Joy of joys ... (luck or what?) |
|
Posted Thu Sep 02, 2004 7:34 am GMT by red_pen
The following is a summary of the hand I played a few night ago. I could have posted it under bluffing or hand analysis, but i think it's more related to odds and probabilities.
Texas Hold'em Limit (3/6) ring game.
Seat 1: A - Button (played 70% of flops to date)
Seat 2: B (played 25% of flops to date)
Seat 3: hero
Seat 4: C (played 10% of flops to date)
Seat 5: D (played 20% of flops to date, never raises)
Seat 6: E (played 30% of flops to date, raises by the book)
Seat 7: F (played 80% of flops to date, raises only the nuts)
Seat 8: G (played 30% of flops to date)
Seat 9: empty
Seat 10: empty
C: raises 6
D: calls 6
E: calls 6
F: calls 6
G: folds
A: calls 6
B: folds
hero: calls 3
  
hero: checks
C: bets 3
D: calls 3
E: calls 3
F: calls 3
A: folds
hero: calls 3
hero: checks
C: bets 6
D: folds
E: calls 6
F: calls 6
hero: raises 12
C: calls 6
E: folds
F: calls 6
hero: bets 6
C: calls 6
F: folds
I won't show you my cards until I explain some things.
Most of the table had been playing fairly tight, except F & A who were running with everything half-decent that was dealt to them. They didn't play complete rubbish, but psuedo-high cards, K-x, Q-x, any 2 suited, and off-suited high-ish one-gaps were fair game. It helped that F had hit two gunshot str8s early on and thought his strategy therefore sound.
When the betting got round to me before the flop I was putting C on 2 high cards.(AA, KK, AK, QQ, JJ). He might be playing AQs but I ruled out anything less than this as i was sure he would not have raised. As D & E had called a raise and had been playing v tight, i assumed they had high cards too. F & A also called. So i concluded that there were a lot of high cards out.
Now if there were a lot of high cards out, the low cards were still in the deck. I was already in as the BB, so i called with 85o (yeah, I know). I figured that my odds at the time were about the same as the pot-odds, and I had the additional benefit of a completely hidden hand.
Does anyone agree that on a tight table with plenty of tight callers, playing rubbish (on occasion) isn't as stupid as it might first appear?
Or do you think i was just plain lucky?
btw this hand cracked the table, freaked everyone out, and won me the evening. Mr C particularly was not very impressed.
it is my favourite poker moment to date.
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 Mon Sep 06, 2004 8:25 am GMT by wEbMaStEr
i would say it's "what"
Posted Tue Sep 07, 2004 10:31 pm GMT by birnard
| Quote: | Seat 1: A - Button (played 70% of flops to date)
Seat 2: B (played 25% of flops to date)
Seat 3: hero
Seat 4: C (played 10% of flops to date)
Seat 5: D (played 20% of flops to date, never raises)
Seat 6: E (played 30% of flops to date, raises by the book)
Seat 7: F (played 80% of flops to date, raises only the nuts)
Seat 8: G (played 30% of flops to date) |
i was just wondering where you got these precise numbers. Just your way of guessing? Program keeping track?
Other than that I'd say playing a weak hand sometimes when getting good pot odds is fine by my book, but putting a few players on overpairs and high cards and then saying there should be more low cards left seems like a pretty weak assumption.
This being the pot odds section lets say you have 5outs on the flop with 47 unseen cards (putting at least one person on an overpair).
there is 36$ plus the small blind (1 or 2?) in preflop and 12 more before your call on the flop. So thats 5 to 42 to get a card on the turn and 3 to 49or50 for the bet if I am correct. So that call was ok assuming no one has a set or 2pair already (as you read them to not have but that J is a little scary for a set).
Posted Thu Sep 30, 2004 10:51 am GMT by red_pen
I keep track using a pen and paper. I don't treat the numbers as completely accurate and all revealing (hence they're rounded to the nearest 10%), but i find them useful when it comes to getting a handle on the player types quickly - also they help me identify whom i should be watching the most. (i'd be a waste of space in a live game).
Tho' i've read about the programs you can buy on various websites, i am loathe to part with the money. Does anyone have any experience of them ?
As for the original post, i am now thinking that i've been a bit stupid (not for the first time), and very lucky. the assumption is indeed a poor one. there may be a case to argue that three or four tight players in the same pot might hold each others cards, reducing their chances of improvement, but with 85o you need a helluva lot of "improvement" before you have a sniff of a chance in the showdown.
thanks for your response - the post was hardly worthy of it
|
|
