| Author |
Message |
|
Posted: Mon, 16 Oct 2006, 10:33am Post subject: H0H2 Part 9 - The Problems - Discussion |
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 3190
WPP: 82
Location: calling
|
|
I don't have a lot to say about the Part 9 Problems. Collectively they're an awesome demonstration of Harrington's inflection point play. Worth the price of the book, imo.
1. With an M of ~3 in the BB and Q6o, Harrington recommends calling a min-raise from a big stack in MP for ~1/7 of your stack after SB calls, because of the 5:1 pot odds you're getting. Agree?
That's it. Hopefully more people will post their thoughts on late-stage tourney and SNG play and include some hand histories. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 17 Oct 2006, 11:57am Post subject: |
|
|
Administrator
Joined: 04 Dec 2003
Posts: 1736
WPP: 218
Location: on my laptop
|
|
| 1. In 9-11 our hand is weak(Q6 os) but our pot odds are excellent(5:1). Normally I'd let this hand go(even w/ the excellent pot odds) but here in this low M situation I would call. One reason for this is that if a Q comes on the flop I go all the way with the hand here(low M). However, if my stack is deep(high M) then I don't go all the way with a pair of queens and no kicker. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 17 Oct 2006, 12:12pm Post subject: |
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 3190
WPP: 82
Location: calling
|
|
| Eric wrote: | | Normally I'd let this hand go(even w/ the excellent pot odds) but here in this low M situation I would call. |
Hmm... I actually think the opposite here. With a low M, I don't want to be risking 1/7 of my stack to chase a 3 or 4 outer. With an M above 20, the pot odds would be more compelling. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 17 Oct 2006, 12:37pm Post subject: |
|
|
Administrator
Joined: 04 Dec 2003
Posts: 1736
WPP: 218
Location: on my laptop
|
|
| zook wrote: | | Hmm... I actually think the opposite here. With a low M, I don't want to be risking 1/7 of my stack to chase a 3 or 4 outer. With an M above 20, the pot odds would be more compelling. |
I understand what you're saying. We must have different styles when our Ms are high(I almost never call raises with Kx, Qx etc unless it is just me vs a possible blind stealer heads up). As Harrington points out several times in HOH2, everyone is forced to play similar styles when having low M. The solution to this problem may not appeal to everyone but there are other problems in Part 9 where everyone agrees to push(with marginal cards) regardless of their normal(high M) style. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 17 Oct 2006, 2:05pm Post subject: |
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 3190
WPP: 82
Location: calling
|
|
| Eric wrote: | | The solution to this problem may not appeal to everyone but there are other problems in Part 9 where everyone agrees to push(with marginal cards) regardless of their normal(high M) style. |
You're right, this is probably the one hand out of 26 in this section that I disagree with Harrington's play. But when I first read it, I probably would have played over half the hands differently. HOH was so good for my sng/tourney game. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 18 Oct 2006, 1:16am Post subject: |
|
|
Administrator
Joined: 04 Dec 2003
Posts: 1736
WPP: 218
Location: on my laptop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
