|
|
 Originally Posted by Razvan729
when it comes to situations like this i count combos, lets take this hand for example:
combos that beat me: 3*44, 3*77, 3*88, 1* QQ,because he is butt in his range i count also 78s*3 and 56s*4, that is 17 combos that beat.
me holdind on this hand AQ or KK+ and him doing this i only beat 99- JJ which is 12 combos... i would have equity 49%, but is very unlikely we would raise 99- JJ here...
this is the way i think this kind of hands, post it here just to make sure i am not wrong, i mean even that i have shove equity here, its very rare he will 3bet 3x 99- JJ.
He won't be playing second pair like this almost ever. So let's imagine some fantasy scenario where he's stacking off with KQ here. Your actual equity against 88, 77, 44, 87s (which btw is 2 combos, not 3 because two suits are blocked), 65s, KQ, AQ in this fantasy scenario is:
Board: Qh 8d 4c 7s
Dead:
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 37.304% 26.96% 10.34% 344 132.00 { AdQd }
Hand 1: 62.696% 52.35% 10.34% 668 132.00 { 88-77, 44, AQs, KQs, 87s, 65s, AQo, KQo }
Random tidbit here, but be careful when you're trying to estimate your equity just by the number of combos when there are cards left to come. If his range was 1 combo of 44 and 1 combo of T9o, it's true you're beating one and losing to one, but it's nowhere near a coinflip:
Board: Qh 8d 4c 7s
Dead:
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 40.909% 40.91% 00.00% 36 0.00 { AdQd }
Hand 1: 59.091% 59.09% 00.00% 52 0.00 { 4d4s, Ts9h }
This happens because your equity disadvantage against 44 is much greater than your equity advantage against something like T9o.
|
Reply With Quote