preflop equity

[BigBiceps]

Irrelevant to the discussion, but it was POSSIBILITY not FACT which was my original error which I edited.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
I said 100,000's of hands, because this situation happens at most maybe 1 in 1000 hands, so that would be a sample size of 100. I actually have not ever seen this situation in 50,000 hands, which is why I said this was absurd to begin with.

[/ QUOTE ]
Situations similar to this happen all the time. One of the important points in this thread is that a small percentage edge becomes quite large when magnified with a lot of opponents.

[ QUOTE ]
Like if 55 is included instead of 22, then 44 goes down even more whereas 99 doesn't by so much.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, good point. I put 44 in PokerStove against 3 hands: 77, 54, 43. Turns out that 44 only has 2% equity, while 99 has 57% equity against these same hands. I used to think that if there was a raise and two cold calls from donks that would CC total crap like 43, then I'd be OK calling from the blind w/ 44. From now on I'm mucking 44 but raising w/ 99 in this situation.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like the idea of having to put 6 SB's into a pot to see if I can pick up a runner runner winning hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
You don't have to do anything! You are going to play poker. You're going to use your reads and information gained during the hand and make the best decision possible after the flop. This poll isn't about how you're going to deal with post-flop play - it's what to do PF. I'm not saying that you shouldn't take post-flop considerations into your PF action but, clearly the benefits of raising combined with your current equity edge make all of these hands an easy cap.

Also - I didn't explicity say this in my last post but - when I say that you're better off folding those hands if you're not comfortable playing them postflop - I'm talking about ALL 4 hands. The big mistake that you are making in this thread is that you are assigning a large difference in value between the four hands. There isn't. If you aren't comfortable playing poker then fold - otherwise cap, enjoy playing a big pot and do the best you can on each successive decision.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
That is not using our superior poker skills optimally IMO and is unnecessarily asking for big swings in bankroll. Most players go ON TILT sometimes regardless of their skill levels, and this is just the type of pot that can cause this, which also somewhat reduces the EV of playing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Swings are part of the game. Dealing with TILT is part of the game. If you're going to allow these factors to determine your actions at the table then either you're playing over your head or (probably more likely) shouldn't be playing poker - PERIOD.

[Piiop]

To anyone who voted fold for any of these and actually meant it, are you aware how many bets are already in the pot and that you have the best position?

I would cap them all, but I'd imagine there's not a big difference between calling and capping. However, both are significantly better than folding.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Like if 55 is included instead of 22, then 44 goes down even more whereas 99 doesn't by so much.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, good point. I put 44 in PokerStove against 3 hands: 77, 54, 43. Turns out that 44 only has 2% equity, while 99 has 57% equity against these same hands. I used to think that if there was a raise and two cold calls from donks that would CC total crap like 43, then I'd be OK calling from the blind w/ 44. From now on I'm mucking 44 but raising w/ 99 in this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is exactly why the previous analysis and discussion surrounding it is flawed. You can't assign exact hands to your opponents. You're assuming that these guys hold very specific hands and it's falsely skewing the results of the simulation.

A realistic simulation would assign small, normal ranges for and EP PFR, and EP PF 3-bettor, a couple reasonable ranges for the 1st/2nd 3-bet cold-callers and probably random hands for the rest. In the situation where this occurs there's going to be A LOT of junk coming in behind those first few callers. It's possible that assigning a random hand in the simulation is giving at least one of the cold-callers too much credit for a hand.

This also doesn't take into account the hot/cold nature of the pokerstove simulation and how that's flawed given that we're not also continuing to showdown - most of the time not even past the flop.

[SeaEagle]

Ummmm. Did you miss my sarcasm tags?

[BigBrother]

[ QUOTE ]
I used to think that if there was a raise and two cold calls from donks that would CC total crap like 43, then I'd be OK calling from the blind w/ 44. From now on I'm mucking 44 but raising w/ 99 in this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

LMFAO

If you are going to play any of these hands for 3 bets (and I would play them all), then by all means you should cap it getting 8 to 1.

Each hand has it's relative strength and weaknesses, but against a decent PFR and 3-bettor, I think 76s has a nice benefit that your outs are less likely to be sitting in your opponents hands and that you can 'usually' make a quick decision on whether or not to proceed past the flop.

As for 44 you will occasionally get underset or underboat, but IMHO these baby pairs win some of the biggest pots because they are so well hidden and opponents always love their trip K's (or whatever) and give you tons of action.