6 max hand - 55

[MrWookie47]

With an agg factor of 1, he could be quite aggressive, depending on his WtSD. Unless he's folding everything you and I would fold postflop, giving him something like a 10% WtSD, he has to be betting with a lot of junk. I can't bring myself to fold. I see the analysis that makes betting -EV, but I think betting and folding will be much worse than betting and calling, and calling any river where we hit a straight or better.

[DMBFan23]

Wookie,

great points. I sort of Ad-libbed the range, perhaps there are crappier suited (and unsuited?) hands in his range, that would contain 3s and 4s...(J3s? 35o?)

I also am still torn on the CR issue. I actually probably would have called in the heat of battle, but I wonder if this player ever CR's me without the flush? I suppose he could CR me with a straight as well, man this is tough for these 80% VPIPs. reads help so much here, I should have been paying more attention [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

either way it seems that the potential for him to cr me with two pair, a flush, or a set would add more -EV to the bet. maybe -0.2 BB?

anyways thanks for the critiques, there is certainly more room for detail. I love these kinds of analyses for TAGs, because the variability comes from how people mix up their play, etc. here you have to decide "could he really have 85o?"

[DMBFan23]

Q4o with the 4h.

[MrWookie47]

I find that players that are this loose tend to make additional mistakes by either being much too passive, or much too aggressive, relative to the 2+2er. Given this guy's agg. factor, I'd be inclined to put him in the latter camp. Furthermore, I could even see myself c/r'ing that turn without the flush, with a set, for example, although in this case, it'd probably be best to donkbet and avoid giving a lone heart a free card unless the villain tends to be a pretty relentless bettor. Since your play is indicative of many hands that aren't flushes, and that are beaten by sets or even two pair, it's pretty easy for him to be thinking that you don't have a flush and to think that whatever he has is good.

The other thing to see here is how the probability of getting c/r'd on the turn when you're drawing just kills your EV. S&M's argument in HPFAP about checking with outs isn't spelled out as quantitatively as this. The flush, in particular, is instructive because of how violently it murders us when we're drawing dead but feel compelled to draw anyway.

You know, this post has inspired me to want to work out something substantial on the subject of the interplay between the desire to check with outs, the competing desire to semibluff bet for fold equity, and the desire to not give free cards with what might be the best hand. I think that discussion is underexplored.

[DMBFan23]

[ QUOTE ]
You know, this post has inspired me to want to work out something substantial on the subject of the interplay between the desire to check with outs, the competing desire to semibluff bet for fold equity, and the desire to not give free cards with what might be the best hand. I think that discussion is underexplored.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think about this a lot, particularly when dealing with something like

-UI overcards,
-with showdown value,
-in position

against passive and aggro players obviously different concerns dominate. but when you have a hand with no showdown value, how does it change? and how does it change as the opponent gets looser (and thus his passive or aggressive behaviors take on different meanings, and your fold equity decreases but you are more likely protecting something).

I suppose the same example could be applied to small pairs, but I find myself with UI overcards much more often so I think about it more.

[car ramrod]

[ QUOTE ]
You know, this post has inspired me to want to work out something substantial on the subject of the interplay between the desire to check with outs, the competing desire to semibluff bet for fold equity, and the desire to not give free cards with what might be the best hand. I think that discussion is underexplored.



[/ QUOTE ]

I would love to see you do it, and I would love to read it. This is not a situation I put a lot of thought into, but should begin to.

[MrWookie47]

[ QUOTE ]
-UI overcards,
-with showdown value,
-in position

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly what I was thinking about writing about. Raising Axs on the button and getting called by the BB, who checks and calls the flop. You're at the turn with A high and maybe an overcard kicker to go with it combined with some other draw: flush draw, gutterball, etc. The proper action is clearly a very complicated function of your high card strength, the strength of your draw, your opponents tendancies, how likely the board hit your oppoenent, how likely your opponent thinks you are to have hit the board (if he's thinking at all), and the size of the pot. This is going to take me a while, but I'll hammer away at it.

[milesdyson]

don't try to do it, dude. it's too complicated and could result in suicide.

fwiw i was going to advise checking the turn in this hand, but then i see ev calcs, detailed reasoning and such, and figured i would stay out.

OMG.

And btw, awesome analysis. You guys continue to blow me away with this stuff. nh