A Limit question
Mar. 26th, 2006 07:53 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
peterbirksHere's an interesting hand from yesterday.
You have A♠, 4♠, in big blind at $4-$8. Three not-too-bad-not-too-good players limp, followed by a guy in Cut-off who plays every hand. You have also observed that he tends to fold flops that he misses, but always to bet if he is first with the opportunity to do so. If raised, he may slow down on the turn, but if just called, he always bets again. Once again, as far as you have observed, if he is just called, he tends to bet the river again, but your sample size here is small. It's possible that he checks the river if he has missed completely. Since you are unsure about this, let's assign a 50% probability to him betting the river, whatever, and a 50% chance that he will check if he misses the river completely.
Five players see flop. $19 in the pot.
Flop is 4♣, 5♡, 8♠,
giving you bottom pair with Ace kicker. The three limpers check, and our friend bets, as predicted. Calling here is compulsory and raising might be a good idea, to get rid of the players with overcards. As it happens, you elect to call, (a) because you have been doing your bollocks and you are playing like a gun-shy wimp, and (b) you think that the overcard guys are going to come in for two bets if they are going to come in for one. On reflection, I think that a raise is better. But, that's history now and it isn't the interesting part of the equation. As it happens, the three limpers fold. Presumably they give your call more respect than it deserves, since you have a reputation as tight-aggressive.
Two players see turn. $27 in pot
Turn is 4♣, 5♡, 8♠, 10♣,
You check. Opponent bets. The question here is, are you getting odds to beat a random hand with your bottom pair. top kicker?
Let's suppose you call.
Two players see river. $42 in pot.
The river brings 4♣, 5♡, 8♠, 10♣, Q♣.
Opponent bets again. Do you have odds to call (a) a completely random hand? (b) a random hand where he will only bet 50% of the time if he has missed completely? (c) a "very loose" player's hand where he will only bet 50% of the time if he misses completely?
You have A♠, 4♠, in big blind at $4-$8. Three not-too-bad-not-too-good players limp, followed by a guy in Cut-off who plays every hand. You have also observed that he tends to fold flops that he misses, but always to bet if he is first with the opportunity to do so. If raised, he may slow down on the turn, but if just called, he always bets again. Once again, as far as you have observed, if he is just called, he tends to bet the river again, but your sample size here is small. It's possible that he checks the river if he has missed completely. Since you are unsure about this, let's assign a 50% probability to him betting the river, whatever, and a 50% chance that he will check if he misses the river completely.
Five players see flop. $19 in the pot.
Flop is 4♣, 5♡, 8♠,
giving you bottom pair with Ace kicker. The three limpers check, and our friend bets, as predicted. Calling here is compulsory and raising might be a good idea, to get rid of the players with overcards. As it happens, you elect to call, (a) because you have been doing your bollocks and you are playing like a gun-shy wimp, and (b) you think that the overcard guys are going to come in for two bets if they are going to come in for one. On reflection, I think that a raise is better. But, that's history now and it isn't the interesting part of the equation. As it happens, the three limpers fold. Presumably they give your call more respect than it deserves, since you have a reputation as tight-aggressive.
Two players see turn. $27 in pot
Turn is 4♣, 5♡, 8♠, 10♣,
You check. Opponent bets. The question here is, are you getting odds to beat a random hand with your bottom pair. top kicker?
Let's suppose you call.
Two players see river. $42 in pot.
The river brings 4♣, 5♡, 8♠, 10♣, Q♣.
Opponent bets again. Do you have odds to call (a) a completely random hand? (b) a random hand where he will only bet 50% of the time if he has missed completely? (c) a "very loose" player's hand where he will only bet 50% of the time if he misses completely?
Re: Your Play of the Hand
Date: 2006-03-27 06:49 pm (UTC)Your last sentence is very important. In general I believe you should match strength against their weakness, both the strength of better postflop equity and the strength of position. So even though they rate to have not much but will bet anyway, I believe folding marginal hands still is best OOP. And returning again to the matter of the math question and whether you should call the river, again not being able to get checked rivers OOP with him makes playing marginal hands even worse. Because now he will not only bet bluffs that you can beat, but also very bad made hands that better players would check behind with, like a pair just above your bottom pair.
Bluff