Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Last night, I took a hand from Fuel with my KQh vs. his JJ. Preflop, he raised from the button. I think I flat called. The flop was Queen-high. I checked. He checked. The turn was a blank. I bet out, he called. The river was another blank. I bet out big again and he called again. (These details were originally wrong, very wrong, but have since been corrected. That said, you'll see that its ultimately unimportant).
After the hand, Fuel said, "I was 85% to win."
I thought, you crazy?! and wrote, "Since when is JJ v KQ an 85/15 situation. Last I heard, it was almost 50/50."
He answered, and I paraphrase, "Based on your range of hands, the chance that you were ahead on the flop was only 15%."
And he is probably right. And I am right too. I guess it's all about perspective.
Until next time, make mine poker!
posted by Jordan @ 5:20 PM,
- At 6:17 PM, Fuel55 said...
Here's the actual hand fishcakes:
- At 6:45 PM, 4dbirds said...
History Channel is airing Life After People again on the 23rd. It was really interesting and I don't think my synopsis ruins anything. :-).
PS: Fuel scares me.
- At 6:54 PM, KenP said...
Actually, JJ is 3:1 against just a random hand. But, Jordan is 1.5 to 1 on the call so he isn't getting the pot odds. Read? Maybe. Implied odds? Well, it is 'only' below 10% of his stack.
Well, the overcard comes and he slow plays it. Fuel discounts that for the rest of the hand. Can you do that against someone you consider a decent post flop player who is showing aggression?
If Jordan claims implied odds, I have to say game, set, and match. But, Fuel has a reasoned view. It just ended up wrong. Wrong read.
I think any reasonable player could have played either hand. As much kismet as reason.
- At 7:00 PM, KenP said...
I think Fuel real mistake was not betting the flop for information.
- At 9:26 AM, HighOnPoker said...
Well, the point isn't really a hand analysis exercise, although I understand why one go that way. The point is that we often argue over hands in poker because we are all perceiving them in different ways. Here was a hand in which Fuel, whom I respect, came up with math that I thought was nonsense (15/85) and I told him that. But after reviewing it from his perspective, I see that his math made sense. That, however, doesn't discount my math, which said that the chances of Fuel having AA, AK, AQ, or KK was low (I felt he was raising pretty often in position in the 6-max game). That meant that I really was playing for a King or Queen flop. When I later reviewed the hand, I saw it as 50/50, pretty much, since to me, the important decision was preflop. To Fuel, it was on the turn when I bet out. Just different perspectives.
But as Fuel told me last night, we can both be right about the math, but only one of us can win the hand. Truer words haven't been spoken.
- At 4:49 PM, Hammer Player a.k.a Hoyazo said...
I wish I understood why that 85-15 number is being given any credit at all. It is pure silliness. Most people would call in that spot with KQ, hoping for a K-high or Q-high flop and then try to win it.
I think you played this hand well, and frankly I think Fuel played the hand well as well. He didn't lose a dime more than he had to, only check-check/calling and check/calling the whole way, and given the way you play the game I think it was easily reasonable enough for him to think that his Jacks might have been ahead.
85-15? Huh? Nice hand.