Again. Read my posts. I never said anything to diss you. You are the one consistently attacking and dissmissing everyones post with LOL, speeches and attitude. I dont need to prove anything to prove anything. It is you with the theory...

Sent from my SCH-I545 using 2+2 Forums

"as he is too busy saying he is unjustly slighted"

This was the diss.

Btw,

I played 2 hands tonight in back to back rounds with the same guy that was almost to a T this discussion....

The player-let's call him "LARCENY MAN" I would describe him an older gentleman whose been at the felt for a long time. He tries to win at poker and might actually win a slight bit if playing in drooler games. He understands boards, stealing blinds, what players have when in different positions. To the naked eye he would appear to be an old nit if first sitting down to play with him. But to the trained eye(we have history) he is not a nit. He has an ego where "he won't be pushed around" in fact he wants to be the pusher. Also wants to be the pusher because he has larceny in his heart. This gentleman LOVES to raise first in from late to steal blinds.

So he raises first in from one off button into my bb. I defend 75s. Flop Ace, 5 2 rainbow. And he is a good candidate to fit (the light peeler who doesn't believe me. Well he doesn't believe i have an ace but does know i can have a piece and it beats him. And that sometimes i have the ace. Maybe pretty much has an idea of my range, but thinks it a little looser than it really is. As he sees me as a theif lag. Sometimes he tries to play me off on turn. But usually more when he's stuck and hot. This game just started.) So naturally i checkraise and he calls. Turn i bet and he starts to grab chips for half a second with one hand then whips it in/folds(he steam folds as he doesn't like being raised) with the other.

Then very next round he raises again same positions. This time i have q8 clubs. Flop comes AA5 rainbow. Here i will lean to fold against unknowns or tight. But sometimes why not? If you're gonna steal sometimes this is a decent spot. But against Larceny man? I can't let him off that easy. The problem is i just did this last round and i know it's in his mind and much more likely he's gonna wanna push back. So this is a dilemma but i know his range is so friggin wide from 34s and up maybe 65off and up if connected or one gap type of stuff. Somewhere around there depending if he's on tilt or crushing maybe he tightens some. Right now only stuck a little but gettin irritated i'm not letting him have his way. So i say F it and checkraise. I don't know what i'm gonna do on turn yet(not set in stone. Depends on card, physical tells, opponents demeanor. and how they see me. But most likely i'm firing turn and considering a 3 bet turn bluff unless i hit pair) but this is one of those times where i described "sometimes i get involved in some interesting hands on the turn" meaning i do occasionally 3 bet bluff the turn here. I know it sounds a little sick, and maybe it is, but that's how it goes if i feel something's off lol. And or i'm up against a guy that wants to be the pusher and not be pushed around. I'd be even more inclined to try a threebet bluff turn if i pick up flush draw on turn. As when you're "stepping out there" it's nice to have something to fall back on in case it doesn't work at least i got outs. Also when i make these 3 bet bluff turns it had to be a hand that can be believable. Meaning a hand that fits into my range. My opponents knows while i'm aggressive and only have small piece sometimes i most definitely will place an Ace this way. Even big Aces and full houses. As i don't threebet preflop in these spots. So turn is J off suit i bet and i thought he was gonna go for it as he legitimately made a natural move to grab chips and raise but then again stopped himself and whipped it in to fight another day.

Don't get me wrong. Sometimes he'll have the A and i look like the dummy and the whole table looks at me like i'm on drugs. But he won't have it much more than he will.

DarkCheck, what range would you expect a typical button opener to have? And what range would you defend against him? Now, how much equity do you think these ranges have against each other on an A82r flop? If you have Pokerstove or equilab, why don't you plug it in and see for yourself.

For the record, I think practically everyone on this thread would agree that the BTN's range would have the equity advantage here, but your comments earlier seem to imply you think the BB does. Check that for yourself.

Also, what would you do with KQ on an A82r flop?

Tell me what you think the ranges/hands are and i'll tell you if i agree.

I've done simulations for enough spots similar to this one that I'm confident in my conclusions so don't wish to redo them myself. I was only suggesting it as a exercise for you to do to help concretely analyze this spot.

You seem to respond to every post except what you do with KQ on A82 flop? I only keep asking because I think it's really important, especially when determining how villains will play/adjust to you.

I generally check call myself.

darkcheck, i have to say in the beginning i was skeptical and thought there was a decent chance u were a mid stakes to high stakes crusher. after the sample size of ur posts grew, i was able to hear more of ur logic. there is no way u are a better player than bbb.

also what is basics??

how the hell is this situation not basic? it should occur at a high frequency right? ppl playing 6m or even fr online at ALL STAKES down to 2c/4c get into this situation time after time after time. i'm going to make a guess that you avoid short handed situations and heavily game select, so you rarely get in this situation. when it does occur, for the most part you play ur k/r or k/f only strategy.

ok how do u play KQ on A82r?

it must be troubling you somewhat which is why ur posting ur inferior strategy on this forum for evaluation.
when ppl tell u this is basic, u seem offended and tell them ur a better player. lol...

Why try to hurt my feelings on New Years Eve?

But of course you can prove this? Otherwise it would sound like a silly thing to say since you don't really know right? It's not as easy as you would think to tell whose better than who. It's all just speculation. And usually the known famous or hierarchy get the fanboys to build them up even more and think are better than they actually might be. But there are players you never heard of that can be equal or better that just didn't get the right opportunity or willing to risk their bankroll to play high for fame. Where most who are famous have gone broke many times but lucky enough to have met people in the poker community to lend them large sums of money to get back in the action and hope they run good and build it up again. While some kid at a kitchen table in iowa might have more skill and instincts than anyone you've thought to be the best but not their opportunities.

I mean the perception changes greatly from month to month, year to year whose the best. Look at Isildur, Dwan, Negreanu, Hellmuth for a few. Isildur and Dwan were first seen as sick unreal "the one". Then they both went broke(or speculated to have) or close to it and thought they were fish. Now they still take shots and play high and if they run good people will say their "the one" again. When Negreanu and Hellmuth first started getting known people thought they were great because they had some hardware(bracelets). Bear in mid they play a whole lot more tournies than the average person. So alot easier to win bracelets with so many chances than the average player. Also many of their tourney wins were in much smaller fields making it easier to win. Then they struggled at times in both cash and tournies and people said they suck at poker. Then they win some tournies again and everyone thinks their good again. Are they? Who knows. But i bet somewhere out there there's someone less famous than them that plays better than them.

But i don't care if i'm better than him or not. I just find it silly that he and you think it without having any clue. And i find it annoying when people talk down to people from their high perches. Especially when the real truth is the people they talk down to might be on their level or higher.

But why bring this up anyway? Can we let this go and move on? Why trying to insult? Happy New Year!

Well show them. And how do you know the ranges you calculated are correct? And how do you calculate the unpredictable situation of how people play turns and rivers? And how much they win or lose when we both hit the turn? For instance...

My opponent raises on button Q10. I defend Q8. Flop A82 i checkraises he calls Q comes on turn. OOPS! Everyone wants to point out how things go bad for me when i run into a big hand(which is gonna happen alot less often than it will right? I mean do you usually hit a flop hard or more likely to miss?) I bet when people think peeling 100 percent they think they win when they hit a pair. But i'm gonna have set 2 pair top pair aces in my range while your peeling with air. The time i meerly have an Ace you will be in horrible shape peeling for a q or 10. this is a small pot not worth fighting a very good player for when he will make good decisions throughout more than the standard player.

p.s. for all asking about the KQ on A82 i checkraise as well. It is one of the few hands i'd be tempted to just call with but don't to maintain my balance as evenetually people would figure out i only call kq. And another spot where you peeling q10, k10 type hand get burned again.

Thank you for answering. Now the more important followup question.... You check raise the A84 flop. What's your distribution look like, what% is Ax+, what % is middle pair, gutshots, 2 random overs to middle pair?

After you answer this, I think you will see why I said how weak your range will be comparatively to mine when you c/r the flop and I call

Also it's just impossible for some kid in Iowa to be better at limit holdem than the world class players. While he may have a better feel for certain spots or whatever that just doesn't really matter in limit holdem

This is the most entertaining thread ever. It's so tempting to pile on, but I'll try to contain myself. Let me just say, while it may not be easy to prove who is a better poker player, it's easy to see who has a better thought process. Well, to a " trained eye" at least

Also, I am salivating at the thought of playing with an opponent who only c/r or folds these flops.

So you're telling me that the button is more likely to have me beat(the best hand) on the flop when he plays a huge range of hands preflop possibly 100 percent. Let's imagine we're playing hu. So if i'm playing a guy raising every hand on button it would be incorrect to assume i'm ahead more often than not when i flop 2nd pair 8's with 6 kicker or better? Sometimes bottom pair 2's but of course i play far less 22's than A's and 8's. I'm a little drunk but that doesn't sound right.

Why impossible? And who decides whose world class? I'ts not like chess where you actually all play each other to know who Bobbie Fisher really is. And even then there might be a Bobby fisher in chess that just decides to stay home and play a computer because he shuns the spotlight.

Whose best can't be proven. It's all rumor, speculation, opinion. And of course when players get into big groups of friends like 2+2 or high stakes players they will naturally boost each other up and say themselves and their friends are the best(like let's say Joe Scmho pro who plays decent now becomes friends with Dwan and Galfond all of a sudden he's be a top player because he hangs with them and plays decent). Then they post on 2+2 and it's already built in through gossip that these people are the best. Then they tell you how a hand is played and everyone accepts it as proof. I only decide if someone's good when i play with them. And even then the best i can say for sure is "he knows how to play/tough" but i couldn't say for sure he's better than another guy that "knows how to play/tough".

After hearing both thought processes from just this thread, it is my opinion that BBB has a more sound/solid understanding of the situation.

Not trying to pick on you, but that's not how chess works either. It appears to me that you are posting misinformation for actual information as a posting strategy, but I'll cave in anyways to explain my thought process on this...

The ranking of a chess player is measured by an ELO rating system. There are established federations such as FIDE and USCF. It is impossible imo for some unknown to be better than Magnus Carlsen, or even Bobby Fischer. Chess has evolved to such a high level that no unknown can just study/play a computer at home and then go on to beat world class players. I'd confidently bet my entire bankroll on this and expect to win every time.

I do agree with you that it is a lot harder to prove who's best in poker. I think this is the case since unlike chess, "best" is harder to define in poker. Do you mean having the strongest grasp of theory, being well disciplined, having the highest growth rate in making money, just plain having made the most money, or some kinda weighed mix?

+1

I'm guessing the button leads about 60/40 if the big blind 3 bets his good hands. Maybe if you call everything in the blind that'll bump you up to about 43%.

Gosh...if only there was some way to know for sure? Maybe if we could somehow list out all the hands that the button is opening in some compact way and also all the hands that BB is defending. Then maybe some computer genius could write a program that measured how often each hand vs hand combination won on all possible turns and rivers, then aggregated the results to tell us how often each side won as a percentage.

Maybe then we wouldn't have to sit on our ass bloviating about argument and counter-argument and picking fights with people who are looking at us funny. We could just do the math. Do you think it's possible that people like BBB have access to such a program already which is what makes them so confident of their conclusions? Surely not, they're probably pulling things out of their ass as well.

Also lol at assuming button opens 100%. Maybe some of your villains do, but those guys aren't your problem.

So my opponent plays closer to 100 percent of hands preflop and i play closer to 50 percent hands(and never 3 bet) and i'm gonna flopping 2nd pair 8's 6 kicker or better everytime and he stands to be a favorite? So it's expected if you play 100 percent of hands to flop better than 2nd pair 8's 6 kicker on A82 flop?

p.s. So how good do i have to flop to expect to be ahead? Why do hu specialists call down queen high often if their opponents will flop better than pair of 88's middle kicker everytime on A82?

Not sure what you mean by closer to 100%. It's widely agreed that BB should be defending a far wider range than button is opening because of the good odds he's getting. 50% is surely too tight and will let button make too much by stealing preflop to compensate on later streets.

Secondly, postflop strategy is going to look a lot different if Button is opening close to 100% and BB is defending tight. Since BB has the stronger range on most flops he should be the one "c-betting". So then, the original question doesn't even apply.

a. because they might still have odds/equity to call down despite not being ahead.
b. ranges are a lot closer in pure HUHU.
c. I don't think it's default to call down most Q-hi ui on A-hi flops anyway.

Statement like this show you don't understand some of the basics of HU play, equity, EV, ranges, etc. This in not meant as an insult, it's just a fact.

There's nothing wrong with that, we all have things to learn regardless of experience level. It's probably better to study and understand these basics before trying to convince all of any superior strategy.

You could think of it this way: maybe your strategy is superior but you don't have the tools or understanding to prove that it is. Work on learning how to PROVE a strategy is better than another: start with easy cases and build up little by little. No matter what, you'll end up improving your game.

I'm not a math or hu guy. I play full ring. Knowing how to do the math doesn't mean you know how to play poker. You kept trying to "get me" and you finally got me. Congrats. But it doesn't mean you know how to play poker better than me or to strategize at the table. If it was just knowing hu equity wouldn't you all be world class since you guys know it? Poker is feel, instincts, knowing your opponents weaknesses etc.. As long as you have a general understanding of when to draw is all you need to know math-wise. Knowing how to proceed with different board textures and stuff like that is what makes a poker player.

Either (a) you don't understand what % of hands the button opens (it's likely not 100%) or the button somehow does open 100% and (b) you are folding way to many hands in the bb. So even if somehow your strategy of only having a check raise range on the flop is correct (it isn't), it's likely a product of you having a pretty big leak preflop in the bb.


Here's an example (Reductio ad absurdum). Button opens and we defend AA+ in the bb, folding the rest. A strategy of check raising our entire continuing range would certianly be correct.

I was never a believer of calling very weak out of bb just because getting 3.5 to 1. I see players who are deemed good do it but i just feel in long run it catches up to us. I mean i prefer to be tighter oop(especially if opponents is a pro, against passive fish more willing to loosen up) than the raiser. Yes we're getting 3.5 to 1 but we will find ourselves in alot of bad spots preflop where in position player can makeup for this. Meaning just because he might raise 72 doesn't mean i want to call with 72. As he bluffs me alot more often than i can bluff him. When defending 72 and flop comes 910j, k55, etc. basically anything that doesnt contain a 7 or 2 or give me a straight draw. And even when i hit a 7 or 2 i don't want to be in a position having to payoff everytime i hit a 2. Flop comes j102, turn q. You calling down? What if another bad card comes? If against a decent opponent he can punish and value bet or bluff you often enough to make up for getting 3.5 to 1 preflop. i prefer to just toss my 72 into the much and on to the next hand. I understand the mentality of calling preflop with 100 percent if opponent is raising 100 percent. As we get 3.5 to 1 in an even range situation. But i just think postflop i put myself in alot of bad spots. Now adjusting to 50 might be a little too rigid and was just making up a number there. But i do believe i need to not be playing any 2.