Absolute v's Relative hand strength
Robbs link to Spoonitnow's "when not to cbet" thread reminded me of this concept. Its something thats come up in a couple of vids I've watched lately and I think is a really good concept to get a grasp of as a beginner.
Heres an example to demonstrate the point:
$0.5/$1 No Limit Holdem
2 players
Converted at weaktight.com
Stacks:
BTN ($197.26)
Hero (BB) ($111.50)
Pre-flop: ($1.50, 2 players) Hero is BB :as: :jc:
BTN calls $0.50, Hero raises to $4, BTN calls $3
Flop: :ts: :ks: :7s: ($8, 2 players)
Hero bets $5, BTN calls $5
Turn: :3s: ($18, 2 players)
Hero bets $9, BTN calls $9
River: :jd: ($36, 2 players)
Hero bets $17, BTN raises to $34, Hero raises to $93.50, BTN calls $59.50
Final Pot: $223
BTN shows: :qs: :8d:
Hero shows: :as: :jc:
Hero wins $222 ( won $110.50 )
BTN lost -$111.50
Now ignore the way the hand was played till the river, irrelevant to the point here. On the river BTN has the 2nd nut flush, which on this board is the 2nd nuts overall. Incredibly strong absolute hand. However, what he fails to consider, is how strong it is relative to what hands I bet/shove this 4 flush (i.e., very obvious flush) board. For his call to be good, he has to think I'm capable of doing this with J:s: really, since worse than that is 9:s: or worse which is extremely unlikely.
So on other boards his abolute hand strength (2nd nuts) could well be worth a call, if I could likely do this with a set/straight/2P/etc, but on this particular board, with this particular action his relative hand strength is fairly poor.
Note, his relative hand strength when I first bet the river 1/2 pot could well be strong enough to raise and expect to get called by worse.
