Quote:
Originally Posted by Track Collector
I think my initial response and your response both contain errors. And, it would seem to be a bit complicated given that it is a 3-way pot with 1 player all-in.
I failed to consider that Vic and the villain have a side pot, and I agree that the villains chances are 37% in that one. And although minor, I also neglected the limpers/blinds who ended up folding.
Please note that before going any further, Vic starts the hand with $70 more than the villain.
The villain's all-in call of Vic was for 425 - 67 (calling the all-in of the first player) = 358.
Against Vic in the side pot, the villain is risking 358 to win Vic's 358. (The other 67 Vic put in went to the main pot where he has an approximate chance of winning 3-way of .379 and the villain's chance is .261).
So against Vic, he needs to win 50% of the time where his estimated chances are 37%. Not Good! (In hindsight), although I imagine only a tiny microscopic number of poker players would even be able to arrive at a close approximation of their required odds of calling while while trying to do in in real time and perhaps eventually having clock called.
...
|
I'm a strong believer in table talk which in this case was legal since even though there were 3 people the banter couldn't influence the $67.00 guy.
I should have engaged him conversation and found a way to let him know I might have bigger spades as well. I'm convinced he never even considered that.
Believe me. Even though I knew I was well ahead I wanted him to fold. I was happy winning what was already out there with a hand I couldn't improve.
IMO his call was VERY STUPID but not that surprising at this level of play.
Again, not crying, I'm a big boy.
Reminds me of the reason why I'm not really cut out to play poker for big $$$'s.
I have a tough time reconciling doing everything correctly and still losing quite often just because of the math.
