A concise list of 2+2 theorems - Page 3 - Micro Stakes Pot Limit and No Limit

Two Plus Two Forums Poker Strategy Online No-Limit Hold’em Cash

A concise list of 2+2 theorems

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 3 of 4

1 2 3 4

Page 3 of 4

1 2 3 4

09-16-2009 , 03:53 PM

#51

Fly-fisher

grinder

Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 471

Quote:

Originally Posted by juguerra

This is so true.

Quote

09-16-2009 , 04:06 PM

#52

pokerarb

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 6,185

The aquarium has the "please, do not feed the fish" sign.

I propose that all micro players hang above their PC:

"Please, do not bluff the fish".

Quote

09-16-2009 , 04:44 PM

#53

jack4you

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 668

I have the River monster theorem.

At least in micro stakes, when someone raises all in on the river or puts a rediculouly large overbet in on the river, if they are not a maniac, they usually have the nuts or the second nuts, in some cases they have 3rd nuts.

I don't believe calling here is profitable with the 3rd nuts, I'm not even sure if calling with the 2nd nuts is profitable but if you have a full house but there are 5 other full houses or quads that can beat you, I would suggest breaking Zeebo's Theorem.

Quote

09-16-2009 , 05:24 PM

#54

DDAWD

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 6,879

Quote:

Originally Posted by jack4you

Make an exception for flushes. As long as the board doesn't contain four to a flush, micro players usually consider any flush the nuts. Not sure if this applies when the board is paired.

Quote

09-16-2009 , 07:38 PM

#55

jack4you

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 668

Quote:

Originally Posted by DDAWD

Make an exception for flushes. As long as the board doesn't contain four to a flush, micro players usually consider any flush the nuts. Not sure if this applies when the board is paired.

In my experience, more times then not if they are shoving on the river on a paired board they have a full house.

I don't think it's profitable in the long run to call an all in with a flush on a paired board, not in my experience so far.

Quote

09-23-2009 , 09:37 AM

#56

Dunky boy

centurion

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 132

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cry Me A River

Damn this forum is full of alkys!

I can shtop anytime! Hic

Quote

09-23-2009 , 02:43 PM

#57

pierrot_lune

journeyman

Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 388

thanks, it will help.

Quote

12-10-2009 , 07:00 PM

#58

kataruni ochiru

journeyman

Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 223

Nice post. Would like to see some more confirmed theorems added to the original post!

Quote

12-12-2009 , 03:06 AM

#59

JacknCoke56

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,321

Could this qualify as a sticky?

Quote

01-27-2010 , 04:14 AM

#60

Zilionara

stranger

Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 11

nice definitely useful info

Quote

01-28-2010 , 08:57 AM

#61

JBzh

newbie

Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 22

can someone explain to me what "a sarcastic excuse for spew" means please ? (it the Reliability part of the Yeti Theorem)

Quote

03-25-2010 , 01:23 AM

#62

DSREK7

newbie

Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 36

I'm going to have to disagree on Zeebo's Theroem: No one's ever folded a full house. If the board has 2 kings and 2 queens and you have a queen, you're not going to fold that?

Quote

03-25-2010 , 02:35 AM

#63

SemiSimple

grinder

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 471

I think the theorem is talking about spots where board is low and has something like 555K on it and you have quads. Then you should bet to your hearts content because no one will fold a K.

Quote

03-25-2010 , 02:50 AM

#64

theboot

old hand

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 1,927

thanks to threads like these more ppl are doing the exact opposite.

Quote

03-25-2010 , 02:55 AM

#65

Zeth

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 6,763

Quote:

Originally Posted by DSREK7

I'm going to have to disagree on Zeebo's Theroem: No one's ever folded a full house. If the board has 2 kings and 2 queens and you have a queen, you're not going to fold that?

You might, but randoms won't.

Quote

07-14-2010 , 02:19 AM

#66

ADHDeezNUTZ

grinder

Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 502

I kinda agree that is a spot where even some randoms will fold. but if zeebo's theorem is premised in low stakes than for sure not folding. easily anyone higher could conceivably lay down a queen on KKQQx board.

Quote

01-10-2011 , 02:49 AM

#67

hetero_flush

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 428

bump for new contributions

Quote

01-10-2011 , 02:54 AM

#68

TJ Eckleburg12

Only Gives Out Winners

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 15,116

The Jack-Ten Theorem

Regardless of positions,

Any time JT makes the nuts,

someone has it.

Quote

01-10-2011 , 06:21 AM

#69

stry67

veteran

Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 2,542

Quote:

Originally Posted by TJ Eckleburg12

The Jack-Ten Theorem

Regardless of positions,

Any time JT makes the nuts,

someone has it.

+1000

Annnnnnnd the AK theorem. When ya flop top 2 pair with AK, someone has the bottom set, every ....single.....frackn.....time.

Quote

01-10-2011 , 09:03 AM

#70

Cangurino

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 13,476

Courtesy of gadolparah:

The Three-Button Theorem: With the nuts on the river it is most profitable to bet slightly less than all-in.

Proof: When you set your opponent all-in he has two options, call and fold. Hence he will call 50% of the time, and fold 50% of the time. When you bet slightly less, he has the additional option to raise. Hence the likelihood of a fold is reduced to one third. Thus, all the money (or almost all of it) goes in two thirds of the time, and we increase our expected winnings by one sixth of our river bet. Q.e.d.

Quote

01-10-2011 , 09:06 AM

#71

porh

journeyman

Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 233

^^ LOL i need to try that

Quote

01-10-2011 , 09:09 AM

#72

PokerRon247

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 11,192

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cangurino

I'm sure that's actually worked for me a few times. I think the fish sometimes just go "FU I'm all-in" without actually realising they have zero fold equity for their last $1.50 in a $98 pot.

Quote

01-10-2011 , 12:12 PM

#73

SammyG-SD

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 12,600

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cangurino

I really think this is 100% accurate.

Quote

01-10-2011 , 12:43 PM

#74

mtagliaf

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 5,649

Quote:

Originally Posted by TJ Eckleburg12

The Jack-Ten Theorem

Regardless of positions,

Any time JT makes the nuts,

someone has it.

this is good, mine was similar but a bit more general purpose.

the taglius theorem:

If you're wondering if someone has a jack in a multi-way pot, the answer is yes. Someone always has a jack.