[NL2-NL10] NL50, AKo

  • 7 replies
    • Gerv
      Gerv
      Bronze
      Joined: 07.05.2008 Posts: 17,678
      Hello Burek2k,

      My own personal opinion favours a direct push due his insane AF (=also bluffing frequency)

      Therefore I like to stick with like 10% bluffing frequence:

      3.75+2+8.25 : 6.25
      =
      30.8%
      - 10%
      =
      [27.80]^-1 = 3.6:1~ equilates to 5.5 outs.

      With 2 OCs + 2 backdoors, this is for me an easy shove but I need some assistance from Max ''GreenPeace'' Ingolpoker or Ysessa :]

      Best regards,
      Gerv
    • jmackenzie
      jmackenzie
      Bronze
      Joined: 04.06.2008 Posts: 1,245
      Got a couple of problems with this hand, first off you've only got 83 hands gathered and therefore cant rely at all on his af or w$@sd being his true amount...

      As the hand has been played I would give him the benifit of the doubt and fold.

      This is one of those times were I personally would check behind on the flop. Although we arnt protecting our often best hand there is little way of us knowing this. Due to the 2 backdoor draws plus the overcard outs, seeing a turn card and re-evaluating may be the best option, as if he checks again we can put in a delayed c-bet even if we did miss.
    • Nunki
      Nunki
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.10.2006 Posts: 865
      High AF => bluffy/nutpeddler

      [high Af,high wts,low w$sd] =>bluffs too much and we 3bet AI in the hand in question.
    • jmackenzie
      jmackenzie
      Bronze
      Joined: 04.06.2008 Posts: 1,245
      this post interests me canwe get some more imput? :P
    • Fongie
      Fongie
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.12.2006 Posts: 4,978
      AF is very inaccurate after just 80 hands.. I believe you need at least 1000+ to get anything close to accurate.

      I asked hasenbraten on some coaching I think which stats are getting accurate when, and AF was one of the ones which needed most hands.
    • IngolPoker
      IngolPoker
      Black
      Joined: 05.09.2006 Posts: 10,473
      forget the stats after 80 hands, play standard, and bet/fold flop ^^
    • Nunki
      Nunki
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.10.2006 Posts: 865
      To make a reasonable estimate of many stats a fair few hands are required. The issue that commonly faces us at the table though is not necessarily one of the estimation of a particular stat but of being able to extract useful information with regards to a persons playing tendencies. This is often possible after not too many hands.

      Using Burek's hand as an example:

      A high Af, high wts, low w$sd (WWSF is also useful here ) COULD mean that villain has either been running really bad betting the second best hand (in cooler spots etc.) very often or is an over-aggro type who tries to win too many pots.

      Suppose that the chances of a decent villain running this bad is 1/50. Suppose that we also know from playing in this game before that 1/10 of players try to buy too many pots. If we further suppose that other outcomes are not likely then we can say that villain is 5 times more likely to be a bluffing-station than not. ie.P{bluffer}=83% (subject to a load of assumptions).

      A lot of assumptions I know but in the hand in question we are almost pot-committed anyway and villain does not need to be bluffing very often to make it OK for us to continue. Villain's stacksize also tends to make it more likely that he's fishy. A suspicion that villain likes to over-defend his blinds would also make it more likely that villain is getting it in light here.

      80 hands would not be much use if we wanted to estimate any particular stat but within those hands there is often plenty of useful information to help us make optimal decisions at the table.