Nl Hand

[rwood 0]

this may belong in strat but i decided to post it here due to how interesting it is..5/1.00 NL HE full ringhero J 9 :spade:hero has just posted his blind he checks option4 players to a flop ofK Q A :club:it is checked aroundturn T :spade:hero bets pot, button pushes all in for almost 100 moreis it plus +ev in the long run to make this call???the math is pretty simple but it's an interesting hand to think about.i'll post my math after a few people respond...

[timwakefield 68]

this may belong in strat but i decided to post it here due to how interesting it is.

that is unwise

[SuitedAces21 2,722]

is it + ev to call with the nuts? i'm not sure on the math, but I prolly call.

[cdt002 0]

what part of "general poker forum" don't you understand?? This is way too specific for here. We try to deal in only vague references and ambiguous broad topics here.

[XX44466XX 0]

Definitely fold. Fold Aces if someone bets into you pre-flop too.

[rwood 0]

actually there is a good argument you should fold

[hotbacon 0]

I'd call.Folding isn't much of a mistake though. Your'e chopping a lot and can be freerolled.But, it's pretty odd that villain would take this line with the nuts + flush draw.I'd expect to see a retarded bluff sometimes.

[loogie 115]

I bought the ticket for the whole seat, but I only need the edge!

[timwakefield 68]

actually there is a good argument you should fold

agreedIn fact, i think it is probably a fold. I'm not quite math savvy enough to work it out, but even if he has no flush draw and you call and split, you are losing a significant amount to the rake. Add in the chance he has a flush draw as well as the straight and it hits, and it looks like a fold.

[sholden 0]

The worst case is obviously that the opponent has both a J and a flush draw and hence will be freerolling. However, there are two possible flushes out there so he can't know that...But if that's the case then, folding gives has an EV of $0 obviously.There is 112 in the pot and you need to call 100. Assume the rake will be $3... So 80% of the time we win $4.50 and 20% of the time we lose 100, so the call has an EV $-16.40 or so... If he has the spade flush draw is odds a are a little lower since we have a spade.However, cn we really know he has a flush? Maybe he has a set and is retarded.In which case we win $109 70% of the time, we split and win $4.50 7% of the time, and he fills up and we lose $100 23% of the time, so the EV is $53.60.Or he could have the same hand we have with a straight and no flush draw - in which case calling has an EV of $4.50.Or he could be on a stone cold bluff (or a pair), in which case we win $109 93% of the time and split and win $4.50 7% of the time for an EV of $101.60.Then there's two pair - maybe he's a true retard and has AK... We win $109 84% of the time, split and win $4.50 7% of the time and lose $100 9% of the time for a EV of $82.80So the EV is:-16.4 * A + 53.60 * B + 4.5 * C + 82.8 * DAnd thus it all depends on your read on your opponent and hence the values of A, B, C, and D (the probabilities of each case). If it's almost certainly A, then folding is good - but in the $1 can you know that? It's going to be C often enough with opponents who just want the pot now and don't want flush draws sucking out on them... And B and D are non-zero.

[timwakefield 68]

The worst case is obviously that the opponent has both a J and a flush draw and hence will be freerolling. However, there are two possible flushes out there so he can't know that...But if that's the case then, folding gives has an EV of $0 obviously.There is 112 in the pot and you need to call 100. Assume the rake will be $3... So 80% of the time we win $4.50 and 20% of the time we lose 100, so the call has an EV $-16.40 or so... If he has the spade flush draw is odds a are a little lower since we have a spade.However, cn we really know he has a flush? Maybe he has a set and is retarded.In which case we win $109 70% of the time, we split and win $4.50 7% of the time, and he fills up and we lose $100 23% of the time, so the EV is $53.60.Or he could have the same hand we have with a straight and no flush draw - in which case calling has an EV of $4.50.Or he could be on a stone cold bluff (or a pair), in which case we win $109 93% of the time and split and win $4.50 7% of the time for an EV of $101.60.Then there's two pair - maybe he's a true retard and has AK... We win $109 84% of the time, split and win $4.50 7% of the time and lose $100 9% of the time for a EV of $82.80So the EV is:-16.4 * A + 53.60 * B + 4.5 * C + 82.8 * DAnd thus it all depends on your read on your opponent and hence the values of A, B, C, and D (the probabilities of each case). If it's almost certainly A, then folding is good - but in the $1 can you know that? It's going to be C often enough with opponents who just want the pot now and don't want flush draws sucking out on them... And B and D are non-zero.

You left out option E, that your opponent has JUST a flush draw, or option F, that he has a flush draw and one or two pair (option G).

[sholden 0]

You left out option E, that your opponent has JUST a flush draw, or option F, that he has a flush draw and one or two pair (option G).

I had a paragraph saying "or he has... but I can't be bothered doing any more math"... Obviously I shouldn't have deleted it, but I had to answer the phone

[timwakefield 68]

I had a paragraph saying "or he has... but I can't be bothered doing any more math"... Obviously I shouldn't have deleted it, but I had to answer the phone

Yeah I was just being nitpicky. Since you don't actually have time to work out the equation during the hand (and since you are estimating the % chance that he has any specific holding), AND since options E F and G are fairly unlikely, it is somewhat of a moot point.

[rwood 0]

you said that it would be strange for someone to play a straight+flush draw like this?this is a PERFECT way to play this, as most people will call and the person will be freerolling. a player doesnt make this raise with anything but the straight...maybe at .10/.25nl but .5/1.00 players are not mentally retarded....the only plausible option is A or he has a naked straight...i believe this is a clear fold.

[lgdrunks 0]

you said that it would be strange for someone to play a straight+flush draw like this?this is a PERFECT way to play this, as most people will call and the person will be freerolling. a player doesnt make this raise with anything but the straight...maybe at .10/.25nl but .5/1.00 players are not mentally retarded....the only plausible option is A or he has a naked straight...i believe this is a clear fold.

is this a joke?

[Dubey 1,035]

I think he has a straight + a flush draw about 5% of the time.he has a bare jack about 90% of the time, a flush draw with no Jack 2% of the time, and a set or 2-pair about 3-4% of the time. Easy call.

[rwood 0]

bump this now that it's in strat

[hotbacon 0]

Edit: I change my mind. I think it's a fold now too.

[reynaldo124 0]

why would you want to call here... just because you dont want to give up a few dollars and youre +EV everytime this happens (maybe two times a year)? theres two possible flush draws he could be freerolling you with. and yes going all-in with the freeroll (str8 + flush draw) is definitely the right thing to do. anyone with a set or two pair, which looks unlikely with AKQ10 out there and noone raising pre-flop, would just call and hope to catch the full house and bust you.

[nopunk 0]

So we fold the nuts on a draw heavy board?I play mostly LHE, so I appreciate the math of the game, but I can't for the life of me see folding the nuts--not even a draw heavy board.I think he is making a gaybet here more than often enough to offset the times we are being freerolled.

[MasterLJ 0]

You guys are missing the point.He is calling to chop and the board shows 2 possible flush draws on the river along with the nut straight.If 80% of the time he chops and 20% of the time the flush comes on the river for his opponent, then this is NOT a profitable call.Realistically your opponent doesn't always have the flush draw, so let's augment the stats and say that 90% of the time you chop, 5% of the time you win and 5% (retard with a set or whatever) of the time you lose to the flush. Given those stats, you have to call every time.If you came up with a different allocation of that 10% (say 2% to win, 8% to be outdrawn) then it is not profitable to call.EDIT: Let me use some actual numbers here. Going to leave the above post the same whether I'm right or wrong.5 to the flop, pot is $5 (assuming SB completed).Checks around, Hero bets $5 (now Hero has invested $6).Villain pushes for $100 more (let's say Hero has the all-in covered).Total pot before call: $1108 times out of 10 hero wins absolutely nothing (net).2 times out of 10 hero loses $5+$100 = $105.If you fold this every time (let's keep with 10 times) you're in this situation you lose $60.80% to win nothing20% to lose $105 totalThat's pretty -EV.So back to my original point, you have to think you can win this hand more times than you lose to the flush (catch someone bluffing at this, betting their set (you can still lose) etc.). Add in the fact that villain isn't always drawing to the flush... you have 90% to chop, 5% to win, 5% to lose.90% to win nothing5% to win $100 (net)5% to lose $105 ($15 in pot when villain pushes for $100 total, Hero has to call $95 for a total of 210).And if you fold every time you're losing $60 per 10 hands.This is still slightly -EV because you are risking more than you can win because you bet out first.This is actually a very good question.

[sholden 0]

You guys are missing the point.He is calling to chop and the board shows 2 possible flush draws on the river along with the nut straight.If 80% of the time he chops and 20% of the time the flush comes on the river for his opponent, then this is NOT a profitable call.

The rest of us don't have X-Ray vision and hence don't know that he has the straight plus a flush draw.

Realistically your opponent doesn't always have the flush draw, so let's augment the stats and say that 90% of the time you chop, 5% of the time you win and 5% (retard with a set or whatever) of the time you lose to the flush. ,Given those stats, you have to call every time.If you came up with a different allocation of that 10% (say 2% to win, 8% to be outdrawn) then it is not profitable to call.EDIT: Let me use some actual numbers here. Going to leave the above post the same whether I'm right or wrong.5 to the flop, pot is $5 (assuming SB completed).Checks around, Hero bets $5 (now Hero has invested $6).Villain pushes for $100 more (let's say Hero has the all-in covered).Total pot before call: $1108 times out of 10 hero wins absolutely nothing (net).2 times out of 10 hero loses $5+$100 = $105.If you fold this every time (let's keep with 10 times) you're in this situation you lose $60.80% to win nothing20% to lose $105 totalThat's pretty -EV.So back to my original point, you have to think you can win this hand more times than you lose to the flush (catch someone bluffing at this, betting their set (you can still lose) etc.). Add in the fact that villain isn't always drawing to the flush... you have 90% to chop, 5% to win, 5% to lose.90% to win nothing5% to win $100 (net)5% to lose $105 ($15 in pot when villain pushes for $100 total, Hero has to call $95 for a total of 210).And if you fold every time you're losing $60 per 10 hands.This is still slightly -EV because you are risking more than you can win because you bet out first.This is actually a very good question.

The original post also had numbers in it - I used them for in my calculations earlier - which seems a better idea than making some other random numbers up.If you chop you don't win nothing, you win $4.50 - since in the original hand there's $12 in the pot. Assuming a $3 rake your half is $4.50.If it really is 90% to split, 5% to win, 5% to lose it's an easy call..9*4.5 + 0.05*109 + 0.05*-100 = $4.50 EV. Which is certainly no -EV.Even using your strange rake-free numbers we get:.9*7.5 + 0.05*110 + 0.05*-95 = $7.50 EV. You have some funky math if you work out that's -EV.Folding doesn't lose you $6 - that money is already in the pot, it's no longer your's to lose. Folding (as always) is 0 EV. If folding was -EV (some wierd game where you have put something in pot in order to fold) then you'd be calling in places which were -EV but less -ve than folding. Poker isn't like that because the rules aren't retarded.All that matters are the probabilties that your opponent holds:straight + flush drawstraight onlyflush draw onlyset for boat drawtwo pair for boat drawpair or less for a gutshot straight on the board draw...Then you simply multiple each by the relevant EV, add them up and call if it's positive. Those probabilities greatly depend on you opponent and hence there is no answer for the abstract case.I certainly default to calling though.

[MasterLJ 0]

Wow, seems like you are more interested in proving someone wrong than discussing an interesting situation.First, I don't care what anyone says about this matter, poker is about winning more chips than you lose, so if you've invested $6 in a pot and decide to fold (0% chance of winning) you have $6 less than when you started. If you do this 10 times in this situation, you lose $60. Folding is the equivalent of giving all invested money 0% equity, and it must be taken into account when we can see the entire hand in retrospect.Second, no one is talking about x-ray vision you dolt. Look up the defintion of "if" as it pertains to "if the flush comes for your opponent 20% of the time."http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ifThird, no I did not calculate rake because I'm trying to keep the model simple. There is some magic percentage of losing that makes this call not profitable. None of us know this, but we can conjecture. Given your model (let's assume it's correct) with 90% to chop 5% to lose and 5% to win, and assumes we are calling everything, it nets us 0.9*102.5 + 0.05*-106 + 0.05*205 = a return of $97.5 for investing $100. That's not a good return on investment, but it beats folding... barely.p.s. I have NO idea where you are getting 7.5, is that rake?Finally, we agree. The latter part of your post is correct. The odds here are completely dependent on how often the villain has a 10 along with a draw that can beat us. It's easy to see from your math or mine that if you hike up that percentage chance that we get outdrawn, this can quickly become a -EV call. The maximum for this percentage over the long-run is roughly 20% (draw to boat or flush), this would entail that every time you were in this situation you were up against someone with the flush draw and the straight.

[sholden 0]

Wow, seems like you are more interested in proving someone wrong than discussing an interesting situation.First, I don't care what anyone says about this matter, poker is about winning more chips than you lose, so if you've invested $6 in a pot and decide to fold (0% chance of winning) you have $6 less than when you started. If you do this 10 times in this situation, you lose $60. Folding is the equivalent of giving all invested money 0% equity, and it must be taken into account when we can see the entire hand in retrospect.

I gave what I considered a reasonable discussion post at the beginning, which you contradicted with some really stange math.Your simply wrong, but feel free to count things that way - you'll make the wrong decisions and everyone else gets more money, which is clearly find with me since I'm part of "everyone else".

Second, no one is talking about x-ray vision you dolt. Look up the defintion of "if" as it pertains to "if the flush comes for your opponent 20% of the time."http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=if

The only way the flush can come for your opponent 20% of the time, is if your opponent has two suited cards of the appropriate suit. Everyone else doesn't have X-ray vision and hence (in a case like this hand - in which there are plenty of possible holdings for the opponent that don't involve a flush draw) can't use 20% as the win percentage for the opponet.

Third, no I did not calculate rake because I'm trying to keep the model simple. There is some magic percentage of losing that makes this call not profitable. None of us know this, but we can conjecture. Given your model (let's assume it's correct) with 90% to chop 5% to lose and 5% to win, and assumes we are calling everything, it nets us 0.9*102.5 + 0.05*-106 + 0.05*205 = a return of $97.5 for investing $100. That's not a good return on investment, but it beats folding... barely.

It wasn't my model, I was using the percentages you gave in your previous post.

p.s. I have NO idea where you are getting 7.5, is that rake?

By doing the simple calculation based on the number you gave...

90% to win nothing5% to win $100 (net)5% to lose $105 ($15 in pot when villain pushes for $100 total, Hero has to call $95 for a total of 210).

So at the point of Hero's decision to call the all-in we have the following:The pot contains: 15+95 = 110Calling costs: 95So if we win we get $110 profit (110+95-95)If we lose we get a $95 loss (0 - 95)If we split we get $7.50 profit ( (110+95)/2 - 95)What we have already put in the pot is irrelevant as a cost, we are considering the EV of the call itself, not the EV of the entire hand. Hence the profit on the split. If you don't count like that (which is what you are claiming above) then you will fold profitable calls.