| Author |
Message |
|
Posted: Tue, 30 Sep 2008, 4:12am Post subject: making a really loose call (surprise!)
|
 |
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 3552
WPP: 112
Location: at your tables, calling your bets
|
|
This is the $55 6-max tournament. My read on villain is he's a bad regular who plays way too loose from late position, especially when he's short stacked. I've seen him open shove stuff like 53o from the button but I haven't seen him make any huge overbets like this before. Can I assume he'd raise small with his big hands, to the point where I can call here? What do you think his range is?
PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $50+$5 Tournament, 125/250 Blinds 25 Ante (5 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com
MP (t4720)
Button (t4815)
SB (t7284)
Hero (BB) (t7590)
UTG (t19678)
Preflop: Hero is BB with 6 , A
2 folds, Button raises to t4250, 1 fold, Hero raises to t7565 (All-In), Button calls t540 (All-In) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 30 Sep 2008, 11:36am Post subject:
|
|
|
i rarely, if ever, get pms
Joined: 28 Apr 2005
Posts: 4317
WPP: 178
|
|
this is about as close to 1:1 as you're going to get, so you need just under 50% equity to make this call ok.
It's actually pretty close - the following range is reasonable to put him on, and gives you barely enough equity to call. I think this might be one of those rare occassions where even I could agree with the argument that you might be able to find a better spot though.
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 50.411% 46.35% 04.06% 4542830796 398066862.00 { A6o }
Hand 1: 49.589% 45.53% 04.06% 4462263576 398066862.00 { TT-22, A2s+, K2s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T8s+, 97s+, 86s+, 75s+, 64s+, 53s+, 43s, A2o+, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o, 98o, 87o, 76o, 65o, 54o } |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 30 Sep 2008, 11:58am Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 3552
WPP: 112
Location: at your tables, calling your bets
|
|
Well the blinds still count for something, I need 46.2% to breakeven, but I agree I should be looking for 50% equity since I'm likely to find better spots later.
I don't know how much total crap like 54o is in his range, but I don't think he ever open shoves TT or AK either. I was thinking something like this
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 49.939% 44.86% 05.08% 2608643688 295324146.00 { 77-22, A9s-A2s, K6s+, Q8s+, J8s+, T7s+, 97s+, 87s, 76s, ATo-A4o, KTo+, QTo+, JTo, T9o }
Hand 1: 50.061% 44.98% 05.08% 2615692404 295324146.00 { A6o } |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 30 Sep 2008, 12:12pm Post subject:
|
|
|
i rarely, if ever, get pms
Joined: 28 Apr 2005
Posts: 4317
WPP: 178
|
|
I dunno - I think both of us might be ranging him a little too much on how we value hands rather than how he probably does.
The reason I'm including hands like AJ-AK, 88-TT in his push range here are because those are hands that while he'd be fine if you called, he also doesn't want to make a standard raise preflop and then have you stop'n'go or c/r his ass on the flop.
I included hands like 45o because u said he had pushed 35o from the button. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 30 Sep 2008, 1:31pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House
Joined: 09 Jul 2008
Posts: 883
WPP: 135
Location: London, England.
|
|
Why wouldn't he be open shoving the better hands? is it because he's a bad player? my thought would be if he plays the bad hands in a similiar fashion to the better hands it'd be more deceptive and so disguise his decent hands. Is this correct thinking? or would it be completely wrong for him to play the better hands in a similiar fashion for some subterfuge.
thanks |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 30 Sep 2008, 8:16pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Crazy Canadian Courtiebwnage
Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 2631
WPP: 101
Location: google image happy flower
|
|
| chardrian wrote: | | The reason I'm including hands like AJ-AK, 88-TT in his push range here are because those are hands that while he'd be fine if you called, he also doesn't want to make a standard raise preflop and then have you stop'n'go or c/r his ass on the flop. | I would agree with this thinking. Probably the reason for the overbet shove in the first place? I think you need to include 88 and 99 in his range for sure.
| chardrian wrote: | | I included hands like 45o because u said he had pushed 35o from the button. | He said he hadn't seen a huge overbet from him yet, though ... so might need to shorten his range? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 30 Sep 2008, 8:19pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Crazy Canadian Courtiebwnage
Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 2631
WPP: 101
Location: google image happy flower
|
|
| LuckySlevin wrote: | | my thought would be if he plays the bad hands in a similiar fashion to the better hands it'd be more deceptive and so disguise his decent hands. | We're assuming he doesn't think enough to realize this and push with his monster hands too. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 30 Sep 2008, 11:18pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House
Joined: 20 Jul 2008
Posts: 912
WPP: 114
|
|
| If I'm not mistaken, in order to make this call. Villain needs to be pushing 45% or worse just to break even. I would probably wait for a better spot unless I'm missing something? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 01 Oct 2008, 1:03am Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 3552
WPP: 112
Location: at your tables, calling your bets
|
|
The idea is that he's not pushing his huge hands. Look at my equity vs. the top 45% with the top 5% taken out.
BTW he had Q4s. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 01 Oct 2008, 6:22pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House
Joined: 20 Jul 2008
Posts: 912
WPP: 114
|
|
| The only reason why I would wait (and obviously you play WAY higher then I do) is because even if your A high is good. Its not good by very much. All he would need is two cards higher then a 6 and its a 60-40. Either way your push is +EV, its just very close. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 01 Oct 2008, 7:05pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 3552
WPP: 112
Location: at your tables, calling your bets
|
|
| revolvingiris wrote: | | The only reason why I would wait (and obviously you play WAY higher then I do) is because even if your A high is good. Its not good by very much. All he would need is two cards higher then a 6 and its a 60-40. Either way your push is +EV, its just very close. |
You should try to put people on actual ranges and move beyond this type of "maybe I'm dominated maybe I'm 60-40" reasoning because it doesn't help too much in close spots. BTW no one cares what buy-ins you play. As long as you make an effort to back it up with logic, your advice is welcome. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 02 Oct 2008, 5:48pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House
Joined: 20 Jul 2008
Posts: 912
WPP: 114
|
|
| mcatdog wrote: | | revolvingiris wrote: | | The only reason why I would wait (and obviously you play WAY higher then I do) is because even if your A high is good. Its not good by very much. All he would need is two cards higher then a 6 and its a 60-40. Either way your push is +EV, its just very close. |
You should try to put people on actual ranges and move beyond this type of "maybe I'm dominated maybe I'm 60-40" reasoning because it doesn't help too much in close spots. BTW no one cares what buy-ins you play. As long as you make an effort to back it up with logic, your advice is welcome. |
Yeah its something I am working on. One thing I struggle with ranges is that its just that, a range. I do put opponents on certain holdings based on the type of player they are. But from there I try to whittle it down based on position, lucky streak, any "x" factor I can....Like I said, in your spot it was a +EV play. But since I play at lower buy ins the smallest +EV decisions can be folded for a better spots. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 04 Oct 2008, 10:03am Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 01 Nov 2005
Posts: 3026
WPP: 115
Location: GO BUCKS!
|
|
| revolvingiris wrote: | | But since I play at lower buy ins the smallest +EV decisions can be folded for a better spots. |
If I were you, I would try to take advantage of all of the +EV spots that you can. Especially against bad players. Better spots may never come along. Question, what do you mean by lucky streaks? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 04 Oct 2008, 1:13pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House
Joined: 09 Jan 2005
Posts: 944
WPP: 108
Location: California
|
|
| LuckySlevin wrote: | Why wouldn't he be open shoving the better hands? is it because he's a bad player? my thought would be if he plays the bad hands in a similiar fashion to the better hands it'd be more deceptive and so disguise his decent hands. Is this correct thinking? or would it be completely wrong for him to play the better hands in a similiar fashion for some subterfuge.
thanks |
+10 pts for using the word subterfuge in a sentence. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 05 Oct 2008, 2:08pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House
Joined: 20 Jul 2008
Posts: 912
WPP: 114
|
|
| Sprayed wrote: | | revolvingiris wrote: | | But since I play at lower buy ins the smallest +EV decisions can be folded for a better spots. |
If I were you, I would try to take advantage of all of the +EV spots that you can. Especially against bad players. Better spots may never come along. Question, what do you mean by lucky streaks? |
I'm not talking about 60-40's or anything close. I was refusing to the .1 or .2 +EV plays that sometimes could go either way...One factor I look for is how lucky a player has been getting. Luck defined as= has been getting a ton of great hands in a row. Or is sucking out a ton when getting to the river, turn. Has been hitting a lot of draws without odds. Luck is just one of those things that cant be accounted for and I am trying to slightly account for it. Meaning, that with whoever this particular player is. I may or may not choose to take some gambles or risks at that time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 05 Oct 2008, 2:46pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 01 Nov 2005
Posts: 3026
WPP: 115
Location: GO BUCKS!
|
|
| Luck has nothing to do with it. Gambooooool with the retards as often as you can. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 05 Oct 2008, 3:48pm Post subject:
|
|
|
11 OF DIAMONDS
Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Posts: 4379
WPP: 117
Location: ISHPERMING MISHIGEN
|
|
| revolvingiris wrote: | | Sprayed wrote: | | revolvingiris wrote: | | But since I play at lower buy ins the smallest +EV decisions can be folded for a better spots. |
If I were you, I would try to take advantage of all of the +EV spots that you can. Especially against bad players. Better spots may never come along. Question, what do you mean by lucky streaks? |
I'm not talking about 60-40's or anything close. I was refusing to the .1 or .2 +EV plays that sometimes could go either way...One factor I look for is how lucky a player has been getting. Luck defined as= has been getting a ton of great hands in a row. Or is sucking out a ton when getting to the river, turn. Has been hitting a lot of draws without odds. Luck is just one of those things that cant be accounted for and I am trying to slightly account for it. Meaning, that with whoever this particular player is. I may or may not choose to take some gambles or risks at that time. |
You want to rethink this. Just because someone sucks out 4 hands in a row doesn't mean he has any more or less of a chance to suck out on the very next hand. Every hand should be treated independently. Do not make plays (or choose not to make plays) because you think someone is lucky or is due for luck. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 05 Oct 2008, 6:01pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House
Joined: 20 Jul 2008
Posts: 912
WPP: 114
|
|
| givememyleg wrote: | | revolvingiris wrote: | | Sprayed wrote: | | revolvingiris wrote: | | But since I play at lower buy ins the smallest +EV decisions can be folded for a better spots. |
If I were you, I would try to take advantage of all of the +EV spots that you can. Especially against bad players. Better spots may never come along. Question, what do you mean by lucky streaks? |
I'm not talking about 60-40's or anything close. I was refusing to the .1 or .2 +EV plays that sometimes could go either way...One factor I look for is how lucky a player has been getting. Luck defined as= has been getting a ton of great hands in a row. Or is sucking out a ton when getting to the river, turn. Has been hitting a lot of draws without odds. Luck is just one of those things that cant be accounted for and I am trying to slightly account for it. Meaning, that with whoever this particular player is. I may or may not choose to take some gambles or risks at that time. |
You want to rethink this. Just because someone sucks out 4 hands in a row doesn't mean he has any more or less of a chance to suck out on the very next hand. Every hand should be treated independently. Do not make plays (or choose not to make plays) because you think someone is lucky or is due for luck. |
For the time being, I disagree with this. Im not saying Ill fold AA or KK pre to a lucky player. But I would much rather attempt a steal on someone who is TAGG then LAGG on a lucky streak. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 05 Oct 2008, 6:22pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 01 Nov 2005
Posts: 3026
WPP: 115
Location: GO BUCKS!
|
|
| Don't tell me, you also bet on red when black has hit 5 times in a row. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 05 Oct 2008, 6:47pm Post subject:
|
|
|
11 OF DIAMONDS
Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Posts: 4379
WPP: 117
Location: ISHPERMING MISHIGEN
|
|
| revolvingiris wrote: | | givememyleg wrote: | | revolvingiris wrote: | | Sprayed wrote: | | revolvingiris wrote: | | But since I play at lower buy ins the smallest +EV decisions can be folded for a better spots. |
If I were you, I would try to take advantage of all of the +EV spots that you can. Especially against bad players. Better spots may never come along. Question, what do you mean by lucky streaks? |
I'm not talking about 60-40's or anything close. I was refusing to the .1 or .2 +EV plays that sometimes could go either way...One factor I look for is how lucky a player has been getting. Luck defined as= has been getting a ton of great hands in a row. Or is sucking out a ton when getting to the river, turn. Has been hitting a lot of draws without odds. Luck is just one of those things that cant be accounted for and I am trying to slightly account for it. Meaning, that with whoever this particular player is. I may or may not choose to take some gambles or risks at that time. |
You want to rethink this. Just because someone sucks out 4 hands in a row doesn't mean he has any more or less of a chance to suck out on the very next hand. Every hand should be treated independently. Do not make plays (or choose not to make plays) because you think someone is lucky or is due for luck. |
For the time being, I disagree with this. Im not saying Ill fold AA or KK pre to a lucky player. But I would much rather attempt a steal on someone who is TAGG then LAGG on a lucky streak. |
Generally speaking, you should be stealing from taggs more than laggs. However, luck should have NOTHING to do with your decision making. What makes you think luck is more important than math? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 06 Oct 2008, 10:58am Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House
Joined: 20 Jul 2008
Posts: 912
WPP: 114
|
|
| Sprayed wrote: | | Don't tell me, you also bet on red when black has hit 5 times in a row. |
haha and green when its missed 40 times or more....I think you guys are thinking that I am missing huge plays with this one. Currently, luck is the only thing in poker that cannot be accounted for. Every dog has his day and sometimes you can see it. All I am saying is that it is a factor of the game and I don't like to rule any out. I apply math to every hand that I am in. I didn't say I choose to go with fear of blind luck over mathematical probability. All I said was I take it into account on specific hands in specific situations. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 06 Oct 2008, 7:20pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House
Joined: 09 Jul 2008
Posts: 883
WPP: 135
Location: London, England.
|
|
| mcatdog wrote: | The idea is that he's not pushing his huge hands. Look at my equity vs. the top 45% with the top 5% taken out.
BTW he had Q4s. |
Could you explain this a little more, I don't quite get it, thanks mcat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 07 Oct 2008, 2:15am Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 3552
WPP: 112
Location: at your tables, calling your bets
|
|
| Do you have PokerStove on your computer? If you don't then get it (it's free) and then I'll explain. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 07 Oct 2008, 4:24am Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House
Joined: 09 Jul 2008
Posts: 883
WPP: 135
Location: London, England.
|
|
| Yes I have PS mcat - oh I think It's just clicked what you are saying now - so put him on a 45% range in PS, and then manually deselect the top 5% of hands? It' has prompted another question though where did the 45% ranging come from? How did you come to that range? thanks |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FTR1 at ChiliPoker: $300 Added, November 8th @ 15:00 ET
