it's true that for advanced strategy, you shouldn't look at decisions in a vacuum, but your approach here is way way off. c-bets are profitable whenever they were profitable. if a c-bet is only marginally profitable in a given situation, it may still be the most profitable alternative. you have already lost the money that you put in earlier.

Bluemage - do you coach? teach me plz

I don't much appreciate the repeated, contentless peanut gallery comments from you in response to my posts. If I'm not mistaken, harassing others is against the 2+2 terms and conditions.

I did state that c-bets are also profitable because they reduce the money you lose by just giving up on the flop.

The article goes into depth on the subject, but the point I'm making is that considering the sunk cost of the posted blind is problematic for analyzing the EV of a complete strategy.

Bluemage - You are so wrong in your math in this thread but you can't see it. A winning player at the higher end of the stakes is trying to give you advice but you just blank it and waffle on about your somewhat genious math/theory.

I know giving opinions and having a discussion is a good thing in general, but in this case, you're wrong. Just accept it, and understand why you are wrong, and then improve your game.

That article sucks.

I would also like coaching from you. You seem like a poker genius. Please keep posting.

Disagreeing is not the same as ignoring advice. Also, can you spot the fallacy?

And regardless of whether I am wrong or right, the fact that you haven't given any reasoned explanation as to why I might be wrong makes your post pointless.

I don't suppose it's too much to ask people to actually back up their assertions with some kind of logical argument?

Oh look, yet another moronic post. I could have sworn I wasn't posting in the LC thread.

OMFG - You've already been proved wrong, do you want me to quote and show why your wrong? do you need to be told the same thing 5x? People have gave reasons to why your wrong, i don't need to keep giving the same advice. LDO

On second thoughts, forget the coaching, i'll find someone else who's better value for money.

LOL

I'll try and explain. (Though i could be wrong myself so appologies if I am).

POsting your blind is an unprofitable bet! Thats why its forced.

Once it's in the pot it is no longer yours and is why you dont get it back when you fold.

therefore, when you make calculations regarding a play, such as a 3bet, you dont consider it as a loss. Becasue you have already lost it to the unprofitable bet that is the blind post.


So once its in the pot you have to make profitable plays to win it back. this means that you consider it in the $$won but not in the $lost.

Hope this makes sense (and is corrct)


Also, great posts from both OP and Pimo's explinations. Will begin to read again now im at the end to try to fully undertsand! ty

LOL, for such a great and high quality OP, this thread is beginning to go south really fast, and it happened somewhere around when bluemage began posting.

It's too much to ask from me. I post for the fun of it, and don't feel like wasting my time picking apart every detail of some random wannabe poker author's hopelessly amateurish reasoning.

I'm not sure if you're reading the same thread, because it's readily apparent this thread went south around when you, all or nothing, and pete starting making LC posts in a theory thread.

If the overall strategy of "raising preflop and then c-betting" is unprofitable, but c-betting is profitable, then that clearly shows that raising preflop was the mistake in the hand. The entire series of events that occurs after that has a negative expectation relative to folding. However, given that you've raised preflop, the cost of the mistake has already been incurred. You should put it behind you and try to play as profitably as you can from that point on.

For a non-poker example: suppose I offer you the following wagers. I flip a coin, if it comes up heads I give you $6, if it comes up tails you give me $9. Additionally, if it comes up tails I will then offer you a second wager: I flip a coin, if it comes up heads I give you $9, if it comes up tails you give me $6.

The expected value of the overall game assuming you take the second flip is:

0.5 x $6 + 0.5 x -$9 + 0.25 x $9 + 0.25 -$6

or -$0.75. Yet the EV of playing the second game is $1.50. Clearly, you shouldn't play at all if you like money. But if for whatever reason you do, it always makes sense to play the second game.

Now in the case of posting your blind, it is a "mistake" that you have no control over. Sure, you will lose money by making a 0 EV shove. But you didn't lose it by shoving, you lost it by posting the blind, so it shouldn't change any decisions. Luckily, both players are required to make the -EV play of posting blinds.

LC = Low content obv, which you are right, i had nothing intelligent to add because i thought that the other posters had pretty well summed it up... So there was no need for me to add...

^^^^^^^^What i have quoted is a collection of the rubbish that you have posted which is certainly not good strategy advice, nor is it LC. It's just garbage... Primo/Nichelm/Insane_steve and all of the posters in this forum who are doing a great job (and are extremely successful), you should learn from... Not try to write your own freaking strategy guide on how to fling poo.

My posts are obviously not meant as "strategy advice", if you lack the intelligence to figure it out. They are responses to a discussion, and I am entitled the right to be wrong.

Your posts, on the other hand, are simply LC trash that violate the terms and conditions of 2+2. If you disagree with what I have stated, then feel free to advance your own arguments and point out how and why I am wrong. Otherwise, GTFO so that I can continue to engage in discussion with those great posters and try to learn something.

This makes a lot of sense. Thank you for explaining.


However, I'm still somewhat confused about this line of reasoning. In your theory thread, you asserted that "Every decision you make in a SNG should be evaluated on its effect on your hourly expectation."

In this case, is the decision to 3bet with A6o or better as part of a complete strategy really increase your hourly expectation? I'm finding it difficult to comprehend why folding those BBs 77% of the time is considered to have no effect on your profit, which is what is implied by the concept that the BB is a sunk cost already.

Basically I made my calculations to consider the hourly expectation (of BBs), not the independent EV of the decision to shove. Should you still disregard the sunk cost under these circumstances?

Do you feel your right are being violated? That i'm not sticking to the "terms and conditions"???

I would like to exercise my right to protect the eyes of those around me that i have great respect for. This would include attempting to stop you from continually being a pest when something has been stated to you several times. I'm pretty sure that you were answered and that the discussion was relatively clear cut. So why should i have to point out why you are wrong when Primo among others have pointed it out to you 45 million times.

You are certainly entitled to be wrong, and you have done that, so you need to get over it and move on. Perhaps try to take on board what has been said and implement it in your game.

Im just trying to help you out is all...

Im now going to read the terms and conditions of twoplustwo once more so that i can sleep tonight.

PS: who are you, are you a gimmick account leveling us all?

Posting harassing content is against those terms and conditions. Your posts certainly serve no purpose beyond this.

I really could care less, as your failings are really an issue for mods to consider, but your posts are simply distracting from the purpose of this thread, which is to discuss the effectiveness of 3bet shoving, not to flame people you disagree with.

How the **** am i harrassing you? And im not flaming you, i told you i was trying to help you...

My intentions are good, i come in peace. I just want you to listen and stfu.

And you didn't answer my question about who you are?

I don't know about you, but sarcastically asking for coaching is not a form of help where I'm from. Neither is suggesting to someone to write a strategy guide on how to fling poo. Nor is falsely accusing someone of derailing a thread when you yourself participated in that process.

As far as I can tell your intentions have never been good; you showed up guns blazing.

If you hadn't noticed, I have from the outset been very interested in listening, as I have asked time and again for better explanations and clarification that has the weight of logic behind them, rather than "STFU YOU'RE WRONG, ROFL!!!"

I assumed this was nothing more than yet another rhetorical jab. To answer your question, I'm not a gimmick account. I'm a winning low stakes HUSNG player trying to learn more and slowly move up. This is my first and only 2+2 account.

I wasn't 'sarcastically' asking for coaching. I was just seeing if you were interested, seen as though you seemed so sure you were smarter than Primo and he is the best HUSNG coach around. I confess, i did correctly judge that you were trying to write a 'poo flinging strategy article'...

And i have read right through this thread, and in fact i think the OP in particular is very well written. In fact i have asked Steve for permission to use this post in my upcoming video for the training site i work for... If i ever do a video on poo flinging i would really like you to be involved.

I am done with this, i need to sleep and your hurting my head. I really do apologise if i have violate the terms and conditions and i hope Chry or one of the other mods doesnt ban me, because god forbid i miss out on listening to you.

PS: Congrats on your 100th post, you bought it up in style, holla!!!!

this is correct.


bluemage, before you call me out and say what im doing is wrong, this is a known formula, plz refer to posts from any great player and you'll prolly see very similar ones, you have no control over your BB, it's in the pot, therefore if your the BB and the button limps and you raise to 3x, you are RISKING 2BB to win 2 BB, NOTTTTTT risking 3 BB to win 1 BB. Please go read some posts from JMan or any other amazing 2p2 poster and you'll find calculations very similar to these.




Fabrizio, I don't want to say your wrong, cause you seem like you've put a solid amount of thought / research into i t, and im not really sure what stakes you play, vs a bad player, calling a hand w/ SD value like A6o / K2s / etc. OOP is not going to be a big mistake, because they will almost ALWAYS shut down and you will get to SD value a large % of the time after a cbet, which isnt even 100% of the time, HOWEVER, vs a good player, I think playing hands like this <25bb OOP is going to get you in ALOT of trouble, because, as I said, they do NOT play post, and player will be firing solid, accurate barrels, especially if you are calling fairly wide (as this seems to advocate) and therefore being forced to float alot of flops. They will also start vbetting SUPER light (as they should) and I think you'll end up being much more -EV than you would expect in these situations. Obv if you are playing a mediocre player who you happen to be a level above, you can overcome this by great OOP play in these pots, but vs a player of equal or similar skill, you will never be able to overcome that edge

You shouldn't be folding your BB 77% of the time, that was the point of this thread, if you read through and actually do some of the math out in the given equations or look at the examples insane_steve present, you can reshove close to 100% of your hands given the parameters of the opponents we have been given, so no, you should NOT be folding 100% of your hand. Just cause you can reshove 100% profitably does it mean you shouldn't mix in flats / smaller 3bets, no, of course not, just like with any other part of poker, it becomes a meta / leveling-war, but it IS profitable, and the equations that were given ARE correct.






edit: also wtf, this thread was so solid , I vote ChiRy to come back and delete the last 2 pages of all of our posts =/, it was better before

*sigh*

In my OP, I'm calling the EV of folding -50, not 0. So actually any shove resulting in a cEV of more than -50 is better than folding. So you can probably shove even wider than my OP suggests. I think I wrote it like this to present the most profitable scenarios to show just how awesome shoving at these stacks is against someone who raises a lot of buttons.