another 1/2 lhe hand

[JaysonWeber 0]

Poker is a Zero Sum Game.This means if someone wins... Someone...*Hint* Answer to this Questions is Loses.

[akishore 0]

Poker is a Zero Sum Game.This means if someone wins... Someone...*Hint* Answer to this Questions is Loses.

well, not to be picky, but it's not a zero sum game with rake. the average player loses because of rake. so, it's possible for both players to lose.that's another thing, rake. significant rake makes defending even less attractive.finally, i don't understand what this vague statement has to do with the issue, or at least to support your side.aseem

[akishore 0]

you're so wrong its not even funny.

just wondering, what are your standards for defending here?UTG raises, the whole nine-handed (or ten-handed or eight-handed) table folds to you in the big blind.aseem

[JaysonWeber 0]

You have to defend your blinds w/ a hand that's strong enough too.... I will happily invite you to play at my table It's 4 handed right now so there's 6 seats open you can have one of them, preferably two to my left.Defend Blinds, It's different than just calling this cold.

[akishore 0]

You have to defend your blinds w/ a hand that's strong enough too....

thanks jay, that changes everything. i'll start doing that now. you donkey! of course we're defending with hands that are "strong enough" to defend with. we're arguing whether A-4 suited is strong enough to! aseem

[dimseven 0]

you're so wrong its not even funny.

Your preflop call would make more sense if this was NL.

[akishore 0]

oh man, i can't believe it boils down this to.let's put UTG on a range of hands he raises from EP.assuming an average player:AA-88, AK-A9, KQ-KTi purposely made it looser to make a point. if he's tighter, it might be just:AA-TT, AK-AJ, KQeven if he's pretty damn loose, it might be:AA-66. AK-A6, KQ-K8do you see how unfavorably our A-4 compares to the range of hands?aseem

[wrto4556 0]

im calling any suited connector, any Ax suited, any pair, and suited broadway, AK-AT, KQ and others depending on the limits and reads.

[akishore 0]

you're so wrong its not even funny.

Your preflop call would make more sense if this was NL.

i so heavily disagree if we're talking about typical online games where both players usually have around 100 big blinds.huge reverse implied odds here, much more so than in limit.it's even more of a fold in NL than it is in limit (unless the stacks are short, around 20 - 30 big blinds).aseem

[holman3rd 0]

Interestig conclusion from these numbers - you must defend against steal raises HU your BB with any trash suited, and with any trash offsuited and not connected if you think that you have at least 1 card higher than raiser for a rough estimate - 35-45% of time. Against aggressive stealer you must defend with any two and it will be better than folding and loosing -0.5BB instantly.

this is wrong.folding doesn't lose you -0.5 BB instantly, it loses you 0 BB.if you want to include the big blind as money you voluntarily put in, then subtract 0.5 BB from every number in his simulations. that makes defending with 27s against AK -0.87 BB, which is lower than folding for "-0.5 BB" according to him.folding always has 0 EV. defending with 27s against AK here has -0.37 BB EV. clearly, folding is better.aseem

Everyone else please remember that UTG raised here, so this was not a blind steal attempt.That said, calling A4s here headsup is bad. Either fold it or raise it. I prefer to fold it. As has already been clearly explained here, the implied odds are very bad, plus you're quite possibly either dominated here or up against a big pair (absent any read on UTG, of course).The point is that you're likely to either win a small pot or lose a big one.Now, if this were a blind steal attempt (e.g., an open raise from the button), then the ideal play is to re-raise, not flat call. Wait a minute. This is a limit game, right? My comments assume that. NL I can see the cold call given the higher implied odds.

[akishore 0]

im calling any suited connector, any Ax suited, any pair, and suited broadway, AK-AT, KQ and others depending on the limits and reads.

you're folding A-9 offsuit but defending with A-2 suited?can you explain that?(this is heads-up, right? after UTG raised and everyone folded to you in a ring game.)aseem

[dimseven 0]

you're so wrong its not even funny.

Your preflop call would make more sense if this was NL.

i so heavily disagree if we're talking about typical online games where both players usually have around 100 big blinds.huge reverse implied odds here, much more so than in limit.it's even more of a fold in NL than it is in limit (unless the stacks are short, around 20 - 30 big blinds).aseem

I meant if You happen to make a flush with implied odds, and still have the discipline to fold on the flop if You don't, meaning too that You think You're beat if an A is on board and fold.

[JaysonWeber 0]

You have to defend your blinds w/ a hand that's strong enough too....

thanks jay, that changes everything. i'll start doing that now. you donkey! of course we're defending with hands that are "strong enough" to defend with. we're arguing whether A-4 suited is strong enough to! aseem

Im arguing that it is. I would have auto folded it 2 months ago, but I'm confident enough that I can outplay this guy, I'm giving him credit for a decent hand, want too put him on a range?I just dont give him credit for a PREMIUM hand, It's 2/4...

[holman3rd 0]

you're so wrong its not even funny.

Your preflop call would make more sense if this was NL.

i so heavily disagree if we're talking about typical online games where both players usually have around 100 big blinds.huge reverse implied odds here, much more so than in limit.it's even more of a fold in NL than it is in limit (unless the stacks are short, around 20 - 30 big blinds).aseem

Aseem--I disagree re: implied odds in NL. Typically in a heads up situation, hitting a flush isn't as obvious to a preflop raiser as it would be if he were in the pot with a few more opponents. The point is, if he has a made hand (but not a flush), you're likely able to milk some $$ out of him as he won't necessarily put you on a flush (since it's head up).In my experience, opponents in heads up situations far too often try to represent big hands and bluff at coordinated boards.I have no math whatsoever to back this up, just my experience (which is probably less than yours).Still, I would be interested in hearing more on your belief that reverse implied odds are huge here.

[wrto4556 0]

the win percent is the same, but implied odds are better.The only reason im not calling with Peter Russ' hands is because this isnt a steal raise so our hand has to be a tad bit stronger. Axs is strong enough. it doesnt even seem close to me.

[holman3rd 0]

You have to defend your blinds w/ a hand that's strong enough too....

thanks jay, that changes everything. i'll start doing that now. you donkey! of course we're defending with hands that are "strong enough" to defend with. we're arguing whether A-4 suited is strong enough to! aseem

Im arguing that it is. I would have auto folded it 2 months ago, but I'm confident enough that I can outplay this guy, I'm giving him credit for a decent hand, want too put him on a range?I just dont give him credit for a PREMIUM hand, It's 2/4...

If that's true, and I think that's a reasonable assumption, then re-raising to take control of the hand is the better play IMO.You'll be out of position against a preflop raiser...not exactly an ideal situation. If he's weak, put him on the defensive by popping him. He's likely to put you on a much stronger hand than A4s. Then again, if he's a fish, none of this matters at all, just fold.As for defending the blind, how's this even relevant from a non-steal raise from UTG?Defending is done when raises come from late position, typically. Reason being if you constantly fold all but your strongest hands, thinking players will raise your blind everytime the action is folded to them, regardless of the cards they hold.

[holman3rd 0]

the win percent is the same, but implied odds are better.The only reason im not calling with Peter Russ' hands is because this isnt a steal raise so our hand has to be a tad bit stronger. Axs is strong enough. it doesnt even seem close to me.

Please comment on your read of UTG. if you're read is that he's a fish, then re-raise (i suppose flat call is ok because implied odds are decent against a fish). If you read him as a rock or a good player, then a call here is bad, imo.

[akishore 0]

You have to defend your blinds w/ a hand that's strong enough too....

thanks jay, that changes everything. i'll start doing that now. you donkey! of course we're defending with hands that are "strong enough" to defend with. we're arguing whether A-4 suited is strong enough to! aseem

Im arguing that it is. I would have auto folded it 2 months ago, but I'm confident enough that I can outplay this guy, I'm giving him credit for a decent hand, want too put him on a range?I just dont give him credit for a PREMIUM hand, It's 2/4...

you're arguing that it's a good enough hand to defend with?you haven't argued anything!i've listed so many reasons why it sucks, and instead of actually addressing them, you're telling me to sit in your game.you really haven't said anything more than something to the effect of "defend this. you're not? that's so weak!"and by the way, "outplaying" isn't much of an edge when you're almost always a significant underdog going into the hand and when you have pretty decent reverse implied odds going into the flop. if you can "outplay" him postflop, why aren't you defending here with 7-2 offsuit? do the cards not matter or something?and i DID put him on a range of hands, see above. do you think my range is way off? if it's not, are you still saying A-4 suited compares favorably to those?also add in the fact that your typical 2/4 player is LOOSE. that means you can't "outplay" him by getting super aggressive and hoping he folds a big pair when an overcard flops or something.really, i want to hear your real arguments.aseem

[akishore 0]

Aseem--I disagree re: implied odds in NL. Typically in a heads up situation, hitting a flush isn't as obvious to a preflop raiser as it would be if he were in the pot with a few more opponents. The point is, if he has a made hand (but not a flush), you're likely able to milk some $$ out of him as he won't necessarily put you on a flush (since it's head up).In my experience, opponents in heads up situations far too often try to represent big hands and bluff at coordinated boards.I have no math whatsoever to back this up, just my experience (which is probably less than yours).Still, I would be interested in hearing more on your belief that reverse implied odds are huge here.

yeah, the suitedness makes implied odds go up.however, you're usually playing this hand for pair value. a flush only hits by the river around 1/27th of the time, and that's not what you're really defending for USUALLY.if that's all you're defending for, i hope your opponent is deep-stacked and loose and aggressive enough for it to work. some are, and then defending with this becomes profitable.in most cases, though, you can't play comfortably when an ace flops and when it doesn't. you tend to only get action when you're beat when an ace flops, and that action is significantly more expensive than it is in limit.that's all i'm saying.aseem

[wrto4556 0]

your typical 2/4 player makes hella mistakes postflop.

[akishore 0]

the win percent is the same, but implied odds are better.The only reason im not calling with Peter Russ' hands is because this isnt a steal raise so our hand has to be a tad bit stronger. Axs is strong enough. it doesnt even seem close to me.

are you talking about why you fold A-9 offsuit but defend A-2 suited?the win percents aren't the same at all.if that's not what you were talking about, feel free to correct me.aseem

[akishore 0]

your typical 2/4 player makes hella mistakes postflop.

enough to overcome the huge underdog status you have against an UTG raise?come on now, that's exxagerating your edge just a little.aseem

[dimseven 0]

you're so wrong its not even funny.

Your preflop call would make more sense if this was NL.

i so heavily disagree if we're talking about typical online games where both players usually have around 100 big blinds.huge reverse implied odds here, much more so than in limit.it's even more of a fold in NL than it is in limit (unless the stacks are short, around 20 - 30 big blinds).aseem

Aseem--I disagree re: implied odds in NL. Typically in a heads up situation, hitting a flush isn't as obvious to a preflop raiser as it would be if he were in the pot with a few more opponents. The point is, if he has a made hand (but not a flush), you're likely able to milk some $$ out of him as he won't necessarily put you on a flush (since it's head up).In my experience, opponents in heads up situations far too often try to represent big hands and bluff at coordinated boards.I have no math whatsoever to back this up, just my experience (which is probably less than yours).Still, I would be interested in hearing more on your belief that reverse implied odds are huge here.

It's true that reverse implied odds are huge here if You don't have the discipline to be able to fold this hand with an A up there. True, Your opponent could have a lesser hand (jacks or something) but it's not good to get involved with A-4. What I meant in the first place is what You meant too, if we hit our flush, then we can "milk" our opp. Not just a flush, but if the board comes with 2 4's and we hit trips, or we hit 2 pair with A 4 with no face cards on board to threaten us (opp having a face card as the kicker)

[TheIceman05 0]

I think WRTO and Jayson are arguing from a s/h perspective, the fight for the blinds is significantly more important. This is NOT NOT NOT a steal raise. Repeat: this is not a steal raise. If this bet came from CO or Hijack, I'm going to defend with a very wide range of hands.A few more issues:1) I'm confident WRTO and Jay (whatever) could outplay the raiser post-flop. The OP probably can't, at least not to the degree necessary to make this hand playable. That's like saying "46s in late position is an easy call" because Daniel and Gus can play it profitably. Well, sure they can. They're sick fucks. They can play Uno! card profitably. The same argument goes for WRTO and Jay... this is not a hand that's very easy to play after the flop.2) IF the hand is a call, it's a pretty small decision. Assuming you're 60/40 on average, your share of the pot after you call is 1.6 small bets. So the EV of the preflop call is about +.6 small bets. You really don't think the average player's reverse implied odds in this situation are any less than half a small bet?? That would be mega generous. 3) I still haven't seen a cohesive argument from anyone besides Aseem, Ice, people in my corner.I might be wrong about this... Depending on the player and my image and my reads, I might call here. But I certainly wouldn't suggest to someone that it's "an easy call."Cheers,Ice

[dimseven 0]

in most cases, though, you can't play comfortably when an ace flops and when it doesn't. you tend to only get action when you're beat when an ace flops, and that action is significantly more expensive than it is in limit.that's all i'm saying.aseem

I know what You're getting at. The thing is, good NL players can get away from A-4 when an A flops and there's no flush, 2 pair, or trips. And if not even an ace flops, its even easier.