Folded middle set? "idiot" |
|
Posted Thu Nov 24, 2005 9:38 am GMT by Xamzax
I have read and re-read harrington on hold em vol I and II enough by now... fine books, both. But one thing sort of haunts me from his writings.
I'll paraphrase here
Whenever someone brags about how he came to the conclusion that he needed to fold his middle set, harrington quietly says to himself "idiot". He also makes the assumption that If your set of sevens is up against a set of eights, you were always supposed to lose all your money. Where is the cut off point for making a read that you are beat and having to pay it off regardless?
Here's an example. You have the As, Qs and the board reads: 4s, 5s, 6s. There are three people in the hand with you and the big blind immediately bets out. You raise him and he re-raises you once more, putting a chunk that will pot commit you on the turn. Sadly, this was an unraised pot before the flop and he could have anything.. including a 7s, 8s.
Do you.. could you.. fold?
There's no way I'd fold here. For the most part, if I did fold here, I'd be folding only to the str flush that would come so rarely that I'd have nothing but negative expectation by doing so... even if I was correct that ONE time, it's only once out of a bunchalotta times when you'd be wrong. Most likely scenario is the bb is holding a Kxs.
Here's another scenario: You hold AKs, raise and are re-raised, you call and the flop comes: AKK. You're holding kings full!
You check.
Opponent softly bets 1/3 pot.
You re-raise him.
He modestly reraises you back.
You've shown him your serious and he's putting out soft bets why? Maybe because his hand is only Aces full of kings. I've been to both sides of this hand and I'd pay him off almost every time.. but is that the correct play?
it's by no means an exact science, this poker game of ours. Are we an idiot for folding middle set when we had a logical read of our opponent? Is harrington right or wrong?
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Thu Nov 24, 2005 9:49 am GMT by tame_deuces
He is right.
The point is simple, alot of NL players go around thinking about what they can lose in a hand while they are in fact holding a hand that is ahead more than 50% of the time, iow. it is a winning hand.
Let's take a pretty typical scenario, player A holds a straight but when the third of a suit hits he refuses to bet anything more, checks it down and gives himself a nice pat on the back when he does indeed see that he DID avoid betting into the slowplayed nut flush...weeeeeeeeh....as in weak/tight.
Or player B in the SB is facing an all-in raise from the table maniac who has gone all-in on 3 consecutive rounds and hasn't missed a raise in 4 orbits...he picks up his cards and sees A9s. He prudently folds (hell, the maniac might have AT!...and the BB is behind to act....)...the BB calls with a pair of 7s and loses to the maniac's KK...player B pats himself on the back and will sadly live his poker life without the knowledge that he is a tight/passive nutpeddler.
You got to get your chips into the middle with hands that are likely to be best, anything else is losing poker.
Posted Thu Nov 24, 2005 9:58 am GMT by Muck
I think the simplest example is KK vs AA pre-flop.
E.g. You raise 4xBB with KK under the gun. Guy raises back all-in, say 20xBB. You know you could be behind to AA, so do you fold? No, it’s almost never optimal to fold KK. You call and if you lose so be it.
Sometimes you just have to play the odds and remember that occasionally you’ll bust. That’s why bankroll management is important. If you’re playing in a game where you can’t afford to bust your playing at limits that are too high and stopping you from taking the risks you must to maximise your profit.
Posted Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:50 pm GMT by snoogins47
| Xamzax wrote: |
Whenever someone brags about how he came to the conclusion that he needed to fold his middle set, harrington quietly says to himself "idiot". He also makes the assumption that If your set of sevens is up against a set of eights, you were always supposed to lose all your money. Where is the cut off point for making a read that you are beat and having to pay it off regardless? |
When the read is a LOT of possibilities, all that beat you, and the pot is small enough to risk being wrong.
| Quote: | | it's by no means an exact science, this poker game of ours. Are we an idiot for folding middle set when we had a logical read of our opponent? Is harrington right or wrong? |
Usually, yes.
| Quote: | | You've shown him your serious and he's putting out soft bets why? Maybe because his hand is only Aces full of kings. I've been to both sides of this hand and I'd pay him off almost every time.. but is that the correct play? |
If the ONLY hand he could have is AA, then no, paying him off is silly. The part where this breaks down is that there are a number of hands he COULD have, that you beat, that aren't AA. If he'd raise with AA, or with Any K, AA is a overwhelming underdog, just based on the combinatorics. It doesn't break down that neatly, and his range is not quite this wide, usually...but for instance, if we assume our villain must hold AA, AK, or will SOMETIMES do this with KQ (not even ANY other kings, just KQ) and we'll even go farther... in the sim, we'll say it's only when he has KQs (basically, meaning that KQ has only 25% of its normal chances of appearing here) and our AK is still a FAVORITE, with just shy of 51.1% equity.
Tame is on the right track. Something people never seem to remember is that, with the exception of weirdness with the blinds:
In a heads up pot, we NEVER have to be an odds-on favorite in order to be winning more than our share
|
|
