|
scfc_andy15
|
05-11-2010, 10:19 AM
Post subject: $2NL 9Max - bluff nit?
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 123
|
|
Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $0.02 BB (9 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com
UTG ($2.41)
UTG+1 ($2)
Hero (MP1) ($2)
MP2 ($2.03)
MP3 ($2.12)
CO ($1.83)
Button ($4.22)
SB ($0.80)
BB ($1.67)
Preflop: Hero is MP1 with 9 , 9
2 folds, Hero bets $0.08, MP2 raises to $0.27, 5 folds, Hero calls $0.19
Flop: ($0.57) A, 3, A (2 players)
Hero checks, MP2 bets $0.16, Hero raises to $0.63, 1 fold
Total pot: $0.89 | Rake: $0.05
Villian is running at 8/4/3.9 over 200 hands so fairly nitty, notes say he has only shown down strong hands on river. I make what i think is standard raise pre-flop and get 3 bet to a smallish amount just over 3x total my original raise, I am putting his range here at AKo, 1010+ so I originally call here only to set mine.
Flop comes down A3A and I check as I doing with basically all my range here and he bets out 1/3 pot, I then decided to raise as I believed that he would be folding 1010-KK to a believable check raise as the aces would scare him and he is very nitty and the chances of him having AA, AK+ are reduced with the two aces on the board. So I raise the weak cbet he folds if he had called I would of closed down and only put any more money in if I spiked a 9.
|
|
"Whether he likes it or not, a man's character is stripped bare at the poker table; if the other players read him better than he does, he has only himself to blame. Unless he is both able and prepared to see himself as others do, flaws and all, he will be a loser in cards, as in life."
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
Imthenewfish
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: sites im allowed to play on
Posts: 945
|
|
Easy flop checkraise baed on his betting size unless you have a read otherwise. I think my flop raise would have been ~3 times his bet for around $0.50. I would have folded pre because i think 99 would usually be really hard to play against a nit OOP. Only reason I would call is if he's pretty straightforward postflop. "Villian is running at 8/4/3.9" I know that the third number is aggression factor or something, but could someone explain how it's calculated? I don't really know if it's he bets 3.9% of the time postflop or what, and this number could change if I called or folded preflop.
|
|
|
|
abysil
|
|
Two Pair
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 48
|
|
Aggression factor is (#raises + #bets) / #calls
Aggression Freq. is (raises+bets) / (calls + folds + raises + bets) * 100
These are both for post flop play.
So in both cases the higher the number the more likely he is to bet out or raise your bet after the flop. An Agg. Frq of 50 means that half the hands where he sees a flop he is folding or calling, and half the hands he is raising or betting. This is the third number PT3 shows in the hud, but 3.9 looks like an aggression factor instead of freq.
|
|
|
|
fatguy'06
|
|
3-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 63
|
|
I dont think call pre flop was good. Isnt the rule of thumb 15:1 implied odds? And assuming you could even get the nit all in you would only have 10:1.
|
|
|
|
JR9477
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Iowa
Posts: 426
|
|
I think a nit is more likely to bet on the turn with AA/AK, though I think his 3bet range is more like QQ+,AKs. (AA-1,AK-8)9, (QQ-6,KK-6)12
He's Folding 57% (minimum imo)
He needs to fold 46% of the time; [63 / (15+57+63)]
Looks fine to me.
|
(Josh)
|
|
surviva316
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Confusing people with my liberal biblicisms
Posts: 1,625
|
|
his 3b size was not small. you're getting <10:1 to set mine OOP, so this should be a very easy fold (in fact it's a very easy fold IP, too).
there are 3 things about preflop that make calling seem very bad, but listing them seems pretty spoonfeeding-esque
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BooG690
I just wanted to share singing vaginas.  |
|
|
Imthenewfish
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: sites im allowed to play on
Posts: 945
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by surviva316
his 3b size was not small. you're getting <10:1 to set mine OOP, so this should be a very easy fold (in fact it's a very easy fold IP, too).
there are 3 things about preflop that make calling seem very bad, but listing them seems pretty spoonfeeding-esque
|
You kind of just did list them?
|
|
|
|
scfc_andy15
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 123
|
|
so you need 10:1 to call just for set odds? so .27-.08 and I need $0.19 to call and we have $1.73 effective stacks behind after the call so .19/1.73 = 0.1098.... so that means .19 goes into 1.73 like just over 10 times so doesnt that mean I have the 10:1(I am honestly shit at math so this might be horribly wrong)
|
|
"Whether he likes it or not, a man's character is stripped bare at the poker table; if the other players read him better than he does, he has only himself to blame. Unless he is both able and prepared to see himself as others do, flaws and all, he will be a loser in cards, as in life."
|
|
Hoopy
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Riverballs
Posts: 777
|
|
Easy fold pre flop - our implied odds aren't good enough to set mine + we will be oop making it harder to build a big pot if we do hit.
|
|
|
|
littleogre
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,344
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by scfc_andy15
so you need 10:1 to call just for set odds? so .27-.08 and I need $0.19 to call and we have $1.73 effective stacks behind after the call so .19/1.73 = 0.1098.... so that means .19 goes into 1.73 like just over 10 times so doesnt that mean I have the 10:1(I am honestly shit at math so this might be horribly wrong)
|
Actually the jury is still out on that one. You'll hear anywhere from 12-1 to 20-1 depending on who you ask .
|
|
|
|
fatguy'06
|
|
3-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 63
|
|
Quote:
|
so you need 10:1 to call just for set odds? so .27-.08 and I need $0.19 to call and we have $1.73 effective stacks behind after the call so .19/1.73 = 0.1098.... so that means .19 goes into 1.73 like just over 10 times so doesnt that mean I have the 10:1(I am honestly shit at math so this might be horribly wrong)
|
you did it right, but the chance of flopping a set is more or less 15:1 (like ogre said), but your getting ~10:1 implied odds which isn't enough.
|
|
|
|
littleogre
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,344
|
|
I would fold pre-flop but i like the play on the flop. Assuming op has a high c-bet frequency and he doesn't like to get it in with under pairs. Villain is never raising pocket 3s. With 2 aces on the board his range is weighted heavily to hands like aa kk QQ and jj. Now if he doesn't mind geting it in with under pairs then you gotta c-fold the flop
|
|
|
|
littleogre
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,344
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatguy'06
you did it right, but the chance of flopping a set is more or less 15:1 (like ogre said), but your getting ~10:1 implied odds which isn't enough.
|
No it's better then 15-1 but you need to include the fact the he will not pay you off every time and you will not win every time
|
|
|
|
scfc_andy15
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 123
|
|
ok so i did the calculation correct but for this to be a +ev play we should of had more money behind as I need 15:1 to profitably set mine?
|
|
"Whether he likes it or not, a man's character is stripped bare at the poker table; if the other players read him better than he does, he has only himself to blame. Unless he is both able and prepared to see himself as others do, flaws and all, he will be a loser in cards, as in life."
|
|
Carroters
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Da Amberlamps
Posts: 2,216
|
|
Preflop is horrible.
Flop also looks bad without actually knowing that he folds underpairs. He's a nit at 2NL FR, he probably doesn't feel too much like folding KK or QQ now he's finally got to play a "monster" hand and there's not 1 but 2 aces on the flop, giving him reason to believe it's less likely you have one. The only information you're basing your flop play on is that you've only see him show down strong hands. Well that's likely because he only plays strong hands which usually flop the best of it and don't need to consider folding too much. You're attacking a range of the nuts and JJ-KK, the latter are hand that 2NL players in general will not give up easily, since they usually have agreat deal of problem in letting hands go. Not saying this guy is like that for sure, but I'd want a way better read that this is the case for me to have any trust that i can fold out JJ-KK.
Fwiw there's 18 combos of JJ-KK (I don't think TT and AQ are seperate enough to assume he 3 bets one and not the other) and 8 combos of AK; so 8/26 combos - about 31% of hands are the nuts. Therefore, you need to be pretty damn sure this guy will fold the rest a really high % of the time to do this.
|
|
|
|
fatguy'06
|
|
3-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 63
|
|
Quote:
|
No it's better then 15-1 but you need to include the fact the he will not pay you off every time and you will not win every time
|
that's where the, "more or less" part comes in.
|
|
|
|
surviva316
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Confusing people with my liberal biblicisms
Posts: 1,625
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatguy'06
that's where the, "more or less" part comes in.
|
lulz i guess technically it is either more than 15:1 or less than 15:1.
i didn't list the 3 reasons i had in mind. the fact that we're not even getting 10:1 OOP is only one of the reasons.
and i wouldn't word it as "the jury's still out on setmining odds." the reason the jury's still out is because there's no magical odds that apply always. the odds needed to call from the SB facing a BU open 200bb's deep from a good tagg reg who has an ATS of 90% with an aggressive shorty in the BB is ASTRONOMICALLY different from the odds needed when facing an UTG open from a positionally aware nit with 2 callers when we're on the BU 75bb's deep.
don't resort to this 12:1 vs 20:1 vs 8:1 vs 15:1 crap
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BooG690
I just wanted to share singing vaginas. |
|
|
jaytoi
|
|
Straight
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 119
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by surviva316
lulz i guess technically it is either more than 15:1 or less than 15:1.
the odds needed to call from the SB facing a BU open 200bb's deep from a good tagg reg who has an ATS of 90% with an aggressive shorty in the BB is ASTRONOMICALLY different from the odds needed when facing an UTG open from a positionally aware nit with 2 callers when we're on the BU 75bb's deep.
don't resort to this 12:1 vs 20:1 vs 8:1 vs 15:1 crap
|
Aren't both situations kind of bad there? In the 1st situation we can expect to be 3b squeezed a lot vs tagg regs 90% opening range, possibly shoved on, leaking chips galore everytime we flat. In the second we may have a good chance of getting paid off, but isn't any type of set mining pretty shite 75BB deep?
|
|
Im ready this time.
|
|
surviva316
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Confusing people with my liberal biblicisms
Posts: 1,625
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaytoi
In the second we may have a good chance of getting paid off, but isn't any type of set mining pretty shite 75BB deep?
|
if this were the case then you would just about never play 44 in an MTT. this is an easy easy easy easy set mine, even if UTG opens for 6bbs (even though we're only getting 12.5:1). this becomes more and more the case the fishier and fishier the two flatters and the two blinds are
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BooG690
I just wanted to share singing vaginas. |
|
|
littleogre
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,344
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by surviva316
lulz i guess technically it is either more than 15:1 or less than 15:1.
i didn't list the 3 reasons i had in mind. the fact that we're not even getting 10:1 OOP is only one of the reasons.
and i wouldn't word it as "the jury's still out on setmining odds." the reason the jury's still out is because there's no magical odds that apply always. the odds needed to call from the SB facing a BU open 200bb's deep from a good tagg reg who has an ATS of 90% with an aggressive shorty in the BB is ASTRONOMICALLY different from the odds needed when facing an UTG open from a positionally aware nit with 2 callers when we're on the BU 75bb's deep.
don't resort to this 12:1 vs 20:1 vs 8:1 vs 15:1 crap
|
Perhaps my wording was bad but what i mean is in some situations 10-1 implied odds is plenty good enough. In other situations 15-1 may not be good enough. I guess it would be more appropriate to say their is no magical number that applies in all situations.
|
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska
05-26-2012, 03:08 PM Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
Linear Mode
