Interesting No Limit Question.

Lafortezza

Stolen from twoplustwo forums.

It is the beginning of the big tournament and everyone has about $10000 in front of them. When the turn rolls around you have two opponents, both pretty good players.

The board AKQT with two diamonds. The pot has $900 in it.
The player to your right bets $200 with what you are almost sure is a straight. You have AJ of spades. You are almost sure that the guy behind you has a diamond flush draw.

Which of the following is the best move considering your position:
A. Fold
B. Call
C. Raise the minimum (to $400)
D. Raise a moderate amount (say to about $700)
E. Raise a lot (say to $2000)
F. Move All-In

There is one very important card to consider.

Marq

Interesting question. If the player behind you holds the jack of diamonds as part of his flush draw, he should be going all in if you make any raise, as he is guaranteed his stake back if both of the other players are holding the straight, and free-rolling at the rest of the pot which he'll take down if his flush draw hits (about one in five times). If he doesn't hold the jack of diamonds, but does hold two other diamonds, then a raise and a large reraise (from you) should be enough to let him know that his flush draw is behind at least one straight, and he should drop it.

So you have to decide there and then whether you're prepared to commit all of your chips to this pot which you are most likely splitting with at least one player, and possibly losing to another. If you are prepared to take those odds that the flush won't hit (about 80%), I think it's best to get all of your chips in the centre right there on the turn. The player behind you can only call if he has the made straight, he shouldn't call with a bare flush draw.

As for me:
I can't fold, because I have the nuts on the turn.
I can't flat call, because if there's any slim chance that someone is on two pair or trips or the flush draw without a jack i don't want them to get in cheap to outdraw me.
Ditto raising the minimum amount (only total pussies raise the minimum amount eh?)

There is absolutely no way that I'm going to throw away the hand, even if someone comes back over the top of me, so I think all of my chips are in the centre at this moment.

Although, If we look at the pot odds:
say you call, and the player behind you moves all-in. Say we're sure he has the diamond draw with the jack of diamonds. The first player calls, and we're sure he has the straight. I have an 80% chance of winning 33% of the pot, and a 20% chance of losing all of my chips.
4 out of five times I'll get my stake back. One out of five times I'll lose my whole tank.

If you knew this in advance, you wouldn't play the hand, as it has (how do I put this?) Negative Expected Value.

But we don't know this in advance, and we're in this situation now, and we're not guaranteed that the villian has the jack of diamonds and won't know until he acts after us.

So I'm all in. Fúck the lot of ye. 2 of spades on the river. 3-way split. Next hand please.

Lafortezza

Raise the minimum (to $400)

If you figured all that out for yourself then you're way ahead of all the pros on 2+2!
I got as far as "maybe its not as simple as call and see if there's a diamond on the river"...
When you weigh up the chance that you might split a fairly small pot or else be asked for alot more chips to see the river, then folding becomes a reasonable option since you're not pot-committed and its early in a tournament and you've plenty of chips left.

Marq

do i get a gold star now?

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

Errr, you cant fold (if you think you should fold then give up poker quickly) and you cant raise, as it hurts your EV more by having to call an all in (or moving all in and being called) if somebody is freerolling you, than it does by giving the flush draw odds to call. So the answer is call.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=1114858&page=&view=&sb=5&o=&vc=1

Marq

David Sklansky: Cúnt.

On an unrelated note:
Hector - am i to take from your post that you would call, then if the the guy behind you moved in, you would fold?

DeVore

I was with marq (before I read his response which needs nothing further from me). You have the nuts. Stick it to them.

Oh and fcuk Sklansky, he's never played against Vernon!

DeV.

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

Marq wrote:

David Sklansky: Cúnt.

On an unrelated note:
Hector - am i to take from your post that you would call, then if the the guy behind you moved in, you would fold?

I havent worked out the figures but I think you would still have to call.

Lafortezza

Raise the minimum (to $400)

All of Sklansky's theory type questions usually leave out some situation-specific information. If this question actually occured in real life in a tournament I'm sure the vast majority of us would be betting like maniacs to push the flush draw out. If he has Jx diamonds the so be it.

The nuts come around far too seldom.

DeVore

My question to him is "how are you 'Almost sure' of what the two guys have?". In the question he pretty much puts the two of them on exact hands. Thats not poker, poker is a sum of the probabilities of the possibilities. As you say the odds of him having a Jx of diamonds are pretty damned small so the question then is "how many saw the flop, was it raised before hand that would drive jx of diamonds out before he realises he might be on to a good thing, did he stay through a raise, was he in first position etc etc".

I admire Sklankys understanding of the maths behind the game, it far exceeds mine but these are only interesting mental gymnastic questions, instructive if you dont understand things like EV, Implied odds, pot odds etc....

DeV.

Marq

Hector put it to me last night that he thinks the problem revolves around whether or not the guy to our right who has already acted who we are "almost sure" has the straight, also has the flush draw with the jack of diamonds. While I don't think that that's the problem that Luke posted up, I agree that if you think the guy who originally raised has the made straight and the flush draw too you have to call, not allowing the guy to reraise you.

But as I say, I don't think that's the problem here - it's the free-rolling bastard who has yet to speak who we're worried about.

Lafortezza

Raise the minimum (to $400)

Marq wrote:

Hector put it to me last night that he thinks the problem revolves around whether or not the guy to our right who has already acted who we are "almost sure" has the straight, also has the flush draw with the jack of diamonds. While I don't think that that's the problem that Luke posted up,

That's pretty much what the problem boils down to. The chance that someone might be freerolling with the J diamonds to possibly make a flush means that you're in a situation where you have the chance to chop a small pot, chop a bigger pot (if there's a non-diamond river card and someone bluffs) or fold your straight if a diamond hits the river.

So while you have a nice hand, the pot isn't too big and it could all go pear-shaped depending on the guy with the 'probable' flush.

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

DeVore wrote:

My question to him is "how are you 'Almost sure' of what the two guys have?". In the question he pretty much puts the two of them on exact hands. Thats not poker, poker is a sum of the probabilities of the possibilities. As you say the odds of him having a Jx of diamonds are pretty damned small so the question then is "how many saw the flop, was it raised before hand that would drive jx of diamonds out before he realises he might be on to a good thing, did he stay through a raise, was he in first position etc etc".

I admire Sklankys understanding of the maths behind the game, it far exceeds mine but these are only interesting mental gymnastic questions, instructive if you dont understand things like EV, Implied odds, pot odds etc....

DeV.

The situations are a bit contrived so that the discussion can take place over the important aspect of the question, rather than getting caught up in all the usual crap. The fact that I have never seen this important area discussed seems to bear witness to the fact that these interesting mental gymnastics questions are instuctive to everyone. In fact if you dont understand EV & pot odds etc I dont think you can learn much from them, you need to have a good grounding to understand the mechanics of the computation.

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

Marq wrote:

Hector put it to me last night that he thinks the problem revolves around whether or not the guy to our right who has already acted who we are "almost sure" has the straight, also has the flush draw with the jack of diamonds. While I don't think that that's the problem that Luke posted up, I agree that if you think the guy who originally raised has the made straight and the flush draw too you have to call, not allowing the guy to reraise you.

But as I say, I don't think that's the problem here - it's the free-rolling bastard who has yet to speak who we're worried about.

You are pretty sure that the first guy has the straight, and that the second person has the second guy has a flush draw. If the second guy has the J of diamonds then he has the straight as well, and since Sklansky didnt mention that he could have the straight then you can ignore this possibility.

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

lafortezza wrote:

That's pretty much what the problem boils down to. The chance that someone might be freerolling with the J diamonds to possibly make a flush means that you're in a situation where you have the chance to chop a small pot, chop a bigger pot (if there's a non-diamond river card and someone bluffs) or fold your straight if a diamond hits the river.

So while you have a nice hand, the pot isn't too big and it could all go pear-shaped depending on the guy with the 'probable' flush.

No, hes not the important person here, the first guy is.

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

DeVore wrote:

My question to him is "how are you 'Almost sure' of what the two guys have?". In the question he pretty much puts the two of them on exact hands. Thats not poker, poker is a sum of the probabilities of the possibilities. As you say the odds of him having a Jx of diamonds are pretty damned small so the question then is "how many saw the flop, was it raised before hand that would drive jx of diamonds out before he realises he might be on to a good thing, did he stay through a raise, was he in first position etc etc".

I admire Sklankys understanding of the maths behind the game, it far exceeds mine but these are only interesting mental gymnastic questions, instructive if you dont understand things like EV, Implied odds, pot odds etc....

DeV.

This is a question with a easily deductable answer, but nearly everyone who answered, both here and on 2+2 got it wrong. Does that tell you something about its usefullness?

Fr0g

Raise to a moderate amount (say $700)

Maybe I haven't thought this through all the way. If he has the Jd he will see your all in to get a share of the pot with top straight and has the possibility of drawing a flush. No?

DeVore

Correct Fr0g. Thats basically the nub of the question. Sklansky tells you that he "almost certainly" has a flush draw. If its a high diamond but not the Jack then he cant/shouldnt call your all in. If its the Jack of diamonds, he already has the nuts and is drawing to a better hand/the-stone-colds.

HJ point is that if he has X of diamonds he cant/shouldnt call the 200 on the turn as he doesnt have the odds for it (thats a BIG presumption that he's a sufficently good player that he realises that, you might have to make it a little more *obvious* to him but thats a moot point). If he has the J diamonds he's freerolling (ie: he cant do worse then you and has a 1/5 shot roughly at doing better).

HJ.... If I was holding the A diamonds I might well take the odds anyway, on the grounds that I could make more if it hits from a lower flush (*you* seem to have perfect knowledge of your opponents cards, it doesnt say that HE might not think you are both on flush draws and expected to get paid if it hits.... in which case he's right to take the bet for the implied odds...).

In short, these kind of questions are mental gymnastics for maths geeks (of which I'm one!) and possibly highlight an interesting facet of Poker but to talk of "right" and "wrong".... maybe online where you dont look into their eyes and read them... but in the real world theres a LOT more going on then the maths and thats something I've had to learn the hard way...

DeV.

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

DeVore wrote:

Correct Fr0g. Thats basically the nub of the question. Sklansky tells you that he "almost certainly" has a flush draw. If its a high diamond but not the Jack then he cant/shouldnt call your all in. If its the Jack of diamonds, he already has the nuts and is drawing to a better hand/the-stone-colds.

He doesnt have the J of diamonds.

DeVore wrote:

HJ point is that if he has X of diamonds he cant/shouldnt call the 200 on the turn as he doesnt have the odds for it (thats a BIG presumption that he's a sufficently good player that he realises that, you might have to make it a little more *obvious* to him but thats a moot point). If he has the J diamonds he's freerolling (ie: he cant do worse then you and has a 1/5 shot roughly at doing better).

He doesnt have the J of diamonds, and he does have the right odds to call. In fact the whole nub of the problem lies in the fact that if you simply call then he does have the correct odds to call, so in this case you should normally raise to hurt his EV if he calls. However, if you raise, it means that the ORIGINAL bettor can reraise, and there is a chance that he has a flush draw, AS WELL as the straight draw, which means effectively that you are risking your whole stack to split the pot. The EV that you give up by not raising is more than made up for the EV of reopening the betting for the original better.

The moral of the story, is that sometimes you have to give up the chance of hurting somebodies EV (and remember this is a zero sum game, so this means increasing your EV), if by doing so you might be giving another player a chance to signifently lower your EV.

DeVore wrote:

HJ.... If I was holding the A diamonds I might well take the odds anyway, on the grounds that I could make more if it hits from a lower flush (*you* seem to have perfect knowledge of your opponents cards, it doesnt say that HE might not think you are both on flush draws and expected to get paid if it hits.... in which case he's right to take the bet for the implied odds...).

Hes getting the right odds to call, not regarding implied odds.

DeVore wrote:

In short, these kind of questions are mental gymnastics for maths geeks (of which I'm one!) and possibly highlight an interesting facet of Poker but to talk of "right" and "wrong".... maybe online where you dont look into their eyes and read them... but in the real world theres a LOT more going on then the maths and thats something I've had to learn the hard way...

DeV.

This is complete nonsense. The situation described could only come about if you are a very good reader of people, so its far more likely to happen live than online. And it helps you to make the right decision should this situation ever arise, or one similar. There are plenty of times in poker when it comes down to simple math, in fact every hand you play is simply an extension of your ability to use applied statistics, wether you realise this or not is another thing.

Just because pscyhology plays a part of poker doesnt mean that you should ignore the maths.

DapperGent

Tell me Hector which has better +EV, politeness or rudeness?

bohsman

refusing to look at all this +Negative rubbish and concentrating on how the flush draw with the J is going to play the hand, if I flat call I might get to see the river on the cheap, minimum raise and moderate raise are just asking the freeroller to come over the top and a raise of two thousand might just get him to flat call to keep others in the pot

DeVore

I'm not following something here or I'm thinking about this from a weird angle.

You dont know that the Jack is out there. If it IS out there then HE doesnt know that Kd or Ad or Qd coupled with Jsch isnt out there which he has to fear if he doesnt have the high diamond. The question is far from cut and dried.


DeV.

DeVore

Hectorjelly wrote:

He doesnt have the J of diamonds.



<snip> However, if you raise, it means that the ORIGINAL bettor can reraise, and there is a chance that he has a flush draw, AS WELL as the straight draw, which means effectively that you are risking your whole stack to split the pot. The EV that you give up by not raising is more than made up for the EV of reopening the betting for the original better.

<snip>
This is complete nonsense.
<snip>

Er, from the original question:

The player to your right bets $200 with what you are almost sure is a straight. You have AJ of spades. You are almost sure that the guy behind you has a diamond flush draw.

Want to be careful there Hector, even superman was injured falling off a high horse....

DeV.

mewso

5/1 Hector will never start a post with "I think the best thing to do here is...."

bohsman

You want to keep the flusher in without commiting all your chips, whatever i voted i think the 2000 bet is the best option if the flusher doesnt have the Jd youre going to win 4/5 of the time if he does have the Jd you can still get away from the hand if a diamond comes on the river and I know theres a 2s coming on the river... its obvious if you do the maths. :rolleyes:

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

DeVore wrote:

Er, from the original question:

The player to your right bets $200 with what you are almost sure is a straight. You have AJ of spades. You are almost sure that the guy behind you has a diamond flush draw.

Want to be careful there Hector, even superman was injured falling off a high horse....

DeV.

The person who hasnt acted yet, who you put on the flush draw, doesnt have the J of diamonds. If he had the J of diamonds he would already have the straight, and he doesnt have the straight yet.

If Im mistaken here please tell me.

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

DapperGent wrote:

Tell me Hector which has better +EV, politeness or rudeness?

It depends.

I thought I was justified in saying this was nonsense;

DeVore wrote:

Originally Posted by DeVore
In short, these kind of questions are mental gymnastics for maths geeks (of which I'm one!) and possibly highlight an interesting facet of Poker but to talk of "right" and "wrong".... maybe online where you dont look into their eyes and read them... but in the real world theres a LOT more going on then the maths and thats something I've had to learn the hard way...

DeV.

Because it seems to miss the point of the exercise entirely, and then make somewhat vague and confusing statements about live vs online poker. I thought it was nonsensical in the context of the discusssion. I didnt mean to appear rude.

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

DeVore wrote:

I'm not following something here or I'm thinking about this from a weird angle.

You dont know that the Jack is out there. If it IS out there then HE doesnt know that Kd or Ad or Qd coupled with Jsch isnt out there which he has to fear if he doesnt have the high diamond. The question is far from cut and dried.


DeV.

There are only two diamonds on the board, so if somebody has the J of diamonds nobody else can have the straight and the flush draw. One diamond is no good, you need two.

DapperGent

Hectorjelly wrote:

The person who hasnt acted yet, who you put on the flush draw, doesnt have the J of diamonds. If he had the J of diamonds he would already have the straight, and he doesnt have the straight yet.

If Im mistaken here please tell me.

I don't think the wording precludes him having both the made straight and the flush draw. i.e. holding the Jack of diamonds.

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

DapperGent wrote:

I don't think the wording precludes him having both the made straight and the flush draw. i.e. holding the Jack of diamonds.

Whilst It doesnt specifically preclude it, the wording implies that you take him for a flush draw only. Its also very unlikely for his flush draw to contain the Jd, so even if you consider this possibility, (which I advise you dont) then you would have to weight its possibility low in any calculations.

Finally, it doesnt make any difference to the actual problem, as he is going to get a chance to raise anyway. The crux of the situation is actually about the first guy, and if we give him a chance to raise with is at least a straight, and possibly a straight and flush draw.

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

musician wrote:

5/1 Hector will never start a post with "I think the best thing to do here is...."

Ill take that bet

DeVore

Hectorjelly wrote:

Whilst It doesnt specifically preclude it, the wording implies that you take him for a flush draw only. Its also very unlikely for his flush draw to contain the Jd, so even if you consider this possibility, (which I advise you dont) then you would have to weight its possibility low in any calculations.

Finally, it doesnt make any difference to the actual problem, as he is going to get a chance to raise anyway. The crux of the situation is actually about the first guy, and if we give him a chance to raise with is at least a straight, and possibly a straight and flush draw.

Why is it that the wording precludes the second guy having the straight and flush draw but ALLOWS the first guy to. In fact since the first guy is described as having a straight (no word of a flush draw) I would take that as the limit of his hand.

The second guy is described as having a flush draw. That wouldnt proscribe him having ALREADY having the straight and drawing to the flush.

In fact, Lafortezza's comment (from the 2+2 forums) that there was "one important card to consider" or words to that effect, immediately made me think that the flush draw might also be a straight flush draw.

I think someone owes me an apology

I take your point about the two diamonds on board, I misread it as two plus the T of diamonds.

DeV.

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

DeVore wrote:

Why is it that the wording precludes the second guy having the straight and flush draw but ALLOWS the first guy to. In fact since the first guy is described as having a straight (no word of a flush draw) I would take that as the limit of his hand.

A made hand would take precedence over a draw, so I think this thinking is slightly faulty. However, your right he could have the Jd. However, as stated before, this doesnt change what the correct answer is; and its very unlikely.

JuliusFranco

at the risk of repeating someone elses point...

i agree that the question does not imply that the player behind you has a Jd. (ie a made hand)

surely a flat call here is dangerous as you are giving the person behind pot odds on hitting his flush. i'd go all in here. this should take the flush draw off the hand.

Also, it's early in the tournament, and you're telling the other players that you're not scared of sticking all your chips in the middle. It might also scare the 1st player a bit too as he might think you have a Jd, and your problem becomes his problem to an extent!

Finally, if the player behind you did have a Jd, then he might raise all in himself anyway. I prefer to take such inititives myself

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

Heres the simple solution, 1/3 of the time the player with the made straight will have a diamond jack. If he has the diamond jack then if you raise it gives him the chance to reraise all in, which you must call because you will still only lose 5% of the time. But this 5% chance of losing is worse than giving the guy who only has the flush draw the chance of drawing out on you. Especially as you can fold on the river having not lost many chips if a diamond appears.

If you reraise all in then the flush draw will fold, but the straight will call, and some of the time you will be freerolled, which is a bad situation to be in.

I called De Vores point nonsense, as it seemed to imply that situations are more likely to be cut and dried online rather than offline, which bears no resemblence to reality. There are many differences between offline and online poker, but there are many situations in which the only important aspects are the cards, and specifcally the probabilities, so the situations are the same. In these cases there is usually a mathematically proveable "correct" answer. These happen all the time. Deciding whether to call an all in or not is a math problem, based upon the read you have. The better the read the easier the problem.

mewso

Despite the fact that there may be a matimatically correct way to play every time I think tournament strategy is generally discussed in more broad terms. Does it put you all-in? Is it the first hand of a tournament with alot of prize money at stake? If so is it worth being eliminated? Are your opponents all matimatical genuises? Do they know that your all-in has given them no odds to call whatsoever? Will they behave as you think they should or does it really matter if you have the correct matematical play?
The old Aces in the first hand of the WSOP question - would you call an all-in bet? etc. Matematically you would be correct to call an all-in but in the first hand of the WSOP I'm folding. Others would call and I would not write in stone which decision is correct. My point is can we discuss poker with more of an opinion and less of a "You must do this or you are wrong" tone. this is why I quoted those odds Hector. You almost always state your case as if you are declaring law which i might do myself if I got out my calculator every time someone asked a question here instead of putting myself in their position and circumstances where decisions had to be made without easy access to sklansky.

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

musician wrote:

Despite the fact that there may be a matimatically correct way to play every time I think tournament strategy is generally discussed in more broad terms. Does it put you all-in? Is it the first hand of a tournament with alot of prize money at stake? If so is it worth being eliminated? Are your opponents all matimatical genuises? Do they know that your all-in has given them no odds to call whatsoever? Will they behave as you think they should or does it really matter if you have the correct matematical play?
The old Aces in the first hand of the WSOP question - would you call an all-in bet? etc. Matematically you would be correct to call an all-in but in the first hand of the WSOP I'm folding.

I have the feeling that Im being set up for this. This is a good example of when the players or psychology doesnt matter, poker is a game of incomplete information; but in this case you have all the information you need.

Your wrong to fold AA preflop at the start of the WSOP. Without getting into the detail of the subject, it would be a mistake for even the best players in the world to fold, so its a huge mistake to fold for any of us lesser lights.
<This is all assuming that you are at the WSOP to win or cash, if your there for the experience then ignore the above>

Now I know that to be the case, I can show it mathematically if anyone is interested. The only assumption you have to make is the tournament equity of a good player, but its not hard to guess what range thats in.

No matter how good you are, you are giving away tournament equity by folding, and in the long run thats all a good tournent player has. *

Now I know the above to be true, but Im sure my manner isnt going to win me any new friends. I would be honestly interested in how I could put this in a less confrontational style, without lying.

musician wrote:

My point is can we discuss poker with more of an opinion and less of a "You must do this or you are wrong" tone. this is why I quoted those odds Hector. You almost always state your case as if you are declaring law which i might do myself if I got out my calculator every time someone asked a question here instead of putting myself in their position and circumstances where decisions had to be made without easy access to sklansky.

You seem to be making three points here

a) Its easy to come up with the right answer when you have a calculater

b) I dont put myself in their position or circumstances when replying to a post

c) You object to my tone

For point a, Ive allways been interested in maths and statistics, so the maths is usually pretty trivial for me (the simple stuff anyway). There arent that many different situations that can occur so I tend to remember them rather work them out on the spot. Eg Two overcards and a flush draw (overcards are above your opponents pair), Your ahead by 5% percent or so on the flop. Etc Etc. So when I play, its by instinct, but instinct backed up by numbers.
If I post about the hand, or someone else hand, Ill run the hand though two dimes, to make sure I was right about the %, and to show why a paticular action was right or wrong.

Im not really sure what you have a problem with but If you'd prefer I could adjust the figures to give a random error of x%, so as to simulate the stress of the live environment?

and b)

If the situations or circumstances (ie your on the bubble in a tournament, or there are big differentials in the prize money) pertain to the hand, then I would hope to always include them. There are a lot of funny (read: wrong) ideas floating around about tournemnt play, so it might look like Im ignoring something when Im not. If I miss something in a post, please tell me.
If you mean that I dont take into account the stress and difficulty of making the right decision at the time, well I would assume that everyone understands this implicitly. We discuss problem hands so that we know what to do next time it happens. Everybody makes mistakes.

And finally c) my tone

To be honest, I cant help it. I get called terrible names on the 1808 forums from time to time; but then I get thank you mails as well sometimes, so maybe it adds up. If people dont want me to post here then organise a poll.

* Just to clear up the inevitable confusion. If you get the best two players in the world, who are both equal in skills and get them to play 100,000,000,000 WSOPs, the only difference being that one of them will fold AA in the first couple of rounds to an all in and the other wont. The person who calls will do better. So if you want to win/cash, call. If not fold.

Fr0g

Raise to a moderate amount (say $700)

I'm with musician, I'd fold. I'm not likely to play 100,000,000,000 WSOPs

DeVore

HJ, I get the feeling you are being a bit paranoid actually, theres no set up here but I think Musos point is that most people (myself included) come to these boards with the approach that says "I've still got lots to learn" and you sometimes seem to be preaching canon law. You arent being set up or anything, its not a conspiracy to have a go! I like your posts, you know the math well but its not all about maths and there are many ways to play poker. Go tell Joe O'Neill that he has to play mathematically correct... he wouldnt know an odd if it feel on his head and sang to him. And yet he's more successful then any of us...

If we want to amuse ourselves with maths problems that are couched in poker terms, hey, its our time (in work ). But lets not fool ourselves that they any more to do with a live card game then "two trains leaves Cork and Dublin at 30 and 60 miles an hour each..." has to do with public transport....

DeV.

mewso

Hectorjelly wrote:

I have the feeling that Im being set up for this. This is a good example of when the players or psychology doesnt matter, poker is a game of incomplete information; but in this case you have all the information you need.

Your wrong to fold AA preflop at the start of the WSOP. Without getting into the detail of the subject, it would be a mistake for even the best players in the world to fold, so its a huge mistake to fold for any of us lesser lights.
<This is all assuming that you are at the WSOP to win or cash, if your there for the experience then ignore the above>

Now I know that to be the case, I can show it mathematically if anyone is interested. The only assumption you have to make is the tournament equity of a good player, but its not hard to guess what range thats in.

No matter how good you are, you are giving away tournament equity by folding, and in the long run thats all a good tournent player has. *

Now I know the above to be true, but Im sure my manner isnt going to win me any new friends. I would be honestly interested in how I could put this in a less confrontational style, without lying.

We can go round in circles if you like as in my quote I've stated that it would be an incorrect matematical decision. So it comes down to a personal decision on my part to fold. I don't want to drag this up again but I think this is a perfect example of how to some players the possibility of elimination at this stage of a tournament carries as much weight as anything else. With the matematics agreed the correct manner to use in your response would be to resist the urge to preach the obvious and just say you would call.

Hectorjelly wrote:

For point a, Ive allways been interested in maths and statistics, so the maths is usually pretty trivial for me (the simple stuff anyway). There arent that many different situations that can occur so I tend to remember them rather work them out on the spot. Eg Two overcards and a flush draw (overcards are above your opponents pair), Your ahead by 5% percent or so on the flop. Etc Etc. So when I play, its by instinct, but instinct backed up by numbers.
If I post about the hand, or someone else hand, Ill run the hand though two dimes, to make sure I was right about the %, and to show why a paticular action was right or wrong.

Im not really sure what you have a problem with but If you'd prefer I could adjust the figures to give a random error of x%, so as to simulate the stress of the live environment?

A little bit of a petty answer there. Of course I dont want you to alter the figures. I welcome your posts most of the time and respect your opinion but I think you're ignoring my point that to some players it goes beyond matematics and therefore decisions made at the table may involve far more than pot odds vs outs etc. If you quote odds in a post and prove that this is the only play do we then close that post as the definitive answer has been given?

Hectorjelly wrote:

and b)

If the situations or circumstances (ie your on the bubble in a tournament, or there are big differentials in the prize money) pertain to the hand, then I would hope to always include them. There are a lot of funny (read: wrong) ideas floating around about tournemnt play, so it might look like Im ignoring something when Im not. If I miss something in a post, please tell me.
If you mean that I dont take into account the stress and difficulty of making the right decision at the time, well I would assume that everyone understands this implicitly. We discuss problem hands so that we know what to do next time it happens. Everybody makes mistakes.

I heartily agree but consider this phrase "The odds imply you should have called in that situation but given the circumstances I may well have folded myself". Could you imagine yourself saying this?

Hectorjelly wrote:

And finally c) my tone

To be honest, I cant help it. I get called terrible names on the 1808 forums from time to time; but then I get thank you mails as well sometimes, so maybe it adds up. If people dont want me to post here then organise a poll.

Getting a bit petty again there Hector. Of course I and I hope nobody else wants you to stop posting here. If you are aware of your manner (which is worrying) then theres not much I can do about it. I will mention it no more especially considering the rather sensitive reaction. I make these kind of observations to be constructive and it's not meant maliciously at all Hector. As I have already said I welcome your posts and we can all learn from what you contribute so fire away and click that quote button.

Culchie

Call

I 'folded' as well on this (check my vote yesterday) but then kept quiet as I was told to 'give up poker now' if I voted to fold.

Glad to see that I'm not alone, and has given me a little confidence to voice my opinion.

It's based on purely what I would do if i was in this situation early doors in a tournament......I would fold .

900 Chips in the middle, 100,000 around the table...... I can't see the other guys cards, I'm not pyshic, if I get bad vibes, I fold.....no point in being stubborn and very wrong over 900 chips.

I know it's not based on maths, or pot odds, or whatever, but common sense methinks, probably defensive, but I'm still in the touramnent with all my chips........I can wait, i can wait.

Hectorjelly

Raise the minimum (to $400)

Culchie wrote:

I 'folded' as well on this (check my vote yesterday) but then kept quiet as I was told to 'give up poker now' if I voted to fold.

Glad to see that I'm not alone, and has given me a little confidence to voice my opinion.

It's based on purely what I would do if i was in this situation early doors in a tournament......I would fold .

900 Chips in the middle, 100,000 around the table...... I can't see the other guys cards, I'm not pyshic, if I get bad vibes, I fold.....no point in being stubborn and very wrong over 900 chips.

I know it's not based on maths, or pot odds, or whatever, but common sense methinks, probably defensive, but I'm still in the touramnent with all my chips........I can wait, i can wait.

Do you fold the nuts often? If its common sense to fold the nuts, what paticular hand are you willing to make a stand on? 6 aces perhaps? A royal sampler?

DeVore

emoticons. great things altogether....

DeV.

Juan Pablo

Hectorjelly wrote:

A royal sampler?

Brilliance!