BAHH: another AK out of position early in tournament

On May 7, 7:54 am, "John_Brian_K" <John_Brian_Kent_1... DeleteThis @Yahoo.Com>
wrote:
> > Once you make a standard raise and get called more than once, you
> > basically give up if you miss.  The problem with having AK is that they
> > always put you on AK, so unless you hit the flop wtih it, 44 is going to
> > call you all day long assuming you have AK.  Justify the bad play away all
> > you want, but in the end we have a hand that was played very poorly here..
>
> > ---
> > Morphy
> > xaqmor... DeleteThis @donkeymanifesto.com
> >http://www.donkeymanifesto.com
>
> Let me sum this up real nice for everyone.  MOrph would have played his 44
> the same way and now is using this thread to bash OP for rivering his hand
> and busting (his?) hand.
>
> And for those who do not really pay attention to Morph, his MO is to
> criticize people for putting people on hands they can beat because as we
> all know you should ALWAYS put your opponent on the nuts.
>
> BOOM byae
> John
>
> ---- 
> looking for a better newsgroup-reader? -www.recgroups.com


Except that in this case, the OP:

1) Couldn't beat the hand he put his opponent on, even though he was
correct.
2) Waited until his opponent was pot committed to push with incorrect
odds.
3) Thinks he did the right thing even though he put his stack in as
almost a 3-1 dog going to the river(his best possible case scenario),
and he very easily could have been drawing dead.

Michael
 >> Stay informed about: BAHH: another AK out of position early in tournament 

"XaQ Morphy" <a1c5905 RemoveThis @webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
news:2sr8f5xh4n.ln2@recgroups.com...

> I take the good odds to draw to top pair, or to push him off the hand on
> the turn. The Diputsur OOP Float, if you will.

Grrrrr... that's it! Where's my diaper? I'm driving to
Milwaukee to kick some ass!
 >> Stay informed about: BAHH: another AK out of position early in tournament 

On May 6 2008 6:17 AM, Old Wolf wrote:

This is a good example of what you will be called by.

PokerStars Game #17271804197: Tournament #87535915, $6.00+$0.50 Hold'em No
Limit - Level II (15/30) - 2008/05/07 - 18:50:41 (ET)
Table '87535915 4' 9-max Seat #7 is the button
Seat 1: tien12 (1460 in chips)
Seat 2: quentin88 (1340 in chips)
Seat 3: taxi151 (1680 in chips)
Seat 5: snoooop40 (1280 in chips)
Seat 6: madmike333 (1805 in chips)
Seat 7: truckexpert (855 in chips)
Seat 8: WillGamble2 (1470 in chips)
Seat 9: tha ice cube (2125 in chips)
WillGamble2: posts small blind 15
tha ice cube: posts big blind 30
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to WillGamble2 [6d Jd]
tien12: calls 30
quentin88: raises 120 to 150
taxi151: folds
snoooop40: folds
madmike333: folds
truckexpert: folds
WillGamble2: folds
tha ice cube: folds
tien12: calls 120
*** FLOP *** [9s Qd Qh]
tien12: checks
quentin88: bets 150
tien12: calls 150
*** TURN *** [9s Qd Qh] [Qs]
tien12: checks
quentin88: bets 300
tien12: calls 300
*** RIVER *** [9s Qd Qh Qs] [3s]
tien12: checks
quentin88: checks
*** SHOW DOWN ***
tien12: shows [Qc 2c] (four of a kind, Queens)
quentin88: mucks hand
tien12 collected 1245 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 1245 | Rake 0
Board [9s Qd Qh Qs 3s]
Seat 1: tien12 showed [Qc 2c] and won (1245) with four of a kind, Queens
Seat 2: quentin88 mucked [Ad Kd]
Seat 3: taxi151 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: snoooop40 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: madmike333 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: truckexpert (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: WillGamble2 (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 9: tha ice cube (big blind) folded before Flop

---- 
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
 >> Stay informed about: BAHH: another AK out of position early in tournament 

On May 7 2008 8:36 AM, John_Brian_K wrote:

> > Morphy, your reply to Old Wolf was one of the finest I have read on RGP in
> > a long time.
>
> Old Wolf put the guy on exactly the hand he had, Morph made fun of him for
> it and YOU defend him.

Not so, he never really put him on anything, but even if he did put him on
the hand he had, he was never getting the correct odds to draw to his hand
as he said he was.

> Hey Fell what is your poker roll? How about you give me half, we go
> around back I kick you in the nuts and we call it a career?

I'll thank you to stay away from my nuts, DETROIT boy.

Fell
--
"One should always play fairly - when one has the winning cards."
Oscar Wilde

_____________________________________________________________________ 
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
 >> Stay informed about: BAHH: another AK out of position early in tournament 

On May 7 2008 10:43 AM, phlash74 wrote:

> 3) Thinks he did the right thing even though he put his stack in as
> almost a 3-1 dog going to the river(his best possible case scenario),
> and he very easily could have been drawing dead.
>
> Michael

6-1.

Fell
--
"One should always play fairly - when one has the winning cards."
Oscar Wilde

______________________________________________________________________ 
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
 >> Stay informed about: BAHH: another AK out of position early in tournament 

"XaQ Morphy" (referring to a $6 buyin)
> First hand/orbit of a turbo at that buyin level I'd just push preflop.

Would you really?

Palooka
 >> Stay informed about: BAHH: another AK out of position early in tournament 

On May 7, 6:05 am, "FellKnight" <jordandevenp....TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > *** FLOP *** [5s 7d 7s]
> > Old Wolf NZ: bets 200
>
> > Continuation bet
>
> So you got called by 2 people preflop, both of whom have position on you.
> You flopped nothing, but it was a reasonably decent flop for AK. Why are
> you betting? It is unlikely that you will make a better hand fold, and
> just as unlikely (given your big preflop raise), that you will get called
> by a worse hand.

Well, according to Harrington on Hold'em, conditions were
good for a continuation bet: I am the pre-flop aggressor, and
the texture of the flop was such that it was unlikely to have
helped my opponents; so it's reasonable to expect that a
bet will take down the pot sometimes. Betting half the pot
means that if it works at least 1/3 of the time then it is a
profitable bet.

Three players in the hand is worse than two, of course,
but it's not like I'm betting into 5 people. What is it about
this situation that makes the Harrington advice not apply?
 >> Stay informed about: BAHH: another AK out of position early in tournament 

On May 8, 2:44 am, "XaQ Morphy" <a1c5....RemoveThis@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> On May 6 2008 6:17 AM, Old Wolf wrote:
>
> I've read everyone else's comments and will take a different approach. It
> seems you took the results of the hand then used those to justify the play
> at each street. I'll do the same here, but I'll change up the hand a bit.

Well, it may look that way, but I did consider my opponent
to be most likely to have a pair at the time, and played
accordingly (although, as several people have pointed out,
my play was still bad even though he did in fact have the pair!)


> > Dealt to Old Wolf NZ [2c 9s]
> > fissoc: folds
> > Kakilakis: calls 20
> > michaltoja: calls 20
> > shermanash: folds
> > littlelok: calls 20
> > mammfred: calls 20
> > kingbouw: folds
> > Old Wolf NZ: raises 120 to 140
>
> Well I do have 29o, so I'm putting in a raise for value.
>
>
> See how this works? You can say whatever you want after the hand and
> justify it away.

I don't understand how your analogy is meant to work.
You cannot raise for value preflop with 92o, but you can
with AKo.

Later on you talk about the possibility of beating 44
by hitting the 9 , but that is only half as likely as the
chance that AK can beat 44, because there are two
cards to hit.
 >> Stay informed about: BAHH: another AK out of position early in tournament 

On May 8 2008 10:57 PM, Old Wolf wrote:

> On May 7, 6:05 am, "FellKnight" <jordandevenp... RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > *** FLOP *** [5s 7d 7s]
> > > Old Wolf NZ: bets 200
> >
> > > Continuation bet
> >
> > So you got called by 2 people preflop, both of whom have position on you.
> > You flopped nothing, but it was a reasonably decent flop for AK. Why are
> > you betting? It is unlikely that you will make a better hand fold, and
> > just as unlikely (given your big preflop raise), that you will get called
> > by a worse hand.
>
> Well, according to Harrington on Hold'em, conditions were
> good for a continuation bet: I am the pre-flop aggressor, and
> the texture of the flop was such that it was unlikely to have
> helped my opponents; so it's reasonable to expect that a
> bet will take down the pot sometimes. Betting half the pot
> means that if it works at least 1/3 of the time then it is a
> profitable bet.
>
> Three players in the hand is worse than two, of course,
> but it's not like I'm betting into 5 people. What is it about
> this situation that makes the Harrington advice not apply?

Allow me to explain why:

Let's assume that you continuation bet, which you point out as a
potentially profitable bet, works more than 1/3 of the time... in fact,
let's assume that it works fully 1/2 of the time. Against one opponent,
your bet will work 1/2 the time, providing a nice, tidy, profit. Against
2 opponents, the bet works against both opponents only 1/2*1/2 = 1/4 of
the time. The addition of another opponent has turned a very profitable
play into a losing play. Add more opponents, and your chances go down
even more (1/8, 1/16, etc). To make this more than a marginal or
break-even play, you would need your bet to succeed more than 2/3 of the
time against a single opponent, and this is very unlikely to be the case.

Fell
--
"One should always play fairly - when one has the winning cards."
Oscar Wilde

------- 
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
 >> Stay informed about: BAHH: another AK out of position early in tournament 

On May 9 2008 7:43 AM, FellKnight wrote:

> On May 8 2008 10:57 PM, Old Wolf wrote:
>
> > On May 7, 6:05 am, "FellKnight" <jordandevenp....TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > *** FLOP *** [5s 7d 7s]
> > > > Old Wolf NZ: bets 200
> > >
> > > > Continuation bet
> > >
> > > So you got called by 2 people preflop, both of whom have position on you.
> > > You flopped nothing, but it was a reasonably decent flop for AK. Why are
> > > you betting? It is unlikely that you will make a better hand fold, and
> > > just as unlikely (given your big preflop raise), that you will get called
> > > by a worse hand.
> >
> > Well, according to Harrington on Hold'em, conditions were
> > good for a continuation bet: I am the pre-flop aggressor, and
> > the texture of the flop was such that it was unlikely to have
> > helped my opponents; so it's reasonable to expect that a
> > bet will take down the pot sometimes. Betting half the pot
> > means that if it works at least 1/3 of the time then it is a
> > profitable bet.
> >
> > Three players in the hand is worse than two, of course,
> > but it's not like I'm betting into 5 people. What is it about
> > this situation that makes the Harrington advice not apply?
>
> Allow me to explain why:
>
> Let's assume that you continuation bet, which you point out as a
> potentially profitable bet, works more than 1/3 of the time... in fact,
> let's assume that it works fully 1/2 of the time. Against one opponent,
> your bet will work 1/2 the time, providing a nice, tidy, profit. Against
> 2 opponents, the bet works against both opponents only 1/2*1/2 = 1/4 of
> the time. The addition of another opponent has turned a very profitable
> play into a losing play. Add more opponents, and your chances go down
> even more (1/8, 1/16, etc). To make this more than a marginal or
> break-even play, you would need your bet to succeed more than 2/3 of the
> time against a single opponent, and this is very unlikely to be the case.
>
> Fell
> --
> "One should always play fairly - when one has the winning cards."
> Oscar Wilde

That math works for a single hand. If you consistently do a C-bet to
disguise the strength of your hand, you should do the C-bet regardless of
the math. A tourney is more than one particular hand. You should,
however, be willing and able to hit the brakes after that.

Players at my table can take it to the bank that if I raise preflop, I'll
be betting on the flop. What they don't know is how strong I am when I
make that bet.

---- 
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
 >> Stay informed about: BAHH: another AK out of position early in tournament 

On May 7, 5:53 pm, "FellKnight" <jordandevenp....RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On May 7 2008 10:43 AM, phlash74 wrote:
>
> > 3) Thinks he did the right thing even though he put his stack in as
> > almost a 3-1 dog going to the river(his best possible case scenario),
> > and he very easily could have been drawing dead.
>
> > Michael
>
> 6-1.
>
> Fell
> --
> "One should always play fairly - when one has the winning cards."
> Oscar Wilde
>
> ______________________________________________________________________ 
> looking for a better newsgroup-reader? -www.recgroups.com


His opponent had an underpair to the board, so a river 5 or J would
counterfeit his opponent's two pair and allow his Ace kicker to play.
12 outs. Of course, he had no way of knowing that, since based on his
read of a medium pair (I'm assuming he means 88 or 99 here), he'd only
have 6 outs. I think we both agree that he had no real reason to
expect even that.

Michael
 >> Stay informed about: BAHH: another AK out of position early in tournament 

On May 9 2008 1:57 AM, Old Wolf wrote:

> On May 7, 6:05 am, "FellKnight" <jordandevenp....TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > *** FLOP *** [5s 7d 7s]
> > > Old Wolf NZ: bets 200
> >
> > > Continuation bet
> >
> > So you got called by 2 people preflop, both of whom have position on you.
> > You flopped nothing, but it was a reasonably decent flop for AK. Why are
> > you betting? It is unlikely that you will make a better hand fold, and
> > just as unlikely (given your big preflop raise), that you will get called
> > by a worse hand.
>
> Well, according to Harrington on Hold'em, conditions were
> good for a continuation bet: I am the pre-flop aggressor, and
> the texture of the flop was such that it was unlikely to have
> helped my opponents; so it's reasonable to expect that a
> bet will take down the pot sometimes. Betting half the pot
> means that if it works at least 1/3 of the time then it is a
> profitable bet.

No, it doesn't.

Is a better hand going to fold? How many times will you win by just
checking?May

You're taking an extremely simplistic view of things with a very
superficial analysis.

Maybe you'll have the best hand, maybe not.

They might call even if you have the best hand, with a flush draw as an
example. In that case you aren't ahead by much. If you don't have the
best hand they'll call. Some of the time you'll be drawing very, very
thin.

So, if you bet then maybe you have the best hand and they call. Call the
probability of that happening x1. You win the pot, call the pot size P.

Maybe you bet and they call with a good draw. Your edge is slim, say
60/40. x2 that's the case, you win 1.5P*.6 and lose .5P*.4

Maybe you bet and they call with a pair, say they have a 60/40 edge. x3
with the reverse win of case 2.

Maybe you bet and they fold.

Add all those up.

Then compare it to what the possible outcomes are from checking.

Even if betting is "plus EV" it's not profitable if checking has higher EV.

_____________________________________________________________________ 
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
 >> Stay informed about: BAHH: another AK out of position early in tournament 

garycarson wrote:

>
> Even if betting is "plus EV" it's not profitable if checking has higher EV.
>

No. It means that its not "the most profitable." Or "as profitable."
It does not mean that it is "NOT profitable."

Changing semantics like that does not help the truth or understanding,
and it only partially helps with the mathematics, so long as it doesn't
change the value of ev.

+ev is +ev. Now at the end of the day it is correct to say money is
left on the table. It would even be possibly correct to say, that this
is a leak that prevents you from overcoming the rake, or that in
addition to other leaks means that over all you are an unprofitable player.

But that is a really poor definition of "not profitable".
 >> Stay informed about: BAHH: another AK out of position early in tournament