Dohhhhhhh: 46:16 = 2.875:1 not 3.9:1 Lambert: 12 outs never makes us a favourite. If we're up against just top pair here, we have around 40-45% chance to win. AMYBR: You're getting it in on this flop knowing you're behind, knowing that the only thing making it profitable long-term is the money already in the middle, if you can never get a fold from your opponent. I think calling to see a turn is more profitable in the long-term because I agree with Dohhhhhhh that nobody ever plays perfect poker and your opponent is unlikely to immediately lock-up if you make your hand. Your direct odds of nearly 3:1 are good enough to make a call profitable if you only have some small implied odds. I'm not posting much at the moment because of trouble with my eyes. So don't be asking me follow-up questions or owt. lol Posted by BorinLoner
I may be wrong so if I am, please explain why, but we have about 2.2% of hitting any given card as the next card (be it turn or river), so 12 outs x 2.2% x the 2 remaining streets, so 26.4% to hit an out on the turn, 52.8% to hit one by the river.
In Response to Re: Hmmm spot vs nit to get into profit: thoughts? : I may be wrong so if I am, please explain why, but we have about 2.2% of hitting any given card as the next card (be it turn or river), so 12 outs x 2.2% x the 2 remaining streets, so 26.4% to hit an out on the turn, 52.8% to hit one by the river. Where am I going wrong? Posted by Lambert180
In Response to Re: Hmmm spot vs nit to get into profit: thoughts? : I'd be very surprised if you hadnt ever tried to create a pot MW with a hand of equity 4 handed as a game winds down Ryan........ but ok. I find it interesting that despite the points discussed within the thread this is the most constructive thing that you can think to say. I think anyone can come up with a host of good reasons to opt to raise out of the BB here, or equally to check. I didnt really think it was neccessary to lay it all out. Posted by AMYBR
In live poker, when we smash the board with a hand like 9Tdd if we are gonna get paid off then it doesn't matter if there is 4 quid in the middle of 16.
Also I think that post flop is pretty standard in that we raised with a pretty hand, got a pretty flop and then got action.
If we are hating life on this kind of board post flop then it actually makes raising pre even more silly IMO.
In Response to Re: Hmmm spot vs nit to get into profit: thoughts? : In live poker, when we smash the board with a hand like 9Tdd if we are gonna get paid off then it doesn't matter if there is 4 quid in the middle of 16. Also I think that post flop is pretty standard in that we raised with a pretty hand, got a pretty flop and then got action. If we are hating life on this kind of board post flop then it actually makes raising pre even more silly IMO. Posted by scotty77
Maybe go back and re read? I said I was more than happy spinning for stacks off flop from very beginning. Not "hating life" at all...sigh..
Just interested in other peoples thoughs on hand.....
In Response to Re: Hmmm spot vs nit to get into profit: thoughts? : In live poker, when we smash the board with a hand like 9Tdd if we are gonna get paid off then it doesn't matter if there is 4 quid in the middle of 16. Also I think that post flop is pretty standard in that we raised with a pretty hand, got a pretty flop and then got action. If we are hating life on this kind of board post flop then it actually makes raising pre even more silly IMO. Posted by scotty77
disagree with bolded part tbh. i dont get it when people say "well you raised pre with Xy hand and got a nice flop what else were you hoping for" obv this is great flop considering our hand but when we face action from a nitty player we have close to 0FE on a shove which makes getting it in -ev.
In Response to Re: Hmmm spot vs nit to get into profit: thoughts? : disagree with bolded part tbh. i dont get it when people say "well you raised pre with Xy hand and got a nice flop what else were you hoping for" obv this is great flop considering our hand but when we face action from a nitty player we have close to 0FE on a shove which makes getting it in -ev. Posted by LOL_RAISE
The real sticking point of the hand that I thought was interesting has kind of got lost. But I'd be grateful for your opinion on this aspect Lol_Raise:
As you say, (which I agree and stated in OP) we have next to 0 FE here. We have strong equity, and do believe all our outs are clean other than the shaving off of diamonds pairing the board, still leaving us with 11 clean outs.
If we believe oppo shutsdown on all scary turns, but fires 3/4pot+ 1st to speak on all blank turns, how do we then feel about 3betting to get it in feeling strongly oppo will always 4bet shove (this was line I took, hindsight being 3bet shoving is likely a better line). If we mentally commit to flipping just over a BI can it be argued that committing at highest point of equity could be fine. In honesty this was the reasoning within the hand, as vs this particular opponent it would be difficult to extract value once my hand is made, and extremely difficult to play for his stack.
AMYBR your not flipping, it's -ev if you have zero fold equity in this spot If this hand plays another way with the equity you have plus fold equity then it maybe +ev or just neautral EV. oppo has only ever got 2prs/sets with your reads so best set up v 2prs is 40% - sets is 34% oppo has to fold 25% of the time to make this +ev I think, someone can correct me on the exact percentage required
Semi bluffing is only good when you have FE
I don't know why you think oppo shutsdown on scary turns, you can't know that that sure. It's all about playing post flop poker and not just chucking it in as a sight dog all the time because your going to spew money.
End of the day if we get priced out on the turn then so be it
AMYBR your not flipping, it's -ev if you have zero fold equity in this spot If this hand plays another way with the equity you have plus fold equity then it maybe +ev or just neautral EV. oppo has only ever got 2prs/sets with your reads so best set up v 2prs is 40% - sets is 34% oppo has to fold 25% of the time to make this +ev I think, someone can correct me on the exact percentage required Semi bluffing is only good when you have FE I don't know why you think oppo shutsdown on scary turns, you can't know that that sure. It's all about playing post flop poker and not just chucking it in as a sight dog all the time because your going to spew money. End of the day if we get priced out on the turn then so be it Posted by rancid
Bit of a sweeping statement off the back of one posted hand bud. Plus we are only playing oppos 120bb stack effective.
Fwiw I make it 49% vs 2pr hands (which is obv the most likely range of hand). We go from having 49% equity on flop and holding betting lead when we 3bet (yes betting lead is immaterial if we percxeive 0fe - but obv always leaving in a thin margin of spew). If we flat oppos c/r we head to turn with 25% likely facing an uncomfortable bet size on all bricks and finding it difficult to extract value when we make our hand, especially as hand is played.
I'm just uncomfortable with leaving ourselves so vulnerable to being taken off hand at turn when we take the passive line. Can make up the difference in % needed in eventual pot size if we are comfortable flipping the BI. Its not online, we arent multi tabling and crunching hands across 6 tables.
In Response to Re: Hmmm spot vs nit to get into profit: thoughts? : Bit of a sweeping statement off the back of one posted hand bud. Plus we are only playing oppos 120bb stack effective. Fwiw I make it 46% vs 2pr hands (which is obv the most likely range of hand). We go from having 46% equity on flop and holding betting lead when we 3bet (yes betting lead is immaterial if we percxeive 0fe - but obv always leaving in a thin margin of spew). If we flat oppos c/r we head to turn with 23% likely facing an uncomfortable bet size on all bricks and finding it difficult to extract value when we make our hand, especially as hand is played. I'm just uncomfortable with leaving ourselves so vulnerable to being taken off hand at turn when we take the passive line. Can make up the difference in % needed in eventual pot size if we are comfortable flipping the BI. Its not online, we arent multi tabling and crunching hands across 6 tables. Posted by AMYBR
Maybe sweeping but if it's -ev then it's just loosing money however small it all adds up ) & it's deffo 40% versus KQ
I just disagree that if we hit our hand oppo will shutdown. I guess if it's your read that oppo shutsdown all value hands when scare cards comes and never bets then ok but if oppo c/r flop then pretty dam certain oppo going to continue on all turn cards Will oppo just c/f sets/2prs on scary turns, I don't think do - oppo will at least c/c lets face it, if oppo c/f this spot on turn then wow you can print money IP versus this oppo right )
Do you really think oppo is only going to put you on the draw
Pots size will be £62, oppo has £90ish behind. There isnt a whole lot of room left for him to manouvre once he opens or takes a c/c line. As said very nitty, especially so for stacks.
Given action on flop I think my range is fairly transparent. My reads arent fixed in stone, and I far from think oppos will play optimumly overall. This hand was posted as reads were strong and knowledge of player was thorough. It was just a strange spot after being c/r'd by a clear narrow range of hands, but having strong indications that if c/r was flatted it would be very hard to extract any meaningful value on later streets. This was the basis for the 3bet. To deny oppo to get away on later streets, being comfortable with effectively flipping a BI. Not leaving self in a position where life becomes very difficult on turn with bricks. Am happy to give up the marginal% difference here to ensure stacks go in. This spot vs this specific player.
You yourself state that you have 0 fold equity, you have TEN HIGH, facing likely 2pair/set why would you want to get it in?
Even if you win no more money in the hand when you hit its extremely close to a break-even call, which is of course better then making a -EV shove/3bet call.
Why are you randomly removing 44 from his hand all of a sudden? Clearly oppo must have top 2 and you are just trying to convince everyone you made the correct move.
Edit - just seen post when you state he had Q4o. My bad.
Pots size will be £62, oppo has £90ish behind. There isnt a whole lot of room left for him to manouvre once he opens or takes a c/c line. As said very nitty, especially so for stacks. Given action on flop I think my range is fairly transparent. My reads arent fixed in stone, and I far from think oppos will play optimumly overall. This hand was posted as reads were strong and knowledge of player was thorough. It was just a strange spot after being c/r'd by a clear narrow range of hands, but having strong indications that if c/r was flatted it would be very hard to extract any meaningful value on later streets. This was the basis for the 3bet. To deny oppo to get away on later streets, being comfortable with effectively flipping a BI. Not leaving self in a position where life becomes very difficult on turn with bricks. Am happy to give up the marginal% difference here to ensure stacks go in. This spot vs this specific player. Posted by AMYBR
Yeah but by doing this you have allowed oppo to play abso perfect versus you by getting it as a fav, which is +EV for him - while it's -ev for you
In Response to Re: Hmmm spot vs nit to get into profit: thoughts? : Yeah but by doing this you have allowed oppo to play abso perfect versus you by getting it as a fav, which is +EV for him - while it's -ev for you Just gambling against the tide Posted by rancid
hmmm fair point. I still think its pretty marginal in terms of eventual pot size and likely shutdowns. I personally still hate flatting flop, although I would flat vs a wider range of players.
If we could factor in some FE it would obv be better but as we cant its pretty moot. But yeah allowing oppo to play perfect against us can never be good lol . For me it just comes down to oppos very high shutdown factor when we flat and improve or barrell size once we give up lead when we dont improve. That is my only issue.
You yourself state that you have 0 fold equity, you have TEN HIGH, facing likely 2pair/set why would you want to get it in? Even if you win no more money in the hand when you hit its extremely close to a break-even call, which is of course better then making a -EV shove/3bet call. Why are you randomly removing 44 from his hand all of a sudden? Clearly oppo must have top 2 and you are just trying to convince everyone you made the correct move. Edit - just seen post when you state he had Q4o. My bad. Posted by NColley
No your right, 44 should still be kept in his range. %'s in regard to 2pr hands were as a response to specific comments. As said from very beginning a set is very much in his range.
Not trying to convince anyone of anything mate. Just debating the margins of getting it in on flop at highest point of equity vs nit who is very unlikely to fold, but shutsdown a high % of time on fillers Its still very marginal imo vs narrow player type. Not convinced what was in fact best, but comfortable with getting it in outcome regardless. If hand doesnt improve I still wouldn't hate the line. Outcome never mattered
I think maybe you should reappraise your desire to get it all in on this hand given the nitty c/r oop. With 0FE you are effectively calling the allin, which as we know is never the preferred approach. Save your ammo for another hand where you can be the boss.
So folding the turn if it bricks is no hardship, and you still have a nice pot if it hits.
so pot is 16 we bet 7 and get c/r to 23 we started with 140bb so now have 129bb left. if he is never folding the flop and u want you 3b/c then its essentially like calling a shove
treating his raise like a jam pot becomes 159 and we have to call off 129bb so we are getting pot odds of 1.23:1
doing some maths that i ahvent done in a long time i work out we need 44.8% equity to get it in and be breakeven.
we have 38% equity vs KQ, so 3bet/calling flop is -ev if he never folds. therefore folding to his c/r is better than 3bet/calling it off.
so fold />raise
what about calling?
16 in pot we bet 7 get raised to 23 so we have to call 16 into a pot of 16+23+7=46.
46/16 is almost 3:1 so we need ~25% equity to call we have ~25% equity to improve our hand over 1 street so in a vacuum calling is roughly breakeven. since people dont play perfectly, even nits we will get action when we improve over atleast 1 street when we get to put money in as a big favorite which overall makes the flop call +ev imo. (also we may be able to get to see free rivers on say Ax turn cards)
so pot is 16 we bet 7 and get c/r to 23 we started with 140bb so now have 129bb left. if he is never folding the flop and u want you 3b/c then its essentially like calling a shove treating his raise like a jam pot becomes 159 and we have to call off 129bb so we are getting pot odds of 1.23:1 doing some maths that i ahvent done in a long time i work out we need 44.8% equity to get it in and be breakeven. we have 38% equity vs KQ, so 3bet/calling flop is -ev if he never folds. therefore folding to his c/r is better than 3bet/calling it off. so fold />raise what about calling? 16 in pot we bet 7 get raised to 23 so we have to call 16 into a pot of 16+23+7=46. 46/16 is almost 3:1 so we need ~25% equity to call we have ~25% equity to improve our hand over 1 street so in a vacuum calling is roughly breakeven. since people dont play perfectly, even nits we will get action when we improve over atleast 1 street when we get to put money in as a big favorite which overall makes the flop call +ev imo. (also we may be able to get to see free rivers on say Ax turn cards) call />fold />raise imo. Posted by LOL_RAISE
Nice post ty.
Your math and % are always going to be better than mine. But have to ask: 38% equity vs KQ? Do we not have 11 clean outs?
In Response to Re: Hmmm spot vs nit to get into profit: thoughts? : Nice post ty. Your math and % are always going to be better than mine. But have to ask: 38% equity vs KQ? Do we not have 11 clean outs? Posted by AMYBR
Against all combos of KQ, our equity will be around 38%. Sometimes oppo will have KxQd, which drops our equity to about 36-37% due to redraws to the higher flush.
Comments
Where am I going wrong?
call flop raise. getting it in is bad as you say he is never folding on the flop, someone did maths earlier showing its -ev.
Just interested in other peoples thoughs on hand.....
As you say, (which I agree and stated in OP) we have next to 0 FE here. We have strong equity, and do believe all our outs are clean other than the shaving off of diamonds pairing the board, still leaving us with 11 clean outs.
If we believe oppo shutsdown on all scary turns, but fires 3/4pot+ 1st to speak on all blank turns, how do we then feel about 3betting to get it in feeling strongly oppo will always 4bet shove (this was line I took, hindsight being 3bet shoving is likely a better line). If we mentally commit to flipping just over a BI can it be argued that committing at highest point of equity could be fine. In honesty this was the reasoning within the hand, as vs this particular opponent it would be difficult to extract value once my hand is made, and extremely difficult to play for his stack.
If this hand plays another way with the equity you have plus fold equity then it maybe +ev or just neautral EV.
oppo has only ever got 2prs/sets with your reads so best set up v 2prs is 40% - sets is 34%
oppo has to fold 25% of the time to make this +ev I think, someone can correct me on the exact percentage required
Semi bluffing is only good when you have FE
I don't know why you think oppo shutsdown on scary turns, you can't know that that sure. It's all about playing post flop poker and not just chucking it in as a sight dog all the time because your going to spew money.
End of the day if we get priced out on the turn then so be it
Fwiw I make it 49% vs 2pr hands (which is obv the most likely range of hand). We go from having 49% equity on flop and holding betting lead when we 3bet (yes betting lead is immaterial if we percxeive 0fe - but obv always leaving in a thin margin of spew). If we flat oppos c/r we head to turn with 25% likely facing an uncomfortable bet size on all bricks and finding it difficult to extract value when we make our hand, especially as hand is played.
I'm just uncomfortable with leaving ourselves so vulnerable to being taken off hand at turn when we take the passive line. Can make up the difference in % needed in eventual pot size if we are comfortable flipping the BI. Its not online, we arent multi tabling and crunching hands across 6 tables.
Maybe sweeping but if it's -ev then it's just loosing money however small it all adds up )
& it's deffo 40% versus KQ
I just disagree that if we hit our hand oppo will shutdown.
I guess if it's your read that oppo shutsdown all value hands when scare cards comes and never bets then ok
but if oppo c/r flop then pretty dam certain oppo going to continue on all turn cards
Will oppo just c/f sets/2prs on scary turns, I don't think do - oppo will at least c/c
lets face it, if oppo c/f this spot on turn then wow you can print money IP versus this oppo right )
Do you really think oppo is only going to put you on the draw
Given action on flop I think my range is fairly transparent. My reads arent fixed in stone, and I far from think oppos will play optimumly overall. This hand was posted as reads were strong and knowledge of player was thorough. It was just a strange spot after being c/r'd by a clear narrow range of hands, but having strong indications that if c/r was flatted it would be very hard to extract any meaningful value on later streets. This was the basis for the 3bet. To deny oppo to get away on later streets, being comfortable with effectively flipping a BI. Not leaving self in a position where life becomes very difficult on turn with bricks. Am happy to give up the marginal% difference here to ensure stacks go in. This spot vs this specific player.
Just gambling against the tide
If we could factor in some FE it would obv be better but as we cant its pretty moot. But yeah allowing oppo to play perfect against us can never be good lol
Not trying to convince anyone of anything mate. Just debating the margins of getting it in on flop at highest point of equity vs nit who is very unlikely to fold, but shutsdown a high % of time on fillers Its still very marginal imo vs narrow player type. Not convinced what was in fact best, but comfortable with getting it in outcome regardless. If hand doesnt improve I still wouldn't hate the line. Outcome never mattered
treating his raise like a jam pot becomes 159 and we have to call off 129bb
so we are getting pot odds of 1.23:1
doing some maths that i ahvent done in a long time i work out we need 44.8% equity to get it in and be breakeven.
we have 38% equity vs KQ, so 3bet/calling flop is -ev if he never folds. therefore folding to his c/r is better than 3bet/calling it off.
so fold />raise
what about calling?
16 in pot we bet 7 get raised to 23 so we have to call 16 into a pot of 16+23+7=46.
46/16 is almost 3:1 so we need ~25% equity to call
we have ~25% equity to improve our hand over 1 street so in a vacuum calling is roughly breakeven.
since people dont play perfectly, even nits we will get action when we improve over atleast 1 street when we get to put money in as a big favorite which overall makes the flop call +ev imo. (also we may be able to get to see free rivers on say Ax turn cards)
call />fold>raise imo.
Your math and % are always going to be better than mine. But have to ask: 38% equity vs KQ? Do we not have 11 clean outs?