Texas Holdem Hand - Page 4

oscark · #31 12-09-2005, 05:51 PM

Unfortunately.

DcifrThs · #32 12-09-2005, 05:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
there is a 0% chance a solid thinking bb raises a 5 person field w/ KTs or KTo.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a 0% chance that the above statement is correct. Not only is there the online misclick factor but also the human factor - people occasionally do things you don't expect.

I'm not saying the guy has KT, but assigning a 0% chance to any particular holding is ridiculous, especially as the action unfolds and new information comes to light.

SpaceAce

[/ QUOTE ]

allow me to rephrase [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]. i'll lay you 199:1 on whatever money u feel comfortable wagering that bb does not have KTs or KTo. if there is a misclick factor along w/ human nature then this wager should be very attractive to you...if not, then .5% probability of him having KTo or KTs is too high for your risk aversion factor...thus if you were in the hand, its effectively a 0% probability that the solid thinking (in stevie's words "super solid") bb would have those hands given the preflop action. then factor in the flop action ... and if its NOT zero, the chance is so close to zero as to be meaningless for analytical purposes.

care to wager?

Barron

andyfox · #33 12-09-2005, 06:21 PM

"also, as to 11-9, 0% chance bb 3bets (Effectively) bottom 2 pair on turn."

The 11-9 was in reference to Steve's play the first time around on the turn, when there was just a bet from the BB. At that point, the hands Westley has listed are the most likely holdings for the big blind, although for reasons I've indicated in another post in this thread, I think Q-J is unlikely.

DcifrThs · #34 12-09-2005, 06:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
"also, as to 11-9, 0% chance bb 3bets (Effectively) bottom 2 pair on turn."

The 11-9 was in reference to Steve's play the first time around on the turn, when there was just a bet from the BB. At that point, the hands Westley has listed are the most likely holdings for the big blind, although for reasons I've indicated in another post in this thread, I think Q-J is unlikely.

[/ QUOTE ]

ty andy. i misread that. i also vasly discount QJs

Barron

Steve Giufre · #35 12-09-2005, 07:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
"also, as to 11-9, 0% chance bb 3bets (Effectively) bottom 2 pair on turn."

The 11-9 was in reference to Steve's play the first time around on the turn, when there was just a bet from the BB. At that point, the hands Westley has listed are the most likely holdings for the big blind, although for reasons I've indicated in another post in this thread, I think Q-J is unlikely.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, and I think QJ is pretty much impossible. I'm really not even sure Oscar plays AQ like that (up to this first turn bet.) I know a lot of guys would, but its not entirely possible he may have slowed down a bit with that hand. Maybe we can get him to chime in since he just popped up.

After he three bets the turn I think AQ very unlikely but I could be wrong. I think he should put he stop sign up with jj qq and aa included.

#36 12-09-2005, 09:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]
westley,

what does button have?

button is agro and winning.

was there a flush draw on the flop? what did he do nothing but CALL WITH that whole time.

steve played this hand expertly (assuming he folded) other than the pf call.

edit: also, as to 11-9, 0% chance bb 3bets (Effectively) bottom 2 pair on turn.

Barron

[/ QUOTE ]
Barron, the 11:9 favorite part only pertains to why the hero should initially raise the turn. Once the hero just calls the turn and it goes raise and 3 bet behind him, I understand that the hero's hand has been severly devalued. And maybe it is right to fold this turn, but I will just come right and say it, I cant fold this hand even on that board in this huge pot, when I know there is one opponent for sure that is very aggressive. I am not saying its right to call down here, Im just saying what I would do. And If this is a leak in my game I am comfortable with this flaw.

Steve Giufre · #37 12-10-2005, 12:16 AM

I folded. They capped the turn, and Oscar check called the buttons river bet. Oscar had QQ and the button had K10.

I felt OK about folding the turn after the three bet, but I was unsure about whether or not I should raise the first turn bet or not. After thinking about it more and reading some of the responses I'm pretty sure I got it right (regardless of the results.) Even though I think AQ is highly unlikely, if he does have it, I do only have 4 outs to the best hand, and Im pretty sure its getting capped behind me.

#38 12-10-2005, 01:14 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I folded. They capped the turn, and Oscar check called the buttons river bet. Oscar had QQ and the button had K10.

I felt OK about folding the turn after the three bet, but I was unsure about whether or not I should raise the first turn bet or not. After thinking about it more and reading some of the responses I'm pretty sure I got it right (regardless of the results.) Even though I think AQ is highly unlikely, if he does have it, I do only have 4 outs to the best hand, and Im pretty sure its getting capped behind me.

[/ QUOTE ]
Easy fold IMO [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]
NH, thanx for posting the results, I think the whole world wanted to see this one.

golferbrent · #39 12-11-2005, 03:46 AM

Steve,

I think you are in big trouble here. If the BB is solid as you say... then I dont see him holding a hand you beat here. Preflop he has 1 of four hands (A-A,K-K,Q-Q, and A-K). Based on the flop action and the ensuing turn action you can now put him on exactly 2 hands... A-A or Q-Q.

Based on this analysis, I have you solidly in third place. The button surely has to have K-10. It is the only hand he can call all those bets on the flushless flop and then raise the turn with. I hope you found the courage to fold on the turn.

As far as the other people putting the BB on a wider range I don't see it if he is a solid player. I wouldn't even include J-J in his range. I don't see a solid player raising a field of 5 others with J-J OOP. Not going to happen.

Only, slight mistake you made was possibly calling preflop. In general, I don't see this as a huge mistake, but if you grow too fond of these hands it will become a mistake. Every now and then... limping with baby pairs is ok. What a bummer of a pot... but I hope you lost the min!

DcifrThs · #40 12-11-2005, 12:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
In general, I don't see this as a huge mistake, but if you grow too fond of these hands it will become a mistake. Every now and then... limping with baby pairs is ok.

[/ QUOTE ]

given the game description (party higher limits) pf, why is limping behind 1 limper w/ a small pair sometimes good? why is it only ok every now and then?

Barron