You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Comments
The one thing I continue to question is, as rancid says, whether the villain is capable of folding the turn to our check-raise and how often we need him to do that to make it better than calling to see the river. He has actually offered us 25% on our call and we're between 20% and 25% against most of his range. We can call profitably if we only average getting a small amount more on the river.
But yeah, we can't worry about running into the top of the villain's range when we decide to check-raise the turn, unless we have reason to believe that the villain's play weights him towards monsters. We'd need reads for that.
If villain shoves the turn and we fold, we do give up our 20% equity in the hand. So when he has AA, etc, we've made a -EV play. However, when he has Ax or something, we turn our 20% equity into 100% equity by making him fold. So that's a very +EV play.
Without knowing his hand, we can't say that it's bad because he could force us to fold with a 3-bet. It's only bad if he 3-bets light sometimes or doesn't fold his weaker Ax hands. Against his entire range, it's probably a good play to check-raise.
The fact that he only clicked back the turn (or near enough) and called the spade river is actually a sign that we've done a good job of representing a set on the turn and not a draw.
IMO if we aren't taking the aggressive line on the flop (which is OK) we should continue to be passive on the turn when our equity drops, especially when we can only represent a really narrow range on the turn when we raise... and we have no idea if villain is capable of folding what looks like at least top pair after a 3 bet pre and 2 barrels on an A high flop.
Folding our equity in holdem is not often a very big mistake because we win a lot when we get opponent to fold their equity. In omaha it's much more of a concern when we are forced to fold our equity when we could have took a more passive approach to realise our equity.
Generally speaking, this line looks more marginal to me than strong. That's not a specific read but we don't have specific reads up to this point and that's what I think is more likely in a vacuum against randomers.
We don't want to be check-raising into a station, obviously.
I think semi bluffing with more equity is far better than having less equity
pot equity + fold equity = total equity
yo!
AKs, AQs could easily be in villains range given the action. I'm less inclined to shovel the money in when we dont have the nut draw also. We can convince ourselves its a cooler but i don't think we can justify it when its of our own making chasing a draw with potentially dirty outs and playing it like the nuts.
We don't like getting it in on the turn just drawing to three outs, but we don't like check-calling to the river and just check-folding when we miss, either. Check-calling down and giving up when we miss will cost us more than trying to win the pot with a semi-bluff in the long run.
Highly dependant on range assignment, ie. villian could pick up more pot equity on turn
or our fold equity may just remain the same verus some villians
maybe we should all go and c/r 100% of dry turn's and report our findings
We rep so much stronger a range by taking a non-standard drawing line.
Not that bit about check-raising all dry turns, though. I'm not going to do that.
Of course it depends on villain's range but we do have to make some assumptions on that. Which assumptions we make depends on our experiences of general players in these types of situations, until we have specific reads.
So summary:
Erm.
You won the hand.... wp.
Wait for it...
Well here's a little something that you may or may not have known but 'Turn Equity' can increase 'Fold Equity' more than 'Flop Equity' due to it having an extra 0.05% more Equity than the pot equity. Usually 45% Equity will get a bluff through.
Being serious, I think the flop and turn play was fine.
Equity is basically how much of the pot we "own". In other words, if we think we are 40% to win against our opponent's range, then 40% of the pot is "ours".
Equity has become shorthand for the strength of our hand, however we can also exercise some 'fold equity'.
That fold equity is what we call the value of being the player to make the bet, rather than the player making the call. So if we somehow know that our opponent is holding a pocket pair below QQ (not-inclusive) and we have AK:
If we shove and can make our opponent fold all his pairs below 77, we actually can cut in half our opponent's equity in the hand. So he folds half of his pairs and when he does call we've got a roughly 50/50 chance. Now our total equity is 75%, even though our opponents hands are all 50% to win if he calls.
Generally speaking though, when people talk about equity in this forum, they're talking about the value of our hand if it gets to showdown.
Lovely explanation of equity.
@IDONK So my thread is a record then? Lot's of equity talk in that as well