Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="AlexTheOwl, post: 4017163, member: 269625"] Ok. I understand now and I agree. I haven't read your book yet, or all of this thread, but I think I understand. As I think braveslice suggested, your range is not literally the cards you think the villain may have, it's a shorthand way of entering the approximate distribution of WA and WB hands you think are in the villain's actual range. If the hero doesn't c-bet, the villain may bet QQ or JJ because he reads the hero as weak, or may bet for value. I'd say the latter is more likely. Isn't this where the tricky part of discussing WA / WB using equity kicks in? If the hero is likely to be WB and most of the villain's bets are going to be for value, I don't think we can say the hero should call if the pot odds are less than ~33%. If we check and the villain bets, his range is heavily weighted toward hands that crush us. And there is a playability concern - our own hand is unlikely to improve on future streets, making it difficult to call any future bet. If we check the flop, I'd fold to any non-trivial bet by the villain. The chance that the villain gains equity on a later street? The chance that the villain bets with a hand that is WB us because he thinks we are weak? The chance that the villain makes a bet that gives us poor pot odds? As noted just above, I think it doesn't take an overbet from the villain to give us a -EV situation. All of the above, I suppose, and those are all valid reasons I think. The argument for not betting is simply that the hero would be building a bigger pot when he is probably WB, and probably unable to bet or call multiple streets even if he is WA. You may be overestimating the importance of post-flop range balancing at the $.05 BB level in a site with a massive player pool. I have no doubt that what you say is true at your usual blind level, and there is some non-zero value to post-flop balance even at this level. For the sake of argument, you are giving the villain a narrow range pre-flop. After calling a flop bet, the villain's range is almost entirely Top Pair Good Kicker or a set of tens. All the hero has done is make a standard flop c-bet. There are two clubs on the board. I'd guess the odds of a bet by the villain on the turn here are close to 50/50 if we check. I think I understand your argument pretty well, thank you again. Good! You say I gave the villain free equity for no reason. I gave him free equity to avoid building a big pot when I was probably behind. Now, in the unlikely event that we have reached the turn after both player check the flop, I am in a much better situation: - I know I am probably WA - it is harder for the villain to know where they stand. So far I have 3-bet pre and checked the flop. Am I just betting now with a medium pocket pair or KQ because they showed no strength? Slowplaying a monster? Semi-bluffing with a draw? The villain's range is mostly QQ and JJ now if we agree for argument's sake that he has a narrow pre-flop range. I am probably ahead, and my range here in the villain's eyes includes many hands they might beat. Depends on board texture (hopefully we have avoided clubs, Queens, and Jacks), but generally yes, I am betting. Nothing has changed since the turn, and I have no reason to believe this player is tricky. I'm probably ahead here and will get calls from weaker hands. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us