I Disregard Clarkrmeister's Theorem (almost)

Catt · #1 06-30-2005, 02:38 AM

Villain in this hand is a solid TAG, though a bit tight (it's possible he is 2+2). He is capable of bluff-betting / bluff-raising, but I wouldn't say he uses it often on the river (though he does semi-bluff the turn). He can "make moves" by putting his opponent on a range of hands and playing back regardless of his own cards. He plays post-flop well. He may be experiencing a subtle form of tilt as he and I have tangled HU a few times and I've been lucky enough to either have the best hand and suck bets out of him or have the lesser hand and draw out on the river after aggression early with the lesser hand. His stats are 22/17/2.3 (2.7/3.2/1.3) with a WTSD of 42 and a W$SD of 62 over ~450 hands (mostly datamined). His 3-betting standards are unknown; this is the first hand I have capped pre-flop at this table after raising a fair bit and stealing a lot (been caught with 2nd best once, maybe twice). I have seen him fold to one bet on the river in a biggish pot (I thought it was probably a good fold though I don't know what he had) and I have folded for 1 bet on the river in a biggish pot prior to this hand (I think it was a good fold, though a somewhat fishy donk chatted "lol, not pot commited, eh?").

Party Poker 5/10 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is UTG with Q[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
Hero raises, MP 3-bets, 3 folds, BB calls, Hero caps, MP calls, BB calls.

Flop: (12.40 SB) 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (3 players)
BB checks, Hero bets, MP raises, BB folds, Hero 3-bets, MP calls.

Turn: (9.20 BB) 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero bets, MP raises, Hero calls.

River: (13.20 BB) Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero checks, MP bets, Hero calls.

Final Pot: 15.20 BB

Comments on any street appreciated. Especially interested in river play thoughts. I considered bet-call but wouldn't have bet-folded on the river.

My seat selection is less than ideal, but the table was reasonably nice.

billyjex · #2 06-30-2005, 03:59 AM

looks standard

pheasant tail (no 18) · #3 06-30-2005, 04:25 AM

What's Clarkmeisters Theorem?

What's your question?

Are you wondering if you missed a chance to get raised on the river? You did.

Did you want to get raised on the River? I wouldn't.

Does it appear like he had the Ac? If he doesn't you will make more by letting him bet the river.

What's your question?

MrBig30 · #4 06-30-2005, 04:41 AM

The clark is when the 4th flushcard hits on the river right? This river doesnt change anything, and opp already represented the Ac by raising the turn. No reason to bet river but definitely call down.

imported_azalin · #5 06-30-2005, 06:28 AM

I would play it the same although i dont remember whats clark 's theorem. Can you remind me?

Mr. Graff · #6 06-30-2005, 07:30 AM

The Clarkmeister Theorem states that when a four flush hits on the river and you have a good piece of the board but no flush you should value bet because there is a good chance he also does not have it but will still call often enough when he is beat.
In this hand it is obvious you both have a flush, the question is just which is higher. Considering the opponent I play it exactly the same way on the turn and river.

[ QUOTE ]
His stats are 22/17/2.3 (2.7/3.2/1.3) with a WTSD of 42 and a W$SD of 62 over ~450 hands (mostly datamined).

[/ QUOTE ]
This shows how WTSD and W$SD just cannot be trusted when you only have 450 hands. He is obviously running good and his real figures will be very different.

MrBig30 · #7 06-30-2005, 07:36 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
His stats are 22/17/2.3 (2.7/3.2/1.3) with a WTSD of 42 and a W$SD of 62 over ~450 hands (mostly datamined).

[/ QUOTE ]
This shows how WTSD and W$SD just cannot be trusted when you only have 450 hands. He is obviously running good and his real figures will be very different.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes there is too much quoteing of exact PT numbers around. All you can really say from those numbers is he is fairly tight and fairly aggressive.

kiddo · #8 06-30-2005, 08:07 AM

Perfect on all streets.

Why should u bet river? If he bluffs he will fold. If he got lower flush he will call, and bet if checked 2. If he got A he will raise. Its a no win situation betting river.

xLukex · #9 06-30-2005, 09:48 AM

[ QUOTE ]
The Clarkmeister Theorem states that when a four flush hits on the river and you have a good piece of the board but no flush you should value bet because there is a good chance he also does not have it but will still call often enough when he is beat.
In this hand it is obvious you both have a flush, the question is just which is higher. Considering the opponent I play it exactly the same way on the turn and river.

[ QUOTE ]
His stats are 22/17/2.3 (2.7/3.2/1.3) with a WTSD of 42 and a W$SD of 62 over ~450 hands (mostly datamined).

[/ QUOTE ]
This shows how WTSD and W$SD just cannot be trusted when you only have 450 hands. He is obviously running good and his real figures will be very different.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was under the impression that when betting out on the river you had a hand, but were hoping villain would fold a better, non-flush hand.

Catt · #10 06-30-2005, 12:58 PM

I guess this is pretty standard and I must have been farther to the drunk side of the "lightly buzzed ------- really drunk" scale when I posted.

I considered bet-calling the river as opposed to check-calling. My read on Villain made it possible that he was raising the turn without a [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] or with a lower [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (say, for example, 88 or 99 with a [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]), and possible that he would check through the river. I haven't done the full math of putting him on a reasonable range and putting him on a reasonable course of action on the river given that range. It sounds like most intuitively feel it's better to risk having this get checked through than to risk putting 2 in on the river.

The thread title is stupid and was an attempt at drawing attention to the thread -- this is pretty far away from Clark's. And yes, a guy winning 60%+ of SD when WTSD is 42 is running pretty damn well.