|
|
#31
12-08-2005, 01:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
[ QUOTE ]
Obviousl this board is draw heavy and a big raise is needed. Heres my question / problem with it though. He limped with 22. He called $30 more (obvious call) He needs to make about $240 to break even since hes gonna have to fold almost every time he doesnt hit a set. Actually its probably closer to $300 to cover the times he gets set over setted. He only made about $200 on this hand so in terms of EV, you could say he actually lost money. If he makes a bigger flop raise, the guy may fold and then he makes even less. I realize that if he doesnt raise, he takes a chance of losing a big pot, but it also makes it look likes OP is drawing if he just calls the flop. He can then raise a non flush card turn. Im not saying that calling the flop on this draw heavy board is correct, necessarily. Im just wondering if anyone else thinks this way. In terms of EV, he wouldve been better folding to the preflop raise even thought the call was clearly correct at the time. Does anyone else think like this? [/ QUOTE ] Haha. So on average if we win $300, and in this instance we only made $200, needing $240 to break even, should we fold in the future? 
|
|
#34
12-08-2005, 03:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
Ironically I just lost set over set with 22s twice in the span of about 2 hours.
|
|
#36
12-08-2005, 04:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
[ QUOTE ]
I have 203 22-44 hands that saw a flop. I have ONE instance of set over set. You're right, cleary a PF fold. [/ QUOTE ] Damn! 203?! The long run ain't so long after all. PF is easy call, btw. Whether he should have open limped it in the first place is up for debate, but definately works out fine against many donks, in my experience. Edit: oops, wasn't an open limp.... uh.. easy call, then.
|
|
#37
12-08-2005, 04:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
[ QUOTE ]
He only made about $200 on this hand so in terms of EV, you could say he actually lost money. [/ QUOTE ] Indeed, we must on average extract $240+ when we hit. But that doesn't mean that in each individual case we hit we must make $240+. I guess my point is that the EV of calling the raise preflop shouldn't be viewed in the vacuum of this hand.
|
|
#38
12-08-2005, 07:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
TD, I'm not sure why you advocate folding this hand preflop. I dont have much to add, so I'm not going to throw around the same statement, ("I'd call preflop") but you've tailored your comment to this situation independantly. So, either I'm missing something in general, you know something I dont know about the players, or my original statement is correct.
|
|
#39
12-08-2005, 08:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Obviousl this board is draw heavy and a big raise is needed. Heres my question / problem with it though. He limped with 22. He called $30 more (obvious call) He needs to make about $240 to break even since hes gonna have to fold almost every time he doesnt hit a set. Actually its probably closer to $300 to cover the times he gets set over setted. He only made about $200 on this hand so in terms of EV, you could say he actually lost money. If he makes a bigger flop raise, the guy may fold and then he makes even less. I realize that if he doesnt raise, he takes a chance of losing a big pot, but it also makes it look likes OP is drawing if he just calls the flop. He can then raise a non flush card turn. Im not saying that calling the flop on this draw heavy board is correct, necessarily. Im just wondering if anyone else thinks this way. In terms of EV, he wouldve been better folding to the preflop raise even thought the call was clearly correct at the time. Does anyone else think like this? [/ QUOTE ] Haha. So on average if we win $300, and in this instance we only made $200, needing $240 to break even, should we fold in the future? [/ QUOTE ] Did I say you should fold in the future. No, I said it was an obvious call. I bolded it for you since you didnt see it.
|
|
#40
12-09-2005, 02:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
You wrote: "He only made about $200 on this hand so in terms of EV, you could say he actually lost money."
That might be true, except for the word "expected" in "expected value." Rinse/repeat for the last full paragraph. If the question is whether you on average make enough to make this call +EV, there's only one good way to tell, and that's statistics baby!
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
