Knowing anothers hand enough to overcome your piss poor hand

arod15 · #1 08-07-2005, 02:37 PM

One thing I found playing various B+M rooms is people talk too much. They often times tell you how they would play a certain hand and why almost mapping their play for you. With than in mind, is entering a pot vs. somone you know for a fact has KK or QQ (not AA as they also said what they do and why) worth a chance with a trash hand? for example there are three ways to skin him you can represent an A if it falls, you can hit a monster flop, or represnt a you got a big piece on a scary flop. I just think that knowing anothers hand might make a sometimes unplayable hand worth a shot. Comments? Thought? lets discuss.....

#2 08-07-2005, 03:09 PM

A scary board won't come often enough to move KK/QQ off her hand.
Ummm are we talking no-limit?

EDIT: You would have to represent a specific hand the entire time.

EDIT: You also have to be a type of player to play these kinds of hands, and your opponent must know this.

arod15 · #3 08-07-2005, 03:35 PM

agreed and yes we are talking NL that would to my knowledge almost never work in Limit.

djoyce003 · #4 08-07-2005, 08:56 PM

worth it in no limit not worth it in limit because you can't fold them off their hand no matter what, and u can't win enough on the times you flop a monster.

If you know he has AA you can call in no limit with virtually any 2 cards as long as his preflop raise is small enough because if you catch, you are getting all his money and if you don't, you are just losing the preflop raise. In limit you are calling the raise and if you are lucky can get 3-8 bigbets out of him with your monster...if he's truly crizazy you might get more than that but its doubtful.

arod15 · #5 08-07-2005, 10:10 PM

I agree sometimes people just announce there hands i think i play almost any two if i am 90% more certain of a players hand. Another important factor is the player. Some will not fold to threatining boards they just cant give it up i find myself leaning more towards folding unless their is favorable pot odds or the raise was too small. Against a weakish tight i def see a lot more flops as the best hand is not needed to win....

NYCNative · #6 08-08-2005, 02:47 AM

I asked this question in the small stakes NL section because at that level it is less likely villain is capable of making big laydowns. The overwhelming response was that if you have the kind of David hand that can slay a Goliath (i.e. a suited connector or a smaller PP which will result in getting paid off if you flop a set) that it is smart to make such plays with the caveat that you have to play well post-flop and you have to be disciplined enough to get rid of it when the flop teases instead of pleases. (Not that you have to flop your full house to make it worth it, but you have to know whether the price villain charges for you to see a turn and/or river makes sense.)

It also helps if villain sucks (i.e. he will slowplay monsters, check a flop hoping to CR when you're smart enough to take the frere card, etc.) but doesn't it always?

SNOWBALL138 · #7 08-08-2005, 03:13 AM

1. Four flushes and 4 straights don't come often enough
2. Sometimes you opponent won't have JJ, but AQs instead. When you bet the A high flop, you get called and lose.
3. In all but the rarest of cases, it takes more than one round of betting before you can narrow down your opponents cards in a precise way. This means that you have to play essentially "blind" for 2 rounds or more. You can't recoup this on later rounds of betting.

Maulik · #8 08-08-2005, 10:54 AM

Interesting question. Look at some of the pros who play junk/marginal hands. If you think you can get your opponent to muck a betterhand then yes.

However, if you think you are going to make this work against a gambler (read Asian dude @ Taj) you aren't going to make it work. Also, your lack of discipline at times isn't going to make this +EV often enough. Perhaps this can work against a TAG, less so against LAGs.

Play 5/10 this weekend.

arod15 · #9 08-09-2005, 08:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Interesting question. Look at some of the pros who play junk/marginal hands. If you think you can get your opponent to muck a betterhand then yes.

However, if you think you are going to make this work against a gambler (read Asian dude @ Taj) you aren't going to make it work. Also, your lack of discipline at times isn't going to make this +EV often enough. Perhaps this can work against a TAG, less so against LAGs.

Play 5/10 this weekend.

[/ QUOTE ]
Are we going to AC. Yes i played that asian dude to loosely. But i wasnt refering to a player with him. And yes i need to be more disciplined againsted a player like him

PokrLikeItsProse · #10 08-08-2005, 05:55 PM

Chris Ferguson once posed the problem of what hands you can call with if you and an opponent both had 50K with $1/2 blinds and your opponent opens for $5, but accidentally exposes his hand as A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].

The answer is: any two cards. The fascinating problem is discussed by Matt Matros in his excellent book, The Making of a Poker Player in the chapter on game theory.

There exists a point where the money in your stacks becomes small enough that it is not worth it to call with any two cards. I haven't bothered to solve for it or see if someone else solved for it.