| Author |
Message |
Aelfinn
Four of a Kind
Joined: 16 Sep 2008
Posts: 313
Location: South Dakota
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 1:36 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| nilgiri wrote: |
| Aelfinn wrote: |
| As far as have 31% equity, I agree that 31% is almost enough to get it in here, but not quite enough for me peronally. |
"Almost" means that he rarely has to fold for it to be +EV. Hu's point (I think) is not that it's almost +EV, so that's a good reason to shove (which btw makes no sense); it's that it's almost +EV when he calls. Given that he's folding some not-insignificant percent of the time, it now becomes +EV to shove.
Also, I'm really unclear what your personal preference has to do with this... |
This is the only part of what you have said that I disagree with. In my experience at 25 NL most villians are 3 betting with a narrow enough range that I think they will rarely fold here. I don't think its unrealistic to assume that villian has AK or TT+. If we shove he probably only folds if he has AK and we called by all of his other likely hands.
And FWIW poker is a game of incomplete information. What decisions we come to after assessing the info we have is a matter of peronal preference. As I stated before, I don't think shoving here is horrible, but based on my experience I think it may not be the optimal play. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Riddim
Moderator
Joined: 04 Dec 2005
Posts: 9912
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| adam27x wrote: |
| One spot I'm always disgusted by is getting 3bet when I open AK somewhere OOP. I never want to flat and play a pot OOP without the initiative, but OTOH AK doesn't do so hot against the 3betting ranges of a lot of players at 25nl so 4betting and folding to a 5bet is pretty gross as well. Is this an automatic 4bet? If not, can someone come up with an example where I should and another where I should not 4bet this spot? |
A lot of the time if villain is tight enough that both 4-betting and calling feels kinda gross, folding will actually be the best option when you're OOP. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nilgiri
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 3790
Location: Massachusetts
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aelfinn wrote: |
| nilgiri wrote: |
| Aelfinn wrote: |
| As far as have 31% equity, I agree that 31% is almost enough to get it in here, but not quite enough for me peronally. |
"Almost" means that he rarely has to fold for it to be +EV. Hu's point (I think) is not that it's almost +EV, so that's a good reason to shove (which btw makes no sense); it's that it's almost +EV when he calls. Given that he's folding some not-insignificant percent of the time, it now becomes +EV to shove.
Also, I'm really unclear what your personal preference has to do with this... |
This is the only part of what you have said that I disagree with. In my experience at 25 NL most villians are 3 betting with a narrow enough range that I think they will rarely fold here. I don't think its unrealistic to assume that villian has AK or TT+. If we shove he probably only folds if he has AK and we called by all of his other likely hands. |
6*3 combos of TT-QQ + 3*2 combos of KK-AA = 24 combos that call
9 combos of AK = 9 combos that fold
24/(24+9) = 72.7% call (so 27.3% fold)
Equity vs. TT+ = 23.56%
$43.26 * .2356 - $14.73 (EV when he calls) * .727
+
$13.80 * .273
=
$0.47 EV if you shove
It's still +EV.
This is assuming he never, ever has anything other than TT+/AK.
| Quote: |
| And FWIW poker is a game of incomplete information. What decisions we come to after assessing the info we have is a matter of peronal preference. |
That's fine. After assessing all the information available to you, it could be someone's personal preference to always fold AA preflop. What I don't understand is how one's personal preference is relevant in a strategy thread. Either a line is +EV or not, no?
Maybe I'm not understanding what you mean when you say, "I agree that 31% is almost enough to get it in here, but not quite enough for me peronally." Are you actually saying that it isn't enough for you, but for other people it might be enough, or do you mean something else? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Riddim
Moderator
Joined: 04 Dec 2005
Posts: 9912
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 3:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nilgiri, thanks for having an incredible amount of patience with this thread and actually going through the numbers and stuff. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aelfinn
Four of a Kind
Joined: 16 Sep 2008
Posts: 313
Location: South Dakota
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nilgiri wrote: |
| Aelfinn wrote: |
| nilgiri wrote: |
| Aelfinn wrote: |
| As far as have 31% equity, I agree that 31% is almost enough to get it in here, but not quite enough for me peronally. |
"Almost" means that he rarely has to fold for it to be +EV. Hu's point (I think) is not that it's almost +EV, so that's a good reason to shove (which btw makes no sense); it's that it's almost +EV when he calls. Given that he's folding some not-insignificant percent of the time, it now becomes +EV to shove.
Also, I'm really unclear what your personal preference has to do with this... |
This is the only part of what you have said that I disagree with. In my experience at 25 NL most villians are 3 betting with a narrow enough range that I think they will rarely fold here. I don't think its unrealistic to assume that villian has AK or TT+. If we shove he probably only folds if he has AK and we called by all of his other likely hands. |
6*3 combos of TT-QQ + 3*2 combos of KK-AA = 24 combos that call
9 combos of AK = 9 combos that fold
24/(24+9) = 72.7% call (so 27.3% fold)
Equity vs. TT+ = 23.56%
$43.26 * .2356 - $14.73 (EV when he calls) * .727
+
$13.80 * .273
=
$0.47 EV if you shove
It's still +EV.
This is assuming he never, ever has anything other than TT+/AK.
| Quote: |
| And FWIW poker is a game of incomplete information. What decisions we come to after assessing the info we have is a matter of peronal preference. |
That's fine. After assessing all the information available to you, it could be someone's personal preference to always fold AA preflop. What I don't understand is how one's personal preference is relevant in a strategy thread. Either a line is +EV or not, no?
Maybe I'm not understanding what you mean when you say, "I agree that 31% is almost enough to get it in here, but not quite enough for me peronally." Are you actually saying that it isn't enough for you, but for other people it might be enough, or do you mean something else? |
I'm not going to argue with your math, it appears it is +EV to shove here.
Poker would be a very simple game if every line was simply +EV or not. Each persons individual preference obviously comes into play, even where strategy is concerned. I prefer to put villian on a tighter range here than others that have posted. Because of this preference my strategy on how to play this hand differs from yours. I think it is obtuse to say preference and opinion have no place in a strategy thread.
But FWIW I have thoroughly enjoyed this conversation. Its made me think about this hand in a different light. That is the point right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Riddim
Moderator
Joined: 04 Dec 2005
Posts: 9912
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aelfinn wrote: |
| Poker would be a very simple game if every line was simply +EV or not. |
Not really, because that actually is the case. The issue is that actually knowing one way or the other, especially when taking into consideration how it will affect other hands, is pretty much always impossible. There are lots of assumptions involved, and even when you get those right the math that follows will often be counter-intuitive and/or very complex. So in practice we have to settle for simple models and hope that they're good enough approximations for our purposes.
Also, I'd say that personal preference has absolutely nothing to do with hand reading, and that you're confusing it with empirical evidence. The latter will obviously vary from player to player depending on how many hands you've played, which types of situations you've happened to get into the most and which hands your opponents have happened to show up with the most. The more you play and observe though, the closer your empirical data will be to reality.
In my opinion, personal preference should almost exclusively come into play when a decision is close to neutral in EV. For example, you might find two different playing styles with which you make basically the same amount of money in the long run. Here, the style you choose might depend on which one has the lowest/highest variance, which one you think is more fun and probably a few other factors as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aelfinn
Four of a Kind
Joined: 16 Sep 2008
Posts: 313
Location: South Dakota
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Riddim wrote: |
| Aelfinn wrote: |
| Poker would be a very simple game if every line was simply +EV or not. |
Not really, because that actually is the case. The issue is that actually knowing one way or the other, especially when taking into consideration how it will affect other hands, is pretty much always impossible. There are lots of assumptions involved, and even when you get those right the math that follows will often be counter-intuitive and/or very complex. So in practice we have to settle for simple models and hope that they're good enough approximations for our purposes.
Also, I'd say that personal preference has absolutely nothing to do with hand reading, and that you're confusing it with empirical evidence. The latter will obviously vary from player to player depending on how many hands you've played, which types of situations you've happened to get into the most and which hands your opponents have happened to show up with the most. The more you play and observe though, the closer your empirical data will be to reality.
In my opinion, personal preference should almost exclusively come into play when a decision is close to neutral in EV. For example, you might find two different playing styles with which you make basically the same amount of money in the long run. Here, the style you choose might depend on which one has the lowest/highest variance, which one you think is more fun and probably a few other factors as well. |
I think it is rather obvious that this is what I was refering to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Riddim
Moderator
Joined: 04 Dec 2005
Posts: 9912
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aelfinn wrote: |
| I think it is rather obvious that this is what I was refering to. |
Yeah, normally I'd agree. In my experience though, people who make statements like yours about personal preference are a lot more likely to also be inclined to say what you said about "... +EV or not" and mean it literally. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aelfinn
Four of a Kind
Joined: 16 Sep 2008
Posts: 313
Location: South Dakota
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Riddim wrote: |
| Aelfinn wrote: |
| I think it is rather obvious that this is what I was refering to. |
Yeah, normally I'd agree. In my experience though, people who make statements like yours about personal preference are a lot more likely to also be inclined to say what you said about "... +EV or not" and mean it literally. |
Wow, I thought this forum was about having conversations that would help the members of the forum become better poker players. But apparently its about curb stomping the guy that doesn't necessarily agree with everyone else. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nilgiri
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 3790
Location: Massachusetts
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think one person can prefer to put an opponent on a tight range, and one can prefer to put him on a looser, and somehow both of these are correct or fine or whatever. Only one range for him is correct, and my assumption is going to be more or less correct than yours.
We obviously don't have access to all information (and even if we did have access to all the current information, assuming we believe in free will our opponent can always change his range). But still we make an assumption about his range, and that assumption has some degree of correctness. If we see him raise very, very few hands over a sample of 400 hands, it would be incorrect to assume he raises a very wide range, regardless of your personal preference.
| Aelfinn wrote: |
| Wow, I thought this forum was about having conversations that would help the members of the forum become better poker players. But apparently its about curb stomping the guy that doesn't necessarily agree with everyone else. |
I'm sorry if it feels like that's what I am doing. I honestly think that personal preference has no place at all in a poker strategy discussion. It makes no logical sense to me to ever talk about it, so it is very difficult for me to understand what you mean. I guess I'm not sure how else to voice my disagreement without it sounding slightly insulting because I think it is such an extremely huge error. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HuJwang
Forum Blight
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 8691
Location: Vancouver, BC
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nilgiri wrote: |
"Almost" means that he rarely has to fold for it to be +EV. Hu's point (I think) is not that it's almost +EV, so that's a good reason to shove (which btw makes no sense); it's that it's almost +EV when he calls. Given that he's folding some not-insignificant percent of the time, it now becomes +EV to shove.
|
sort of.. what i actually intended was that in the worst realistic case (villain's range is exactly TT-AA and AK, and he always calls a shove) it is only a very slight mistake to shove. so, it takes very little to push the correct move from a c/f to a shove. if he has any extra hands in his range that he will fold, or any worse hands in his range that he will call, it is an easy shove.
as a sidenote, you could of course come up with some terribly contrived situations where it would be very -EV to shove. for example you know villain only flats pre with AA-KK and would usually shove/fold JJ-QQ or AK pre. there probably are some people who play like that. however, if you had a good enough read on the player to know his range that well, you'd already know what to do on this flop and there'd be no point in this thread. in the absence of any specific reads, i'm fairly confident shoving is the best play here against most opponents.
| Quote: |
| Wow, I thought this forum was about having conversations that would help the members of the forum become better poker players. But apparently its about curb stomping the guy that doesn't necessarily agree with everyone else. |
we're not saying we think you're wrong because we don't like you or because we don't like people who think differently. we're saying we think you're wrong because we think you're wrong. that's all there is to it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aelfinn
Four of a Kind
Joined: 16 Sep 2008
Posts: 313
Location: South Dakota
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
prefer - 20 thesaurus results:
Main Entry: choose
Part of Speech: verb
Definition: pick, select
Synonyms: accept, adopt, appoint, call for, cast, co-opt, commit oneself, crave, cull, decide on, designate, desire, determine, discriminate between, draw lots, elect, embrace, espouse, excerpt, extract, fancy, favor, feel disposed to, finger, fix on, glean, judge, love, make choice, make decision, make up one's mind, name, opt for, predestine, prefer, see fit, separate, set aside, settle upon, sift out, single out, slot, sort, tab, tag, take, take up, tap, want, weigh, will, winnow, wish, wish for
Notes: choose means to pick out or select from a number of alternatives, while chose is the past tense of choose
I prefered (i.e. chose) to put villian on a tighter range than most. This is all meant by my personal preference. Perhaps it was poor choice of words. This is all I was getting at. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aelfinn
Four of a Kind
Joined: 16 Sep 2008
Posts: 313
Location: South Dakota
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| HuJwang wrote: |
| nilgiri wrote: |
"Almost" means that he rarely has to fold for it to be +EV. Hu's point (I think) is not that it's almost +EV, so that's a good reason to shove (which btw makes no sense); it's that it's almost +EV when he calls. Given that he's folding some not-insignificant percent of the time, it now becomes +EV to shove.
|
sort of.. what i actually intended was that in the worst realistic case (villain's range is exactly TT-AA and AK, and he always calls a shove) it is only a very slight mistake to shove. so, it takes very little to push the correct move from a c/f to a shove. if he has any extra hands in his range that he will fold, or any worse hands in his range that he will call, it is an easy shove.
as a sidenote, you could of course come up with some terribly contrived situations where it would be very -EV to shove. for example you know villain only flats pre with AA-KK and would usually shove/fold JJ-QQ or AK pre. there probably are some people who play like that. however, if you had a good enough read on the player to know his range that well, you'd already know what to do on this flop and there'd be no point in this thread. in the absence of any specific reads, i'm fairly confident shoving is the best play here against most opponents.
| Quote: |
| Wow, I thought this forum was about having conversations that would help the members of the forum become better poker players. But apparently its about curb stomping the guy that doesn't necessarily agree with everyone else. |
we're not saying we think you're wrong because we don't like you or because we don't like people who think differently. we're saying we think you're wrong because we think you're wrong. that's all there is to it. |
I have absolutley no problem with this. In fact I applaud this, it is in fact the entire reason of contributing to a forum. What I was refering to was how nit picky some people were becoming about the specific language I chose to use when the meaning was quite obvious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HuJwang
Forum Blight
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 8691
Location: Vancouver, BC
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| well, apparently it wasn't as obvious as you thought it was. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Riddim
Moderator
Joined: 04 Dec 2005
Posts: 9912
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 7:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yeah, if I had thought it was obvious I probably wouldn't have spent a paragraph replying to it, because I would've known that you meant what you meant and not what you said and what I thought you meant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB Copyright 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
