Quote:
Originally Posted by jdr0317
Can't we argue the inverse and say that our implied odds against 52o are much higher? It seems like a somewhat fallacious assumption that even though our top 15% will beat their top 95% 65% of the time, that they'll win more when they do win the pots than we will to help a bit. While sure, we don't get a dime w/ our AK versus their 52 on AK6, but they could win a fairly big pot from us on A52r, but we're also way more likely to be on the good end of set vs set, flush v flush, straight v straight, pair v pair, etc.
I do agree that getting paid off on your random crap that the opponent can't see on the board helps a lot, but still.
It really depends. A lot of players that assume they're good end up taking the worst of it more often than they should, and then blame their opponents for it.
Typical example: $1/2 NL. Rando limp in EP and Hero raises AK OTB to $10. One of the blinds and rando call. Flop comes A52. Rando bets $4. Hero raises to $50, rando calls. Turn is a jack or something, rando checks and hero pushes for $150 more. Rando calls and tables 52o. Hero complains about how badly rando played his hand because he should have folded preflop.
Postflop, hero played really poorly. The preflop raise is a maybe little big, but the flop raise is way too big, and that led to a bad turn push. I'm not saying that hero necessarily gets away from his hand, but he probably got stacked when he shouldn't have. If you're consistently playing top pair hands for 100 BBs, you're probably losing more than you ought.