www.flopturnriver.com

Poker Forum

Over 1,246,000 Posts!

Already Registered? Username: Password: Remember Forgot Password
Tweet

5nl: JJ overpair on wet flop

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display Modes

nish81

01-20-2010, 01:45 PM Post subject: 5nl: JJ overpair on wet flop

#1 (permalink)

Flush

Join Date: Jun 2009

Posts: 295

so i decided to take a shot at 5nl, and look what i found. no reads on the villain

- flop bet was for value from draws pretty much

- turn raise was because i thought it was likely villain was trying to get a cheap draw, and once he shoved, i was committed pretty much

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.05 BB (8 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

Button ($6.01)
SB ($5)
BB ($5.05)
UTG ($13.87)
UTG+1 ($5)
MP1 ($4)
MP2 ($10.43)
Hero (CO) ($5.10)

Preflop: Hero is CO with J

, J

1 fold, UTG+1 calls $0.05, MP1 calls $0.05, 1 fold, Hero bets $0.30, 3 folds, UTG+1 calls $0.25, 1 fold

Flop: ($0.72) 6

, 8

, 9

(2 players)
UTG+1 checks, Hero bets $0.65, UTG+1 calls $0.65

Turn: ($2.02) 3

(2 players)
UTG+1 bets $0.40, Hero raises to $2.20, UTG+1 raises to $4.05 (All-In), Hero calls $1.85

River: ($10.12) A

(2 players, 1 all-in)

Total pot: $10.12 | Rake: $0.50

<JustinSKS> Tha'ts why I fold my 33 to 72o, because 7 high beats, 1 pair, donk.

JR: lets do it JUAN
JR: mono e mono
JR: man to man
JR: HU4ROLLZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Dealer: juan0984 folds

Play for FREE and practice your game at...

Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!

Outlaw

01-20-2010, 02:15 PM

#2 (permalink)

Full House

Join Date: Nov 2007

Posts: 1,033

When he shoves, what are you beating?

At 5NL, most players aren't sophisticated enough to shove against such strength with draws on the turn. I'm guessing he has a poorly played set/two pair, overpair or 33.

spoonitnow

01-20-2010, 03:02 PM

#3 (permalink)

Straight Flush

Join Date: Sep 2005

Location: IRC Chat Room

Posts: 5,406

Quote:

Originally Posted by Outlaw

When he shoves, what are you beating?

This is the right question to ask here, but the large pot compared with how little we need to call means that to call the answer can still be "not much".

It's played fine. You should be committed from the flop as long as nothing too scary comes on the turn. People will show up with like Q8o and other random crap here quite a bit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ripptyde

I only have 2 simple rules when I am coaching a new student.

Rule # 1: don't ask questions

Rule # 2: don't ask questions

I have no interest in discussing strategy with a protege'. Your job is to remain quiet and listen. I have a very systematic approach that I will share with the right candidate and I promise that I will turn you into a force of nature and show you elements of the game of poker that you never knew existed.

nish81

01-20-2010, 04:10 PM

#4 (permalink)

Flush

Join Date: Jun 2009

Posts: 295

thanks for the help - i know i'm probably behind when he shoves, but i dont need to be ahead very often at all, im already pot committed when i 3betted.

<JustinSKS> Tha'ts why I fold my 33 to 72o, because 7 high beats, 1 pair, donk.

JR: lets do it JUAN
JR: mono e mono
JR: man to man
JR: HU4ROLLZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Dealer: juan0984 folds

ShadyCardPlayer

01-20-2010, 11:13 PM

#5 (permalink)

Guest

Posts: n/a

Do we get a spoiler or not? Set of 3's or what? 2 Pair? 63o?

nish81

01-21-2010, 12:39 PM

#6 (permalink)

Flush

Join Date: Jun 2009

Posts: 295

<JustinSKS> Tha'ts why I fold my 33 to 72o, because 7 high beats, 1 pair, donk.

JR: lets do it JUAN
JR: mono e mono
JR: man to man
JR: HU4ROLLZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Dealer: juan0984 folds

daviddem

01-21-2010, 01:39 PM

#7 (permalink)

Full House

Join Date: Aug 2009

Location: Philippines/Saudi Arabia

Posts: 983

Well it may seem easy to say after the spoiler, but the line is definitely that of a set miner. Now you could also argue that if he plays Axs like this preflop, it might be a flush draw

Now ranges. On the turn after his $0.4 bet and taking the previous streets into account, I would surely include 66, 88-JJ. Let's say he would have raised QQ+ preflop. I won't include hands like A9o because I have no reads and without reads I assume the guy does not play what I would not play in that position. However I will widen the range a bit compared to mine and include flush draws with Ahxh (people like to play suited aces, uh?). Let's exclude AhKh and AhQh on the assumption he would have raised these preflop. So stoving this, I get 47.7% equity for your pair of jacks. Now you could argue that he could also maybe have JT, or hands like A9o, or K9, but without read I would not include all of these marginal hands in his range.

At the end of the day, say you get about 50% equity here. So is raising good here? He is certainly not folding the better hands. Does he call with worse? I am not so sure. Maybe with TT. You have to make his draws pay, but let's say we estimate he is on a draw only about 50% of the time, I think if I raised in this spot, I would raise smaller. There is $2.42 in the pot, so raising to $1.6 is enough to prevent him to call profitably with a flush draw, as long as you decide to shut down in case a bad card comes on the river. Then the downside of raising is "what are you going to do if you are shoved over".

I wonder if just calling and re-evaluate the river would be horrible here, against a line that really stinks the slowplayed made set (poor play, I agree). Would be easier to say with a bit of a read, if you had looked up how tight the guy is on pokertableratings you would have had a better idea of his EP preflop range, I suppose.

Spoon, what would you think of just calling this turn? I know you said it was played fine, but is this not overplaying an overpair facing a set mining line?

Virginity is like a bubble: one prick and it's all gone

shallam

01-21-2010, 02:35 PM

#8 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

PREFLOP. Jc-Jd

I like your 6x PFR, 4xBB plus one for each limper, just the right size. You only get one caller. So our PFR worked we've created some dead money and we probably the best hand. Headed into the flop our least favorite card will be an A. We'd prefer not to see any over cards. We'd love to see a J and a A, but we would settle for uncoordinated undercards.

FLOP. 6H, 8S, 9H
Not a bad flop. The good news is that there are no over-cards and we have only one opp. The bad news is that we have coordinated draw heavy undercards. If our CB gets called we will be worried about both made hands and draws like sets, flushes, straights, two pairs below us and slow played big pairs above us. While JJ is a strong solid hand, we don't want to go broke deep stacked with this hand unless we have a set or better.

A bet of anywhere between 1/2 to the full size of the pot is justified. I prefer a little over 1/2 the pot. That will strike the right balance between making a draw pay but not over-committing to us if we are beat. We'd love to take the pot right now. I like a bet of about .45. You bet .65 a strong but not unreasonable bet. Your lone opp calls.
The call is hard to interpret his hand could range anywhere from a loose call over-cards (AQ), unimproved pocket pair (TT, 55), complex draws (gutshot+pair, pair over-card, pair BDFD), primary draws (both flush & straight), two pair and sets.
Putting him on a hand at this stage is very difficult. I would lean toward the middle of the range maybe a straight draw, BDFD, and an over-card (Ah-7x). Also I am getting VERY concerned about pot control. We do NOT want to create a huge pot here.

TURN. 3C
This is a good card if our opp is drawing but a bad card if he has us beat (two pair, set, straight, overpair). Our opp bets out .40. I'm not sure what to make of this. On the one hand, it is a solid bet OTOH relative to the size of the pot it is a tiny bet. Clearly he is not ready to fold.
I like just calling here. The strength of our hand does not support a big raise, nor a fold. I like calling hoping that he is a) bluffing; b) on a draw that will hopefully miss.

You choose to make a big raise. I hate that move. Worse, he comes over the top and you call. I hate that even more. Are we putting in our entire stack hoping tha he has A9, TT or just a flush draw ?!? What about the huge number of different hand that have CRUSHED sets, straights, overpairs or at least in bad shap like two pair.

Don't go broke deep stacked with just a pair. There a LOTS of hands that have you beat. If you avoided losing your entire stack you are VERY lucky.

Why is he so eager to get all his money in deep stacked ?

Primary Applicable Concepts:

1. Pot control.
2. Don't go broke deep stacked with just a pair.
3. Reading what your opp bet sizes are telling you about the strength of their hand.

shallam

01-21-2010, 02:42 PM

#9 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

Quote:

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

Quote:

Originally Posted by Outlaw

When he shoves, what are you beating?

That's not my experience. Sure there are lots of loose calls and occasional spazy/spewy raises, but this opp is puting all his money in with a VERY deep stack. Both players started with 250 BB.

Maybe I misinterpreted your "you should be committed" comment ?

shallam

01-21-2010, 02:47 PM

#10 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

Quote:

Originally Posted by nish81

thanks for the help - i know i'm probably behind when he shoves, but i dont need to be ahead very often at all, im already pot committed when i 3betted.

Do you mean your turn raise ? If so it begs the question of wether you should make such a large raise. Second, you probably beat and might be able to salvage part of your stack. I realize that your are getting very big odds to pick off a semi-bluff or overplayed TP hand --- but realistically how many opps will put in their ENTIRE stack with those hands ?

To call we have to believe that our opp is entirely irrational.

Stacks

01-21-2010, 03:04 PM

#11 (permalink)

4-of-a-Kind

Join Date: Jan 2008

Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.

Posts: 2,605

[ ] 250bb deep.

The hand played is 100bb deep. This is 5nl, and the effective stack is $5.

"We'd love to take the pot right now."

When I bet the flop, I wouldn't love to take the pot right there. Why would you love for him to c/f the flop? That means we are ahead, as he surely isn't c/folding the flop with a better hand.

When we raise the turn, we only have to win >18.3% of the time for calling villain's shove to be +EV.

Stacks

01-21-2010, 03:06 PM

#12 (permalink)

4-of-a-Kind

Join Date: Jan 2008

Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.

Posts: 2,605

Quote:

Originally Posted by shallam

To call we have to believe that our opp is entirely irrational.

To call we have to believe that our opp is shoving with a worse hand >18.3% of the time, which given it's 5nl, drawy board, he bet small on turn he could think he made us bluff/spaz raise, etc, I don't think it's unrealistic.

shallam

01-21-2010, 03:10 PM

#13 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

Quote:

Originally Posted by Outlaw

Well.....it couldn't have been that poor, he managed to double up deep stacked....scooping up an entire buy in.

Stacks

01-21-2010, 03:16 PM

#14 (permalink)

4-of-a-Kind

Join Date: Jan 2008

Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.

Posts: 2,605

He wasn't deepstacked.. And stating that it wasn't poorly played just because he managed to win the pot is highly results oriented. Open shoving allin preflop with 72o isn't a good play. However, in some cases you are going to win the hand. Doesn't mean you played it well.

shallam

01-21-2010, 03:28 PM

#15 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

Quote:

Originally Posted by XxStacksxX

Quote:

Originally Posted by shallam

To call we have to believe that our opp is entirely irrational.

Good points. I think I may have overstated the case for folding. The real problem IMHO is the turn raise not the call ...as much. The turn raise has him pot committed.

My response was mostly based on the feel that a hand like AhKh simply wold not be played tha way. Perhaps a bit hasty on my part. Maybe I'll stove the whole thing later.

But just for the heck of it here is a devil's advocate defense of folding (I'm not sure I believe but here it goes anyway)....

--------
By worse, you mean "worse" at the moment. But first start with the mountain of sets, straights, two pair and even overpairs hands that you drawing thing to nearly dead --- more consistent with the way the hand was played -- drawing thin to nearly dead. Then sure throw in the razor thin possiblity of a flush draw, almost assuradly with additional nonflush (overcard, straight, etc) outs -- the equity for JJ becomes puny.

shallam

01-21-2010, 03:38 PM

#16 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

Quote:

Originally Posted by XxStacksxX

Winning the pot with a worse hand is irrelevant. The opp here had waaaaay the best hand. With a set your goal should be to stack an opp who can't let go of an overpair. From that stand point the hand was played well.

Getting your opp to put all his money with just two outs can't be that bad.

OTOH, perhaps you can make the case there is some strategy which will more reliably get your opp to stack off with just an over pair. I personally believe there is. But I haven't heard that yet.

There is a difference between "poor" play which this was not... and "suboptimal" play which this MAY have been.

shallam

01-21-2010, 03:41 PM

#17 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

[quote]

Quote:

Originally Posted by XxStacksxX

[ ] 250bb deep.

The hand played is 100bb deep. This is 5nl, and the effective stack is $5.

Yes. You are quite right. My mistake.

AdamThePirate

01-21-2010, 03:43 PM

#18 (permalink)

Straight

Join Date: Aug 2008

Location: Manchester

Posts: 142

Send a message via Skype™ to AdamThePirate

Quote:

Originally Posted by shallam

Quote:

Originally Posted by XxStacksxX

250+ BB = deep stacks.

It's 5nl, FFS. Hero has 100bb.

Quote:

Opponent is probably stacking off with a lot worse than just sets here. Turn is fine imo. Quite happy to get it in.

Quote:

Getting your opp to put all his money in, deep stacked, with just two outs can't be that bad.

Results oriented ftw...

Stacks

01-21-2010, 03:44 PM

#19 (permalink)

4-of-a-Kind

Join Date: Jan 2008

Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.

Posts: 2,605

Do some stoving. If we assume his range for bet/shoving the turn is fairly strong, such as {33, 66, 88-TT, A9s, 98s, 86s, 75s, T7o, 98o}, then we have 19.97% equity, and therefore a call is correct. Notice all of those hands beat us but TT/A9s, which he is much more likely to have than a hand like 33, or other sets. Not to mention, if villain is limp/calling hands like T7o/98o/75s/etc preflop, we have to assume he isn't all that good, and therefore can definitely have worse hands than A9/TT in his range. Hands like K9s, JTs, JTo, 76s, etc, which we beat, which will raise our equity even more.

shallam

01-21-2010, 03:47 PM

#20 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

[quote="shallam"]

Quote:

Originally Posted by XxStacksxX

[ ] 250bb deep.

The hand played is 100bb deep. This is 5nl, and the effective stack is $5.

Yes. You are quite right. My mistake.

BTW, as far as I know Pokerstars offers 5nl/.01/.02. And 10NL with .05 or .10 BBs. It does not offer 5nl/.02/.05.

So while hero may have bought in for 5nl, the game is really a 10nl max buy in.

Stacks

01-21-2010, 03:54 PM

#21 (permalink)

4-of-a-Kind

Join Date: Jan 2008

Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.

Posts: 2,605

Quote:

Originally Posted by shallam

Winning the pot with a worse hand is irrelevant. The opp here had waaaaay the best hand. With a set your goal should be to stack an opp who can't let go of an overpair. From that stand point the hand was played well.

Villain did have a better hand, but that's not relevant. That information is revealed post decision. At the time of the decision we have to look at villains range, and whether we have the necessary equity to stack off against his range.

Why is your goal with a set to stack an overpair? You shouldn't be trying to get the most money in the pot from Top Pair? Bluffs? Draws? etc? You are looking at this situation and thinking it is all-encompassing of similar situations, when it isn't. Once again, being results oriented. Your goal with a set, should be to maximize value when ahead of villians range, and minimize losses when behind villains range. The same as with all hands.

Getting your opp to put all his money with just two outs can't be that bad.

The way in which you do that can be bad.

OTOH, perhaps you can make the case there is some strategy which will more reliably get your opp to stack off with just an over pair. I personally believe there is. But I haven't heard that yet.

That's what I'm arguing. I'm saying that just because he got the money in against an inferior hand, that the villain didn't play the hand well. That just because it worked out in his favor this time, doesn't mean it was optimal/correct/good to play his 99 in this manner.

There is a difference between "poor" play which this was not... and "suboptimal" play which this MAY have been.

This was poor play, as well as suboptimal play. Any play that isn't optimal/best has flaws, and therefore is open to scrutiny. This villain's line with 99 was far from optimal, and therefore imo, is poor play.

AdamThePirate

01-21-2010, 03:54 PM

#22 (permalink)

Straight

Join Date: Aug 2008

Location: Manchester

Posts: 142

5nl means 5c big blind. We buy in for 100bb to have maximum value from our monster hands vs. other opponents.

http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/1417/5nlffs.jpg

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carroters

Take it Doyle, take it!

shallam

01-21-2010, 03:58 PM

#23 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

Quote:

Getting your opp to put all his money in, deep stacked, with just two outs can't be that bad.

Results oriented ftw...[/quote]

You can argue that a critique of the hero's hand is results oriented now that we know he was up against a set. FWIW, that wasn't the case for me as wrote my original response before knowing the results.

It makes less sense to talk about being results oriented for the villian. The villian KNOWS that he has a set. Thus, his goal should be to get all the money in -- he accomplished that goal. OTOH, I you want to argue that there is some strategic error that he made in attempting to get all the money in then it seems that you should have some specific rationale for that.

Stacks

01-21-2010, 03:59 PM

#24 (permalink)

4-of-a-Kind

Join Date: Jan 2008

Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.

Posts: 2,605

Quote:

Originally Posted by shallam

BTW, as far as I know Pokerstars offers 5nl/.01/.02. And 10NL with .05 or .10 BBs. It does not offer 5nl/.02/.05.

So while hero may have bought in for 5nl, the game is really a 10nl max buy in.

Wat?

What does 5nl/.01/.02 even mean? It's not 5nl if the big blind is $0.02. It's 2nl. Pokerstars allows you to buyin deep on many of it's microstakes tables, thus at 2nl ($0.01/$0.02) you can buyin for a max of $5, which is 250bb. That doesn't make it 5nl. It's just deep-stacked 2nl.

The same goes for 5nl I believe, where pokerstars allows you to buyin for $10 (I think). In this case, the blinds are $0.02/$0.05, which means it's 5nl, and the effective stack is $5, which is 100bb. I don't see what you mean by 10nl max buyin, etc.

shallam

01-21-2010, 04:03 PM

#25 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

[quote="XxStacksxX"][quote="shallam"]
Winning the pot with a worse hand is irrelevant. The opp here had waaaaay the best hand. With a set your goal should be to stack an opp who can't let go of an overpair. From that stand point the hand was played well.

Villain did have a better hand, but that's not relevant. That information is revealed post decision. At the time of the decision we have to look at villains range, and whether we have the necessary equity to stack off against his range.

The original discussion was a critique of the villians hand not the hero hand. You said the villians set/pair/whatever was poorly played.

Stacks

01-21-2010, 04:04 PM

#26 (permalink)

4-of-a-Kind

Join Date: Jan 2008

Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.

Posts: 2,605

Quote:

Originally Posted by shallam

It makes less sense to talk about being results oriented for the villian. The villian KNOWS that he has a set. Thus, his goal should be to get all the money in -- he accomplished that goal. OTOH, I you want to argue that there is some strategic error that he made in attempting to get all the money in then it seems that you should have some specific rationale for that.

Being results oriented can still be applied to your view of villain's play.. Sure he knows he has a set, and sets are generally fairly strong hands, but you referred to how his goal is to stack overpairs, possibly because you know the results of this hand is that our hero had an overpair. The decisions should not be based on the outcome of the hand.

And yes there is a strategic error with the manner in which he got the money all-in, and that's why I'm saying villain played 99 poorly. I don't see how this is arguable. He made errors in playing his hand, therefore he played it poorly. Just because he was fornunate enough to have the best hand, and for our hero to have a solid second best hand, doesn't mean he played it well.

Outlaw

01-21-2010, 04:06 PM

#27 (permalink)

Full House

Join Date: Nov 2007

Posts: 1,033

Against an unknown and only holding one pair, I tend to assign villain a pretty narrow range when I get raised on the turn. I am being generous throwing in AhKh and JT but to balance that I threw in a flopped straight which we can never rule out at micros in a limp-called pot. There's almost 89 which lowers your equity even more.

Now do we have the 19% equity necessary to call?

By the way, you played your hand exactly like an overpair. If I were the villain, why the hell would I bluff you on the turn with a draw knowing people don't fold overpairs at micros?

Board: 6h 8s 9h 3c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 16.721% 15.83% 00.89% 390 22.00 { JcJh }
Hand 1: 83.279% 82.39% 00.89% 2030 22.00 { 88+, 66, 33, AhKh, JTs, T7s, T7o }

shallam

01-21-2010, 04:11 PM

#28 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

[quote="XxStacksxX"]

Quote:

Originally Posted by shallam

------------------
"Being results oriented can still be applied to your view of villain's play.. Sure he knows he has a set, and sets are generally fairly strong hands, but you referred to how his goal is to stack overpairs, possibly because you know the results of this hand is that our hero had an overpair. "
----------------
Actually no. While my statement certainly includes over pairs as in this case -- it also take into account flush draws and even made straights. Given the play of the hand a straight is very UN-likely, big pairs very likely, and suited over cards fairly likely. Under those cirumstances it is good poker to try to get all your money in.

This is not the least bit results oriented, it is entirely game circumstances oriented.

shallam

01-21-2010, 04:19 PM

#29 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

[quote="XxStacksxX"]

Quote:

Originally Posted by shallam

-------------------
"And yes there is a strategic error with the manner in which he got the money all-in, and that's why I'm saying villain played 99 poorly. I don't see how this is arguable. He made errors in playing his hand, therefore he played it poorly. Just because he was fornunate enough to have the best hand, and for our hero to have a solid second best hand, doesn't mean he played it well."
---------------------------

OK, this is the part that I was trying to get at...what is the error that that he villian made ?

Do you agree that the villian should be trying to get his opp to put in all his money ?

Do you agree that the villian should read hero's play as indicative of an over-pair ? And if so doesn't it make an attempted stack off even more imperative ?

AdamThePirate

01-21-2010, 04:20 PM

#30 (permalink)

Straight

Join Date: Aug 2008

Location: Manchester

Posts: 142

Quote:

Originally Posted by Outlaw

By the way, you played your hand exactly like an overpair. If I were the villain, why the hell would I bluff you on the turn with a draw knowing people don't fold overpairs at micros

Wtf are you talking about, he played it as a classic value bet line, imo we play the same with sets, flushes, straights etc.

Stacks

01-21-2010, 04:25 PM

#31 (permalink)

4-of-a-Kind

Join Date: Jan 2008

Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.

Posts: 2,605

Outlaw, if you were villain would you be limp/calling any of those hands in the range you assigned villain? If not, then your point about hero playing his hand exactly like an overpair, and how you find it absurd for villain to 'bluff' the turn or put it in with worse, holds no weight. It's not how you would play the hand, it's how villain would. And I believe that if a player is bad enough to limp/call with hands like 88+, AKs, JTs, etc, and bad enough to bet the turn that small, then there has to be some chance of them getting it in with worse than top tier nut hands.

Stacks

01-21-2010, 04:33 PM

#32 (permalink)

4-of-a-Kind

Join Date: Jan 2008

Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.

Posts: 2,605

You have said things like:

"Opponent had wayyyy the better hand"

"Getting your opponent to put in his stack drawing to only 2 outs can't be a bad thing"

Yet, you claim to not be looking at it from a results-oriented perspective? Seriously? Those paraphrased statements above shouldn't matter to whether we think villain played the hand correctly or not.

You see no error in the manner in which villain played the hand? The limp/call preflop with 99 seems correct to you? The check/call on the flop with top set on a very draw heavy board seems correct to you? His very small donk lead on the turn seems correct to you? None of those seem all that correct to me, sorry.

You seem to be looking at only the big picture, and it's kinda results oriented. Instead of looking at the decision, you seem to keep pointing out that villain got his money in against an inferior hand, and that because of this, he played it well. This is not the case.

shallam

01-21-2010, 04:36 PM

#33 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

Side note --- some hand ranges.

Given the play of the hand by the turn here are is my view of the likely hand ranges.

Set = 25%

Straight = 25%

Two pair = 25%

Over pair = 10%

Flush (probably with additional outs) 15%

Does anyone have a drastically read ?

Stacks

01-21-2010, 04:39 PM

#34 (permalink)

4-of-a-Kind

Join Date: Jan 2008

Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.

Posts: 2,605

Are these "hand ranges" from Hero's view of what you believe villain's likely holdings to be?

Do you believe that villain plays this the same the vast majority of the time with all of those hands mentioned (sets/straights/overpairs/two pair)?

daviddem

01-21-2010, 04:39 PM

#35 (permalink)

Full House

Join Date: Aug 2009

Location: Philippines/Saudi Arabia

Posts: 983

Getting back to my post way back up, does anybody here think that flatting the turn is an option or is that completely retarded?

Error(s) that opp did IMO:
- limp/calling in EP, which is a way of saying "hey I have a small/medium pocket pair and I hope to flop a set" although I would agree that at the micros poor players will limp/call with a much wider range. I do that also if I think the vast majority of my opponents are not good enough to know what I am doing AND the table is not seeing multiway limped flops all the time. Flopping a set in a multiway limped pot is a perfect spot to go broke to a flush or stratight. I tend to raise 99 in EP and fold anything < 77.
- flatting the flop. I check/raise here but only if I am pretty sure my opponent will bet. Maybe minraise if I think opp is not very strong (eg 2 overcards) and/or not on a strong draw to try and induce a call or re-raise. In this case his bet is close to pot size, so it's a little on the big side for a c-bet, so I tend to put him on strength, so I make a proper 3x raise. He has to pay for his two-outer and lots of people do not lay down an overpair in this spot.
- edit: and I forgot the leading $0.4 into a $2 pot, giving my opponent odds to call with just about anything.

I don't slowplay sets, especially not on drawy boards facing an aggressive opponent who shows strength. I need a very specific read or situation to slowplay.

shallam

01-21-2010, 04:48 PM

#36 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

XxStacksxX =

You have said things like:

"Opponent had wayyyy the better hand"

"Getting your opponent to put in his stack drawing to only 2 outs can't be a bad thing"

Yet, you claim to not be looking at it from a results-oriented perspective? Seriously? Those paraphrased statements above shouldn't matter to whether we think villain played the hand correctly or not.

You see no error in the manner in which villain played the hand? The limp/call preflop with 99 seems correct to you? The check/call on the flop with top set on a very draw heavy board seems correct to you? His very small donk lead on the turn seems correct to you? None of those seem all that correct to me, sorry.

You seem to be looking at only the big picture, and it's kinda results oriented. Instead of looking at the decision, you seem to keep pointing out that villain got his money in against an inferior hand, and that because of this, he played it well. This is not the case.

----------

Interesting points.

Yes, my statements above were based on the hand the hero did have --- however, the hero was playing the hand exactly like we would expect him to play an over pair. Making the actual hand and likely hands match extremely well. Moreover, if we throw in other reasonably likely hands like two over card hearts -- the villian will want to play the hand EXACTLY the same way....get all the money in. Agreed ?

The only hand where getting it all in would be a mistake is a straight. Agreed ? And given the play of the hand that is extremely unlikely. Agreed ? If so, then perhaps you'll agree that getting all the money in is good poker and the debate -- if any -- is how best to get all the money in.

Stacks

01-21-2010, 05:01 PM

#37 (permalink)

4-of-a-Kind

Join Date: Jan 2008

Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.

Posts: 2,605

The debate has always been about the manner in which villain was getting the money in.. I never said that villain shouldn't be trying to get top set allin here. Obviously he should be. However, the decisions he made on every street were incorrect, suboptimal, and thus poor. Thus he played the hand poorly.

shallam

01-21-2010, 05:20 PM

#38 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

Quote:

Originally Posted by XxStacksxX

Hand ranges = Heros read of villians hand, after the all in. Prior to that point I would have a very broad range. The call on the flop and lead on the turn tell me very little.

" Will most villians play the hand this way ?" Yes and no. Yes in the sense that I think most villians will reveal the strength of their hand by the turn. I think that many villians will play monsters in roughly this manner.

No, in the sense of this specific play sequence --- in particular the lead on the turn. I would not necessarily expect that. I personally would have preferred to CR either the flop or the turn. I would expect most opps to either a) CR or b) make very large bets into me.

I know Phil Gordon is an advocate of just betting out in cases similar to this arguing it's better to bet, get raised, and get your opp to unintentionally over-commit with a raise as opposed to a CR where you risk your opp throwing the hand away. One of the key ideas here is that the opp/hero doesn't realize he is in trouble until it's too late. When leading you reveal the true strength of your hand later then when you CR. A CR is often a sign of great strength.

Finally, at first glance it might seem like an over-pair doesn't fit with the play of this hand. However, I have seen several players slow play big pairs especially aces. So I included over-pairs based on my experiences --- not at all based on how I would play.

shallam

01-21-2010, 05:58 PM

#39 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

----Critique of the Villian---
PREFLOP.
I'll probably be the minority here but I don't mind limping in with 99 in early position. Folding is too tight, raising is somewhat aggressive for my tastes, calling seems just right. I don't mind getting raised w 99 obviously I am set mining a little here. A PFR would be ok too.

FLOP.
Hitting top set is a very good result. To me the question is should I CR or CC. A CR will help build a big pot if our opp has an overpair or a flush draw--- the bet size is making me think an over pair is likely. A CC may entice our opp to fire another shell without a hand or to catch up if he has a hand like AK.
I slightly prefer CR to CC, but I think either is reasonable.

TURN.
I don't really understand leading out here, but maybe the villain is just thinking at higher level than me. Is this a purposefully weakish looking bet trying to entice a raise maybe even a bluff raise ? I call this a donk-raise -- a stronger cousin to the check-raise. This play risks a mere call on the turn -- which would be a missed opportunity if our opp has an over-pair (likely), a disasterously cheap card if he is on a flush draw (unlikely), a possibly good play against a non-flush AK hand that has trouble letting go (seems unlikely).

Maybe so --- still..... I prefer a standard CR here --- I think I'd just prefer to go all in on my raise. This will make my hand readable, but hopefully my opp we feel pot committed and we can stack him off.

Despite my preferences the play worked. The hero raises with his over-pair and becomes pot committed. Furthermore, the analyses on this forum seem to view hero's raise favorably. So despite my preference for a standard CR on the turn, maybe the donk-raise is the better play.

Once hero makes the big raise to villain's donk bet -- villian's play is easy -- shove it all in.

SUMMARY.

Initially my only strong criticism of the villain was the turn play. The turn lead didn't make sense to me. However: a) it worked, and b) people here seem to think hero's reaction to it was the right play. So maybe not so bad after all ?

AdamThePirate

01-21-2010, 06:10 PM

#40 (permalink)

Straight

Join Date: Aug 2008

Location: Manchester

Posts: 142

Quote:

Flop: ($0.72) 6

, 8

, 9

Quote:

Originally Posted by shallam

To me the question is should I CR or CC. A CR will help build a big pot if our opp has an overpair or a flush draw--- the bet size is making me think an over pair is likely. A CC may entice our opp to fire another shell without a hand or to catch up if he has a hand like AK. I slightly prefer CR to CC, but I think either is reasonable.

I think this is a terrible way to play top set on a draw heavy board.

Quote:

I call this a donk-raise -- a stronger cousin to the check-raise.

I think we've exhausted as much as we can get out of this thread imo.

Shallam, your theory seems very results focused.

shallam

01-21-2010, 06:17 PM

#41 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

[quote="AdamThePirate"]

Quote:

Flop: ($0.72) 6

, 8

, 9

Quote:

Originally Posted by shallam

I think this is a terrible way to play top set on a draw heavy board.
-------------

A CR is ? How so ?

What is your preferred alternative and your rationale for it ?

shallam

01-21-2010, 06:26 PM

#42 (permalink)

3-of-a-Kind

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 98

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamThePirate

Shallam, your theory seems very results focused.

-----

I am sorry to hear that you have so badly misunderstood my posts.

Stacks

01-21-2010, 06:35 PM

#43 (permalink)

4-of-a-Kind

Join Date: Jan 2008

Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.

Posts: 2,605

Quote:

Originally Posted by shallam

Initially my only strong criticism of the villain was the turn play. The turn lead didn't make sense to me. However: a) it worked, and b) people here seem to think hero's reaction to it was the right play. So maybe not so bad after all ?

Results Oriented.. Boom I win!

And just because I'm stubborn, and in class, I refute your other points as well. Even though I've already won everything I was trying to prove.

Villain's Play
Preflop - Easy raise. Villains will call with loads of worse hands, we would like to minimize our positional disadvantage, which can be achieved by villains left to act after you folding, or having a smaller SPR on the flop. Not saying limping in -EV; however, raising 99 here is surely more +EV than limp/calling

Flop - I wouldn't dream of c/calling here, and think it's a pretty terrible decision. Had I limp/called preflop, which I wouldn't have, then my decision is either c/raise, or donk lead. I think both are viable options, but would lean more towards check/raise because the overwhelming majority of villains just assume they must c-bet when checked to. So by check/raising we build a larger pot faster, as well as getting more value from villain's air range.

Turn - If I limp/call preflop, c/c the flop (Never happening here), and get to the turn here, I'm obv not going to donk lead this small on the turn. Villain would be getting too good of a price to just call with any draws he has, and thus not making a mistake. Villain can easily pot control with any non-nut hands now.

How should villain have played? He should have raised preflop. Assuming hero doesn't 3bet preflop, villain should bet/3bet the flop trying to get the money in there.

daviddem

01-22-2010, 12:00 AM

#44 (permalink)

Full House

Join Date: Aug 2009

Location: Philippines/Saudi Arabia

Posts: 983

I hate to interrupt you guys, but I would still love to hear from Stacks or Spoon, who surely are better players than I am, whether flatting the $0.40 turn bet who be totally retarded here?

Virginity is like a bubble: one prick and it's all gone

Outlaw

01-22-2010, 01:10 AM

#45 (permalink)

Full House

Join Date: Nov 2007

Posts: 1,033

Quote:

Originally Posted by daviddem

I hate to interrupt you guys, but I would still love to hear from Stacks or Spoon, who surely are better players than I am, whether flatting the $0.40 turn bet who be totally retarded here?

I think a smaller raise to something like $1.60 would make draws overpay to see the river yet allow us to not be priced in to a shove.

Outlaw

01-22-2010, 01:15 AM

#46 (permalink)

Full House

Join Date: Nov 2007

Posts: 1,033

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamThePirate

Quote:

Originally Posted by Outlaw

By the way, you played your hand exactly like an overpair. If I were the villain, why the hell would I bluff you on the turn with a draw knowing people don't fold overpairs at micros

Wtf are you talking about, he played it as a classic value bet line, imo we play the same with sets, flushes, straights etc.

I doubt villain was worried about a flush, set, or straight on that board since only a straight was possible and I doubt he could imagine being popped with 107 or 75. What's that leave in our turn reraising range? Nothing that beats top set... only an overpair.

spoonitnow

01-22-2010, 05:47 AM

#47 (permalink)

Straight Flush

Join Date: Sep 2005

Location: IRC Chat Room

Posts: 5,406

lol wow guys

mbiz

01-22-2010, 08:35 AM

#48 (permalink)

Straight

Join Date: Jun 2009

Location: Orstraya

Posts: 178

mbiz is an unknown quantity at this point

Quote:

Originally Posted by daviddem

Well it may seem easy to say after the spoiler, but the line is definitely that of a set miner. Now you could also argue that if he plays Axs like this preflop, it might be a flush draw

On that board it looks a lot like somebody fishing for their straight or flush too to me. I think calling the potsize bet on the flop is a bit dubious though and leans toward a set. Ive seen people do it with draws but it puts the hour hand closer to 99o'clock (good one?) imo

bigspenda73

01-22-2010, 09:51 AM

#49 (permalink)

Straight Flush

Join Date: Jul 2006

Location: Pwnsylvania

Posts: 7,545

bigspenda73 will become famous soon enough

turn looks like an ez jam once he bets .40

nish81

01-22-2010, 11:29 AM

#50 (permalink)

Flush

Join Date: Jun 2009

Posts: 295

the hand wasn't really THAT interesting...

<JustinSKS> Tha'ts why I fold my 33 to 72o, because 7 high beats, 1 pair, donk.

JR: lets do it JUAN
JR: mono e mono
JR: man to man
JR: HU4ROLLZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Dealer: juan0984 folds

Page 1 of 2

Latest Poker News
KoRnholio	05-26-2012, 03:08 PM Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
According to an email sent out by Mark Bryan, a gaming analyst at Merrill Lynch, the Australian government plans to legalize online poker sometime in the next six to 12 months. This move will coincide ... more at Poker Blogs »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off Trackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:47 PM.

Play Texas Holdem Online, Online Texas Holdem Strategy, & Poker Forum

This is not a gambling website.

Poker Forum

Over 1,246,000 Posts!

Poker Forum

Beginners Circle

5nl: JJ overpair on wet flop

Play for FREE and practice your game at...