Interesting No Limit Question.

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!