|
Originally Posted by donkbee
This entire post is incorrect. Sure flatting isn't the best way to play the hand, but it's not ANYWHERE close to the absurd mistake folding is. Your statement that flatting is probably almost as bad as folding is insane.
"Anything but shove is pretty terrible" is also incorrect because 3bet less than all-in is not only valid but quite possibly better.
Folding loses you -180 chips.
Flatting and folding half of your flops (chance of overcard(s) flopping) costs you -825 chips half the time, and if you get a random undercards flop (lets say Tx8s5s) and go against a range of hands that will stack off on the flop, you're likely looking at something like 88+,55,KTs,QTs,JTs,AsKs,AsQs,KsQs,AsJs,KsJs,AsTs,A s9s,Ks9s,As7s,As6s,As4s,As3s,As2s,ATo,KTo,QTo,JTo ... to which you're 54% with JJ. So 46% of the time you lose 4800 chips (either of the villians have about 4800), 54% of the time you win about 5500 chips, for a net of about +780 chips.... half the time.
+780 chips half the time and -825 chips half the time = overall EV of -45 chips.
I assumed alot of things up there, and my post is mostly meant in satirical fashion, however in many situations, flat calling is legit not going to be much better then folding.
I disagree specifically with JJ about 3betting less then all-in because many of the hands your "less then all in" 3bet will scare out are actually hands we really want to play against, and have at least 70% equity vs... hands like AT, 44, 55, etc. About the only hand I can think of that might call your shove but fold to your 3bet that we actually WANT to fold, is KQ. I think based on the fact that we accidentally scare away lower pairs and bad Ax more often then 'exactly' KQ, shove is much better then 3betting small.
|