It's just not the same kind of Ace.

Fishlips_Jones · #1 03-23-2005, 11:59 PM

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (10 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].
3 folds, Hero raises, 2 folds, CO calls, 3 folds.

Flop: (5.50 SB) 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero bets, CO calls.

Turn: (3.75 BB) 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero bets, CO calls.

River: (5.75 BB) A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero bets, CO calls.

Final Pot: 7.75 BB

Normally, I chicken-out and check this on the river. This forum has really helped me 'see the light'. While I had concerns, they were no where near as strong as in the KK hand I posted earlier. I noticed there was a certain unique satisfaction to having this turn out well. Kind of like a bubble popping.

Fishlips

FishHooks · #2 03-24-2005, 12:01 AM

way to start making river value bets, took me some time when i started to do that, works wonders for you BB/100

Yobz · #3 03-24-2005, 01:04 AM

My question: what would you do if he raised the river?

Shillx · #4 03-24-2005, 01:17 AM

Yeah this is an important concept for all the new people out there (and lurkers). If you plan on calling a river bet (you should) you need to bet it yourself. Look what happens if you check to him and he has:

A (his best hand): A five or a boat or a straight = he bets
B (damn good hands): An ace = he bets
C (so-so hands): A hand like 66 or T7 = he checks

However he will call a river bet with the hands that fall in catagory (C). Even if the bet isn't for value, it still might be correct to come out betting. Let's say that in this example, that you will win 40% of the time that you are called (and in this example he will always call). At 1st glance it might appear that you shouldn't bet for value. However you only need to be ~55% to win when your opponent is 1st to act and has checked. When you are 1st to act, you still must bet even if you are taking slightly the worst of it. Let's also assume that you are 20% to win if you check and call. So in this case, he will check behind with 50% of the hands that he would have called a bet with. This is why you must bet when your opponent will call with more hands then he will bet.

EV betting = .4*7.75 - 1 = 3.1 BB/Hand
EV check/calling = .2*5.75 + .2*7.75 - .8 = 1.9 BB/Hand

So eventhough it would be correct for you to call in this situation should your opponent bet, it makes you more simply by betting out when a scare card hits because most people will call more hands then they will bet.

Brad

bottomset · #5 03-24-2005, 01:55 AM

^^ very nice Shillx

Alex/Mugaaz · #6 03-24-2005, 02:16 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah this is an important concept for all the new people out there (and lurkers). If you plan on calling a river bet (you should) you need to bet it yourself. Look what happens if you check to him and he has:

A (his best hand): A five or a boat or a straight = he bets
B (damn good hands): An ace = he bets
C (so-so hands): A hand like 66 or T7 = he checks

However he will call a river bet with the hands that fall in catagory (C). Even if the bet isn't for value, it still might be correct to come out betting. Let's say that in this example, that you will win 40% of the time that you are called (and in this example he will always call). At 1st glance it might appear that you shouldn't bet for value. However you only need to be ~55% to win when your opponent is 1st to act and has checked. When you are 1st to act, you still must bet even if you are taking slightly the worst of it. Let's also assume that you are 20% to win if you check and call. So in this case, he will check behind with 50% of the hands that he would have called a bet with. This is why you must bet when your opponent will call with more hands then he will bet.

EV betting = .4*7.75 - 1 = 3.1 BB/Hand
EV check/calling = .2*5.75 + .2*7.75 - .8 = 1.9 BB/Hand

So eventhough it would be correct for you to call in this situation should your opponent bet, it makes you more simply by betting out when a scare card hits because most people will call more hands then they will bet.

Brad

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this, but the problem I have is how can you possibly know the 40% and 20% numbers? I really don't see how to guess these. If you are off 10% the wrong way it can change what your action should be.

I agree with all these concepts but I can't believe in the specific numbers. The problem with that is that when the situation is somehow different it leaves you making 2 muddy judgements. The average (and definitely myself) microlimit player has trouble making even 1 muddy decision.

Has anyone posted any poker tracker data that can give me good numbers to base my decisions off of? The problem with doing them off my intuition is that judgement can easily be clouded.

Shillx · #7 03-24-2005, 04:45 AM

You are correct that the numbers I picked were arbitrary (spelling). However they do prove the point that most people will call with more hands then they will bet. So I could have said that your hand will be good 60% of the time that you are called in this hand. But if you were to check, your hand might only be good 30% of the time that he bets.

So basically what you should take away from this is that you shoudn't worry about betting when you are taking slightly the worst of it on 5th street and you are 1st to act. This is because you are normally an even bigger dog when you check and he bets. Now the exception to the rule is when you are up against a frequent bluffer in which case you should check and call so-so hands.

Now don't get this confused with TOP and having the best hand 55% of the time. When you are last to act in a HU situation, you need to have slightly the best of it in order to bet (fear of a check/raise).

Brad

Fishlips_Jones · #8 03-24-2005, 10:22 AM

Make a crying call.

Fishlips

jrz1972 · #9 03-24-2005, 10:36 AM

This looks like a good time for bet-fold. I'm only beating a bluff if he raises, and I don't think he's bluffing often enough to make calling +EV.

(Of course that second part is read-dependent, but if I have a read on this guy as being the kind who loves to bluff when a scare card hits, I should reconsider my initial bet).

itsmesteve · #10 03-24-2005, 10:36 AM

unless you have hundreds of hands on an opponent, your poker tracker numbers will be as cloudy, if not more so, than your judgement. Numbers i would look at include river aggression and % of time he saw showdown. if he sees lots of showdowns, he'll probably call with a worse hand. if he's aggro on the river, he'll bluff the scare card. Again, for these poker tracker numbers to be worth considering, you need A WHOLE LOT of hands with the opponenet, especially because you're only really concerned with river action. out of the hands you have with the opponenet in your db, how many do you think he/she played the river on? 20% is probably a generous overestimate. Even so, that means for an opponent with 500 hands in your db, you may've seen 100 river actions. statistically, this sample size sucks. Anecdotely, however, say you remember the opponent betting his 3rd pair when an ace fell on the river. this may be much more useful then an isolated percentage.

It really comes down to having a read/feel for the opponenet which you can only get by paying attention to the hands going on around you.