The river check/call. Important limit hold'em tactic

I think my chat here says it best, if you really want to get picky.
I only picked to set it straight.. 30% of 1300 hands is 390 not the 460 so specified. I took a guesstimate out of my head saying that 65% of that 30% is what I thought would beat this hand in particular. I didn't do any of the math to be specific about 65%, it was an acutally guesstimate. A little off granted of about 25%.. but still either way of 60/40 in Freak's favor or my guesstimate of 65/35 the hyper aggresive player.. it is almost a coin toss.

99/390 is hardly a number larger than 1, let alone 3.9.

And if you change that to a %.. .10 is 10% last I recalled.. and when you move the decimal point over from 3.9.. you get .39 makes that 39%

1) Serious question. What limits do you play, and do you seriously think people are paying enough attention to your play to make "changing it up" +EV as opposed to just playing standardly?

2) You still haven't addressed this. As usual, once one of your arguments has become derailed, you conveniently ignore all points relating to it, and go off on a tangent.

I really don't know why FP and I are trying to educate you, as you are a very stubborn, unwilling student (here's the one line you can reply to while ignoring my actual points, enjoy!)

Much love,

~ Chris

No, that's not how you calculate percentages.

You can't just move the decimal point.

99/390 = 0.25. There's no moving of the decimal point anywhere. 0.25 = 25%.

You put in 390/99, which is how many times 99 fits into 390. But that has nothing to do with percentages.

Edit: And that makes your 65% number off by a whole lot. Now do you agree with my postflop play?

This is my new favourite topic ever. According to your maths, 1 is 10,000% of 1,000, which is pretty interesting.

1) Serious question. What limits do you play, and do you seriously think people are paying enough attention to your play to make "changing it up" +EV as opposed to just playing standardly?

All it takes is 1,2 or even 3 people to pay attention to me. Even you have now.. you have me labled as a calling station, won't fight for the blinds type of person.

The whole game is based on strategy. Let others know your strategy and a strategy to let others think they know this strategy.

I will sometimes play 4-6 hands straight in a row when I 1st sit at a table and 4-6 times I will be as tight as a rock. Long as I have 1 person's attention cause I know you won't get everyones.

Yes I will agree 60/40 is good long term but again my prefrence is 70/30.. I like to think the bigger piece of the pie. For instance just recently.. I Have J,10 in the BB.. Everyone folds, which suprises me that the button Limps. Normally it is a raise there.. SB calls and I call. Flop comes K,10,J.. SB Checks and I bet the Pot on my 2 pair, knowing the Button doesn't have alot. I was correct cause he pushes his small stack of chips with K,5 suited.. No flush on the board showing. So he has 5 cards left to come.. turn came nothing to help either of us, and river came a 5. I was 71.3% to win that hand.

You can't just move the decimal point.
Yes you can.. now watch


For giggles.. 20/100 is 1/5 is 20% and 20% is written as .20... it isn't written as 2.0..

Need to check your calculator Dorkus you are moving the decimal point over to many spots

Yes, but using the same working as your previous "math", 20/100 would equal 100/20 = 5, and moving the decimal place would give 20/100 = 50%. Yet shockingly this is not correct.

Keep digging, sir. It's very entertaining.

No, I'm using the same working as you did.

1/1000, switch to 1000/1 = 1000, move decimal place one to the right to "give a percentage" = 10000, so according to your method 1 is 10000% of 1000.

Once again. keep a-diggin'!

Now lets round em both up if you wish.. 99 up to 100 and 360 to 400

Just to prove something as silly as moving a decimal point over.

There is 100 hands out of the 400 that he can have that beats you. 10 divided into 100 is 10.. do the same for the other side.. 10 divided into 400 is 40.. Now we can still reduce this down... 10 divided by 10 is 1... 40 divided by 10 is now 4.... making that 1/4.. totaling that at 25%... making that .25.. one whole Quarter to be exact.. so .25 or 25% times that by 4 is 100%..

Yet the 25% is obscure cause we rounded up the 360 to 400...If you wish we can break the 99/360 into the smallest denomination before the calculating the % if you wish.

Keep digging, sir. It's very entertaining.

Actually its right there with the 100/400 factor.. you don't call it 2.5.. it is .25... so actuality in the 3.9 the decimal point again needs to be moved over to make it a %... of .39

Tell me I am wrong again. Simple math is not that hard.

lmao, you are hilarious.

Where did 360 come from?

Edit: You're still wrong. I can't believe I'm debating the simple matter of the conversion of fractions to percentages with someone who claims they are good at maths.

Where did 360 come from 30% of the 1300 figure it out yourself.

10% is 130 and X 3.. excuse me.. make that 390... I did originally say 390


If I didn't I apologize.. lot better then the 460 conclusion that I didn't come up with.

99/390 was 3.93939393... Yet I did use the 390 cause that is the answer I previously used.

Now the flaw in that is that I divided 99/360 backwards if you need to find one that bad.. in actuality it is 27.5%..

So now I found flaws in my math(which is just as bad for you).. glad to be of service..

Just a little question twizzy: have you ever played a 6 handed LIMIT holdem RING game?

99/390

99/390 = 0.2538

0.2538*100 = 25.38%, 25% to the nearest % which is what FP said about 346539878 posts ago.

Can we get at least vaguely back on topic now please? :x

Back into the topic i have to say that i agree with you FP. The check/call move at the river with a medium strength hand is a very useful one because it´s going to prevent you losing some bets and against hyperaggressive players (like in this particular situation) it´s going to make you win some bets, since it´s pretty easy to induce a bluff against a hyperaggressive player (he most likely won´t let away the chance of betting against someone who bet all the way and suddenly checks at the river).
I can´t add more reasons than the ones given by FP and Rob for why this is the correct move, so you if don´t mind (i don´t want to get off-topic) i´m going to say a few words about this move at NLHE:
Long time ago i wrote a thread about this (you can see it here), and now that you made this thread i realize what is the big difference between this move at limit and at no limit. If you´re against the same kind of player (hyperaggressive), the problem is that when he attempts his bluff he can do it with a huge amount of chips in relation to the pot (he can even overbet), so you can´t call just because of the pot odds. Here the big ability you need to have is to have a good read on him and know if he´s bluffing or value betting (it´s unnecessary to say that if you decide to stay on the hand you MUST call his bet instead of reraising, for the same reason of why you checked). The amount of the river bet (after you checked) of the hyperaggressive player may change: if he bets a little amount you can make the easy decision to call (like if it was limit), but he makes a big amount the decision is much more difficult, but it has the advantage that if you call his bluff you´re winning a greater profit (and of course if you call and he has you beat is worst than limit) .

i think we should drop it..

this topic was the perfect mix of informative and hilarious