Was that rain or pour?
Feb. 7th, 2008 06:38 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
peterbirksWell, the good news is that I found a painter and decorator. The bad news is that the cost is about 60% more than I thought it would be (and I always think high....). I could probably get it done cheaper if I was prepared to wait, then to project manage three or four Eastern Europeans. But, as Stringer Bell said in the Wire, whether you buy them off or go to war, you always pay in some way.
The more bad news is that I took the trusty old Micra in for a service (the one with relatively new tyres, a new battery) and got a phone call saying that it had failed its MOT because of severe corrosion on the rear under nearside. So, not such a trusty old Micra after all.
This means a difficult decision. A year ago I would have just bought another car, but, as is Sod's law, it's come at just about the worst time in cashflow terms. It seems fairly pointless paying whatever the welder says it will cost to repair a 1991 Micra that really is past its sell-by date. So I may tell them tomorrow to write it off, although I have no idea how one goes about this. I assume I just take the V55 down to them, pay them some money, after which they take back the new tyres and new battery without telling me, and I can forget about it. I suppose I could go to the effort of reclaiming the unpaid insurance and road tax, but the latter is hardly worth the effort for £20. The former might be worth doing -- I don't know how the system works on unused insurance.
It's all a bit irritating, because I was likely just about entering a period when a car would have been at least of some use. Then again, it's irritated me in equal measure over the past few years, and hiring might be a more logical alternative on those rare occasions that I need four wheels.
I know that Andy W wrote off his car a while ago (in the sense that it gave up the ghost, rather than he crashed it). Is it complex Andy? How much is it going to cost me?
++++++++
Here's something I've been thinking about in poker terms. As I've written before, I always approach the word "cooler" with some pessimism. Yes, coolers exist, but are they always coolers? In the land of online poker, it's so easy to transfer what would be a cooler in a live game directly to an online game. But if the live game consists of nine other 50%/20% players, whereas all of your six tables online are closer to 20%/6% players (and some afternoons that's the loosest you can find) then obviously when all the money goes in, your opponent's range is considerably narrower.
Indeed, at the moment, I was only half-jokingly going to refer to AKo as the online AQ, in that it was often a hand where you didn't know where you were post-flop.
But that wasn't my point.
This hand got me thinking. Villain is fairly loose passive over a small sample of 40 hands.
Texas Hold'em NL $0.50/$1.00
Seat 1: CADYBEHAN ($45.40 in chips) DEALER
Seat 2: Hero ($100.10 in chips)
Seat 5: Rayback2 ($302.60 in chips)
Seat 6: marvur ($38.47 in chips)
Seat 7: elGATOvolador ($98.50 in chips)
Seat 9: VILLAIN ($151.10 in chips)
Hero: Post SB $0.50
Rayback2: Post BB $1.00
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [J♡ Q♡]
marvur: Fold
elGATOvolador: Fold
VILLAIN: Call $1.00
CADYBEHAN: Fold
Hero: Call $0.50
Rayback2: Check
*** FLOP *** [2♡ 7♡ 8♡]
Woo hoo. Flopped flush
Hero: Bet $3.00
Rayback2: Fold
VILLAIN: Raise $15.00
Hero: Raise $40.00
Absolutely no point in pissing around at all
VILLAIN: Allin $135.10
Hero: Allin $56.10
*** TURN *** [7◊]
*** RIVER *** [6♣]
*** SUMMARY ***
Dealt to VILLAIN [3♡ 5♡]
Total pot $249.20 Rake $3.00
Hero: wins $198.20
VILLAIN: wins $51.00
Now, in this situation, I would still be going all-in against Mr Tight of tightsville. But suppose I had the 5h3h combination and the betting had gone similarly?
In this case, because of opponent's looseness (even when passive) I'm still pushing in my money, even with the 53sooted.
But there are certain opponents whom you know will only be pushing all-in here with either a made flush or a set.
Let's assume you are up against one of those players. My question is this. If that flop comes down, and opponent bets in the above fashion, how likely is it that he has a set and how likely is it that he has a made flush? We'll also allocate 5% to some other kind of hand, and look at the following scenarios:
1) You have limped and he has checked in the big blind or completed in the small blind
2) He has open limped
3) He has raised a smallish amount and you have defended your Big blind
4) You have raised and he has cold-called.
It seems to me that in some of the cases above he is more likely to have a set (depending on the rank of the cards and whether he has raised and been called, or has called a raise) while in others he is less likely to have a set.
Do we ever have a situation where he is significantly more likely to have a made flush than a set? And how does the situation change when, as above, there is more than one opponent?
I'm just wondering about this, rather than coming to any certain conclusions. At the moment I'm probably still going to get fucked if I flop a flush, no matter how small.
_________________
The more bad news is that I took the trusty old Micra in for a service (the one with relatively new tyres, a new battery) and got a phone call saying that it had failed its MOT because of severe corrosion on the rear under nearside. So, not such a trusty old Micra after all.
This means a difficult decision. A year ago I would have just bought another car, but, as is Sod's law, it's come at just about the worst time in cashflow terms. It seems fairly pointless paying whatever the welder says it will cost to repair a 1991 Micra that really is past its sell-by date. So I may tell them tomorrow to write it off, although I have no idea how one goes about this. I assume I just take the V55 down to them, pay them some money, after which they take back the new tyres and new battery without telling me, and I can forget about it. I suppose I could go to the effort of reclaiming the unpaid insurance and road tax, but the latter is hardly worth the effort for £20. The former might be worth doing -- I don't know how the system works on unused insurance.
It's all a bit irritating, because I was likely just about entering a period when a car would have been at least of some use. Then again, it's irritated me in equal measure over the past few years, and hiring might be a more logical alternative on those rare occasions that I need four wheels.
I know that Andy W wrote off his car a while ago (in the sense that it gave up the ghost, rather than he crashed it). Is it complex Andy? How much is it going to cost me?
++++++++
Here's something I've been thinking about in poker terms. As I've written before, I always approach the word "cooler" with some pessimism. Yes, coolers exist, but are they always coolers? In the land of online poker, it's so easy to transfer what would be a cooler in a live game directly to an online game. But if the live game consists of nine other 50%/20% players, whereas all of your six tables online are closer to 20%/6% players (and some afternoons that's the loosest you can find) then obviously when all the money goes in, your opponent's range is considerably narrower.
Indeed, at the moment, I was only half-jokingly going to refer to AKo as the online AQ, in that it was often a hand where you didn't know where you were post-flop.
But that wasn't my point.
This hand got me thinking. Villain is fairly loose passive over a small sample of 40 hands.
Texas Hold'em NL $0.50/$1.00
Seat 1: CADYBEHAN ($45.40 in chips) DEALER
Seat 2: Hero ($100.10 in chips)
Seat 5: Rayback2 ($302.60 in chips)
Seat 6: marvur ($38.47 in chips)
Seat 7: elGATOvolador ($98.50 in chips)
Seat 9: VILLAIN ($151.10 in chips)
Hero: Post SB $0.50
Rayback2: Post BB $1.00
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [J♡ Q♡]
marvur: Fold
elGATOvolador: Fold
VILLAIN: Call $1.00
CADYBEHAN: Fold
Hero: Call $0.50
Rayback2: Check
*** FLOP *** [2♡ 7♡ 8♡]
Woo hoo. Flopped flush
Hero: Bet $3.00
Rayback2: Fold
VILLAIN: Raise $15.00
Hero: Raise $40.00
Absolutely no point in pissing around at all
VILLAIN: Allin $135.10
Hero: Allin $56.10
*** TURN *** [7◊]
*** RIVER *** [6♣]
*** SUMMARY ***
Dealt to VILLAIN [3♡ 5♡]
Total pot $249.20 Rake $3.00
Hero: wins $198.20
VILLAIN: wins $51.00
Now, in this situation, I would still be going all-in against Mr Tight of tightsville. But suppose I had the 5h3h combination and the betting had gone similarly?
In this case, because of opponent's looseness (even when passive) I'm still pushing in my money, even with the 53sooted.
But there are certain opponents whom you know will only be pushing all-in here with either a made flush or a set.
Let's assume you are up against one of those players. My question is this. If that flop comes down, and opponent bets in the above fashion, how likely is it that he has a set and how likely is it that he has a made flush? We'll also allocate 5% to some other kind of hand, and look at the following scenarios:
1) You have limped and he has checked in the big blind or completed in the small blind
2) He has open limped
3) He has raised a smallish amount and you have defended your Big blind
4) You have raised and he has cold-called.
It seems to me that in some of the cases above he is more likely to have a set (depending on the rank of the cards and whether he has raised and been called, or has called a raise) while in others he is less likely to have a set.
Do we ever have a situation where he is significantly more likely to have a made flush than a set? And how does the situation change when, as above, there is more than one opponent?
I'm just wondering about this, rather than coming to any certain conclusions. At the moment I'm probably still going to get fucked if I flop a flush, no matter how small.
_________________
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-02-07 08:47 pm (UTC)Stipulate that you wish to keep the battery and wheels, if you so wish. You can then give them to me for nothing, as you seem to enjoy giving money away.
Since I got the frugal bug I can make do with the leavings of 21st century man. Anyone for a skip dive?
no subject
Date: 2008-02-07 10:42 pm (UTC)Haven't regretted going without for a moment. Hire when you need one, no hassle when you don't.
Andy.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-08 10:20 am (UTC)I use Enterprise maybe half a dozen times a year for the occasions when I need a second car. I believe they still have an office on Lee High Road - should be about 10 minutes' walk for you. http://www.enterprise.co.uk works pretty well for bookings. 0208-3181900
And I'd have thought that flop raise could also come from Ah-x?
Breaker Tourette
Date: 2008-02-08 11:21 am (UTC)Remind me to win $40K by December and then to buy a 350GZ.
I looked up the Enterprise place before Ancaster phoned (actually, first of all I looked for Europcar). It's still there and still hiring, and the kind of car I would want has a headline price of £80 for the three-day weekend (so, assume £160 when it comes to the final bill and you won't be disappointed). That's definitely better value than me owning a car. And also less hassle overall.
I am fully aware of the contradictory nature of all this. I don't understand me either.
++++++
Now, as for the Ah x (where X could be A9, A8, A7 or A2) -- on Full Tilt and, to a slightly leeser extent, on Party, the raise could indeed be that (except that most players aggressive enough to do this would not have been limping) and it would come into the mix if it was a defended blind.
However, it's less likely on the generally more pasdsive IP Netowrk and in this particular case, against that kind of loose-passive limper, it's what Matt Matros might call an alien question. Although that hand is within opponent's range, he wouldn't raise with it on the flop. These guys just call with that kind of hand.
In fact, the semi-bluff at $100 buy-in is restricted to a small percentage of opponents and, more interestingly, it also tends to entail an all-in rather than a smaller raise.
This overbet cr all-in is a favourite weapon because, most of the time, it's a good hand. But you tennd to see it on flops such as K54 two-of-a-suit. You have AK and you call because opponent might be on some kind of draw (say, A5 of the live suit) and he promptly turns over 55.
With three of a suit on board, the cr all-in is much more likely to be a semi-bluff live hand because with the set the guy is likely to bet as he did with the made flush, and in neither case does all the money need to be put in with one bet.
PJ