Cash Game Hand...

BigCityBanker

thread of the year imo.

Some people are disposed towards playing 24o in position when getting big odds, some people are not. Those with differing viewpoints can justifiy them easily.

simple really.

sikes

BuChan wrote:

what about when the board comes 35x and the your opponents have nothing and check the flop and you see a free turn to fill your hand or possibly semibluff.

If scenario 1 happens enough to make this a consideration, then its makes the call preflop worse. If semibluffing is profitable then again, it makes the call preflop worse.

BuChan wrote:

or the pfr makes a weak c-bet and an you get another semi bluffing oppurtunity or perhaps call and see the river for free,

Well calling is probably bad in this spot becuase we cant get to the river for free. Yeah a check raise might taken down the pot, but this situation is not going to be profitable enough to make up the preflop action.

BuChan wrote:

or make your hand on the turn.

Again its probably bad that we actually get to the turn.

Have to go. Will be back later to have a look!

Marq

BigCityBanker wrote:

Some people are disposed towards playing 24o out of position when getting big odds, some people are not. Those with differing viewpoints can justifiy them easily.simple really.

Yeah I think this might come down to taste.
Sikes' viewpoint on "outplaying" may also be different to mine.
Some people associate the words "outplay after the flop" with the idea of complex maneuvering that gets your opponent to fold the best hand or call with the worst.
When I think of outplaying people after the flop I mean simply that I will play better than they do - in a live cash game in Dublin against unknowns in this situation it is highly probable that I will make less mistakes than they do after the flop. statistically they are awful players and I am a less-awful player, so I have an edge. I should make more when I have the best hand than they would if they had the best hand. also I will probably win a lot more hands by bluffing in good spots than they will.
My positional disadvantage is something to consider, but as most of these players will have no concept of how to use position to their advantage, it's probably not as big a disadvantage as it would be against good opposition.

Sikes wrote:

Well I assumed its a losing play, continuing with a pair or outright bluffing into two oppoents.

I actually think that there are plenty of situations were outright bluffing into two opponents will be quite profitable! Probably moreso than continuing with a pair will be.
Your analysis seems to suggest that when I factor in the chance of winning with one pair I don't factor in the chance of losing with one pair. I would have enough faith in my hand-reading to be able to pick the spots when I put a lot of money in the pot with one pair after the flop holding 24o. I doubt I would do it that often, and I doubt that I would always be right, but that makes this situation little different from plenty of others when I am holding a better starting hand.

This thread has probably run its course. But this will be my default question to new initiates in The Well from now on.

sikes

Marq wrote:

Yeah I think this might come down to taste.

It doesn't come down to taste. It comes down to your ability to make these calls profitable. If you can show me hands and situations where we can make this profitable then I might be swayed into your view point.

Marq wrote:

Sikes' viewpoint on "outplaying" may also be different to mine.
Some people associate the words "outplay after the flop" with the idea of complex maneuvering that gets your opponent to fold the best hand or call with the worst.
When I think of outplaying people after the flop I mean simply that I will play better than they do - in a live cash game in Dublin against unknowns in this situation it is highly probable that I will make less mistakes than they do after the flop. statistically they are awful players and I am a less-awful player, so I have an edge. I should make more when I have the best hand than they would if they had the best hand. also I will probably win a lot more hands by bluffing in good spots than they will.
My positional disadvantage is something to consider, but as most of these players will have no concept of how to use position to their advantage, it's probably not as big a disadvantage as it would be against good opposition.

This is sort of a side issue. I referred to the idea of "outplaying" the opponent becuase I believe we have given up to much preflop equity not soley becuase our hand is pants, but we have an UTG raiser, a caller and we are OOP. To make up this equity we are really going to have to exploit something in these players, its not profitable just to maximise our expectation for the hand against unknows becuase as far as I have seen it wont make up the deficit.

Marq wrote:

I actually think that there are plenty of situations were outright bluffing into two opponents will be quite profitable! Probably moreso than continuing with a pair will be.

But bringing bluffing into the equation is going to make the preflop mistake greater becuase if bluffing is profitable then surely extracting big pots from them is not.

We cant have it both ways becuase we cant say that we have some kind of magical read that we can work on to decide when we can bluff them or decide our one pair is good, becuase we are OOP. Also we cant give 2 players a free card.

Marq wrote:

Your analysis seems to suggest that when I factor in the chance of winning with one pair I don't factor in the chance of losing with one pair. I would have enough faith in my hand-reading to be able to pick the spots when I put a lot of money in the pot with one pair after the flop holding 24o. I doubt I would do it that often, and I doubt that I would always be right, but that makes this situation little different from plenty of others when I am holding a better starting hand.

As I said before, I cant see us being able to make these judgements to make the hand profitable. To start bluffing and playing you hands for pair value you are really threading a very thin line.

Marq

sikes wrote:

if bluffing is profitable then surely extracting big pots from them is not. We cant have it both ways ...

I was going to let this thread go but this statement is just too silly to let go by. At the time when we call this 3 euro we haven't put our two opponents on hands. Later in the hand we will be faced with situations where bluffing (or semi-bluffing) might be profitable, or we will be faced with situations where extracting value is profitable, or situations where folding is best.

I cant see us being able to make these judgements to make the hand profitable.

then clearly I have a higher opinion of my self than you do of your self. and the whole question comes down to this. and before you quote each line of this and disect it, let me say that I know that such a belief may be misguided, but it's a belief none-the-less, and hence I have to call in this situation because if that belief is correct, then it is profitable to call.

Anyway, back to the study.

Ste05

I have to say I'd make the call nearly everytime too. Our hand is so lovely and disguised and also the fact that the A would be part of a straight we might make it's highly likely we'll be getting paid off if we hit a straight, unlikely as it may be.

As with any hand you play you have to be fluid in how you approach the later streets, you don't go in with a set definition of how you intend to play the flop, turn and River, whether you have AA or 24o, there's not that much difference here between 64o, 57o and the likes and I'd definitely be playing those hands too. Nicely disguised straights and straight draws are what makes this hand profitable IMO not pairs the likes, they are also nearly always super easy to play. Often times we will just check fold the flop, but there might be times when just being in the hand can be profitable if you can successfully pull off a bluff, be it with 99, AK or with 24o.

sikes

Marq wrote:

I was going to let this thread go but this statement is just too silly to let go by. At the time when we call this 3 euro we haven't put our two opponents on hands. Later in the hand we will be faced with situations where bluffing (or semi-bluffing) might be profitable, or we will be faced with situations where extracting value is profitable, or situations where folding is best.

You have completely missed the point I am trying to make. If you start including the possibility of bluffing them off hands, then surely the probability of hitting our hand and them being strong is massively reduced. So the result of that is the pots that we now win are now smaller on average.

sikes

Ste05 wrote:

As with any hand you play you have to be fluid in how you approach the later streets, you don't go in with a set definition of how you intend to play the flop, turn and River, whether you have AA or 24o.

This is obviously true we should never decide that "this is our plan and we are sticking to it" but our new plan must have come from a situation that had a +EV but we were unlucky that it didnt work so it can't contradict where it came from without an admission that the original plan was a mistake.

So in this case we could say that we can make the call preflop becuase their ranges are tight and when we hit they are calling stations and we get paid. So the equity that we give up preflop is retreived. However, getting to the flop, then saying well I have missed my draw, but I am going to continue with my one pair becuase I think I can bluff this player off his better hand or he has air, is clearly contradicting plan A. Obviously some situations arise that we can take advantage of something and bluff etc etc, but if preflop, in this case, is correct then the probability of it happening is so small, due to the size of the pot we need to win on average against these players when we hit and the fact we are OOP, that it shouldn't be a consideration in our calculations.

Reading back over some of my posts they do seem to come across as preachy. That is not the intention. I dont post here to preach and massage my ego, I dont know 99% of people here, I post here so people can respond tell me Im wrong, but give me reasons why, thus starting a learning process.