is far from bankroll suicide. you're pretty unlikely to get raised here anyway (and if the lag raises you, you may have protected your [best] hand). the main benefit of checking is that you may get a free card with less than the winning hand if someone is scared to bet a weak one.
turn is duh. river is a very nice bet and 3-bet opportunity. the flush came backdoor, so someone with a 9 will still likely raise your bet. ideally SB is planning on checkraising UTG, but there's still a chance that UTG or button will raise it up behind you.
|
|
#38
11-06-2005, 01:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Amusing AKs hand
*grunch* [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
I don't think the AK hand was nearly as amusing as some of the responses in this thread. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Anyway, great post. I learned a lot on this one.
|
|
#40
11-06-2005, 03:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Amusing AKs hand
[ QUOTE ]
Bets for value and to protect the overcard outs. [/ QUOTE ] PF:good Flop:good Turn:c/c = good. i don't think a bet here is for value, it would be a semi-bluff and you won't get 'em to fold. So the "semi" is removed, and its just a bluff (IMO) River:bet this. Nut flush yeah! When people puke out numbers like "you're ahead here like 99% of the time....." I roll my eyes. like oh my god! like really? what dirty cavity did you pull that fvcking number out of?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
