Lay down AK pre. Hand Advice*

I'm considering splitting everything from MehFU's first post in this thread because it actually was a good topic/thread until he came in here and pretty much mucked the entire thread up.

just because the combinations are halved it does not exclude the possibility that he has aces or kings in his hand in this particular hand.

this is fundamental poker, i dont understand how u are not getting this.

ill spell it out.

player 1 holds KK
player 2 holds AKs

player 1 limps player 2 raises player 1 shoves. he tells you he has KK. are you calling because you have AK and he has a lower probability of having it because you have AK and the combinations are lower.

bigspenda73 is trying to tell you you should.......just because the probability is lower and the player *could* be bluffing with air...

retard.

oskar there is a great program called "pokerstove" that u can run hand simulations on once u start using it your odds calculating skills go absolutely through the roof. because u run hands in and out run ranges all sorts of stuff.

go download it it will rock ur poker.

Thanks.

That's funny because that means MehFu is using a program that takes removed cards into account, otherwise we wouldn't even be 2:3 against TT+
You might want to switch to a program that calculates odds the right way MehFu... you know... your way. Rolling Eyes

mehfu, when you say that villain has a choice and thats why he is not less likely to have AA or KK, what you are actually saying is that his range for calling is KK+. However, that range is smaller because you have AK, this is a fact. And same thing applies if his range is bigger, the portion of his range that is KK or AA is SMALLER.

Think of the following situation, this is an extreme case, but i hope it will illustrate what we are trying to say to you:

You are dealt Ax playing heads up, flop comes AAA, you shove. In this case youre giving villain the CHOICE you mention. You know villain is ultra nit, and wouldnt call this unless he has an A. Regardless of the choice youre giving him, his range for calling doesnt exist, because there is NO WAY he has an A given 3 are on the board and you have the other one.

The example was extreme, but i hope illustrates what we are saying.

In the hand we are talking about in this thread, his range exists, but it is definitely SMALLER.

*Last edited by MehFU on Thu, 04 Sep 2008, 2:36pm; edited 1 time in total*

oh my god.

im going to say this very slowly indeed watch.......

you cannot ASSUME because you hold AK that a raising opponent is less likely to hold KK+. the raise in fact increases the chance that they hold these cards because their range narrows as they have raised.

this whole argument is based on the assumption that after the cards are dealt that you somehow because you have AK you now have influence over the cards that your opponent is dealt.

THIS IS A TOTAL FALACY.

the hand is set in stone they have the cards in their hand right now. probability can only stretch so far. i got this from the wiki so its not perfect but its pretty much finishes the argument.

In a deterministic universe, based on Newtonian concepts, there is no probability if all conditions are known. In the case of a roulette wheel, if the force of the hand and the period of that force are known, then the number on which the ball will stop would be a certainty. Of course, this also assumes knowledge of inertia and friction of the wheel, weight, smoothness and roundness of the ball, variations in hand speed during the turning and so forth.

YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW THE CARDS WERE SHUFFLED.

now either i missed something or assumptions are the mother of all fuck ups.

here is the example from above just so your not confused. in the second part, the underlined combos are removed because we hold one of the cards making up that combo, so villain cannot have it. rinse/repeat for KK and you see it reduces the chance he has it by 50%.

MehFU, you're wrong, you could not be more wrong, I cannot source a Wikipedia page to prove your wrongness, because wrongness like yours has not been charted on such a level that 14 years-olds in their parent's basement felt it noteworthy to edit an unreliable internet source about your wrongness.

I think what he's saying is that anybody would only ever limp-raise with AA or KK, in which scenario it really is irrelevant how likely it is for him to have AA or KK. But that's far from a being a realistic assumption.

And if that's how you think, then every time I limped and you raise, I'll 3-bet because you'll lay down everything but AA, right? Rolling Eyes

The Original Post

Let's assume we shove and UTG+1 always folds and MP3 always calls because if we doubt either of these assumptions then this hand shouldn't have been discussed this long because you would be playing with such retards that a shove is so obvious you would have never made this post.

MP3's starting stack is 73.4bb and we have MP3 covered. When we shove, we're betting another 68.4bb to win 83.9bb (Villain's entire stack plus the blinds plus the dead money from UTG+1). To break even on our shove, we will need to have 68.4 / (68.4+83.9) = 44.9% equity at showdown.

Now we need to make an assumption about Villain's range, but first let's look at our equity against a sample range of 22+, AQs+, AKo which we have 44.4% against. If Villain's range is any looser than this, then it's a shove. If Villain's range is this tight, or tighter, then it's a fold. That's really all there is to it.

Now personally, I think this is fold, but the important thing is that the answer is a function of Villain's range and nothing else.

Likelihood of Holding AA/KK, Blockers, etc.

linky to your card removal/hand combo thready spoony?

Well put spoon. Thanks for the solid answer with reasoning and all.

OP... I'm sorry your post got hijacked, 'tho I think the regs brought it back around for some good insight...

...that being said, omfg, I snorted f-in scotch out my nose (blue label b!tches... Shocked

) 'cause I was laughing so hard.

So let me get this straight...

I have AQ... my buddy has KQ... QQ2 hits the flop...

I still gotta worry about trips other than me and my buddy being out there 'cause our holdings don't reduce the odds that someone's shoving holding a Q?!?!

WTF?? ... do I not look like I already have enough sh!t to worry about?!??!?! Shocked

using card removal to try to work out whether people hold cards after the hand is dealt is stupid.

i totally understand card removal theory from a LONG TERM probabilty theory but you simply cannot use it for hand by hand basis.

spoony it does matter how the cards are dealt because the selection pool decreases as the cards are given to each player, this is called mutually exclusive probability.
here ill show u. in this case it is very important because you got dealt the cards after the opp. you are perfectly allowed to try to calculate the probabilty that a person BEHIND you got dealt an ace or a king based on ace king holding however doing it to someone ahead of you is flawed heres why.

deal 1 to OPP (1/52)
deal 1 to YOU (1/51)
deal 2 to OPP (1/50)
deal 2 to YOU (1/49) your last card is a king

think about this:

how do you know that YOU werent the one that got lucky receiving one of the last two (could be three or four, this is not discounted) ki

Poker Forum

Join Our Poker Community!

Poker Forum Index

Beginners Circle

Lay down AK pre. Hand Advice*