Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,256,000 Posts!
Poker ForumAll Other Poker/Live Poker

Pineapple Strategy Thread

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 150 of 495
  1. #76
    givememyleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    15,474
    Location
    ISHPERMING MISHIGEN
    Quote Originally Posted by lherbert2014 View Post
    Did I play it right?

    lherbert2014



    Discard: 6
    yep, looks like you set your FL hand to get max value of +16 royalties, max of +22 with a scoop. i would have set it the same.
  2. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by lherbert2014 View Post
    Did I play it right?

    lherbert2014



    Discard: 6


    Wazzup (dealer)



    Discard: 7 7 3 3

    you could've played KK / 2 pair / 2 pair, but that would only be 8 royalties. Playing a flush in the middle is very nice (+8), bottom flush is +4, and 99 up top is +4.

    When you're in question of what the "best" fantasyland is, often all you have to do is count up the royalty points and find out which play is higher.
  3. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by lherbert2014 View Post
    Did I play it right?

    lherbert2014



    Discard: 6


    Wazzup (dealer)



    Discard: 7 7 3 3

    you could've played KK / 2 pair / 2 pair, but that would only be 8 royalties. Playing a flush in the middle is very nice (+8), bottom flush is +4, and 99 up top is +4.

    When you're in question of what the "best" fantasyland is, often all you have to do is count up the royalty points and find out which play is higher.
  4. #79
    Did I play it right?

    MeGrimlock



    Discard: 5


    tangomecash (dealer)



    Discard: 6 3 5 9
  5. #80
    givememyleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    15,474
    Location
    ISHPERMING MISHIGEN
    Quote Originally Posted by MeGrimlock View Post
    Did I play it right?

    MeGrimlock



    Discard: 5
    brag thread is this way

    haha but seriously sick hand, def set it correctly for a max +40 w/ scoop. i've never had trip aces before.
  6. #81
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    I decided not to set trip tens, what do you think?

    Eric (dealer)



    Discard: 4 T J 2


    Wazzup



    Discard: 2 3 7 5
  7. #82
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    I decided not to set trip tens, what do you think?
    Yeah, I'd do the same. I love spots like this in Pineapple.
  8. #83
    givememyleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    15,474
    Location
    ISHPERMING MISHIGEN
    Had an interesting decision on the 3rd draw:

    Villain





    givememyleg (Dealer)





    Discards: 4, 7


    Draw #3:


    So the 5 goes on the bottom. But in the mid, should I put the 2 or K? Putting the K gives me 3 clean outs in the mid (assuming I also improve my back). Putting the 2 gives me 5 outs to improve to 2p but takes away some of my back two pair outs. Also a small chance I hit trip 2s and trip 5s. I'm already a big favorite to foul, but which one is the best play?

    I went with K in the mid, fwiw.
  9. #84
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Do you discard the 8 on the first draw the way I did?

    OneByPhi (dealer)



    Discard: 8 8 5 4


    Eric



    Discard: 8 2 9 3
  10. #85
    In spots like these, you have to ask yourself, "Why did I set the K up there in the first place?" To get to FL, of course. If you're not willing to play the K in this spot, it takes a lot of the point out of setting FL cards on top. Not being able to set the 8 on the bottom isn't that big of a deal. You still have two 8s, three 9s, and two Js to hit with three draws to come. The bigger issue is the mid, which is a naked 4 after this play and must make 2-pair to avoid fouling. As the hand played out, you did, but I'd need MadMojoMonkey to tell me the odds of avoiding a foul after this play. I imagine this line leads to fouling fairly often, but when you make a hand you get that tasty 8-point bonus on top and the bounty of FL.
  11. #86
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    on my second to last draw the six goes mid. i also put the eight in back for trips but should i have set the ace up front instead for fl?

    Eric



    Discard: 5 2 A 7


    Wazzup (dealer)



    Discard: 7 2 3 2
  12. #87
    As you played it, you needed to catch one of the last two aces or two kings on the end to make FL, but your hand was foulprooof. If you had put the Ace on top and mucked the 8, you would have had one 8, two Js, and three 9s as outs. With 6 outs for the last draw, I would set the A on top and go for it. It's all about FL, bro.
  13. #88
    Did I set it right?

    duffff (dealer)
    K / 2 3 2 / 8

    Wazzup
    K / 7 / 6 6 3
  14. #89
    Your set is geared toward making FL by catching 8s-up or better in the back and 3s-up or another small 2-pair in the mid. Since I see making FL as the main point of POFC, I think it has a lot of merit, although it sucks some that one of your Ks and one of your 3s are dead. The only other plays that seem reasonable to me are xxx/82/K32, setting the 3-flush, and K/83/22. In the first set, with only one of your clubs gone, the flush is very likely to get there, but it's going to be harder to make an FL hand, and the 4 points you get for making the flush aren't that big of a deal in POFC. Setting the deuces low might be best, since roughly 37% of the time you'll catch at least one more deuce by the end of the hand, and even when you don't, you can usually manage to make 2-pair better than 8s up on the bottom, so your goals are fairly similar to the set you made.

    Tweak the hand a little bit, switching the 2 for the 8, and the best set would clearly be K/23/88, so the question here becomes "how much difference does the size of the pair in the bottom make?" If you would automatically set
    K/23/88, isn't K/83/22 ultimately more reasonable than K/223/8, since the pair in the bottom will hit trip or quad 2s a bit more than 1/3 of the time? And since your top card in the mid is an 8, when you don't hit any more 2s, you still have quite a few possibilities for a 2-pair hand better than 8s-up in the back.

    I think your set is perfectly reasonable, but setting K/83/22 seems like it will probably do a little better in the long run.
  15. #90
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Adding on to what OneByPhi said, I'd probably set it
    K/3/228

    Since Q's, K's and A's will not be played to the bottom hand, the only numbers bigger than 8 are 9's, T's, J's (3 values), while the numbers lower than 8 are 2's - 7's (6 values). As such, I consider 8 a "low-high" number. 8's up on the bottom is not a bad escape when you catch FL and protect a small 2-pair in the mid.

    With the 8 on the bottom, you have a much more balanced drawing scenario for the coming streets.
  16. #91
    You may be right about the 8 in the bottom being better. I have been favoring the 8 in the mid there, but I see your point about the relative strength of 8s. I'll try your suggestion for a while, thanks, MMM.
  17. #92
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Did I set it right for pine? Some would say both q and k in front. Some might do K / A5 / JQ suited. In regular ofc some would put queen front, king mid and ace back.

    Eric
    Q / A K 5 / J

    OneByPhi (dealer)
    6 7 J / 9 T J Q K / 8 8 4 4 4
  18. #93
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    I go back and forth between setting AKQxx hands. Right now, I tend to set KQ/A/xx, with the xx varying on value.
  19. #94
    Did I play it right?

    dawgboy



    Discard: T 6 4 8


    Bacon_TT7 (dealer)



    Discard: 8 9 A 9
  20. #95
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    I go back and forth between setting AKQxx hands. Right now, I tend to set KQ/A/xx, with the xx varying on value.
    +1. Sometime I will play Q/KA/xx, depending on if there is a K or A out already
  21. #96
    Quote Originally Posted by Bacon_TT7 View Post
    Did I play it right?

    dawgboy



    Discard: T 6 4 8


    Bacon_TT7 (dealer)



    Discard: 8 9 A 9
    I would have set the hand very differently. I think a strong case could be made that Q/52/77 might be the "best" play.

    One basic idea is to get the FL card on top. That Q is a little nugget of gold on top, put it there. The idea behind Q/52/77 is to make QQ or better on top, a small 2-pair in the mid, and at least 2-pair on the bottom. Since villain didn't show any of your outs, you'll pull your trip 7 on one of your draws about 40% of the time, so boats won't be rare.

    Anyway, look at how the hand plays out down the other branch. After setting Q/52/77, the 1st draw is 832, 2 to the mid to make a pair, 8 to the bottom, muck the 3. The 2nd draw is 974, 7 to the bottom to make trips, 9 to the mid to add outs to a 2-pair draw (note that you can now afford to make 9s-up in the mid because you have trips low.) 4 to the muck. 3rd draw is A88, alas, you can't use both 8s, so you play 8 to make your boat, put the A on top to add outs to your FL-pair draw, and muck the 8. 4th draw is J93, and you play the 9 in the mid to make 2-pair but have to settle for AQJ on top. The final hand looks like this:
    Bacon_TT7 (dealer)



    Discard: 3 4 8 3

    Against the hand you made, this hand wins 2-3 (losing the top to your deuces, winning the mid 9s-up to 8s-up, and winning the bottom with the boat) and nets 6 points in royalties for the boat, +7.

    I'm not saying that this proves anything on the basis of one hand, but even though the FL draw never would have gotten there, this path had a much better chance to get there.
  22. #97
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by OneByPhi View Post
    I would have set the hand very differently. I think a strong case could be made that Q/52/77 might be the "best" play.
    I would have set it the way OneByPhi suggests as well despite the fact that our opponent showed us 2 queens.
  23. #98
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Do you set king mid?

    OneByPhi (dealer)
    Q / A A 4 5 / X

    Eric
    K Q / 4 / J J
  24. #99
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    yeah.
    Q/K/JJ4
  25. #100
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    What about setting the king mid here?

    OneByPhi
    X / 6 3 2 / J 5

    Eric (dealer)
    K Q / X / 8 8 7
  26. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    What about setting the king mid here?

    OneByPhi
    X / 6 3 2 / J 5

    Eric (dealer)
    K Q / X / 8 8 7
    I usually set Q / K / 8 8 7, but I have no argument that it's any better than what you did. Your route gives you 6 live Ks and Qs for FL, leaves the mid open to find 2 small pairs, and has a pair with a live kicker low. That route seems pretty playable, but I'd need somebody better at math than I am to figure out how often you'll make a K or a Q on top and 2 small pair or AA in the mid compared to how often you'll make FL down the other route.

    The other way leans heavily on catching a K and a Q down the road. If you do, FL is virtually guaranteed since it's easy to improve the bottom. But if the Q doesn't come, you are dimishingly unlikely to make FL--yeah, you could backdoor AA on top, make Ks-up in the mid and hit trips or better low, but it won't happen often enough. And even when the Q comes, you either need to catch a K, backdoor AA, or make 2 small pair (and, incidentally, often you'll end up in that uncomforatble spot on the 3rd draw when you have 2 open slots in the mid, catch a card that makes you a small pair in the mid, and then have to decide whether to make that pair to try to catch 2 pair on the end or leave that open for a K).

    The basic question seems to be that when you're in position with KQ887 and villain holds none of your cards, are you more likely to hit a K or a Q on top and 2 small pair or AA in the mid (what set 1 needs) or a Q on top and a K or AA or 2 small pair in the mid (what set 2 needs)? I know that there are some other longshot possibilites, but I think that solving this would give you a pretty good idea.

    But MMM has told me that these kinds of problems (branching in both the top and the mid) are ridiculously hard to solve, and I know you had posted about getting a hand simulator, Eric. This one is probably easier to solve by running large numbers of random hands and comparing results (a la Pokerstove) than by brute force of math. Although if anyone can, that would be awesome.
  27. #102
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Yeah, we need bots. I like being able to get to fl with any additional Q or K in front. It would be good to see how whyfrontK and whymidK do against each other and against other bots over millions of hands. They'd have to face other bots to see who does better when there are still 3 kings in the deck as opposed to when they play each other and there are only 2.
  28. #103
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    pair in back or 3 to a flush in back?

    Eric
    X / 4 2 / 7 7 T

    OneByPhi (dealer)
    K / 4 2 A / 9
  29. #104
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by OneByPhi View Post
    The basic question seems to be that when you're in position with KQ887 and villain holds none of your cards, are you more likely to hit a K or a Q on top and 2 small pair or AA in the mid (what set 1 needs) or a Q on top and a K or AA or 2 small pair in the mid (what set 2 needs)? I know that there are some other longshot possibilites, but I think that solving this would give you a pretty good idea.

    But MMM has told me that these kinds of problems (branching in both the top and the mid) are ridiculously hard to solve, and I know you had posted about getting a hand simulator, Eric. This one is probably easier to solve by running large numbers of random hands and comparing results (a la Pokerstove) than by brute force of math. Although if anyone can, that would be awesome.
    Well, I mean, maybe not necessarily "ridiculously" hard to solve. Just an order of scale up from asking if you'll draw certain cards. Like, asking the kind of questions about drawing cards can be solved in less than 15 minutes (usually much less once the first solution is found). However, asking how cards are drawn AND played involves the sequence of the draw, not merely the occurrence of the draw.

    It's not enough to just draw any 2 pairs over the next 9 cards; you have to draw them AND play them. Since you don't get all 9 cards at once, then drawing any 2 pairs is not necessarily (or even likely) a "successful" draw.

    I can solve this, but I'd need to solve a bunch of intermediate steps, since the original question is poorly stated. There are a LOT of ways to draw and play cards which can result in a final hand value of 2 pair. In order to solve the equity for that primary case, we need to sum the equities of all the subsidiary cases that lead to the primary case being achieved.

    So I'd need to answer a question like, "What is the equity to draw at least 1 K or Q and also making 2-pair in the mid, if I place a wired pair to the mid on the first draw, having NOT drawn a K or Q, then on the 2nd draw I place a kicker and a K or Q, then on either the 3rd or 4th draw I pair my kicker."

    So you need to state the entire line for which you want to solve the equity, in order to solve the equity. Then, you have to state every possible line that leads to a successful outcome, and solve for the equity of each line. Then, you sum the equities from all those results.

    There is no individual step that is prohibitively hard. The hard part is being creative enough to identify every possible route to success. After that, it's just plugging numbers into a simple formula that has been known for decades.
  30. #105
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    pair in back or 3 to a flush in back?

    Eric
    X / 4 2 / 7 7 T

    OneByPhi (dealer)
    K / 4 2 A / 9
    Lately, I'd only break a pair to play a 3-flush if it's a 3-card straight-flush that is unblocked. I generally avoid playing the first flush card I draw if it's not a straight-flush out, or my opponent has blocked me. I'm not really certain that this is always best, but it has a lot of options for development as the hand develops.

    OneByPhi, what are your thoughts on breaking a 3-flush to make a pair + kicker on the set?
  31. #106
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    Lately, I'd only break a pair to play a 3-flush if it's a 3-card straight-flush that is unblocked. I generally avoid playing the first flush card I draw if it's not a straight-flush out, or my opponent has blocked me. I'm not really certain that this is always best, but it has a lot of options for development as the hand develops.


    OneByPhi, what are your thoughts on breaking a 3-flush to make a pair + kicker on the set?

    For some reason it seems like straight draws have a lot more potential in pine than regular ofc.
    Suppose I had the 9 instead of the 4 so that we could do this set:
    X / 2 7 / 7 9 T


    We're utg so we don't know whether this sf is blocked. If I draw any 8 or spade then it probably goes down low. I prefer completing any straight or flush as opposed to waiting for the sf. One reason for this is that all I need is a high 2 pair or better in back to build front and mid for fl.
  32. #107
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Yes, I'd set that hand that way, and the first hand the first way.

    I feel like the +15 for the straight-flush is worth waiting for on the first draw, as long as it's not blocked. I know that it's a terrible long shot, but not nearly so long a shot as in any other poker game. Like you pointed out, with so many ways to make a straight or flush, not to mention 2-pair and trips, it's a low-risk/high reward play... I think.

    I wouldn't let the hand go unimproved, if given the option to improve it, on the 2nd draw.

    ***
    FWIW, when you're first to act with no information about anything but your own cards, nothing is blocked. It's not that you don't know if it's blocked. In fact, you know the opposite... unless you're cheating... but I digress.

    Perhaps I'm just nit-picking terminology there. Mathematically, the reason something becomes blocked, i.e. an impossible outcome, is when the probability distribution function collapses due to the revelation of new information. Until that information is revealed, it is still a part of the foreseeable future outcome of the hand.
  33. #108
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post

    OneByPhi, what are your thoughts on breaking a 3-flush to make a pair + kicker on the set?

    It's kinda late and I just surfed in and saw this. I probably should think more about this, but here are the first few thoughts that come to mind:

    It depends on the texture of the hand. I think 3-flushes have some value in that they will very often make a bottom hand worth 4 points and provide a base strong enough to support 2-pair or trips in the mid and FL on top. I agree that they are especially valuable if they make a straight flush draw. Of course, if the hand has other features that offer a better opportunity to profit, I will happily break a 3-flush.

    Eric's set xxx/42/77T looks like a good spot to break the 3-flush to me. If he sets the 3-flush, he ends up with
    xxx/:27/7T4, which leaves an ugly mid with one of its outs already gone.

    But I'd rather set xxx/56/69J than xxx/566/9J. The opportunity to make 2 flushes or a flush and a straight is significant enough that I'd rather break the pair.

    In general, the more connected the other two cards are, the more likely I am to try to get value out of the 3-flush.
  34. #109
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Maybe I overvalue the 2 pair escape route but I do value high connected cards more than low connected cards for the back. For example, I am much more comfortable setting 7 9 T in back than 3 5 6. This is because a draw like T 7 gives me a high 2 pair in back such that I can set a lower 2 pair mid. However, the 356 hand is pretty much limited to flush/straight/trips unless I have a pair of aces or something mid.
  35. #110
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    Well, I mean, maybe not necessarily "ridiculously" hard to solve. Just an order of scale up from asking if you'll draw certain cards. Like, asking the kind of questions about drawing cards can be solved in less than 15 minutes (usually much less once the first solution is found). However, asking how cards are drawn AND played involves the sequence of the draw, not merely the occurrence of the draw.

    It's not enough to just draw any 2 pairs over the next 9 cards; you have to draw them AND play them. Since you don't get all 9 cards at once, then drawing any 2 pairs is not necessarily (or even likely) a "successful" draw.

    I can solve this, but I'd need to solve a bunch of intermediate steps, since the original question is poorly stated. There are a LOT of ways to draw and play cards which can result in a final hand value of 2 pair. In order to solve the equity for that primary case, we need to sum the equities of all the subsidiary cases that lead to the primary case being achieved.

    So I'd need to answer a question like, "What is the equity to draw at least 1 K or Q and also making 2-pair in the mid, if I place a wired pair to the mid on the first draw, having NOT drawn a K or Q, then on the 2nd draw I place a kicker and a K or Q, then on either the 3rd or 4th draw I pair my kicker."

    So you need to state the entire line for which you want to solve the equity, in order to solve the equity. Then, you have to state every possible line that leads to a successful outcome, and solve for the equity of each line. Then, you sum the equities from all those results.

    There is no individual step that is prohibitively hard. The hard part is being creative enough to identify every possible route to success. After that, it's just plugging numbers into a simple formula that has been known for decades.
    My only issue with solving this kind of problem is asking the right question. That starts the ball rolling and creates an idea-space where the appropriate form of tractable questions becomes more and more apparent.

    In general, if you present me with a question I can answer, then I'll be too intrigued to NOT solve it.

    So guess whatever line you think has the highest equity (or any line, but that gives you some direction) and ask me the equity of achieving that line. Once we know that, we can find the equity for another line. Eventually, we have all the lines, and we sum the equities.
  36. #111
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Setting the boat in back and the flush mid also gives us 6 back plus 4*2 mid or 14 royalties but I think we have a better chance of scooping this way.

    Eric



    Discard: 4


    Wazzup (dealer)



    Discard: 2 2 7 T
  37. #112
    Did I set it right?

    bandrei17 (dealer)
    X / T 6 / 9 Q Q

    Wazzup
    Q / A / 3 3 6
  38. #113
    I think the QQ has so much value as an FL pair that it just has to be played on top. I'd set: QQ/6/T9.
  39. #114
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    Setting the boat in back and the flush mid also gives us 6 back plus 4*2 mid or 14 royalties but I think we have a better chance of scooping this way.

    Eric



    Discard: 4


    Wazzup (dealer)



    Discard: 2 2 7 T
    I like your set.

    WAZZUP fouled on 13th when it played the J on the bottom and discarded a T.
  40. #115
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by bandrei17 View Post
    Did I set it right?

    bandrei17 (dealer)
    X / T 6 / 9 Q Q

    Wazzup
    Q / A / 3 3 6
    OneByPhi is correct about the Q's value for a FL hand being too great to ignore.

    In general, I'd say a pair of Q's should always be set up top. If you had trip Q's, that'd be a tough one. I'd consider Q's up top and the 3rd Q to the mid. I'm not sure, but I think this is more powerful as a FL hand than the strength of setting trips on the bottom.
  41. #116
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    this is why I keep the front clear for fl.

    Eric



    Discard: 4 K 8 T


    Wazzup (dealer)



    Discard: 7 5 3 8
  42. #117
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    this is why I keep the front clear for fl.
    Amen. Giving yourself extra chances to make FL (or royalties) is an important part of getting all of the value that you can out of your cards.
  43. #118
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    It's another hand where WAZZUP fouls on 13th and discards a card that would have prevented foul. In this case, not only prevented foul, but achieved FL, too.

    Also, I think there's a mistake on 11th. WAZZUP played the Q on the bottom, and discarded the 3. Unfortunately, there's no good argument to leave the middle open. Also, the Q is really blocked and the 3 is fully live. Card value is not important in this case, just the best shot at avoiding foul.

    7 outs to make 2-pair or trips on the final draw is 61%.

    In this case, with this board, the chance to draw a wired pair is 16.6%, which is basically 1/6 ( = 16.7%), our rough guess from another thread. The chance to draw one of 4 outs to make 2-pair or trips is 39.5%. Adding those together is 56.1%, which is an OVER estimate (because sometimes we draw BOTH a pair and an out, and we counted THOSE cases twice)...

    So it's once again better to place a live card than to leave it open.
  44. #119
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    FWIW, the chances of drawing a wired pair of K's or Q's on the final draw for Eric were something like ~1.8%. While it's def. a good idea to leave the hand open, if it's convenient for the other hands, it's also important have a bit of perspective of the equity.
  45. #120
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    FWIW, the chances of drawing a wired pair of K's or Q's on the final draw for Eric were something like ~1.8%. While it's def. a good idea to leave the hand open, if it's convenient for the other hands, it's also important have a bit of perspective of the equity.
    Yes, knowing the odds is key.
  46. #121
    Did I play it right?

    JUKER1



    Discard: K 9 7 9


    Wazzup (dealer)



    Discard: 6 4 4 4
  47. #122
    There are wild disagreements about how to set a hand like this--I would have set it AA/5/J8 because I think that if you're lucky enough to be dealt an FL pair, it should always go on top--but let's just look at the line you took after the set. (I should grant that with the cards that actually came, I would have fouled with my set, but I'd argue that over the long haul it's still likely to be a more profitable line.)

    Anyway, when the first draw brings QK3, I agree that putting the 3 on the bottom is automatic, but putting the Q on top instead of the K doesn't make much sense. WAZZUP is showing you a Q, but the Ks are fully live, so you should play the K up instead of the Q because not only is the K more live than the Q, but it also pays 1 more point in royalties if you make a pair on top. When the next draw brings 976, I think it's a better to play 9 up and the fully-live 7 in the mid (because if another K doesn't come, you can still make 99 up for 4 points, and this play leaves a space in the mid to make trip As or two pair if the flush comes for the bottom). The third draw comes K72, leaving you with a tough decision. Do you make the FL pair up and 2-pair in the mid (relying on catching 2 hearts on the end), or set the K low and the 7 mid, giving you a 4-flush on the bottom and 2-pair in the mid? Since you can see 8 hearts between your hand and WAZZUP's, and WAZZUP may have mucked one or more hearts for all you know, I think playing the K low and the 7 mid has to be the better play. When the last draw brings JT9, you play the T low to complete the flush, and the 9 on top to finish with this hand:

    JUKER1



    Discard: Q 6 2 J

    Notice that it is stronger in both the top and the mid, and it pays 4 points more in royalties than the hand you made with the line you played.
  48. #123
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by OneByPhi View Post
    [...]Since you can see 8 hearts between your hand and WAZZUP's, and WAZZUP may have mucked one or more hearts for all you know, [...]
    As usual, your analysis is excellent, OneByPhi.

    I have a nit to pick with the bold above. Mostly, because while it's "true", it is unhelpful. The cards you can't see are all the same in terms of equity. It doesn't matter where they are, i.e. in the deck or in an opponent's hand. There is nothing to benefit seeing "monsters" in the discards.
  49. #124
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post

    I have a nit to pick with the bold above. Mostly, because while it's "true", it is unhelpful. The cards you can't see are all the same in terms of equity. It doesn't matter where they are, i.e. in the deck or in an opponent's hand. There is nothing to benefit seeing "monsters" in the discards.
    Sorry, I should have worded that something like "at best, you have 5 hearts to hit out of the unknown cards that remain." I get that from the standpoint of figuring the odds, you treat all cards unknown to you (even those that your opponent mucks, and therefore knows, but you have not seen) the same. I also get that both in physics and philosophy you can make a case that "the observer""creates" his experience, but--for no other reason than that it seems to best explain my experience--I presume that once my opponent has seen a card, it has moved from the realm of the unknown to the realm of the known. And even though I don't know what they are, my opponent has mucked some specific cards, so some of my perceived outs might be dead.

    The only remote value of this comes in some rare late-hand situations. If I face a 50-50 decision on the last draw (especially in a 3-handed game that allows me to see a lot of the deck), I will sometimes make decisions influenced by whether my opponents are likely to have mucked a specific card. Say I have

    AQA
    343
    T9T

    and I catch K45. I quickly play the 4 to the mid, and then look around to see that only one K and one 5 remain, and my opponents' top hands are AK and KQ. From the standpoint of making FL, it doesn't matter which card I set as a kicker because Ts-up is good enough to qualify my hand. But if either of my opponents had seen the case K, they would have played it, whereas 5s are often highly muckable cards, so I play the K on the bottom, confident that my out is still in the deck.
  50. #125
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO

    I agree that you can make a broad assumption about your opponent avoiding discarding values that help them.

    Also, you can generally assume that discards are "low values" more often than not. I'd love to see a statistic about how often each card value appears in the discard pile.

    I don't know that you could say this about suits, except under the case of your opponent going for a flush in the same suit.
  51. #126
    Where I am right now in my thinking...I am really against splitting up pairs to play draws if it means my middle is totally worthless to start. And I almost never split up pairs to play a draw that involves a FL card unless it's like 4 to a SF or something. Obviously this leads to royalties on bottom less often, but the less frequent boats and having a spot to dump a card along the way when you're basically playing for high 2 pair on bottom is nice.

    If I get something like I'd probably go Q/55/JT. I could see where dumping in middle with live A/Ks out could work, but making a small 2 pair when starting with a pair in the middle is so common, it seems like a waste. And JTcc is obviously still a fine drawing hand on bottom.

    This hand was sort of debatable, but I wanted at least a live card in the middle with the 4 so dead.

    Did I play it right?

    baudib (dealer)



    Discard: 3 3 6 2




    Wazzup



    Discard: 3 6 2 8
    Last edited by baudib; 02-07-2014 at 04:36 AM.
    Playing big pots at small stakes.
  52. #127
    Quote Originally Posted by baudib View Post
    If I get something like I'd probably go Q/55/JT. I could see where dumping in middle with live A/Ks out could work, but making a small 2 pair when starting with a pair in the middle is so common, it seems like a waste. And JTcc is obviously still a fine drawing hand on bottom.
    I'd set this the same way, but I would have set the hand you posted, which has a fairly similar texture, differently. Both in the case of QJ T5 5 and the case of J9554 the basic question is: where should the small pair go? With QJ T5 5, the presence of an FL card for the top and the largish suited connector on the bottom make it easy to see that setting the small pair in the middle is the most flexible set. You don't really mind putting a third 5 in the mid if you can make a straight or a flush low, and you always have the fallback strategy of converting to a FL pair/2-pair/2-pair structure.

    Setting the pair low significantly increases your chance of making a monster on the bottom, but in my experience it can also make it harder to make a mid good enough to beat an FL pair. And since I make getting to FL, not maximizing royalties on the bottom, the first priority on the vast majority of hands, I almost always set pairs 66 or smaller in the mid as long as I have 2 cards in the 8-J range to set low (and especially if they are suited).

    I'd have set the hand you posted as 4/55/J9 for similar reasons. The goal with this hand is to make FL pair/2-pair/2-pair, with some chance of lucking into a straight on the bottom. UTG, the 4 would go in the middle with the 55, but after WAZZUP shows you two 4s, I think setting it up is a little better, as much as I loathe putting anything but FL cards on the top on the set. This set is less favorable than the previous one because the bottom is one-gapped rather than truly connected and it isn't suited, and you will more frequently have to muck your trip card for the mid if you catch it (especially if you catch it early when the bottom hasn't resolved). But considering that maximizing the chance of making FL is one of the primary goals of every set, I'd argue that this set is better than the one you made.

    Granted, you ended up making FL, and even though you never caught another 5, your set gave you a decent chance to make a big hand on the bottom. But, as you pointed out, the 4 you set in the mid had only 1 out, and the 9 in the mid is somewhat problematic because it is bigger than the pair on the bottom if you hit it early but don't hit Js or 5s.

    As an exercise, look at how the hand plays out down the other branch: when the first draw brings 773, you set 77 in the mid and you have 2-pair made. The next draw is Q83, Q to the top to establish an FL draw, 8 on the bottom to set up a bigger 2-pair draw or backdoor straight draw. The third draw comes A96, 9 low to make a pair, A in the mid to seal off the mid. Last draw is QJ2, Q on top to make FL pair, J low to make 2-pair, and you're off to the land anyway.

    baudib (dealer)



    Discard: 3 3 6 2
  53. #128
    Thanks for reply. I think your set has a ton of merit. However, I find it really rough to put the 4 up top, as having the option to set AQ up top (with all of them live) is really important. If I were to play J9 on bottom, I'd probably still go 554 in the middle.

    9 in the mid is somewhat problematic because it is bigger than the pair on the bottom if you hit it early but don't hit Js or 5s.
    I don't think this is really a problem; even in regular OFC, I figure if I don't get trip 5s or Jacks up on the bottom, I'm probably getting scooped anyway.
    Playing big pots at small stakes.
  54. #129
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post

    I agree that you can make a broad assumption about your opponent avoiding discarding values that help them.

    Also, you can generally assume that discards are "low values" more often than not. I'd love to see a statistic about how often each card value appears in the discard pile.

    I don't know that you could say this about suits, except under the case of your opponent going for a flush in the same suit.
    It would be interesting to look at our data and show the number of times each card was discarded (2 to A ignoring suits).
  55. #130
    Did I play it right?

    baudib



    Discard: 3 6 7 2


    Wazzup (dealer)



    Discard: 2 2 4 T
  56. #131
    I think you're looking for the brags, beats, etc. thread, which is here:
    http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...5D-196144.html
  57. #132
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    lol, I agree quad aces in the middle and sf in back is something to brag about.
  58. #133
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    lol, I agree quad aces in the middle and sf in back is something to brag about.
    And since the poster clearly wasn't looking for help with strategy but wanting to share a big hand, it would be more appropriate in the other thread.
  59. #134
    Sorry@ didn't mean to post it here
    Playing big pots at small stakes.
  60. #135
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by baudib View Post
    Sorry@ didn't mean to post it here
    baudib,

    Don't worry about it. I'd rather have members be active and post in an inexact thread than not post at all.

    Congrats on that awesome hand!

    I'm also glad that OneByPhi brought it up. If we get too many non-strategy posts in this thread then I'll move them where they need to go.

    Cheers,
    Eric
  61. #136
    How would you set this as dealer in a 3-handed game?

    Opp1
    K
    65
    TT

    Opp2
    Q
    2
    887

    You have J9554
  62. #137
    Quote Originally Posted by OneByPhi View Post
    How would you set this as dealer in a 3-handed game?

    Opp1
    K
    65
    TT

    Opp2
    Q
    2
    887

    You have J9554
    x

    Playing big pots at small stakes.
  63. #138
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    That fully live 3-flush is super tasty.

    OOP, I think the set X/554/J9 is probably strongest. However, the revealed info about the T's, 8's and 5's changes things.

    Your pair of 5's has only 1 out left. The J9 is blocked for a straight by pairs of T's and 8's and the fact that a Q is not a good straight card, due to value of FL pairs.
  64. #139
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    That fully live 3-flush is super tasty.
    Indeed. And I set it as you and baudib would have. Not to be results-oriented, but I ended up catching 4 more spades, but fouling after making AA on top and catching one more 9, but failing to get 2-pair in the mid. If I had set,
    xxx
    955
    J4
    I would have made FL.

    Was that a remotely reasonable set? With 10 spades still out, should I have reasoned that I was likely enough to catch 3 more spades or backdoor Js-up or better that setting the pair of 5s in the mid was the superior play? What do you think, MMM?
    Last edited by OneByPhi; 02-11-2014 at 10:14 PM.
  65. #140
    Interesting. While I obviously would have chosen to do what you did, the fact that your cards are SO SO live makes J4 an interesting play.
    Playing big pots at small stakes.
  66. #141
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,595
    Location
    UK
    Did I play it right?

    Keith (dealer)



    Discard: K


    Wazzup



    Discard: 6 2 T 3
  67. #142
    Quote Originally Posted by Keith View Post
    Did I play it right?
    Your hand would be very marginally (probably insignificantly) better if you just flip the 3s on top to the bottom and move the 4s up. However, there are two alternative sets to consider.

    You make 4 points more in royalties by setting

    Keith (dealer)



    Discard: 4

    As the hand turned out, WAZZUP fouled anyway, so the extra royalties would have paid off in this spot, but often you might lose the top with T-high when 44 would allow a scoop, so the 5 points you lose by not getting the scoop make the difference in royalties not worth it. The "right" play shouldn't be evaluated on the basis of what happened in a specific case, but on what the most profitable play is in the long run, and I'm not sure how often you would win the top with 44 (which will beat any hand without a pair and 22 or 33) compared to T-high (which mostly will only win when opp fouls).

    However, setting the quad 8s in the bottom is best, even though it makes 4 points less in royalties than the T-high/flush/boat set did because it lets you stay in FL. Furthermore, with 2-pair in the mid and AKT on top, your hand still has decent scoop potential.

    Keith (dealer)



    Discard: 6
    Last edited by OneByPhi; 02-12-2014 at 11:58 AM.
  68. #143
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Splitting quads was a mistake, I think. Whatever the result on this hand, you would get to stay in FL if you played the quads. Unless you could gain 12 points more than quads by breaking the quads... unless that, then you're highest EV is to gain an additional FL by placing quads.

    I've only broken quads once... it was to place a straight flush.
  69. #144
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,595
    Location
    UK
    thats why i was wondering ....quads gave me very little else though and it was a fantasy land hand
  70. #145
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    How do you play the third draw?

    Eric



    Discard: 7 7 9 5


    Wazzup (dealer)



    Discard: 4 6 2 2
  71. #146
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,004
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Seems like a pretty straight-forward play, as far as the A is concerned.

    I feel like the 3rd draw is the fulcrum of the round. After the 3rd draw, there is only 1 draw left... so whatever you have at this point, you might be stuck with it.

    So playing the 3rd draw in the safest possible way is generally my go-to plan. If my opponent is FL-ing, I may reconsider... you know.
  72. #147
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    How do you play the third draw?
    As you face the decision on the 3rd draw, you see 9 diamonds, counting the ace in your hand, so if you place the A on top, you have 4 diamonds to catch, and you also need to improve the mid. There are only 4 outs left for the mid: one 8, one 3, and two 2s. You have to hit both 4-outers to make FL, and you foul if you miss. However, if you play the A low, you not only make the flush, you still have the same chance to hit two 4-outers for FL on the 4th draw because you have the same four outs for the mid and 2 As and 2 Ks on top for 4 outs there. It just has to be better to take a sure 4 points and have a virtually foulproof hand that still preserves the same number of outs.
  73. #148
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    For this pine hand do you set the 3 club flush in back or set the King in front the way I did?

    Eric
    K / 3 / 8 5 5

    Wazzup (dealer)
    2 / 6 4 / A 9
  74. #149
    I'd play it xxx/55/K83, but I think your play is fine. The advantage of my set is that the 3-flush will usually get there and the pair in the mid is well on the way to 2-pair or trips; the disadvantage is that I'm not exploiting the FL card. However, there are 3 As, 3 Ks, and 4 Qs still in the deck, and I'd argue that this set is less prone to fouling. The advantage of your set is that it gets the K on top right away and has a pair in the bottom to build on; the disadvantage is that if you make KK up, you have just the bare 3 to start from to build a hand that beats KK.

    This is another one of those spots that it would help to have a hand simulator to play tens of thousands of hands to see which set works out best, but I imagine either set should do pretty well over the long haul.
    Last edited by OneByPhi; 02-15-2014 at 02:43 AM.
  75. #150
    Eric: In post 145, why would you set the in the mid instead of playing 3 diamonds on bottom?

    In many cases, in order to get there on bottom you'll be going for diamonds, and it's not like 32o is an amazing draw in the middle. I could see it if it were the
    Playing big pots at small stakes.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •