|
|
#21
06-05-2005, 05:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Hand to Talk About
raise the flop, bet the turn
and seriously i hope this doesn't turn into a 500 post thread, cuz this hand is really boring and standard. in fact if you raised the flop he probably woulda folded instantly 
|
|
#24
06-05-2005, 06:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hand to Talk About
Pretty standard. I can't see how the turn is a check assuming that you have your usual tight table image and since you don't really have enough equity to worry about having to fold to a check-raise. I might 3-bet preflop. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
Some more interesting variations IMO would be whether to bet the river if your opponent called your turn bet and checked it to you, and whether to bet the turn if you made a pair.
|
|
#26
06-05-2005, 08:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hand to Talk About
If Mason checks behind, the pot is 3BB. He hits the gutshot one time in 11.5. If he hits it, he will win some more money on the river. Probably the gutshot is worth about 0.35BB of equity.
In addition, Mason's hand is so weak that the river bluff if he misses contributes some positive equity against optimal play. [I'm sure someone will disupte this claim, but the math of bluffing is more complicated than commonly realized. A bluff with your strongest bluffing hand has EV of zero. Weaker hands have positive EV.] So if Mason gets checkraised and folds, it costs him 1.35BB, plus whatever his bluff is worth, plus whatever equity he has from the possibility of pairing and getting checked to on the end. Now all this said, I still think the correctness of Mason's play depends on his opponent's tendencies.
|
|
#27
06-05-2005, 09:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hand to Talk About
Everyone keeps saying this is "standard."
Can someone please explain the flop call to me? These are likely "higher level" thinking concepts that I don't quite understand yet, but if so, I'd like to start thinking about them. However, he's how I see it: The preflop call is standard. On the flop, let's allow 4 full outs for the gut-shot draw There are also potential outs for pairing a 6 or 7, however they are probably only worth 1 out at most, but even then I'd like to consider them negligable due to the reverse implied odds of calling down with a worse hand. So let's consider 4 outs, which requires 10:1 to call. But the pot is only offering 5:1. If we try to consider implied odds, which really only come from hitting the gutshot, Let's consider one of the best scenarios: A 9 comes on the turn. SB bets. Mason raises. Villain Calls. Mason bets and gets called on the river. Here, he makes up an additional 3 big bet - equivalent to 6 small bets - thereby just barely showing a profit on his earlier flop call. Alternatively, Mason may chose to smooth call the turn, and hope to raise the river. This would result in the same profit. However, by raising either the turn or the river, the villain does not have to call. And if Mason earns anything less than those 3 BB's, he is in -EV for his flop call. Further, there are times when his gutshot will not be the best (even though we have allowed 4 full outs for it). That is, he may lose to a higher straight (or better). I suppose a case could be made for the times the "LAG" actually re-raises Mason's straight, thereby easily pushing Mason into +EV land. However, I don't know if this possibility makes up for the ever thin EV line that Mason is walking by calling the flop. Other's have mentioned the "float" concept, but again, how often is this LAG really going to check/fold the turn?? Adam
|
|
#28
06-05-2005, 09:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hand to Talk About
Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
|
|
#29
06-05-2005, 09:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hand to Talk About
[ QUOTE ]
Everyone keeps saying this is "standard." Can someone please explain the flop call to me? [/ QUOTE ] MM is calling in large part because he thinks he'll often be able to pick up the pot when his opponent checks it to him on the turn and he bets. A tight player is "supposed" to fold on this board when the preflop raiser bets out, which makes Mason's call pretty scary, and the opponent will frequently give up with a junk hand or something like 55 on the turn. It's unlikely that this will happen quite often enough to justify the call all on its own, but this combined with Mason's legimiate equity / implied odds from the gutshot is probably enough to make the call correct. The higher level concept involved is to go beyond thinking of outs in terms of "how many cards can improve me to a stronger hand on the next round?" and to also think about outs in terms of free cards, free showdowns, and profitable bluffing opportunities. These things come into play more against higher-level opponents who are more capable of giving up a weak hand or checking a medicore hand.
|
|
#30
06-05-2005, 09:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hand to Talk About
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Everyone keeps saying this is "standard." Can someone please explain the flop call to me? [/ QUOTE ] MM is calling in large part because he thinks he'll often be able to pick up the pot when his opponent checks it to him on the turn and he bets. A tight player is "supposed" to fold on this board when the preflop raiser bets out, which makes Mason's call pretty scary, and the opponent will frequently give up with a junk hand or something like 55 on the turn. It's unlikely that this will happen quite often enough to justify the call all on its own, but this combined with Mason's legimiate equity / implied odds from the gutshot is probably enough to make the call correct. The higher level concept involved is to go beyond thinking of outs in terms of "how many cards can improve me to a stronger hand on the next round?" and to also think about outs in terms of free cards, free showdowns, and profitable bluffing opportunities. These things come into play more against higher-level opponents who are more capable of giving up a weak hand or checking a medicore hand. [/ QUOTE ] Thank you, thank you. Well said and easy to understand. Adam
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
