Lay down AK pre. Hand Advice*

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.05 BB (9 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

MP1 ($5.11)
MP2 ($3.73)
MP3 ($3.67)
CO ($5.60)
Hero (Button) ($6.15)
SB ($9.21)
BB ($5.84)
UTG ($12.80)
UTG+1 ($8.25)

Preflop: Hero is Button with K A
1 fold, UTG+1 calls $0.05, 2 folds, MP3 calls $0.05, 1 fold, Hero raises to $0.25, 2 folds, UTG+1 calls $0.20, MP3 raises to $1.55, 2 folds

Total pot: $0.82 | Rake: $0.00

I rarely see that move outside of shortstackers. Doesn't it almost always mean AA, maybe KK at these stakes(When it's not a shortstacker obviously)?

folding is at worst a small mistake here. ..

Theres so much money in the pot that you should push here. AFter he limps pf behind another limper he very rarely ever has you dominated. Most likely your flipping with him and with all the money all ready in the pot this is +EV. Shove it in.

Originally Posted by thizzSantaCruz

Theres so much money in the pot that you should push here. AFter he limps pf behind another limper he very rarely ever has you dominated. Most likely your flipping with him and with all the money all ready in the pot this is +EV. Shove it in.

I don't understand that. (~NOT~ saying it's incorrect, just saying I dont' understand)

I don't think I've ever seen this move outside of AA or KK But just in case I pokerstove'd it here's what I've got:

Him:Any PP-54%
ME:AKo -45%

Him: JJ+-61%
MeAKo-38%

Him: QQ+, AKs/o -58%
Me: AKo - 41%

Him: KK+ -76%
Me: AKo+ -23%

And I've got next to nothing in the line of FE. He's commited at this point. I dunno, I feel like dumping 5xBB is as stated: "at worst a small mistake here.."
(I'm ok w/ being wrong, that's why I'm asking.)

I've seen people do that with A4 and 33. I've seen people go all-in for 30$ with small PP on 5NL tables. This is were you should know how long this guy has been sitting there. There are 75c in the pot, so the odds are not staggering considering that you have to put him all-in here. I don't think you can call, he'll just have a PSB left, but this forum got me confused. If you can't raise trash UTG then I don't understand the world anymore.
Without a read it's tough. But I think I push here more often than not... No idea if it's good or not.

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $0.04 BB (4 handed) - Party Poker Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

UTG ($10.59)
Button ($9.87)
SB ($2.32)
Hero (BB) ($5)

Preflop: Hero is BB with A K
UTG calls $0.04, 1 fold, SB raises to $2.32 (All-In), Hero calls $2.28, UTG calls $2.28

Flop: ($6.96) 10 9 A (3 players, 1 all-in)
Hero raises to $2.68 (All-In), 1 fold

Turn: ($6.96) 10 (2 players, 2 all-in)

River: ($6.96) 10 (2 players, 2 all-in)

Total pot: $6.96


Villain had Q3.
I looked at my biggest wins and losses with AK, but most of them aren't preflop AI calls... I know I ran into QQ a couple of times. Don't think I stacked off with AK while being dominated lately.

MP3 has less than 100BB left.

Barring reads, you should push over him here.

Dead money in the pot more than makes this push worthwile.

Unless you got a read that he is an insurmountable nit, his range is def wider than AA-KK. I've seen people with 3bet ranges from junk through Ax, connected paint, any pp. And you've got dead money in the pot that, against a wider range, likely gives you equity to shove. Also, I'd bet there's a % that this guy folds to the shove (even if it's small) that you can add in...

That being said, I agree with Daven in that you've only got 5bb in right now -- not wanting to play for stacks with AKo is "at worst a small mistake"...

Ok. I'm getting that now. Effective stack here IS 180xBB so, I personally won't feel comfortable stacking off with:
Unknown
nit

I guess I do have to factor in some FE since i've seen these villains fold w/ .30$ behind in a 4 dollar pot...

oh LOL, i didnt see the call/raise line, i misread the hand

nah, his range is skewed a lot more towards AA, some KK, and very few QQs

The fact that you have AK minimizes this though, but this line is still so fucked up

clear fold, or blindly apply concept 22

Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer

oh LOL, i didnt see the call/raise line, i misread the hand

nah, his range is skewed a lot more towards AA, some KK, and very few QQs

The fact that you have AK minimizes this though, but this line is still so fucked up

clear fold, or blindly apply concept 22

lol. Thank you! It was limp/raise folks! I'm folding this to everyone but maniacs. (@ 5NL)

Originally Posted by wellrounded08

lol. Thank you! It was limp/raise folks! I'm folding this to everyone but maniacs. (@ 5NL)

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...63-t75178.html

I still think that most of the time when you call there it's good... and he has about 70bb, I don't know where you went wrong there.

Originally Posted by oskar

Originally Posted by wellrounded08

lol. Thank you! It was limp/raise folks! I'm folding this to everyone but maniacs. (@ 5NL)

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...63-t75178.html

I still think that most of the time when you call there it's good... and he has about 70bb, I don't know where you went wrong there.

Don't act like you can add... That's for high class folk. My bad.

Just played this.
I rest my case.


Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $0.04 BB (5 handed) - Party Poker Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

UTG ($1.98)
MP ($1.76)
Button ($4.35)
Hero (SB) ($5)
BB ($2.04)

Preflop: Hero is SB with A K
2 folds, Button raises to $4.35 (All-In), Hero calls $4.33, 1 fold

Flop: ($8.74) 8 6 9 (2 players, 1 all-in)

Turn: ($8.74) 6 (2 players, 1 all-in)

River: ($8.74) 7 (2 players, 1 all-in)

Total pot: $8.74

Results in white below:
Button had 3 4 (one pair, sixes).
Hero had A K (one pair, sixes).
Outcome: Button won $4.37, Hero won $8.31

that's a little different, your villain didn't limp/raise very different.

Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer

oh LOL, i didnt see the call/raise line, i misread the hand

nah, his range is skewed a lot more towards AA, some KK, and very few QQs

see, he agrees with me....
now fold, folding here isn't the reason you aren't beating micros...

Originally Posted by daven

Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer

oh LOL, i didnt see the call/raise line, i misread the hand

nah, his range is skewed a lot more towards AA, some KK, and very few QQs

see, he agrees with me....
now fold, folding here isn't the reason you aren't beating micros...

HEY, I COMPLETELY agree. MY OP said it had to be AA or KK. I hate to call this, probably never would call this. BTW: I'm currently beating 5NL, not crushing yet, but beating.

Originally Posted by wellrounded08

BTW: I'm currently beating 5NL, not crushing yet, but beating.

nice work! now crush it and move up

At micros barring reads that say he's a huge nit I would get it in here every time. At 25nl and a little 50nl I've see shortstackers shove (and sometimes limp/shove) with like 66+ A10+, KJ+ alot.

They want to see a cheap flop and then when you raise them they shove because they don't want to play postflop.

Especially since you are raising from the button and he thinks he has a lot of FE.

that's a little different, your villain didn't limp/raise very different.

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $0.04 BB (4 handed)

SB ($8.73)
Hero (BB) ($5)
UTG ($6.64)
Button ($3.60)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 10 K
UTG calls $0.04, Button calls $0.04, SB calls $0.04 Hero raises $0.16, Button calls $0.16, UTG calls $0.14, SB raises to $8.73 (All-In), 3 folds

Total pot: $0.64

Results in black below:
SB had 2 2 (one pair, twos).
Outcome: SB won $9.21[/color]

Originally Posted by oskar

that's a little different, your villain didn't limp/raise very different.

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $0.04 BB (4 handed)

SB ($8.73)
Hero (BB) ($5)
UTG ($6.64)
Button ($3.60)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 10 K
UTG calls $0.04, Button calls $0.04, SB calls $0.04 Hero raises $0.16, Button calls $0.16, UTG calls $0.14, SB raises to $8.73 (All-In), 3 folds

Total pot: $0.64

Results in black below:
SB had 2 2 (one pair, twos).
Outcome: SB won $9.21[/color]

REALLY, Are you serious with me right now? I'm not sure what you're trying to prove. You show me a case, and say "see, you should call everytime." If you want, I'll go through my HH's and find Every example of when my AA got cracked. And by your logic, we can decide to fold them Preflop, since in the example, they lost. Anyway, the point is, a majority of the time I'm an underdog here. Therefore -EV against the avg. player. This shortstack was no "shorstacker" So it wasn't a strategic shove FWIW.

BTW:
I always welcome being wrong when against a solid Argument, one in which is not random facts or obscure examples.

I just played this hand the next day and thought of this thread and posted it.
If you know it's -EV, why do you even bother posting this thread?
I call there every time, and I'm rarely an underdog. Take it for what it's worth.

The only reason for me not to call there was if I knew the player. Without any read, I don't see how you can fold.

The last two hands I posted - I posted them immediately after I played them, I didn't look them up.

I think you're giving away a lot of value, but I DONT MIND you giving away alot of value.

Now is it different if the villian four-bets us? Can we say we're behind that range even in the microes?

At best, I'm usually 2:1 to win
Worst I'm dominated.
Usually a slight underdog however to PP's.

So I don't mind folding. All the good players I've talked to agree. Without a Read that villain is a straight up maniac, I'm folding all day everyday, and it's AT WORST A minor mistake.

3:1, not 2:1 if you're talking about AK

the limp/RR is almost always a monster. I fold this almost everytime

Originally Posted by iopq

Now is it different if the villian four-bets us? Can we say we're behind that range even in the microes?

I can't imagine. It just happens much too often that somebody thinks you're stealing from him, he doesn't want to play post-flop because he folded to c-bets 5 times in a row with something like AJ when they didn't hit, and just decide to remove all the post flop decisions and move it in right there.
Just an hour ago I played a hand against a guy I play against regularly, and he plays somewhat solid poker... doesn't take many risks. I have a lot of player notes, none suggest that he's a maniac. I raised UTG with QQ, he called, the bb min-raised to 32c, I 4-bet to 1,2 and he pushed all-in for 12$ (I had 16). At this point I'm hoping he has JJ or AK, but he turned over KJ. When I post that situation here and suggest that it would even be possible that KJ could be in his range, everybody would call me crazy.

I know many people here have more experience than me. And at 25NL this is a whole different situation. But at 5NL... I don't know. Maybe it's different at PokerStars... looks like everybody here plays at stars, so maybe the players are better there, I wouldn't know.

your not following along.
IT was a limp/RR!!!!

Is that you're screen name? If it is, I'll put a post-it note next to my screen to limp-raise your ass should we ever meet. Players who do not understand the concept of pre-flop raises often get frustrated when they wanted to play a hand and they constantly get raised... They realize they're probably not going to hit the flop AGAIN, and push.
I genuinely would not be surprised to see someone turn over 55 here. I wouldn't be surprised to see KK either, but in the long run, I think you're ahead here most of the time - at 5NL.

Just paused four tables to post this. I hope I'm not getting flamed, I'm trying to make a point here.

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $0.04 BB (9 handed) - Party-Poker Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

SB ($3.29)
BB ($2.31)
UTG+1 ($4.96)
Hero (MP1) ($5)
MP2 ($6.10)
MP3 ($5)
CO ($1.90)
Button ($5)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with K, A
1 fold, SB calls $0.04, 1 fold, BB calls $0.04, 2 folds, CO calls $0.02, Hero raises $0.20, 1 fold, BB raises $0.40, 1 fold, Hero raises $2.76, BB calls $1.87 (All-In)

Flop: ($4.70) 5, 4, J (2 players, 1 all-in)

Turn: ($4.70) 6 (2 players, 1 all-in)

River: ($4.70) 10 (2 players, 1 all-in)

Total pot: $4.70

Results in white below:
BB had 10, A (one pair, tens).
Hero had K, A (high card, Ace).
Outcome: BB won $4.47

again, a very different example - for starters you are the person raising all-in... It's hard to interpret the rest of the action as there is something wrong with the hand posted...

The guy in his example didn't raise AI either. He basically raised AI... but I doubt that he knew that.

I know the card converter keeps putting people in the wrong position, messes up bet sizes, makes it 0NL... I don't know how it does it.

He limped in EP- he then min-raised to my raise instead of going apeshit and raising 6 times the initial raise, but what his motivation was - only god knows. The point is he limp-raised with Ax and was willing to get his money in with it. And it happens all the time. If I keep watching out for it I can probably post 5 more hands like that in the next week. I'll spare you, but I would bet money on at least one limp-raise resulting in an all-in with even less than AT.

Everyone just need to understand 2 things:

1. Pot Odds
2. Hand combinations

2 is more likely a much newer concept to you. In poker there are X number of possible hands that can be dealt, not 221 or whatever different hands, but 1326 different combinations of hands that you can be dealt.

Let's look at AKo for example, this is not 1 hand, because the frequency you are dealt it is different than say, AA. There are 12 different card-combination that can make AKo (AhKs is different than AsKh).

Offsuit hands have 12 combos, suited hands have 4, and paired hands have 6. When you are dealt AKo, it also affects other possible starting hand frequencies.

Let's look at the 6 combos for AA:

AdAc
AhAc
AsAc
AhAd
AsAd
AsAh

Now, let's say we were dealt AhKs, what does this do to the frequency or chance that someone else was dealt AA.

AdAc
AhAc
AsAc
AhAd
AsAd
AsAh

You can see half of the combinations are no longer available. Therefore, the chances that someone was dealt AA is greatly reduced due to us holding AhKs, the exact same can be said for KK. Because of this we do not have to worry as much about running into AA/KK here and can go ahead and stack off with AKo/AKs PF. Of course, factors like player types, stack sizes, and pot odds all play a vital role as well.

Okay, so I understand this is a limp/re-raise (flat/re-raise if you must) and there is a caller caught in between. And while we do have an Ace and a King blocker cutting the chances they have AA/KK in half, I don't think we should be stacking off here.

For one, if you notice villians stack size he has raised to 31bb leaving himself with only 41bb. And we must put in another 26bb to call. That would make the pot >60bb, leaving the villian with less than a PSB on the flop and us in position, which sets him up for a flop shove in most cases. And since we miss the flop 2/3rd of the time, and he is shoving the flop the majority of the time, then I think I'm sure we can agree we can't just call preflop.

So that leaves either a 4b or a fold. Well what do you think villian is stacking off here with that we beat? I mean he has pretty much already committed himself, but "unless" he is doing this as a bluff our hand isn't going to fair well against a 4bAI calling range, which is gonna be mainly big pocketpairs, some of which crush us, and others we are a slight dog to. And in the fact that the limp/reraise is weighted heavily towards AA/KK (he CAN still have it), and I think this is a fold. I'm pretty sure I would fold this a majority of the time against an unknown at 50nl/100nl. If I knew the player or had significant stats, or seen him do this, then obviously the chances of me stacking off here increase. But against an unknown, in what is probably a marginal situation, I would fold and save the variance for another time. I think if folding is a mistake here (not convinced yet. Haven't seen the math), then it's a small mistake at worst.

Just my little take on the situation. I'll probably be back later and run some math on this to see how it fairs, and post that up if I get a solid answer.

Also oskar, I know you are convinced you should stack off here (and I'm unsure, but looking for the answer), but posting other hands doesn't really help here. For one a few of the hands you have posted are worthless (hint....You had a 6 and a 3). And just because one player is willing to make this player with a worse hand doesn't show anything and we must realize that (1) this is a different villain, so he has different tendencies. Not all villains are the same. And (2) You saw a worst hand THIS time. His range was still comprised of a lot of hands you didn't want to see. Maybe he lost focus at the time and made this play, maybe he was tilted, or maybe he thought you were making a move. Doesn't mean you are always ahead here. I've stacked off pre-flop with some pretty weird shit at times, but only against specific villains.

And no I'm not advocating to always fold AK preflop when faced with an all-in. But reads, history, stats, help determine whether you do felt or not.

stack off for meta game value. but dont do it a different player does it to you, they will think they have u dominated with AA/KK and do it to meta u.

Originally Posted by MehFU

stack off for meta game value. but dont do it a different player does it to you, they will think they have u dominated with AA/KK and do it to meta u.

come again?

riiiight. a short stack limp raises u. its an auto shove.

u have predefined your preflop limp raise shove back "range". because if it comes to showdown everyone on the table will think ur range here is AA/KK/AQ+/QQ ish.

there is the setup for the meta game (a game within a game where prior history has set up the play that the thinking player (your opponenet) is waiting to set up with a limp reraise (hoping you will shove)

10 hands later u get AK in late and 2 limpers. effective stacks are 30 bbs deep.

u raise the limpers 4bbs and the first limper reraises u 15 bbs. heres the science bit:
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 36.429% 34.71% 01.72% 367279164 18216528.00 { QQ+, AQs+, AQo+ }
Hand 1: 63.571% 61.85% 01.72% 654491652 18216528.00 { QQ+ }


your range is the top one (u happen to have AK in this case)

so GIVEN the fact that you have reraised AK and SHOVED over the top before. the limp reraise here is +ev because opponents range is ahead of you.

that is an example of meta game is.

the way to combat this is to only raise 4x 2 limpers and shove back with KK+ next time.

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 64.650% 60.76% 03.89% 162302088 10389714.00 { KK+ }
Hand 1: 35.350% 31.46% 03.89% 84037908 10389714.00 { QQ+ }

and there u have it.

One more time please.

the level of retardation is off the charts ITT. this is a shove all day. As spenda illustrated, with card removal there are only 3 combo's each of AA/KK and were talking about a 1/2 stacker at 5nl. you are flipping here alot, but your also dominating him a good portion of the time.

can i just say that card removal theory is total bullshit. relying on the probabilty that a player doesnt have AA or KK just because you have AK has NO BASIS IN REAL WORLD SITUATIONS AT ALL.

im not denying that this is a limp raise reraise is a shove all day against a shorty and its benefits are clear because it sets you up for meta game later. this is the only real use of this move, u dont do it because you think u are best. u do it because it allows players to get it into their head that you over play AK when all you are doing is taking a calculated risk with a short stack in the hope that u can get it in 5-1 favorite later with AA or KK against a big stack. i would say more often than not this shove back move is ev neutral.

Originally Posted by MehFU

can i just say that card removal theory is total bullshit. relying on the probabilty that a player doesnt have AA or KK just because you have AK has NO BASIS IN REAL WORLD SITUATIONS AT ALL.

you can say that as long as i can say that you have no fucking clue what you're talking about

Originally Posted by MehFU

can i just say that card removal theory is total bullshit. relying on the probabilty that a player doesnt have AA or KK just because you have AK has NO BASIS IN REAL WORLD SITUATIONS AT ALL.

You should consider card removal theory for meta.

just because you have AK it does not follow that a player is less likely to have AA or KK in a PARTICULAR hand.

over all if you were to take a random sample over thousands of hands this would be probabilistically true it does not apply to the real world because the player in the receiving end of a shove has a CHOICE.

if you do not understand this then clearly u play AK like its the nuts.

Originally Posted by MehFU

it does not apply to the real world because the player in the receiving end of a shove has a CHOICE.

Let's see how deep the meta-hole goes.

well put.

Originally Posted by MehFU

just because you have AK it does not follow that a player is less likely to have AA or KK in a PARTICULAR hand.

Help me out here. I'm new, but this is, after all, the Beginners Circle.

There are 52 cards in the deck. I have two of them. The two cards I have are an ace and a king. So I know for damn sure that of the 50 cards that I do not have, there are three aces and three kings.

Let's say the two cards I have are not an ace and a king. I then know with absolute certainty than there are FOUR aces and FOUR kings in the 50 cards that I cannot see.

I should put some statistics equations right here, but what it boils down to is that 3 < 4, so for a PARTICULAR hand, my knowledge that there are fewer aces and kings available for the other guy to draw means that the probability of him having aces or kings is lower. Right?

Xxstacks - I think it's pretty obvious that you have to raise him all-in here. You can't just call and hope to hit the flop.

MeFuh, you are wrong because while he does have a choice - if his range is let's say TT+ then then he is less likely to have AA or KK and more likely to have any of the other hands. He does have a choice, but the pool he's drawing his cards from is different.

gefunkt. your statement is correct in the long term. and this is why you raise preflop with ace king.

however getting reraised limits the range of hands that a player has. hand runs like this:

u raise AKs late. BB reraises u 12 bbs from ur original 3BB raise.

u have 47 bbs behind. pot is 18 bbs.

u shove.

the BB now has a choice.

if you allow the player to have a choice for a whole stack preflop the player can wait until he has you beat if you respond by shoving AK all day.

this is exactly why you reraise AK because its so +EV however shoving 50ish bbs is -EV because only hands that are better are calling you.

probability goes straight out of the window when a player has the cards in his hand at that moment.

oskar
HES NOT DRAWING CARDS HE HAS THEM IN HIS HAND AND HE DREW THE CARDS BEFORE YOU.

do dumb.

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 37.815% 37.53% 00.29% 246749928 1891224.00 { AKs, AKo }
Hand 1: 62.185% 61.90% 00.29% 406992360 1891224.00 { TT+ }

........ if his range is TT+ then he is winning your money.

Gefunkt, the odds of drawing Aces OR Kings if we have none of them are 8/50 x 3/49. With us having AK the odds are 6/50 x 2/49
Or pretty exactly half as likely.

Originally Posted by MehFU

just because you have AK it does not follow that a player is less likely to have AA or KK in a PARTICULAR hand.

Precisely.....wrong. I've already illustrated above why you are wrong.

I'm considering splitting everything from MehFU's first post in this thread because it actually was a good topic/thread until he came in here and pretty much mucked the entire thread up.

just because the combinations are halved it does not exclude the possibility that he has aces or kings in his hand in this particular hand.

this is fundamental poker, i dont understand how u are not getting this.

ill spell it out.

player 1 holds KK
player 2 holds AKs

player 1 limps player 2 raises player 1 shoves. he tells you he has KK. are you calling because you have AK and he has a lower probability of having it because you have AK and the combinations are lower.

bigspenda73 is trying to tell you you should.......just because the probability is lower and the player *could* be bluffing with air...

retard.

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

I'm considering splitting everything from MehFU's first post in this thread because it actually was a good topic/thread until he came in here and pretty much mucked the entire thread up.

while it is a good discussion of its own, its also very relevant to the OP. anyways, spoon made a really good thread about card removal and such a while ago either in BC or NLHE strategies.

Originally Posted by MehFU

........ if his range is TT+ then he is winning your money.

I'm not familiar with all those hi tech computer simulation thingies, but - maybe that's where I'm wrong - TT+ I would consider: TT, JJ, QQ, KK, AA, AJ, AQ, AK.
Of those you are flipping against 3, tie one, dominate 2 and are dominated by 2, - and the Ax hands are more plentiful. How are we loosing money there?

oskar there is a great program called "pokerstove" that u can run hand simulations on once u start using it your odds calculating skills go absolutely through the roof. because u run hands in and out run ranges all sorts of stuff.

go download it it will rock ur poker.

Originally Posted by oskar

Originally Posted by MehFU

........ if his range is TT+ then he is winning your money.

I'm not familiar with all those hi tech computer simulation thingies, but - maybe that's where I'm wrong - TT+ I would consider: TT, JJ, QQ, KK, AA, AJ, AQ, AK.
Of those you are flipping against 3, tie one, dominate 2 and are dominated by 2, - and the Ax hands are more plentiful. How are we loosing money there?

TT+ is TT, JJ, QQ, KK, AA

TT+,AJ+ would be what you described Oskar

Thanks.

That's funny because that means MehFu is using a program that takes removed cards into account, otherwise we wouldn't even be 2:3 against TT+
You might want to switch to a program that calculates odds the right way MehFu... you know... your way.

mehfu, when you say that villain has a choice and thats why he is not less likely to have AA or KK, what you are actually saying is that his range for calling is KK+. However, that range is smaller because you have AK, this is a fact. And same thing applies if his range is bigger, the portion of his range that is KK or AA is SMALLER.

Think of the following situation, this is an extreme case, but i hope it will illustrate what we are trying to say to you:

You are dealt Ax playing heads up, flop comes AAA, you shove. In this case youre giving villain the CHOICE you mention. You know villain is ultra nit, and wouldnt call this unless he has an A. Regardless of the choice youre giving him, his range for calling doesnt exist, because there is NO WAY he has an A given 3 are on the board and you have the other one.

The example was extreme, but i hope illustrates what we are saying.

In the hand we are talking about in this thread, his range exists, but it is definitely SMALLER.

oh my god.

im going to say this very slowly indeed watch.......

you cannot ASSUME because you hold AK that a raising opponent is less likely to hold KK+. the raise in fact increases the chance that they hold these cards because their range narrows as they have raised.

this whole argument is based on the assumption that after the cards are dealt that you somehow because you have AK you now have influence over the cards that your opponent is dealt.

THIS IS A TOTAL FALACY.

the hand is set in stone they have the cards in their hand right now. probability can only stretch so far. i got this from the wiki so its not perfect but its pretty much finishes the argument.

In a deterministic universe, based on Newtonian concepts, there is no probability if all conditions are known. In the case of a roulette wheel, if the force of the hand and the period of that force are known, then the number on which the ball will stop would be a certainty. Of course, this also assumes knowledge of inertia and friction of the wheel, weight, smoothness and roundness of the ball, variations in hand speed during the turning and so forth.

YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW THE CARDS WERE SHUFFLED.

now either i missed something or assumptions are the mother of all fuck ups.

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

I'm considering splitting everything from MehFU's first post in this thread because it actually was a good topic/thread until he came in here and pretty much mucked the entire thread up.

I am BEGGING you PLEASE.... I"m dead serious... this really sux that when this topic was really getting good, somebody came in and said

can i just say that card removal theory is total bullshit.

WTF???!?!

While I think The action varies the probability of him having these hands, I'm not going to be an asshat about it...
Anyway, seriously Spenda, if it's in your power, you have no Idea how much I'd like that so that we can continue this topic reasonably. Let's face it, this is a great topic to debate as long as arguments stay reasonable, because there are so many valid points for both sides. If that can't happen, I will have to take what I've learned thusfar and use that knowledge, if it can happen, great, many players knowledge on the subject could be expanded and/0r verified.

Originally Posted by MehFU

oh my god.

im going to say this very slowly indeed watch.......

you cannot ASSUME because you hold AK that a raising opponent is less likely to hold KK+. the raise in fact increases the chance that they hold these cards because their range narrows as they have raised.

this whole argument is based on the assumption that after the cards are dealt that you somehow because you have AK you now have influence over the cards that your opponent is dealt.

THIS IS A TOTAL FALACY.

the hand is set in stone they have the cards in their hand right now. probability can only stretch so far. i got this from the wiki so its not perfect but its pretty much finishes the argument.

In a deterministic universe, based on Newtonian concepts, there is no probability if all conditions are known. In the case of a roulette wheel, if the force of the hand and the period of that force are known, then the number on which the ball will stop would be a certainty. Of course, this also assumes knowledge of inertia and friction of the wheel, weight, smoothness and roundness of the ball, variations in hand speed during the turning and so forth.

YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW THE CARDS WERE SHUFFLED.

now either i missed something or assumptions are the mother of all fuck ups.

seriously man, your missing the point. no one is saying that he cant have AA/KK, were just saying it is less likely (in this scnerio, 50% less likely). irregardless of the chances he gets dealt AA/KK, there are 6 ways he CAN be dealt AA and 6 ways he CAN be dealt KK. When we look at our cards and we hold 1 A and 1 K, that eliminates the chance that he can also have that exact card, leaving only 3 ways each for him to get dealt AA or KK.

i was going to write out an example proving this exact fact, but spenda's post earlier in the thread illustrates it perfectly so im not going to waste my time.

here is the example from above just so your not confused. in the second part, the underlined combos are removed because we hold one of the cards making up that combo, so villain cannot have it. rinse/repeat for KK and you see it reduces the chance he has it by 50%.

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

Let's look at the 6 combos for AA:

AdAc
AhAc
AsAc
AhAd
AsAd
AsAh

Now, let's say we were dealt AhKs, what does this do to the frequency or chance that someone else was dealt AA.

AdAc
AhAc
AsAc
AhAd
AsAd
AsAh

You can see half of the combinations are no longer available. Therefore, the chances that someone was dealt AA is greatly reduced due to us holding AhKs, the exact same can be said for KK. Because of this we do not have to worry as much about running into AA/KK here and can go ahead and stack off with AKo/AKs PF. Of course, factors like player types, stack sizes, and pot odds all play a vital role as well.

MehFU, you're wrong, you could not be more wrong, I cannot source a Wikipedia page to prove your wrongness, because wrongness like yours has not been charted on such a level that 14 years-olds in their parent's basement felt it noteworthy to edit an unreliable internet source about your wrongness.

Originally Posted by MehFU

oh my god.

im going to say this very slowly indeed watch.......

you cannot ASSUME because you hold AK that a raising opponent is less likely to hold KK+. the raise in fact increases the chance that they hold these cards because their range narrows as they have raised.

this whole argument is based on the assumption that after the cards are dealt that you somehow because you have AK you now have influence over the cards that your opponent is dealt.

THIS IS A TOTAL FALACY.

the hand is set in stone they have the cards in their hand right now. probability can only stretch so far. i got this from the wiki so its not perfect but its pretty much finishes the argument.

In a deterministic universe, based on Newtonian concepts, there is no probability if all conditions are known. In the case of a roulette wheel, if the force of the hand and the period of that force are known, then the number on which the ball will stop would be a certainty. Of course, this also assumes knowledge of inertia and friction of the wheel, weight, smoothness and roundness of the ball, variations in hand speed during the turning and so forth.

YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW THE CARDS WERE SHUFFLED.

now either i missed something or assumptions are the mother of all fuck ups.

Okay I will go through this really slow for you okay, because it's apparent that is what you need.

There are 4 cards (still with me???) and we take 1 away.. You got that?? 4 - 1... That only leaves 3 cards now... I know this because I'm in college.

So in this instance, we are wondering the chances he has KK, or AA (don't get lost!). Well there are 4 kings in the deck, and 4 aces. If we take 1 king away and 1 ace, there are only 3 kings in the deck and 3 aces left. So instead of being able to make KK, and AA, 6 ways each, he can now only make KK and AA 3 ways each.

So you are assuming that because we have our hand already and he already has his hand that just because we have AK we can't affect his holdings, amirite?? Well what if our hand is AA in this instance??? Hmmmm??? That leaves only two aces left, but using your reasoning (however flawed [read as fucked up] it is) it's just as likely he has AA because he limp/reraised, even though now there is only 1 combo of AA remaining.

So while we aren't influencing his cards because, yes he would do this with KK and AA, we can logically make deductions knowing that we have an Ace and a King that the liklihood that he holds AA/KK is cut in half due to the remaining number of those cards in the deck. We aren't saying he never has AA or KK. We are simplying saying that by having AK we have cut his chances of having those hands in half. That means, sure sometimes if we decide to felt we will run into AA or KK, but it will happen less than if we were in this situation not holding AK.

Also, you coming on here acting as if you know everything is total FALLACY (read as fucking retarded).

I think what he's saying is that anybody would only ever limp-raise with AA or KK, in which scenario it really is irrelevant how likely it is for him to have AA or KK. But that's far from a being a realistic assumption.

And if that's how you think, then every time I limped and you raise, I'll 3-bet because you'll lay down everything but AA, right?

The Original Post

Let's assume we shove and UTG+1 always folds and MP3 always calls because if we doubt either of these assumptions then this hand shouldn't have been discussed this long because you would be playing with such retards that a shove is so obvious you would have never made this post.

MP3's starting stack is 73.4bb and we have MP3 covered. When we shove, we're betting another 68.4bb to win 83.9bb (Villain's entire stack plus the blinds plus the dead money from UTG+1). To break even on our shove, we will need to have 68.4 / (68.4+83.9) = 44.9% equity at showdown.

Now we need to make an assumption about Villain's range, but first let's look at our equity against a sample range of 22+, AQs+, AKo which we have 44.4% against. If Villain's range is any looser than this, then it's a shove. If Villain's range is this tight, or tighter, then it's a fold. That's really all there is to it.

Now personally, I think this is fold, but the important thing is that the answer is a function of Villain's range and nothing else.


Likelihood of Holding AA/KK, Blockers, etc.

Originally Posted by MehFU

can i just say that card removal theory is total bullshit. relying on the probabilty that a player doesnt have AA or KK just because you have AK has NO BASIS IN REAL WORLD SITUATIONS AT ALL.

Originally Posted by MehFU

oskar
HES NOT DRAWING CARDS HE HAS THEM IN HIS HAND AND HE DREW THE CARDS BEFORE YOU.

so dumb.

Originally Posted by MehFU

you cannot ASSUME because you hold AK that a raising opponent is less likely to hold KK+.

You are incorrect, but the basis of your belief is what's important to look at here. You don't believe it matters because Villain drew his cards before you (actually he received a card, then you, then him, then you) and this is the source of your inaccuracy. It does not matter what order the cards are dealt in. What matters is which cards you know Villain cannot have.

As a simple example to hammer the point home, let's assume there are four balls in a bag, two are red and two are blue. Hero and Villain randomly draw a ball each. If Hero holds a red ball, the chance of Villain holding a red ball is 33.3% and the chance of Villain holding a blue ball is 66.7%. It doesn't matter who draws their ball first, and it doesn't matter if Villain has even drawn their ball yet. It doesn't matter if there is no Villain and Hero is concerning himself with what the chance of his grand-mother drawing a blue ball would be. It's all the same.

linky to your card removal/hand combo thready spoony?

Well put spoon. Thanks for the solid answer with reasoning and all.

Originally Posted by bode

linky to your card removal/hand combo thready spoony?

Hell if I know. I did a longer one on how to visualize equity against a range with some geometric tricks for short-cuts but the images from it are gone. I'll probably just write a quick one here in the beginner's forum.

Edit: Yeah I went ahead and wrote one http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...tc-t75711.html

OP... I'm sorry your post got hijacked, 'tho I think the regs brought it back around for some good insight...

...that being said, omfg, I snorted f-in scotch out my nose (blue label b!tches... ) 'cause I was laughing so hard.

So let me get this straight...

I have AQ... my buddy has KQ... QQ2 hits the flop...

I still gotta worry about trips other than me and my buddy being out there 'cause our holdings don't reduce the odds that someone's shoving holding a Q?!?!

WTF?? ... do I not look like I already have enough sh!t to worry about?!??!?!

using card removal to try to work out whether people hold cards after the hand is dealt is stupid.

i totally understand card removal theory from a LONG TERM probabilty theory but you simply cannot use it for hand by hand basis.

spoony it does matter how the cards are dealt because the selection pool decreases as the cards are given to each player, this is called mutually exclusive probability.
here ill show u. in this case it is very important because you got dealt the cards after the opp. you are perfectly allowed to try to calculate the probabilty that a person BEHIND you got dealt an ace or a king based on ace king holding however doing it to someone ahead of you is flawed heres why.

deal 1 to OPP (1/52)
deal 1 to YOU (1/51)
deal 2 to OPP (1/50)
deal 2 to YOU (1/49) your last card is a king

think about this:

how do you know that YOU werent the one that got lucky receiving one of the last two (could be three or four, this is not discounted) kings in the deck after the OPP receieves their 2nd card.

you do not.

In simple terms, two events are mutually exclusive if they cannot occur at the same time. (wiki pedia)

dealing cards is a mutually exclusive event chain.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutually_exclusive

card selection does not apply here it is only down to fold equity and hand ranges as spoony correctly said.

Originally Posted by MehFU

using card removal to try to work out whether people hold cards after the hand is dealt is stupid.

i totally understand card removal theory from a LONG TERM probabilty theory but you simply cannot use it for hand by hand basis.

spoony it does matter how the cards are dealt because the selection pool decreases as the cards are given to each player, this is called mutually exclusive probability.
here ill show u. in this case it is very important because you got dealt the cards after the opp. you are perfectly allowed to try to calculate the probabilty that a person BEHIND you got dealt an ace or a king based on ace king holding however doing it to someone ahead of you is flawed heres why.

deal 1 to OPP (1/52)
deal 1 to YOU (1/51)
deal 2 to OPP (1/50)
deal 2 to YOU (1/49) your last card is a king

think about this:

how do you know that YOU werent the one that got lucky receiving one of the last two kings in the deck after the OPP receieves their 2nd card.

you do not.

In simple terms, two events are mutually exclusive if they cannot occur at the same time. (wiki pedia)

dealing cards is a mutually exclusive event chain.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutually_exclusive

card selection does not apply here it is only down to fold equity and hand ranges as spoony correctly said.

Fine, I'll play along one time to up my post count.

One card is dealt to Villain, the King of Spades is dealt to Hero, one card is dealt to Villain, and the King of clubs is dealt to Hero.

What is the chance that Villain was dealt KK?

According to MehFU, the chance would be 6/1326, since there are 6 possible ways to be dealt two Kings and there are 1326 total ways to be dealt a Hold'em hand.

Since Hero holds KsKc, there are 50 cards left that could be in Villain's hand since it is impossible that Villain was dealt the Ks or the Kc. Of those 50 remaining cards, two are Kings.

There are 50 ways Villain could have been dealt his first card, and 49 ways he could have been dealt his second card, which means there are (50*49)/2=1225 ways he could be dealt a Hold'em hand (we divide by 2 since we would consider AsAc to be the same as AcAs, and so on).

Of those 1225 remaining Hold'em hands, only one is KdKh. Therefore, the chance that Villain was dealt KK is 1/1225, which does not equal 6/1326, so MehFU is incorrect.

Actually MehFU is correct in one and only one way; If villains range is KK+ only (or KK or AA only).

Card removal isn't a subject then, because it doesn't change villains range. It's still KK+, with all cards as likely as they were.

Card removal comes into play if villains range is wider then KK+. Let's say villains range is QQ+. Because hero has AK, the likelyhood villain has QQ goes way up.

Mehfu, i suggest you read, pay attention, and study(and then do it all over again) everything that has been said in this thread. Also read the one about hand combinations that is great.
I strongly suggest you do that instead of going to wiki, you are misundestarding that as well. It is precisely because dealing cards from one deck are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE EVENTS, that the theory we are trying to explain is TRUE.
Dont refuse to read this post...clear your mind, give the theory of card removal a shot, study it...if then it doesnt make sense to you, well...just do what you want, but I thought everyone is here to learn.