| User | Post |
|
5:33 am
June 19, 2009
|
Badlilmonkey
| | |
| Guest
| | |
|
|
Post edited 12:36 pm – June 19, 2009 by Badlilmonkey
Post edited 12:37 pm – June 19, 2009 by Badlilmonkey
PokerStars, $0.10/0.25 NO Limit Texas Holdem Cash Games, 5 Players
Board
UTG: $25
CO: $28.80
Button: $71.35
SB: $38.95
BB: $28.85
Dealt to CO K:heart: K:spade:
Pre-flop:
(1 folds), CO raises to $.75, (2 folds), BB calls $.50
Flop: ($1.60) 4:club: J:diamond: 3:diamond: (2 Players)
BB checks, CO bets $.50, BB raises to $2.50, CO calls $2
Turn:($6.60) Q:club: (2 Players )
BB bets $5, CO raises to $10, BB calls $5
River: ($26.60) T:heart: (2 Players)
BB checks, CO bets $15, BB calls $15
Results:
CO Showed K:heart: K:spade:
BB Showed 3:heart: 4:heart:
BB wins $54.60
The Villian had only been there for 13 hands and was 30/15 with a high AFq. I had open raised 2x before and was folded to when I got this hand and felt my image was pretty loose. Geting stacked is meh but I've been thinking that the reraise on the flop should have set alarms off and I failed to listen to them. Also my Turn play was pretty weak I think – I put him AJ and discounted the possibility of qj
|
|
|
6:31 am
June 19, 2009
|
Tackleberry
| | Germany | |
| Member | posts 29 | |
|
|
Post edited 1:34 pm – June 19, 2009 by Tackleberry
Your flop-c-bet looks extraordinarily weak to me – mostly like an invitation to aggro Villains to bluff you off a marginal hand. Which were not bad in this situation – if you made that intentionally – but why didn´t you pull the trigger then and reraised him?
You said that he had a high aggression frequency – did his raise size differ from what he did the other times? Couldn´t we expect an aggro Villain to c/r a draw (like diamonds or 65) as well? In which case you even gave him a free shot to see the turn …
Summarized I don´t think that any alarm bells should have rang on the flop … in contrast I had happily shoved my stack in on the flop. The result is simply a cooler.
Turn is really bad btw – you won´t get money from worse hands and you don´t (!!) punish drawing hands while giving > 4:1.
- Tack -
PS: I am at work, so I have no stove here but calculate it yourself – your equity on the flop with KK against bottom two pair should´t be that bad anyway because you have a bunch of outs to a higher 2-pair … naturally it decreases on a blank turn – why you should commit yourself on the flop, imho.
|
|
|
6:57 am
June 19, 2009
|
Pete
| | |
| Guest
| | |
|
|
Tackleberry said:
Post edited 6:34 am – June 19, 2009 by Tackleberry
Summarized I don´t think that any alarm bells should have rang on the flop … in contrast I had happily shoved my stack in on the flop. The result is simply a cooler.
Turn is really bad btw – you won´t get money from worse hands and you don´t (!!) punish drawing hands while giving > 4:1.
- Tack -
This.
|
|
|
9:26 am
June 19, 2009
|
badlilmonkey
| | |
| Guest
| | |
|
|
Post edited 5:44 pm – June 19, 2009 by badlilmonkey
Tackleberry said:
Post edited 6:34 am – June 19, 2009 by Tackleberry
Your flop-c-bet looks extraordinarily weak to me – mostly like an invitation to aggro Villains to bluff you off a marginal hand. Which were not bad in this situation – if you made that intentionally – but why didn´t you pull the trigger then and reraised him?
You said that he had a high aggression frequency – did his raise size differ from what he did the other times? Couldn´t we expect an aggro Villain to c/r a draw (like diamonds or 65) as well? In which case you even gave him a free shot to see the turn …
Summarized I don´t think that any alarm bells should have rang on the flop … in contrast I had happily shoved my stack in on the flop. The result is simply a cooler.
Turn is really bad btw – you won´t get money from worse hands and you don´t (!!) punish drawing hands while giving > 4:1.
- Tack -
PS: I am at work, so I have no stove here but calculate it yourself – your equity on the flop with KK against bottom two pair should´t be that bad anyway because you have a bunch of outs to a higher 2-pair … naturally it decreases on a blank turn – why you should commit yourself on the flop, imho.
I half betted the pot to get the exact response that was intended. I flat called to look weak and induce an OOP turn bet by him, which I was fairly certain he would. In this instance I felt pushing the reraise on the flop would have allowed him to fold.
I was committed to this hand PF and shit happens so I'm not ( well anymore ) bugged by getting stacked. I mangaled the min raise turn bet. Should have pushed it. But conversely his calling the min raise should have slowed me down coupled with the checkraise on the flop, or maybe not and I am just overthinking it.
|
|
|
11:54 am
June 19, 2009
|
Hitman
| | |
| Member | posts 62 | |
|
|
Your commitment plan was to automatically stack off with an SPR of 18???
Sounds like a pretty bad plan to me unless the villain is a known tard-box, even then you could take better lines to gain value from his weaker holdings. If you're sold on auto-stacking off with this high an SPR that is.
You guys can't routinely "happily stack off" this deep post flop and expect to crush bigger games. Sometimes and vs. some villains, sure, it's going to be profitable. But vs. a guy you have no data on (13 hands is no data) this type of thinking is reckless at best imo.
|
|
|
12:44 pm
June 19, 2009
|
Pete
| | |
| Guest
| | |
|
|
Hitman said:
Your commitment plan was to automatically stack off with an SPR of 18???
Sounds like a pretty bad plan to me unless the villain is a known tard-box, even then you could take better lines to gain value from his weaker holdings. If you're sold on auto-stacking off with this high an SPR that is.
You guys can't routinely “happily stack off” this deep post flop and expect to crush bigger games. Sometimes and vs. some villains, sure, it's going to be profitable. But vs. a guy you have no data on (13 hands is no data) this type of thinking is reckless at best imo.
"You guys can't routinely “happily stack off” this deep post flop and expect to crush bigger games."
(Pete) As 200nl/400nl (FR) are my default games (a little 100 here and there), I have to disagree with this assessment in a vacuum. If you mean preflop, I'm with you. If you're talking about once the flop comes, I'm in disagreement. Let's examine the action.
"Your commitment plan was to automatically stack off with an SPR of 18???"
(Pete) Unless I'm in a very aggressive game, I'm certainly not planning to auto stack with such a high SPR. Back to the action, if I didn't reraise on the flop, I sure would have raised larger on the turn putting the opponent to a decision. The turn is $6.60, and the opponent bets $5.. which puts us at $ 11.60. Don't you think we have enough fold equity against draws combined with hands like AJ,KJ to push our remaining stack?
So yeah, I would have played the hand differently if it was me. By min raising, the turn, we're giving the opponent exactly what he wants for draws.
|
|
|
12:58 pm
June 19, 2009
|
Pete
| | |
| Member | posts 46 | |
|
|
Post edited 8:00 pm – June 19, 2009 by Pete
After thinking about it more.. maybe the check raise preflop at 25nl might lean more towards 2+ pair where at higher games, it could be a number of hands. It's why i recommended not flat calling unless I plan to shove a turn that doesn't complete the straight or flush. I just think we have a lot of fold equity but maybe not enough?
I think I had the opposite committement plan as the poster. I wasn't committed with an SPR preflop, but I found myself considering it on the flop based on the action.
That's also why I mentioned my default stakes. Maybe it's a consideration as well when planning the hand out from the flop action. Not sure.. look forward to everyone's insight. I'm not here to be right, I'm here to learn and increase the winrate. :)
|
|
|
4:23 pm
June 19, 2009
|
Badlilmonkey
| | |
| Guest
| | |
|
|
Hitman said:
Your commitment plan was to automatically stack off with an SPR of 18???
Sounds like a pretty bad plan to me unless the villain is a known tard-box, even then you could take better lines to gain value from his weaker holdings. If you're sold on auto-stacking off with this high an SPR that is.
You guys can't routinely “happily stack off” this deep post flop and expect to crush bigger games. Sometimes and vs. some villains, sure, it's going to be profitable. But vs. a guy you have no data on (13 hands is no data) this type of thinking is reckless at best imo.
I'll respectfully disagree on this. my goal should be to get it all in with this hand. I mangled it however the below text come close the scenario I described. Page 119
Stacks remain $200. You raise to $7 under the gun with
K♠K♣
. A
decent and moderately aggressive regular calls on the button, and
everyone else folds. Your opponent plays about 25 percent of his
starting hands, and he plays well postflop. He views you as being
capable and aggressive.
The flop comes
J♥T♦5♣
. The pot is $17, and the remaining
stacks are $193. You are first to act. What is your plan?
You likely have the best hand, so betting for value makes sense.
Further, if you get raised, you don’t mind getting all-in against this
opponent. He knows your preflop range is wider than just premium
hands,
I had just opened raise 2x in a row and then get KKs the third hand. Most people by now would assume I am opening with a broad range of hands
|
|
|
6:47 pm
June 19, 2009
|
Hitman
| | |
| Member | posts 62 | |
|
|
Badlil,
You're situation is different than the page 119 example in 2 critical ways. First, your spr is 18, the spr in the book situation is just over 11. The deeper the stacks are in relation to the preflop pot size, the worse stacking off becomes with just an overpair (in the book example, an spr of 18 would mean the starting stacks were 313, not 200).
Second, in the example from the text the villain is a decent and moderately aggressive regular who is a thinking player, reading us, so he does know our preflop range may be wider. In that case he may float or value raise us with worse hands, or semi-bluff us to leverage fold equity, and the scenario is much better for us. In your hand, the villain is an unknown player lower stakes, on deeper money. While your range should appear wider due to your recent activity, we don't know that he's 1) recognizing this or even paying attention, or 2) knows how to exploit someone opening on a wide range. For all we know he could be a set farmer. Again the stats you have on him are meaningless, it's only 13 hands of data.
Pete,
I get what you're saying, but not sure I agree. The check-raise on the flop is usually going to mean 2 pair or better, a decent draw, or a combo hand like a pair and draw. If you're going to test him I agree with you, you have to raise more on the turn because you're still crushed by the better hands, but have now given the draw (if that's what it is) a favorable price to call. The problem is, if you raise more you are committing. Since you're not really sure where you're at, raising more is essentially guessing in a big pot. We want our opponents guessing for big pots, we don't want to do that to ourselves.
Where's our commitment plan? If you're committed to getting all in on a safe looking turn card, then raise more. If you're not committed, then I would much prefer (in hero's spot as played) to flat the turn in position for pot control. Let him bluff the river with his missed draws, or "value bet" worse made hands like if he's out of line with AJ. We'll lose less if we're beat this way, and win more from his busted hands and worse 1 pair holdings. Now, when we get some real data and see this guy is a fishcake who stacks off light, now I'm much more willing to commit even this deep (because now I think it will be profitable) and in that case now I am raising the turn bigger just like you suggest. Fishcakes will often call off with their draws, and you'd have to pry AJ from his cold dead hands to get him to fold it. Not knowing, I'm not excited about playing an all in pot this deep with 1 pair. 200NL and 400NL is my regular game too so I can see your perspective, believe me.
|
|
|
6:50 pm
June 19, 2009
|
Hitman
| | |
| Member | posts 62 | |
|
|
PS Pete, I didn't mention this in his flop check-raising range but it's possible… if he's going to check-raise the flop with air or a weaker hand like 88 to "test us", then flatting the turn is better as well because he's going to snap fold all those hands to our turn raise, where as we give him a chance to pay us one more street of value on the river by flatting.
|
|
|
1:26 am
June 21, 2009
|
Pete
| | |
| Member | posts 46 | |
|
|
Hitman,
I haven't forgotten about your reply.. just trying to really think this one through. You bring up a number of great points.
|
|
|
1:28 am
June 21, 2009
|
Pete
| | |
| Member | posts 46 | |
|
|
To the authors:
Could we get you guys to chime in on this thread? It's a common situation I come across and would love to get additional insight.
|
|
|
1:11 pm
June 21, 2009
|
Sunny Mehta
| | |
| Admin
| posts 67 | |
|
|
It's tough to give really specific advice without knowing more about villain. So I'll comment as if 30/15 were his long term stats.
I'd raise more preflop with a 30/15 in the BB. Maybe make it $1 (or more). Then I'd probably just pot the flop and be happy to get all-in. If I couldn't get all-in on the flop I'd still get it in on the turn. While the turn card isn't spectacular, good jacks will often still call a turn bet, and if you get enough money in on the flop they'll sometimes still stack off. Plus, Qdxd hands will love the turn.
I wouldn't worry too much about stacking off with kings on this type of flop against most players. iMO it's usually profitable and, at the very least, hardly ever a big mistake. The only time I think you need to really consciously slow down is maybe against uber-nits.
|
|
|
9:13 am
June 22, 2009
|
Hitman
| | |
| Member | posts 62 | |
|
|
Post edited 4:14 pm – June 22, 2009 by Hitman
Post edited 4:14 pm – June 22, 2009 by Hitman
Sunny Mehta said:
I wouldn't worry too much about stacking off with kings on this type of flop against most players. iMO it's usually profitable and, at the very least, hardly ever a big mistake. The only time I think you need to really consciously slow down is maybe against uber-nits.
Sunny,
How big would the SPR have to be before you would consider not routinely stacking off here?
BTW as stated I agree if the villain will stack off 150+ BB's on an SPR of 18 with just a J or QdXd with 1 card to come, committing is going to be profitable (as I said, I think there are times and villains against whom getting all in with be profitable, and that would certainly qualify). I guess what I don't agree with is that the majority of villains are that retarded.
If half of our unknown villains are that retarded, then again we're essentially guessing in a big pot which we create by our choice. In the case of raising the turn, it's even worse actually, because we are allowing the villain to choose when he wants to play a big pot and when he doesn't. If he's retarded and holds Jx or QdXd, then he will probably chose to. If he's not, then he will likely only chose to when we're crushed and escape giving us additional value when we're crushing him.
If less than half of unknown villains are this bad, then committing seems really bad to me this deep post flop.
So I guess I have 2 questions… how big does the SPR have to be to change your view, and what % of unknown villains do you think are complete spewtards?
Thanks for your answers, much appreciated. 
|
|
|
2:57 pm
June 22, 2009
|
Sunny Mehta
| | |
| Admin
| posts 67 | |
|
|
Hitman,
I totally agree that stack sizes (i.e. – SPR) and opponent type affect your default commitment plan. That's why I answered the question with the stack sizes given and as if villain were actually a 30/15. Honestly it's difficult to answer your questions with specific numbers 'cause there isn't like a line in the sand. You guys are smart enough to know it's a sliding scale.
200bb and 19/16 opponent – not committed. 85bb and 41/22 opponent – obviously committed. Etc. And everything in between.
As for your question about what % of unknown villains are spewtards, again, I can't answer with any kind of certainty. I don't know the population of .10-.25 well enough. Plus, you rarely have ZERO information. As a general rule you should be always be aware of what site you're playing on, what stack size the villain bought in for, what his stats are in the few hands you have on him, what his screenname is, etc…
Buys in full at Pokerstars, has a screenname of "ShipItFtw", and has played zero of his last five hands – probably a nit. Buys in for 80bb at UB, has a screenname of "BearsFan82", and has played 3 out of his last five hands – probably not a nit.
-S
|
|
|
7:03 pm
June 22, 2009
|
Hitman
| | |
| Member | posts 62 | |
|
|
Careful, I'm a Bears fan.
Thanks Sunny, agree with all the various numbers you just put up obv.
I still don't think the OP's spot is a happily get all in spot, and really think flatting the turn is better than min-raising or raising big. I mean, if we were saying begrudginly get all in or it's close get all in, mkay, but people saying oh ya high five the monitor and get all in, I think we're a tad too deep for that and have too little information on the villain. Depending a lot on the villain, it may be very profitable, or it may be hugely -EV, we just don't know.
Another question, although I don't think this is the best play, what do you think of min-raising the turn as a freeze bet? I don't like it in this spot because if we get 3 bet are we really comfortable folding after putting this much money in with KK? And if we're ahead are we really wanting to check down safe rivers when he checks to us? Maybe I'm not thinking about the freeze raise right though…….
|
|
Login
Search 
Home
Print this Post 
Add a New Topic
Reply to Post
Quote and Reply 
Topic RSS 
