|
littleogre
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,344
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by euphoricism
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by littleogre
I just add the bets i expect to make when i hit my hand to the bets already in the pot.
|
Thats.. exactly what we're doing..
Although I want o make sure you understand its not just "bets I expect to make when I hit", because then you'll get "Well, Ill make 2 more bets, and it costs me 1 to call" -- when in actuality its, "Well, there will be 4 more bets total in the pot, and it costs me one more to call." The same situation -- a turn raise, but one gives you 2:1 (the wrong one) and one gives you 4:1 (the right one).
Remember that rule about once its in the pot it ain't yours?
/Just clearing up some symantical problems 
|
Ok let me make sure i'm going about things in the right way. Lets say i flop a gut shot nut str8 draw in a heads up pot with 6 small bets and my opponent leads out making it 7 small bets in the pot We can assume that at the very least my opponent check call the turn and river. Lets also assume that i'm smart enough to fold if the turn is a blank. So in essence i woud be spending i small bet to possible win 11.
|
|
|
|
KoRnholio
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,165
|
|
Quote:
|
typically passive opponent
|
Quote:
|
but we can safely assume villain almost always threebets here -- he'd be pretty stupid not to
|
Typical passive players don't 3-bet unless they have a monster (such a set). Most fishy players will just call down with 1-2 pair after they are raised.
Since top pair (with a wide range of kickers) is a far more common holding than a set that he'll 3bet us with, you cannot assume that we'll get 4-5 big bets (3-4 on the turn, 1 on the river) against this player.
Plus, if we're assuming he has a set, there is the possibilioty of redraws on the river even afer we hit. So that's 20% of the time we will hit on the turn and still lose the pot (and an extra bet) on the river.
Had you made the player a maniac, then a call with questionable odds is defendable. But as the problem was stated, I don't think we can justify a call with less than 8-1 odds.
|
|
Some days it feels like I've been standing forever, waiting for the bank teller to return so I can cash in all these Sklansky Bucks.
|
|
euphoricism
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Your place or my place
Posts: 3,610
|
|
Hmm. I think youre close.
pot is 6sb, or 3bb on the flop, HU.
opponent leads, 7sb in pot, or 3.5BB
So if we call, we'll put another sb in (4bb), and on the turn our opponent will bet again. The pot is now 5bb. If we hit, we raise, pot goes to 7bb and he calls, making 8bb in the pot. If he check calls the river, the total pot is 10bb.
In your post you wrote: Let's also assume I'm smart enough to fold if the turn is a blank. No, no, that would be a bad thing to do. Nothing has changed!
Same situation, 3.5bb on the flop, if we call there will be 4bb on the flop going into the turn. We miss on the turn. Damnit! He bets, 5bb in the pot. If we call, there will be 6bb in the pot. But we hit the river! He leads into us again (7bb) we raise (9bb) and he calls! (10bb)
Our implied odds are 10:1 -- which is exactly .5bb below where our 4 outter should be. Its still a slightly -EV situation to be in -- which is why most people have put the proper answer at "The pot should be 6.5sb's to call for the gutshot" -- which will be exactly break even on your gutshot. If you figure you might have a runner runner draw as well at least some of the time, you're profiting.
However, it makes some fundamental assumptions:
A) Our opponent will pay us when the gutshot hits. If our opponent leads into us hoping to steal the pot and we call chasing our 4 outter thinking we have good implied odds, and our opponent has absolutely nothing -- even when we hit we won't get paid and that makes it a LOSING proposition.
We have to get a raise off on either the turn or the river AND see showdown to BREAK EVEN on that call.
|
|
|
|
euphoricism
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Your place or my place
Posts: 3,610
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KoRnholio
Quote:
|
typically passive opponent
|
Quote:
|
but we can safely assume villain almost always threebets here -- he'd be pretty stupid not to
|
Typical passive players don't 3-bet unless they have a monster (such a set). Most fishy players will just call down with 1-2 pair after they are raised.
Since top pair (with a wide range of kickers) is a far more common holding than a set that he'll 3bet us with, you cannot assume that we'll get 4-5 big bets (3-4 on the turn, 1 on the river) against this player.
Plus, if we're assuming he has a set, there is the possibilioty of redraws on the river even afer we hit. So that's 20% of the time we will hit on the turn and still lose the pot (and an extra bet) on the river.
Had you made the player a maniac, then a call with questionable odds is defendable. But as the problem was stated, I don't think we can justify a call with less than 8-1 odds.
|
No, as the problem stated, we need 6.5:1 to break even, assuming we can get a raise off on either the turn or the river and see showdown as well. See my above post.
|
|
|
|
euphoricism
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Your place or my place
Posts: 3,610
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by euphoricism
That is all assuming he has a "threebettable" hand -- two pair or a set. If he only holds top pair instead of a set or two pair, he's not as likely to threebet the turn when we hit.
Therefore he will bet the turn, we will raise, he will just call. That puts +4 bets in on the turn, and 2 more on the river, +6 total. The same is likely for the river, he's not going to threebet the river with top pair, and maybe not even two pair. So +6 is good there too.
|
|
|
|
|
euphoricism
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Your place or my place
Posts: 3,610
|
|
There also might be a difference between how we're defining our odds. The post asked in terms of SB, I'm writing in terms of BB.
|
|
|
|
KoRnholio
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,165
|
|
Yeah I was talking in terms of SB's for the flop call. 8-1 (small bets) on the flop is good enough if you are quite sure your passive opponent will pay you off all the way).
But I am confused...
Quote:
|
Same situation, 3.5bb on the flop, if we call there will be 4bb on the flop going into the turn. We miss on the turn. Damnit! He bets, 5bb in the pot. If we call, there will be 6bb in the pot. But we hit the river! He leads into us again (7bb) we raise (9bb) and he calls! (10bb)
|
We shouldn't be calling on the turn if that is the case. Since needing to gain 2 bets just to be "almost" breakeven in EV isn't good poker.
My calculations assume we fold the turn if we miss and the odds to call aren't there.
|
|
Some days it feels like I've been standing forever, waiting for the bank teller to return so I can cash in all these Sklansky Bucks.
|
|
euphoricism
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Your place or my place
Posts: 3,610
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KoRnholio
Quote:
|
Same situation, 3.5bb on the flop, if we call there will be 4bb on the flop going into the turn. We miss on the turn. Damnit! He bets, 5bb in the pot. If we call, there will be 6bb in the pot. But we hit the river! He leads into us again (7bb) we raise (9bb) and he calls! (10bb)
|
We shouldn't be calling on the turn if that is the case. Since needing to gain 2 bets just to be "almost" breakeven in EV isn't good poker.
My calculations assume we fold the turn if we miss and the odds to call aren't there.
|
Yes. Ideally we would like to call on the flop if the pot is 4 bb instead of 3.5.
This is a minor grievence at best... or worst... whichever.
|
|
|