Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,292,000 Posts!
Poker ForumTournament Poker

Confused about HoH2 Passage

Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1

    Default Confused about HoH2 Passage

    There's a passage in Harrington on Hold 'em, Part 2 that I just don't understand. It's in the discussion of the Red Zone tactics on page 141:

    "Here's a simple example of first-in vigorish in the Red Zone that's easily remembered:

    1. If your M is exactly 3,
    2. No one has entered the pot yet,
    3. You think there's a 50 percent chance that your remaining opponents will fold to an all-in bet,
    4. You're a 2-to-1 dog to win if you are called, then
    5. You can move all-in with a positive expectation.

    I call this the '3-to-1 Rule,' and it's very handy to remember when you're slogging through the Red Zone"

    This passage seems to be missing a word. Does he mean "and" or "or" here? In some of his examples, some of these conditions are true, but not all of them. This is a typo of some kind, and I don't know how to interpret it.
    Discuss Plato, Aristotle and Aquinas at The Lyceum
  2. #2
    Im pretty sure he means and.
  3. #3
    Even though this is a little confusing and could have been written better I don't think Mr. Herrington was trying to give you a checklist per se.

    I think the important thing to remember is that he is just giving you a general example of things you should be keeping in the front of your mind that you can use to determine when you are in a good position to push. Its not often when you will be able to say with any certainty that all of these example conditions will be true. When your M gets to a crucial level these are the sorts of things you should be thinking. What he says there is just an example and its only important that you are in the right frame of mind. Its like switching gears. The whole point of this can be summed up in "get some nuts when you are on the brink of going out or you will go out for sure".

    I think it was Amarillo Slim who sums it up best: "Better to go out firing than calling"
  4. #4
    The maths in't 100% because it depends if one of the blinds calls, more than one caller, etc...but assuming one caller out of blinds:

    50% not called, M up to 4
    33.5% called and lose, M down to 0
    16.5% called and win, M up to 7

    Therefore, expectation M~3.16

    So, he means AND

    But, I think he is just trying to emphasise how important being first in is, whatever your cards.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •