Home

TheSinner.net

Losing more by calling with the 'winning' hand.

Losing more by calling with the 'winning' hand.

Postby igisjana on Mon Mar 15, 2010 1:30 pm

I thought about the following case last night in bed, when I couldn't fall asleep. The situation is as follows:

You are sitting at a 1$/1$ cash table in a casino that takes a 5% rake with a 5$ cap. You are in the BB with some random hand (say 36o) and it gets folded to the SB who calls (with, say, 56) and you check. Both you and the SB had 100$ stacks before this pot.

Flop: AhAsAd

Check/Check

Turn: Ac

Check/Check

River: Kh

SB bets 99$ (all-in). BB ?

Now if BB folds, he loses his 1$ big blind. But if he calls (and if he calls he, he can be sure that he is never beat), in doing so he creates a 200$ pot allowing the casino to take the 5$ rake, before the remaining pot of 195$ gets split and the BB gets 97.5$ back. Therefore, by calling the BB loses 2.5$ instead of 1$ he'd lose folding.

Hence, the above spot is a spot in which it is better to fold, although one knows that one will never lose the hand should one call.
igisjana
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:44 am

Re: Losing more by calling with the 'winning' hand.

Postby Patrick25 on Tue Mar 16, 2010 9:38 am

cool story bro
Patrick25
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 9:48 am

Re: Losing more by calling with the 'winning' hand.

Postby Birkin on Tue Mar 16, 2010 11:10 am

Interesting. Does the SBs $99 get raked as well or not? That would be hilarious if you fold and he loses $5 to rake.
Birkin
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 9:08 pm

Re: Losing more by calling with the 'winning' hand.

Postby igisjana on Tue Mar 16, 2010 7:32 pm

no if bb folds the pot would be 2$ because sb can take his money out again (you see the same thing online when everyone folds to your bet), so they'd take 5% of 2$, which is 0 chips.
igisjana
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:44 am

Re: Losing more by calling with the 'winning' hand.

Postby igisjana on Tue Mar 16, 2010 7:33 pm

Patrick25 wrote:cool story bro


...dont even try
igisjana
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:44 am

Re: Losing more by calling with the 'winning' hand.

Postby Birkin on Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:48 pm

Quite a few of the casino's have a policy in which they don't rake chopped pots btw.
Birkin
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 9:08 pm

Re: Losing more by calling with the 'winning' hand.

Postby igisjana on Sat Mar 20, 2010 1:05 am

Birkin wrote:Quite a few of the casino's have a policy in which they don't rake chopped pots btw.


Didn't know that. Just assumed that they would, because Stars does it.
igisjana
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:44 am

Re: Losing more by calling with the 'winning' hand.

Postby tritus on Thu May 06, 2010 4:47 pm

igisjana wrote:
Birkin wrote:Quite a few of the casino's have a policy in which they don't rake chopped pots btw.


Didn't know that. Just assumed that they would, because Stars does it.


Switch to FT and play the nosebleeds. $0.50 rake ft-mf-w.

And casino's in the uk still charge hourly fees as opposed to rake....i think...generally to drunk to notice tbh.
tritus
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2009 11:58 pm

Re: Losing more by calling with the 'winning' hand.

Postby Birkin on Sat May 08, 2010 12:38 am

At the vic it varies, but the games i've played have been 5% rake, no charge
Birkin
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 9:08 pm


Return to PokerSoc

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest