Quote:
Originally Posted by dmccoy87
I would GII 99/100 here.
For the sake of conversation, I could see merit in min-raising or raising small and then shoving on virtually any flop. The thought being I might get some calls or (hopefully) a 4b and get a bigger pot while accepting a much higher variance. If my aces get cracked, I reload. If $175 is all I'm playing then I just GII pre.
Brings up an interesting math question.
Say in Course of Action 1 we ship for $175. For scenario 1a, when we fold out the field our EV= 1(75) - 0(175) = 75. For scenario 1b, when we get one non-believer with 88 who puts us on AK, the pot will contain $60 in dead money and we gii as a 4.5:1 favorite against a single player. EV = .82(60+175) - .18(175) = 161.20. If 1a and 1b occur at a 1:1 ratio our overall EV is 118.10.
In Course of Action 2, if we assume that a 3b to $40 will bring about a 6way $240 pot and we plan to ship our remaining $135 on all flops, this will obviously bring about far more variance. Let's say that for scenario 2a we get three callers. One has a flush draw, one has top pair, one has middle pair and a couple backdoors. So now we have $120 in dead money and we gii with 30% equity against three players. EV = 0.3(120 + 525) - 0.7(175) = 71. For scenario 2b let's say we get three callers and one has a set (we'll say our 2 outs are good). EV = 0.056(120 + 525) - 0.944(175) = -129.20. For scenario 2c, on a few rare occasions we get the money in really good against three players, say when two players have TT and one has top pair and a bdfd. EV = 0.76(120+525) - 0.24(175) = 448.20. For scenario 2d, we'll say we get one caller with a combo draw and we gii as a slight favorite with $160 of dead money. EV = 0.52(160 + 175) - 0.48(175) = 90.20.
To look at the 4bet scenario you mention (we'll call this scenario 2e), let's say the initial raiser calls with AK, and it goes fold, fold, player behind ships with 99, we call, initial raiser calls. Under that scenario we get $45 dead money in the pot and face 2 villains all in pre. EV = 0.72(45+ 350) - 0.28(175) = 235.40.
So looking at the above, we would need to be able to definitively say how often we think each of the scenarios would take place in order to weight everything together and say whether COA1 is superior to COA2.
My gut feeling is that 1b takes place more often than 1a, making the EV for COA1 a bit higher than $120. I also think we'll see 2a and 2d happen more often than 2b, 2c, and 2e. And of course there are far more possible scenarios that may occur than the ones I outlined. But based on the quick math I've done I like COA1 more than COA2.
Last edited by Axel Foley; 05-17-2017 at 03:11 PM.