AnskyPoker.com » Poker Theorems A Heads Up Poker Strategy Blog Wed, 07 Sep 2011 23:23:02 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 en hourly 1 Clarkmeister Theorem /2009/04/clarkmeister-theorem/ /2009/04/clarkmeister-theorem/#comments Fri, 10 Apr 2009 17:10:17 +0000 Gugel /?p=199 This is the 3rd post of Theorem Week. If you haven’t done so already, check out Zeebo Theorem and Baluga Theory. In this post, we’re going to dive right into the Clarkmeister Theorem.

Simply put, the Clarkmeister Theorem states that if you are heads up against an opponent and are first to act when there are four cards of the same suit on the board, you should almost always bet no matter what you have. A 2/3 pot sized bet is generally correct.

Let’s look at an example.

Hero (Button) ($100.00)
SB ($100.00)

Preflop: Hero is Button with 7♠, 5♣
Hero bets $3, SB calls $2

Flop: ($6) T♣, 3, 8 (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $5, SB calls $5

Turn: ($16) 2 (2 players)
SB checks, Hero checks

River: ($16) Q (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $14, SB folds

Your opponent is probably laying down everything up but a low-medium flush. It’s just really hard for him to call the river with a hand like T♠, 9♣.

Counter-Strategy
The Clarkmeister Theorem exploits an opponent’s tendency to fold on a 4-suit board. You should counter this strategy by calling more and making small bluff raises. The chances he has a weaker hand that will fold to your bluff raise are much greater than the chances he has a strong enough hand to call.

Reliability
Medium-High

In the next installment, we’ll talk about Aejones Theorem.

]]>
/2009/04/clarkmeister-theorem/feed/ 2
Baluga Theorem /2009/04/baluga-theorem/ /2009/04/baluga-theorem/#comments Wed, 08 Apr 2009 20:23:17 +0000 Gugel /?p=196 This is the 2nd post of Theorem Week. If you haven’t done so already, check out Zeebo Theorem. In this post, we’re going to dive right into the Baluga Theorem.

Simply put, the Baluga Theorem states that you should think twice about whether your one pair hand is good when you’re facing a raise (and especially a checkraise) on the turn. That’s not to say that one pair is never good, but a raise/checkraise on the turn from your opponent generally means he has a very good hand and warning bells should start ringing in your head. He’ll probably have at least top pair with a good kicker or some kind of combo draw (i.e. pair + draw, flush + straight draw).

Let’s look at an example.

Hero (Button) ($100.00)
SB ($100.00)

Preflop: Hero is Button with J♠, K♣
Hero bets $3, SB calls $2

Flop: ($6) J♣, 5, 8 (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $5, SB calls $5

Turn: ($16) T♣ (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $12, SB raises to $38

We should probably fold here. Our one pair hand is rarely good and even if we are ahead of a draw, there are a lot of very dangerous cards that can come on the river that we would have to fold to. It is unlikely that JQ or worse would play it this way and we’re putting ourselves in an extremely poor spot if we call.

Counter-Strategy
If your opponent is aware of the Baluga Theorem, raising or checkraising the turn as a bluff can be very profitable.

Reliability
Medium-High: The Baluga Theorem was forged in 6max games, but it’s still pretty reliable for heads up.

In the next installment, we’ll talk about Clarkmeister’s Theorem.

]]>
/2009/04/baluga-theorem/feed/ 4
Zeebo Theorem /2009/04/zeebo-theorem/ /2009/04/zeebo-theorem/#comments Mon, 06 Apr 2009 14:57:29 +0000 Gugel /?p=184 This week is Theorem Week!   I’ll be talking about Zeebo Theorem, Baluga Theorem, Clarkmeister Theorem, The Yeti Theorem, Aejones Theorem, and Ansky Theorem.

So let’s kick things off with Zeebo’s Theorem. Simply put, Zeebo’s Theorem states that no one ever folds a full house. It doesn’t matter if you make a 1/2 pot sized bet, a full pot sized bet, or massively overbet. The villain will not fold their full house, even on a very dangerous board.

Let’s look at an example…

Hero (Button) ($100.00)
SB ($100.00)

Preflop: Hero is Button with J♠, J♣
Hero bets $3, SB calls $2

Flop: ($6) 3♣, 5, 3 (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $5, SB calls $5

Turn: ($16) T♠ (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $12, SB calls

River: ($40) 3♠ (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $80 (All-in), SB calls

Results:
Hero wins $200 with J♠, J♣
Villain mucks 5, 6♣

So what are the implications of Zeebo’s Theorem?
1. If you think the other person holds a full house and you can’t beat it, do not bluff. It is extremely unlikely you are going to get your opponent off their hand.
2. Massively overbet if you have a strong full house and you suspect your opponent has a weaker full house. They will call.

Counter-strategy:
Every strategy has a counter-strategy.  And every counter-strategy has a counter-counter-strategy.  If you know that your opponent knows Zeebo’s Theorem, you should adjust your strategy accordingly. That translates to folding your weak full houses on dangerous boards to massive overbets. That can also mean bluffing someone off a weak full house with a massive overbet (though this is not recommended).

Finally, unlike some of the theorems we’ll discuss later, Zeebo’s Theorem is remarkably reliable. You can be reasonably sure it will work against a wide variety of opponents.

Stay tuned for the next post in Theorem Week.  Baluga Theorem is up next.

]]>
/2009/04/zeebo-theorem/feed/ 4