| Author |
Message |
|
Posted: Fri, 26 Jan 2007, 9:15pm Post subject: Folding AK Preflop opioions?
|
 |
|
3-of-a-Kind
Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 92
WPP: 110
|
|
So i was in this situation and i think i did the right thing but i got hassled by the rest of the table which made me question myself. Still i know i did the right thing. Do you think im playing to tight?
So im playin 1/2 nl at riverrock in richmond and i get dealt AK os in the large blind. It goes around the table and 6 callers. It comes to me and i raise 17 dollars. Everyone folds but the one guy who raises all in which is a total of 95 dollars. I have a read on this guy and he raises all in with a pocket pair. Not a very good player but been getting lucking. I have a stack of 200 and i fold my AK. He flips over his cards and hes got a pair of nines.
I figure there is no piont in riskin my stack and getting involved in marginal, besides hes pushing with pocket pairs. Any which way it will be a coin flip and i fugire i dont'want to get involved in that. What to you guys think? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 26 Jan 2007, 9:58pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 3558
WPP: 84
Location: right here
|
|
| With all the dead money (6 limps and your $17) you were getting more than the pot odds you needed to call. Plus if there's a chance he has AQ here, it's even better. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 26 Jan 2007, 10:10pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight
Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 181
WPP: 95
|
|
| Id call more than 100% of the time if I could |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 26 Jan 2007, 11:47pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 04 Mar 2006
Posts: 1713
WPP: 58
Location: UK
|
|
| What's to stop this being a standard PokerStove hand? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 27 Jan 2007, 1:01am Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush
Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 592
WPP: 114
Location: Montreal, Canada
|
|
this made me cringe. you shouldn't play with scared money  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 27 Jan 2007, 7:10am Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush
Joined: 22 Jun 2005
Posts: 7939
WPP: 71
Location: Marry Me Cheryl!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 27 Jan 2007, 12:15pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Posts: 4209
WPP: 150
Location: St. Louis, MO
|
|
| easy call here. i will take the coin flip to the flop every time. however, i need to hit the flop, with your read, to continue. if i hit, i turn on the heat. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 27 Jan 2007, 5:12pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 883
WPP: 85
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 27 Jan 2007, 8:22pm Post subject:
|
|
|
3-of-a-Kind
Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 92
WPP: 110
|
|
why is it a bad fold.?
I knew he had a pocket pair, and i was getting invovled in a marginal situation. Isn't it better to walk away and get invovled in a hand you know your goin to win rather than a coin flip/? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 27 Jan 2007, 8:55pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 3558
WPP: 84
Location: right here
|
|
| You had to risk $78 (his $95 minus the $17 you already put in) to win $124 (his $95 plus your $17 plus $12 from all the limpers). So you were getting 1.6:1 odds on your call and you were only a 1.25:1 underdog. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 27 Jan 2007, 9:23pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Posts: 4209
WPP: 150
Location: St. Louis, MO
|
|
| zook wrote: | | You had to risk $78 (his $95 minus the $17 you already put in) to win $124 (his $95 plus your $17 plus $12 from all the limpers). So you were getting 1.6:1 odds on your call and you were only a 1.25:1 underdog. |
ty, zook. the proof is in the math...long term.
exsentrik, as i'm sure you already know, the pros will push ANY and all small edges they can...this is one of them. its a big difference as to why you, me and most of us in here still are playing like amatuers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 27 Jan 2007, 10:42pm Post subject:
|
|
|
3-of-a-Kind
Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 92
WPP: 110
|
|
| Thanks for you input. I will take it into consideration in the future. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 28 Jan 2007, 11:46am Post subject:
|
|
|
High Card
Joined: 23 Jan 2007
Posts: 1
WPP: 117
Location: Ohio
|
|
I understand the OP's reason for choosing to fold. I also agree with the responders' suggestions that he should have called.
With AK and money int he pot already, it would have been correct to cal against any random hand. But poker decisions should not be made simply on the math.
The OP stated he felt he had a solid read on the player. He included his read in his decision making. And, as it turned out, his read was correct.
I don't think the OP was playing with "scared money," as one responder concluded. The OP decided to lay down a coin flip hand in a cash game.
Nothing wrong with that decision, IMO. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 28 Jan 2007, 12:48pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush
Joined: 22 Jun 2005
Posts: 7939
WPP: 71
Location: Marry Me Cheryl!!!
|
|
| ZowieZ wrote: | I understand the OP's reason for choosing to fold. I also agree with the responders' suggestions that he should have called.
With AK and money int he pot already, it would have been correct to cal against any random hand. But poker decisions should not be made simply on the math.
The OP stated he felt he had a solid read on the player. He included his read in his decision making. And, as it turned out, his read was correct.
I don't think the OP was playing with "scared money," as one responder concluded. The OP decided to lay down a coin flip hand in a cash game.
Nothing wrong with that decision, IMO. |
We make money by making the correct decisions based on math. Doing so otherwise would be giving up an edge. We shouldnt be giving up edges theoretically. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 28 Jan 2007, 1:11pm Post subject:
|
|
|
3-of-a-Kind
Joined: 15 Sep 2006
Posts: 100
WPP: 60
|
|
I would call here even though I wouldn't calculate anything. I would just do it because the guy is a shortstack and with these guys I like to gamble on a coin flip. It doesn't cost much.
But this mathematical kind of thinking is great. I'd like to learn that! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 28 Jan 2007, 1:59pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 2911
WPP: 107
|
|
| You cannot fold here if you believe your read, and you will not go busto if you lose (which should never be true). Real busto, not tourney busto. Tourney this is almost always a call because even increasing blinds force you to take the EV every time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 28 Jan 2007, 2:21pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Starfleet's Finest
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 2082
WPP: 116
Location: The University of TEXAS at Austin
|
|
I'd like to add another 'you should have called' vote.
If your read was that he had Pocket Pair, then you should DEFINITELY call. The fact is that you will with something like 48% of hte time here, but by calling, you will be contributing less than 48% of the pot (you cannot include money you already put in i.e. the $17 raise and your blind). Ergo, calling is +EV and because calling is +EV, folding is definitely -EV.
And if you didn't have that read, let's reviewt hands that truly own you: AA, KK. Do you think he would have just called preflop in his position with that many callers in front of him? No, he wouldn't have, so there's a good chance that you have someone dominated who's trying to play in position with AQs or TT or something.
This should definitely have been a call. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 28 Jan 2007, 2:30pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight
Joined: 04 Jan 2006
Posts: 113
WPP: 96
|
|
The only way I fold this is if new him to be real tight and he limped in first maybe second position than I would put him on AA or KK . Other wise
I am calling. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 28 Jan 2007, 4:04pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House
Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Posts: 637
WPP: 175
Location: Location: Location
|
|
| ZowieZ wrote: | | With AK and money int he pot already, it would have been correct to cal against any random hand. But poker decisions should not be made simply on the math. |
Not to beat a dead horse, but I just want to stress that the decision to call here is not one based only on math, but that doesn't mean that math should be ignored. And this particular decision happens to be a more math-oriented one, because the EV calculations are easier than a normal decision. You can either call or fold, and either decision will be the last one that either player makes. This makes the calculations pretty easy. If you fold, the final EV of the decision is zero. So you just calculate the EV of calling and call if it's greater than zero.
| ZowieZ wrote: | | The OP stated he felt he had a solid read on the player. He included his read in his decision making. And, as it turned out, his read was correct. |
Right, and the read can be expressed in mathematical terms. When the OP says he's pretty sure that the opponent has a pocket pair, he is stating his expected range of the opponent. This range can be plugged into pokerstove (or any other poker Odds Calculator) and it will return the chance the a given range will win (after all cards are out) vs. another range. We know our range (AKo), and villians range (any pocket pair, which is expressed as 22+), so the results are:
| Code: | equity win tie
Hand 0: 42.743% 42.49% 00.25% { AKo }
Hand 1: 57.257% 57.01% 00.25% { 22+ } |
So if OP calls, AKo will win 42.7% of the time, and it will lose 57.3% of the time. These numbers can be used in calculating the EV of calling . It's just the chance of winning times the amount you win when you call minus the chance of losing times the amount you lose when you call. And remember, the amount in the pot belongs to nobody anymore, so that amount is not included as part of the amount lost when you call, but it is included in the amount you win (aka dead money). In this case there is already $46 in the pot when your decision happens ($12+$17+$17).
You have to put in $78 to call. So when you lose, you lose $78 (the $78 you just put in). When you win, you win $124 (you get the $78 you just put in back, plus the $78 the opponent put in, plus the $46 already in the pot). So the calcualtion becomes:
EVcall = .427 * $124 + .573 * -$78 = $8.25
So calling is worth $8.25 on average and folding is worth $0.
So taking everything into account (both the reads and the math), a call is the right decision. The math can't be wrong, so as long is the read is solid, a call is definitely right.
In practice, the method that zook used above of comparing winning odds to pot odds makes it a little easier to calculate and much more succinct to show, but I wanted to go through the actual EV method for demonstration purposes.
| ZowieZ wrote: | | I don't think the OP was playing with "scared money," as one responder concluded. The OP decided to lay down a coin flip hand in a cash game. |
In a cash game, your goal is to make the most cash, and $8.25 > $0. The statement you made fails to take into account that there is already a significant amount of money in the pot (and also the hand isn't as close to a coinflip as overcards vs. underpair, because AA and KK are both included in the range).
| ZowieZ wrote: | | Nothing wrong with that decision, IMO. |
A decision to fold here is either a result of a misunderstanding of the EV calculations, or a result of scared money (i.e. you understand a call is +EV but fold anyway because calling is a high-variance play). Either way, there is something wrong with a decision to fold. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 28 Jan 2007, 4:11pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Eats babies
Joined: 28 Feb 2006
Posts: 3884
WPP: 109
|
|
The only hand to fear is AA. If his read was a PP then you are in a coinflip situation with overs, marginal loser against KK and a big dog against only AA. With Dead money in the pot, as stated before, call is the only response.
Here's something worth noting that I posted in this thread about AK.
http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=457080#457080
According to Sklansky,
| Quote: | AK is the favorite against any non-pair hand, a slight dog against all pairs through QQ, a moderate dog against KK and a huge dog against only AA. The fact that you hold one Ace cuts the odds that your opponent has AA in half.
Also, AK doesn't play well after the flop OOP with deep stacks, especially in multiway pots. Blah, balh, blah.... because AK is unlikely to be in trouble preflop, but often has limited value after the flop, it's often best by far to make a big preflop reraise with it. | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 28 Jan 2007, 9:39pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 16 Sep 2005
Posts: 3190
WPP: 95
|
|
| ZowieZ wrote: | | The OP stated he felt he had a solid read on the player. He included his read in his decision making. And, as it turned out, his read was correct. |
I dont understand what you are saying. Yes the read was correct. But the fold was incorrect. If the guy showed you 99 and you had AK then with the pot odds you are getting you have to call. Now if you think he has AA, KK alot more often than 99 you could argue for a fold but with the read we have a call is correct. But the most important thing to realise is that if a call is correct, then a fold is incorrect.
| Quote: | The OP decided to lay down a coin flip hand in a cash game.
Nothing wrong with that decision, IMO. |
No. The OP decided to lay down a coin flip hand when he was getting alot more than the odds he needed to call. Absolutley theres something wrong with that. We're giving away all of the equity we had in the pot for free because we are scared to gambool. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 08 Feb 2007, 1:02am Post subject:
|
|
|
High Card
Joined: 13 Nov 2006
Posts: 7
WPP: 166
|
|
| Thread is a bit old but I believe all the posters stating that this is largely a "math" call have missed one important part. The fact that there were six callers lead to the not unreasonable conclusion that one or more of the outs are missing. People tend to play aces and kings so I don't think it unreasonable to expect two outs to be gone. Not sure what this does to the calculations. Obviously, you can't know this but they're not all holding pocket pairs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 08 Feb 2007, 2:14am Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 29 Apr 2004
Posts: 1920
WPP: 121
Location: St. Louis
|
|
| Sci Fi wrote: | | Thread is a bit old but I believe all the posters stating that this is largely a "math" call have missed one important part. The fact that there were six callers lead to the not unreasonable conclusion that one or more of the outs are missing. People tend to play aces and kings so I don't think it unreasonable to expect two outs to be gone. Not sure what this does to the calculations. Obviously, you can't know this but they're not all holding pocket pairs. |
Actually you missed the important part. This is a live game. The second most important part is that this is 1/2 live game. These morons can and do play anything. Most of these people's ability to play poker doesn't extend past their ability to sit in a chair. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 08 Feb 2007, 4:35am Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush
Joined: 05 Jul 2006
Posts: 7006
WPP: 71
Location: Pwnsylvania
|
|
Don't disguise a weak play by "trying to find a better spot"
Dont play with scared money...make this call 8 days a week. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 08 Feb 2007, 6:46am Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush
Joined: 22 Jun 2005
Posts: 7939
WPP: 71
Location: Marry Me Cheryl!!!
|
|
| Sci Fi wrote: | | Thread is a bit old but I believe all the posters stating that this is largely a "math" call have missed one important part. The fact that there were six callers lead to the not unreasonable conclusion that one or more of the outs are missing. People tend to play aces and kings so I don't think it unreasonable to expect two outs to be gone. Not sure what this does to the calculations. Obviously, you can't know this but they're not all holding pocket pairs. |
this is dumb |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 08 Feb 2007, 9:18am Post subject:
|
|
|
High Card
Joined: 13 Nov 2006
Posts: 7
WPP: 166
|
|
Miffed,
What's wrong with this idea? It's in NLHETP. I'm sure Sklansky would believe one or two of the six is holding an ace or king. The fact that they're weak, live players only increases the odds of holding an ace. They always limp with Ax. Sure, they can limp with most anything, but aces and kings are good possibilities.
I'm not trying to defend the play, just saying it may not be as bad as suggested. Anyone care to calculate the numbers assuming one and two outs gone. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 15 Feb 2007, 5:41pm Post subject:
|
|
|
High Card
Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 5
WPP: 215
|
|
Hey, 1st off I m a new player, so I don't play these blinds at all. However, everyone here is saying it is mathematically incorrect to fold. I won't argue that because i m not good with that. I must say though, everyone who agree with the decision to fold is missing a point. The person who started this thread said: "Villain has been getting lucky".
Even though the math may say it is correct to play the hand, the decision maker might have felt his opponents was really lucky, so he folded. Since this is a coin flip, luck will determine who wins the hand. His pot odds were good enough to allow him to make the call, but luck is also a big part of the game. We shouldn't blame him or critique him (like playing with scared money), because he folded. Personally, if I know the villain has been catchin hands all game long, and you know it's a toss up. I probably would fold too. All because of the "luck" factor.
Here's my 2 cents. Give the guy a break, everyone has thrashed him.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 15 Feb 2007, 6:01pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight
Joined: 25 May 2006
Posts: 140
WPP: 117
Location: Winnipeg
|
|
| RebornSky wrote: | Hey, 1st off I m a new player, so I don't play these blinds at all. However, everyone here is saying it is mathematically incorrect to fold. I won't argue that because i m not good with that. I must say though, everyone who agree with the decision to fold is missing a point. The person who started this thread said: "Villain has been getting lucky".
Even though the math may say it is correct to play the hand, the decision maker might have felt his opponents was really lucky, so he folded. Since this is a coin flip, luck will determine who wins the hand. His pot odds were good enough to allow him to make the call, but luck is also a big part of the game. We shouldn't blame him or critique him (like playing with scared money), because he folded. Personally, if I know the villain has been catchin hands all game long, and you know it's a toss up. I probably would fold too. All because of the "luck" factor.
Here's my 2 cents. Give the guy a break, everyone has thrashed him. |
This is like saying I'm not going to play AA this time because I've been sucked out on the last 5 times I've played them and I'm feeling "unlucky". Nobody would ever do that because they'd be giving up an edge(granted a much larger edge). The thing is even if the edge is 51% in favor of us compared to 49% to the villain, over the long haul it adds up. I think that's all people are trying to get across to the OP.
My 2 cents. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 15 Feb 2007, 6:54pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Posts: 715
WPP: 101
Location: South Bend IN
|
|
| It seems to me that your playing with scared money as well. And this leads to bad decision making, like folding there. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 15 Feb 2007, 10:18pm Post subject:
|
|
|
High Card
Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 5
WPP: 215
|
|
You just went into an extreme situation though. What I was talking about was the 50/50 hands like the one we were talking about. I have never folded on AA or KK or QQ ever because I will gamble on that they wont flop the winning hand.
If by playing with "Scared money" means you fold on the toss up hands against someone lucky at the table who has gotten what he needs most often, then I fall into that category. It's like you cant play poker straight with math. The edge of math is great, but in situations like these, there are other factors in deciding to fold or call. Again, I will revert back to the lucky villain. We all know luck isn't forever, but if that person at your table is having those days where he's really lucky (Every1 has those days), then would you test your luck against him/her? That's up to you to decide on this situation. Please don't state if you have AA you'll fold, because I m only talking about this situation. The person has already said he has a good read on the guy (Pocket pair) and he has AK.
I m only saying the math part of the game is indeed true and will give you an edge. I didn't state it wasn't. Luck is just another part of the game, like the math. I don't know if you guys believe in this, but some people really have bad gambling luck or really good gambling luck. Not stating this as a fact, but I do know some people like that.
Sorry if I anger some of you, but the OP has taken so much heat for not calling from some of you. Chill... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 15 Feb 2007, 10:58pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush
Joined: 22 Jun 2005
Posts: 7939
WPP: 71
Location: Marry Me Cheryl!!!
|
|
| math(pot odds) > all (except reads) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 16 Feb 2007, 5:16am Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush
Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 252
WPP: 148
|
|
| Exsentrik said that he put him on a pair and he said it was a coin flip AND the guy has been getting lucky. You are actually a small underdog here and if the guy has been getting lucky and not you too, you don't want to risk money on a coin flip. I don't like taking coin flips against someone who is on a rush even though pot odds and all the math in the world justify it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 16 Feb 2007, 5:54am Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 222
WPP: 111
Location: mckinney, tx
|
|
| The Odds God wrote: | | Exsentrik said that he put him on a pair and he said it was a coin flip AND the guy has been getting lucky. You are actually a small underdog here and if the guy has been getting lucky and not you too, you don't want to risk money on a coin flip. I don't like taking coin flips against someone who is on a rush even though pot odds and all the math in the world justify it. |
Because why exactly? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 16 Feb 2007, 6:40am Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush
Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 252
WPP: 148
|
|
| What do you mean by asking why? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 16 Feb 2007, 7:42am Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush
Joined: 22 Jun 2005
Posts: 7939
WPP: 71
Location: Marry Me Cheryl!!!
|
|
why are you making an incorrect decision. The game isnt bout luck it is about math.
Hence, not calling with pot odds when you hand can improve to win is a losing lay or Bad poker. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 16 Feb 2007, 3:15pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush
Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 252
WPP: 148
|
|
| I was just talking about extreme example if the guy has been getting lucky and I mean REALLY REALLY lucky. Otherwise, I said before (as Dave Davis - I had to change account cause I forgot pasword and my e mail account was down) that it is a clear call because the guy is shortstacked so you can gamble on a coin flip. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 16 Feb 2007, 3:24pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush
Joined: 29 Apr 2006
Posts: 271
WPP: 159
Location: Sweden
|
|
| It's not like the cards remember that he has been REALLY REALLY lucky. You and he have the same chance to be lucky in any hand, regardless of what happened in the previous hands. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 16 Feb 2007, 5:19pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush
Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 444
WPP: 118
Location: Chicago
|
|
There is no such thing as luck. Probability by definition takes into account that things won't always happen as they *should*. Over the long term though, probability = reality. If you have the proper pot odds to continue a hand in any scenario in a cash game, you should always call. This takes assumes that the actual immediate results of winning / losing don't matter to you, which they shouldn't. Otherwise, you're just playing scared.
I agree with whoever said they'd call 8 days a week. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 16 Feb 2007, 8:23pm Post subject:
|
|
|
One Pair
Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 18
WPP: 132
Location: Baton Rouge
|
|
I guess I'll be the one to say that I don't think that the fold is a bad move in this situation. Of course, I am a firm believer that big slick is a highly overrated hand. You can question your lay down all you want, and even listen to everyone say that you're playing with scared money, but the fact of the matter is that you were beat and you layed it down. It's easy to question your decision after you know what he held but how would you have felt making the call and the gentleman turning over aces or kings?The pot odds weren't so outstanding that you have to make that call with a hand like that.
And by the way, it's not so uncommon for a strong player to limp in with a huge hand waiting for someone else to raise. Especially if that player has the ability to let go of such a hand without losing all of his chips. Just something to think about!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 16 Feb 2007, 10:27pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Life Donk
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 1710
WPP: 93
Location: running with scissors
|
|
| Quote: | | What's wrong with this idea? It's in NLHETP. I'm sure Sklansky would believe one or two of the six is holding an ace or king. The fact that they're weak, live players only increases the odds of holding an ace. They always limp with Ax. Sure, they can limp with most anything, but aces and kings are good possibilities. | Stop discussing "luck" and discuss this!
Can one assign a % to the chance that someone folded one or more of our cards?
At any rate, this % is probably negated by the % that he has a worse A himself or some random junk hand. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 17 Feb 2007, 4:02am Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush
Joined: 22 Jun 2005
Posts: 7939
WPP: 71
Location: Marry Me Cheryl!!!
|
|
Ok. too all the dumb people in this thread:
when you have the pot odds to make a call, and you will profit from that call if the situation were repeated a thousand times THEN YOU MAKE THAT CALL.
Please stop posting about this shyte called luck. If you are certain you are flipping for cash with correct pot odds then you fucking call. And if you cant because you are scared of losing then dont buy into a game you cant afford.
Luck has nothing and i will repeat *NOTHING* to do with poker, and if you think it does then close your account on FTR because we cant help you.
No, seriously. No arguing, your arguement against this is flawed and wrong. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 17 Feb 2007, 7:01am Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush
Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 252
WPP: 148
|
|
It is personal thing if you believe in luck. I would call here all day long, but if this guy sucked out on you a couple of times with a runner runner flush, I am folding. Luck has to do a lot with poker. Of course, over the long term, it break evens. But I believe in rushes and luck because I experienced it and I prefer to stand away from someone who gets lucky all the time and I play more cards when the flop cooperates. It is a thing that all the pros do. Why do you think Sammy Farha calls all in with a flush draw without the odds? Cause he is on a rush!
However, I am not saying you should take this RUSH thing into account when playing or discussing poker too much. He was asking about the correct play and this is a call. But sometimes, math can't help you and if you feel bad about making the call, it doesn't always means you are playing with scared money. But mathematically, it is correct. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 17 Feb 2007, 7:06am Post subject:
|
|
|
Life Donk
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 1710
WPP: 93
Location: running with scissors
|
|
| The Odds God wrote: | It is personal thing if you believe in luck. I would call here all day long, but if this guy sucked out on you a couple of times with a runner runner flush, I am folding. Luck has to do a lot with poker. Of course, over the long term, it break evens. But I believe in rushes and luck because I experienced it and I prefer to stand away from someone who gets lucky all the time and I play more cards when the flop cooperates. It is a thing that all the pros do. Why do you think Sammy Farha calls all in with a flush draw without the odds? Cause he is on a rush!
However, I am not saying you should take this RUSH thing into account when playing or discussing poker too much. He was asking about the correct play and this is a call. But sometimes, math can't help you and if you feel bad about making the call, it doesn't always means you are playing with scared money. But mathematically, it is correct. | This is so wrong. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 17 Feb 2007, 8:28am Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush
Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 252
WPP: 148
|
|
| This is your personal opinion. However, I didn't want to start discussion about rushes, who has them and who doesn't. I have them. This thread is about big slick and mathematical expectation, about odds. I just mentioned luck factor. Didn't intend to start a discussion that doesn't belong here. Just stick to math. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 17 Feb 2007, 11:22am Post subject:
|
|
|
Life Donk
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 1710
WPP: 93
Location: running with scissors
|
|
I knew I shouldn't have gotten involved in this thread, but here goes:
| The Odds God wrote: | | It is personal thing if you believe in luck. [...]Luck has to do a lot with poker. Of course, over the long term, it break evens. | If you believe in luck you will never become a shark. "Luck" does have a lot to do with poker, because believing it exists is what makes the fish come to the tables. "Good luck" is the variance upswing that makes fish think that they are good players. Ironically, "bad luck" is the variance downswing that will make some fish think they are good players but just unlucky, leading to someone moving up in stakes to chase their losses and "staying away from the stupid fish who called all in with one out and hit". Or it leads to the periodic "RIGGED"-posts that we see on any poker forum. The shark knows that luck as a phantom force does not exist, but he is mentally prepared for the variance rollercoaster that is poker.
| The Odds God wrote: | | I would call here all day long, but if this guy sucked out on you a couple of times with a runner runner flush, I am folding. | If anything, I would be more inclined to play with suck a player, because he might be thinking "Wow I'm so lucky right now, I'm gonna play these cards even though they aren't as strong as they should be".
| The Odds God wrote: | | But I believe in rushes and luck because I experienced it and I prefer to stand away from someone who gets lucky all the time and I play more cards when the flop cooperates. | If you believe in rushes as in "because someone was lucky the last ten coinflips he's probably gonna be lucky in this one too", then there is really nothing anyone can say that will make you change your mind. You need to do some serious mental adjustments if you want to make it in this game.
| The Odds God wrote: | | It is a thing that all the pros do. Why do you think Sammy Farha calls all in with a flush draw without the odds? Cause he is on a rush! | This has to be wrong. Without knowing Sammy Farhas poker playing particularly well, I'm 100% certain that there is another reason for him to make that call than him "being on a rush". Examples are that his opponent will be bluffing a certain % of the time, that he can bust his opponent and have a bigger fish fill that seat, that his opponent will tilt if he hits the hand without having the odds to do so, that he is on tilt himself, or any other thing that a pro considers before making a play. I'll tell you this: the one thing he DOESN'T consider is that he's been "getting lucky lately". This is great for those of us who try to play well in this game, because the fish see Sammy calling without odds on TV and then sit down at the poker table and do the same. Their problem is that they don't know WHY he made the call. | The Odds God wrote: | | However, I am not saying you should take this RUSH thing into account when playing or discussing poker too much. He was asking about the correct play and this is a call. But sometimes, math can't help you and if you feel bad about making the call, it doesn't always means you are playing with scared money. But mathematically, it is correct. | Can't you see the contradiction in this? One play is correct, the other is incorrect. If you feel bad about making a correct play then you are playing with scared money/on tilt/whatever and should just get up and walk away.
How ironic that someone with the nick "The Odds God" is siting luck/rushes as an influence on his decisions.
(I rearranged some of the quotes to make it easier to see what I'm referring too). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 17 Feb 2007, 1:54pm Post subject:
|
|
|
3-of-a-Kind
Joined: 06 Nov 2006
Posts: 90
WPP: 98
Location: WA
|
|
For all reasons stated above, I agree in calling, but I can see where someone could be happy with folding and wanted to play devil's advocate a bit. This may be elaborating a bit on 'scared money.'
This is in a casino, and OP didn't mention the actual buy-in, only that he had $200 behind. Online the buy ins are pretty standard, but my nearest casino's NL game is 2 $5 blinds w/ a max buyin of $200. So it could be fair to assume OP is up in his session.
Online players are spoiled in the number of hands we see and the unlimited hours we can play. In a casino, where a tighter player may only be playing 4 or 5 hands an hour, one hand like this will make or break your whole session. It could be a long time before you get another chance to make that money up.
On the other hand, the majority of live players at this level are horrid, so the chances of getting payed off/doubling up when you do hit a monster are very high.
If OP chooses to toss a flip even when getting odds because he wants to finish up on his session or wants to keep more money behind to exploit bigger edges later on, then I can see where he's coming from. However, he needs to be honest with himself and admit he made a mathematically incorrect decision because of these reasons. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 17 Feb 2007, 2:30pm Post subject:
|
|
|
3-of-a-Kind
Joined: 06 Feb 2005
Posts: 76
WPP: 74
|
|
| after the above post i'm pretty sure there is no need for further discussion on this particular topic. well said. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 17 Feb 2007, 4:05pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush
Joined: 22 Jun 2005
Posts: 7939
WPP: 71
Location: Marry Me Cheryl!!!
|
|
| Quote: |
Luck has to do a lot with poker
|
There isnt a lot to say to this....
other than  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 17 Feb 2007, 6:07pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush
Joined: 01 Feb 2007
Posts: 252
WPP: 148
|
|
| Don't attack me so much, HalvSame! I didn't say I believe in luck so much.But sometimes it is just not your day and Doyle Brunson believes in rushes, if you said it about shark that they don't believe in them. I didn't intend to discuss this, I just mentioned it because exsentrik said that he was getting lucky so he was probably scared to toss a coin with it. I am not some kind of a sick gambler who doesn't respect the odds and plays like a maniac when he is on a rush. I see you are very upset because of my messages. I didn't mean it THAT seriously. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 17 Feb 2007, 9:36pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Life Donk
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 1710
WPP: 93
Location: running with scissors
|
|
| I'm not upset at all, I just very firmly believe that your belief is wrong. I'm not trying to point my finger or attack you in any way. Unfortunately there's no way for me or anyone else to make someone change their mind on this issue, so we'll just have to agree to disagree. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted FTR $200 Freeroll at FullTilt on November 23rd
