Nittiest fold of my life at MIcros 6 MAX. Was I wrong?

step7

Player	Action	Cards	Amount	Pot	Balance
Clos82	Small blind		£0.02	£0.02	£3.76
cwurep1	Big blind		£0.04	£0.06	£3.96
	Your hole cards	A A
will198427	Fold
step7	Raise		£0.12	£0.18	£3.94
Matt1872	Fold
Clos82	Call		£0.10	£0.28	£3.66
cwurep1	Fold
Flop
		2 4 7
Clos82	Check
step7	Bet		£0.14	£0.42	£3.80
Clos82	Call		£0.14	£0.56	£3.52
Turn
		8
Clos82	Check
step7	Check
River
		A
Clos82	Bet		£0.56	£1.12	£2.96
step7	Fold
Clos82	Muck
Clos82	Win		£0.51		£3.47
Clos82	Return		£0.56	£0.05	£4.03

Villain is a pretty decent reg from what I've seen - though i don't have too many post flop reads.
Not seen him as a bluff box, plays pretty tight pre. but will flat some dubious (IMnittyHO) SC from the blinds.
I know he's capable of a move here - and it's an old favourite to lead into a four flush board on the river when the hand is checked on the turn - but for pot? Seems expensive as a bluff and what gets passed the flop that can pot river?

I'd set out this session to stop being a pay-off-wizard but is this overly nitty?
Decided to give up on the 6.5BB (think I got the maths right) "invested", figuring better spots would come up
[and one did, stacked him AQ v A3s (OOP again!) on AAx]

Conspiracy theory aside TLDR..
If I wrote poker software to max. the rake, it would deal boards like this.. just sayin! Sorry Tikay
The probability on turned four-flush for villain vs rivered set aces is 8648:1.
That's a 4:1,5:1,5:1,5:1,22:1 forecast coming in - nice day at the races
To put that in context, that's in the order of 3 times more unlikely than quads over quads!!
(I'm sure someone will let me know if I got my maths wrong here)

Struggling with the maths at this hour, but what are the odds of villain hitting the 4-flush? By my reckoning ~20% of the time??..looks like I have a big hole in my game not knowing this for definite.. might have to start another post.

Think generally villain has ~45% equity on the river with a typical non-3 betting range (77-66,ATs-A4s,K8s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T9s,AJo-A9o,KTo+,QTo+,JTo)

I've found at micro's betting normally matches the hand represented! (Discounting the blufftards and maniacs..which this guy is not!)
Expensive lesson finally learned.

PS: Yes I know I should have bet the turn BTW and fold to raise or big lead on the river, set myself up to be bluffed on the river (so maybe even more reason to bluff catch!) Hand probably butchered but would like opinion on as played.
edit: Rethinking this now in the cold light of day! My normal line is bet til they fold or fight back, but on this turn at these stakes think that is spew as no diamond is getting folded here ever - so my bet is neither value or a bluff against a "normal" player.

Again my maths probably wrong but 38% of all possible hand combos beat me? Many of many of them "fish" hands 72s so should be discounted here. But any diamond,35,56 is 378 combos from 990 possible (with card removal) - just goes to show why big bets from normally passive "recreational" players playing any-2-will-do ranges (this guy better than that pool though for sure) should be respected with one pair at the river!

Itsover4u

odds are 1.26% of a four card flush happening pre flop - on the river we don't have the odds to call a put sized bet ever - if he has bluffed you he deserves the pot but folding will always be more profitable.

step7

Thanks for responding

odds are 1.26% of a four card flush happening pre flop

Pre flop?
I'm looking at odds of four flush boards on turn for starters in TLDR section.
Thinking 0.25% if he does indeed have a diamond, 0.36% if not? Not sure if I have this right - deffo need to work on my poker maths.

on the river we don't have the odds to call a put sized bet ever - if he has bluffed you he deserves the pot but folding will always be more profitable

We're getting 3:1 on the river? Plenty pot odds vs his equity + times he's bluffing?

Itsover4u

He potted the river - you are getting 2/1 - you need to be correct 50% of the time to break even

You need to call 56p to win £1.12

Against a pot bet I would hazard you will never make the 51% you need to be profitable by calling every time.

I think Qd is a fold in this spot readless

step7

Sorry 2:1, (used to working percentages rather than classic odds), but this means we only need to be correct 33% of the time??

I look at this as us contributing 33% of the final pot we could win so need to win at least that often to break even - is my thinking flawed? Shocked I haven't got this down pat after playing for as long as I have

Working on my 6max game after switching from primarily HUsng. I can see relative hand strengths massively different here.. so understand your thinking of not calling anything other than the effectively* 2nd nuts in what tend to be quite passive games.

_{*disregarding super nut hands before the pendants pick me up on it}

Duesenberg

You're right @step7 - you need to be good 33%+ of the time when calling a pot sized bet.

It took me ages to get my head around it and I used to think it was 50% as @Itsover4u posted.

The link below is a really helpful article on the subject from Upswing Poker which explains things far better than I'll ever be able to...

https://upswingpoker.com/pot-odds-step-by-step/

As for your hand, I think you'll make more in the long run by over folding all your none flush hands in the situation posted above. At those stakes I really don't think the population as a whole is bluffing anywhere nearly as frequently in these spots as they theoretically should be. You'll be owned once in a while but I'd expect the fold to be +EV in the long term.

Itsover4u

Yeah sorry my bad because you add the money for the call makes it 33%

TheEdge949

FWIW I just dont think were good, enough of the time here, to call.

step7

OK thanks guys, had a wobble there for a moment, rusty after a break!

Rather than do a bunch of mental maths (ala Mr. "Poke" ) in the few seconds you have at the river I prefer to visualise the final* pot as "a pie" (nom) and also visualise how much i'm contributing as a slice in that pie - that's my pot odds. Doesn't have to be bang on, but means I can get 50% / 33% decisions right at least!

To labour a point as I think this may help others on a fundamental..




*final as in including all bets calls etc. as action closes

Yes agreeing with the consensus so far, pretty much readless in soft 6max game this is most often a fold despite having pot odds vs villains equity!
(For the record in a HU match I'm snapping this off against all but the nittiest/passive villains as it's such a "text book" bluff spot)

Enut

Not a nitty fold at all IMO. Of course you could have reraised him on the river, it would have screamed that you had the Ad and you probably only get found out if he has it!

step7

Enut: Of course you could have reraised him on the river, it would have screamed that you had the Ad and you probably only get found out if he has it!

Loving the balls! ..but think that kind of move inadvisable at nl4, can see even most half decent regs calling it off J/Q hi as they used to fish overvaluing any flush and I've never been one in "betting for info" lol

Funny Gambler's Fallacy notion comes to mind "3 Aces are out - makes the chance of him having last one less likely"

Itsover4u

Enut said:

Not a nitty fold at all IMO. Of course you could have reraised him on the river, it would have screamed that you had the Ad and you probably only get found out if he has it!

good play when you have the A diamond blocker on a 3 card diamond board - not so much on this board