Wayne, I dont understand why u want to debate a standard hand in the table chat and then drag the poor lad into the clinic! Also dont call him a "donk" please. Welcome Thoich btw, you shouldnt feel that you hae to justify your play to anyone! Its Your money, you can play what cards you want innit, in any position. Talon is spot on as usual nice post Colin FWIW, Wayne you played the hand spot on imo. Posted by GREGHOGG
Greg agreed should not call him a donk.... in my defence he called me a ATM donk after I made the call this upset me (which it should not have so being petty used this language... out of order) I took the beat with the comment NH and found the riddicule not very sporting which led to this post which he agreed to may I add.
as the answer asked was if the play was 'profitable long term' not whether the 96 hand has the correct odds to call then no it is not profitable long term.
knowing wayne had AJ means he prob did have the correct odds based on equity this time but still would not have had the correct odds if wayne had AA (a realistic part of the range for someone opening utg)
it is not profitable long term but looks like (im not great at math) he had the correct odds based on his equity this time.
Can we end this thread please I regret making it and the comments used, I was angry not with the out draw I am very used to that but to the unsporting comments made by the winner of the hand. The post was made with the agreement of the other player.
The arugment was weather 96 is profitable hand to play long term, as we all know the maths say no if we have implied odds to call or not.
Standard play wayne, dont know why you would post this... dont think you played the hand wrong with thoich's bet sizes... and agreed that thoich's river bet should have been bigger especially with the ace out there... but no criticism of thoich's play pre flop... think a call or a fold with that hand pre flop with pot odds favourable is fair enough... so take it on the chin wayne... worst things happen in poker
Can we end this thread please I regret making it and the comments used, I was angry not with the out draw I am very used to that but to the unsporting comments made by the winner of the hand. The post was made with the agreement of the other player. The arugment was weather 96 is profitable hand to play long term, as we all know the maths say no if we have implied odds to call or not. END OF THREAD! Posted by waynec
you are missing the point. And if he has implied odds to call then obv the math would say yes
Standard play wayne, dont know why you would post this... dont think you played the hand wrong with thoich's bet sizes... and agreed that thoich's river bet should have been bigger especially with the ace out there... but no criticism of thoich's play pre flop... think a call or a fold with that hand pre flop with pot odds favourable is fair enough... so take it on the chin wayne... worst things happen in poker Posted by duonross
u need to read the post m8 its not about the out draw for 100th time, its about playing 96 and simular hands long term.
So can I point out been playing long enough to know beats happen and I do take them on the chin thats poker and all the sh it and sh ite
In Response to Re: Posted on the behalf of a donk who says his play top class : u need to read the post m8 its not about the out draw for 100th time, its about playing 96 and simular hands long term. So can I point out been playing long enough to know beats happen and I do take them on the chin thats poker and all the sh it and sh ite Posted by waynec
And as GT said, you're missing the point. It's situation dependent, so if he's getting the odds to call here then YES it is good play long term.
You can't just say if something is good or bad just by the hand. I.E Calling a 100BB open shove with 96off is HORRIBLE long term and you'll get butchered.
On the other hand, calling 5 chips to see a flop and be in a pot worth 5000 chips is EXCELLENT long term.
ok lets say at every point throughout a HU hand we have exactly 33.3333% equity and villain bets 'pot' on every street. since villain bets pot we are getting 2:1 on our money and therefore 33.333% is the correct equity needed for a call to be breakeven. lets see how it goes....
nl100 villain (SB) raises to 3 we call 2
flop XXX pot = 6 villain pots, we call
turn XXXX pot = 18 villain pots we call
river XXXX pot = 54 villain pots, we call. final potsize = 162.
on everystreet we have had the correct equity for a call to be breakeven, but we don't breakeven from this hand longterm.
66.6666% of the time villain wins. net result = -81bbs. 33.3333% of the time we win. net result = +81bbs
66.6666*-0.81 + 33.3333*0.81 = -54+27 = -27bbs we lose everytime we play this hand.
but all our calls are correct given the odds and percentages, so howcome we lose?
*nb* i might have messed the maths up, but im pretty certain i havent.
Comments
as the answer asked was if the play was 'profitable long term' not whether the 96 hand has the correct odds to call then no it is not profitable long term.
knowing wayne had AJ means he prob did have the correct odds based on equity this time but still would not have had the correct odds if wayne had AA (a realistic part of the range for someone opening utg)
it is not profitable long term but looks like (im not great at math) he had the correct odds based on his equity this time.
versus 4 other random hands - no pairs - vill has got 10%
so at best 10% - at worst 2%
I suppose it's just impossible to range the other four hands
You can't just say if something is good or bad just by the hand. I.E Calling a 100BB open shove with 96off is HORRIBLE long term and you'll get butchered.
On the other hand, calling 5 chips to see a flop and be in a pot worth 5000 chips is EXCELLENT long term.
So you can't just say JTs, is it good long term?
nl100
villain (SB) raises to 3
we call 2
flop XXX pot = 6
villain pots, we call
turn XXXX pot = 18
villain pots we call
river XXXX pot = 54
villain pots, we call. final potsize = 162.
on everystreet we have had the correct equity for a call to be breakeven, but we don't breakeven from this hand longterm.
66.6666% of the time villain wins. net result = -81bbs.
33.3333% of the time we win. net result = +81bbs
66.6666*-0.81 + 33.3333*0.81 = -54+27
= -27bbs we lose everytime we play this hand.
but all our calls are correct given the odds and percentages, so howcome we lose?
*nb* i might have messed the maths up, but im pretty certain i havent.