Quote:
Originally Posted by MurderbyNumbers123
well seeing as you haven't chosen value or bluffing as the point of your checkraise there doesn't seem to be much of a comparison
I can say that in the AAA hand i am going for value, and wont stop until I feel that I am no longer ahead based on various things. Against some players I will slow down absolutely. Actually against very few players will i cap that for 3 streets.
But for your q7 hand I think that you havent chosen if you are going for value or to take him off a worse hand. Either way you can't discount the ace more than u would the 5 when u are stoving something... seems obvious
But you say that you just want to take him off the hand, and I think OTR's whole spiel is kinda a bout the idea of not making mistakes against your opponents range. You are just kind of doing the classic first level thinking mistake where you aren't even thinking about what hands you will be folding out or getting value out of. Its those circumstances that really affect your bottom line in the end.
You can show down q hi by the way there is no rule against it, as a matter of fact showing down q hi will cost just 1sb more than c/r and barreling the turn. Just food for thought.
And by the way I am not on the anti copoka train, I still think you are right on the first hand to be reasonably tenacious with the ace against all but the most face up opponents. Its just so exploitable honestly and i know its a cliche but it is limit hold em and you have an ace with a likely chop or you lose/beat a bluff.
TY for your comments.
Equity calculation point is well taken and appreciated.
As far as whole issue here, it all seems a bit strange.
I honestly dont remember ever seeing anyone folding in a situation like hand 1
and yet sophisticated argument is given why it is such an wrong play.
C'raises like in a hand #2 are all over training sites and forums with, at very least, metagame consideration label on them or, depending on who poster or coach is, marked as sophisticated plays. New era thinking, so to speak.
Here, from small mistakes it has been blown up to a reason I cant get out of ugly break even stretch.
Life time ev in both cases, given the relative rarity and deferent chances and equities vs different playing styles, is negligible one way or another, but chance to showcase superior poker wisdom is taken and at the end it looks like breaking cardinal rules or something.
In fact, we are talking really small margins here.
Really small margins considering that after certain threshold in the game, the turn of a card will make so much larger impact on a bottom line than whether you make or lose 4.6 bets over 1000 hands due to finer understanding of a super fine aspects or lack thereof.
Last edited by copoka; 03-06-2010 at 01:35 AM.