Always get in these spots with TT? Advice please

I would prob have 4 bet this pre... Your initial raise should prob be bigger too considering you are UTG.. As played I think I would bet/fold the turn...

I would like to know how often villain is 3betting, folding to 4bet, calling 4bet and 5betting before I 4bet this.
Call river, he bricks AK enough time here after turn check.

Fold pre.

pre really depends on reads. if we have none, folding can't be too bad.

Even a guess as to VPIP/PFR/3b is better than nothing.

I would guess that 3bets are 5% in a vacuum at 2NL. Folding pre-flop with TT, then, is marginal. I'd say about 50/50 we're ahead. (TT is top 2.6%, which puts Hero right in the middle of Villain's range). A raise here is fine with a bit more info, but a call is lower variance when we're working in the dark OOP.

Feels like Hero played TT as a set mine, but called the flop when it missed. Checking the turn is so weak/passive that Villain will be induced to bluff on the river. As such, 40/60 to call or fold. You have plenty of showdown equity, and look so weak that Villain might bluff with AK.

Thanks guys. So monkey do you think bet folding the turn and river would be better? Id think nearly always he'd be value betting a Q on such a draw heavy board so when he checks i could take it away from him with a bet unless he has AcKc or AdKd where he would definitely call and probably raise. Worse case scenario he hit the jack and stations turn and river?

Originally Posted by seven-deuce

Thanks guys. So monkey do you think bet folding the turn and river would be better? Id think nearly always he'd be value betting a Q on such a draw heavy board so when he checks i could take it away from him with a bet unless he has AcKc or AdKd where he would definitely call and probably raise. Worse case scenario he hit the jack and stations turn and river?

I agree with your analysis here.

Villain's range pre-flop: { JJ+,99-88,ATs+,KQs,AKo }
(I took out TT, since it's highly improbable that 2 players have same PP pre-flop.)

I do think b/f on the turn will help us narrow Villain's range. If Villain calls, Hero checks/folds the river. Hero is just below the middle of Villain's presumed 5% range on all streets.

why would you give such a wide range preflop? And you don't remove TT, you give it one combo cuz that's how many are remaining.

No idea why you'd b/f turn, I want a better argument than "to find out where we're at". River is a fold as played.

Originally Posted by d0zer

why would you give such a wide range preflop? And you don't remove TT, you give it one combo cuz that's how many are remaining.

No idea why you'd b/f turn, I want a better argument than "to find out where we're at". River is a fold as played.

Is 5% too wide? I'm guessing.

TT: Leaving it in or out is 1 combo among 68 (with this range) and it's the only chop, so it's as good as bad. (Maybe bad thinking, but mostly inconsequential, as the stove equity is nearly identical.)

I didn't say bet/fold the turn was a good choice, I said it would help narrow Villain's range, then speculated as to a line that would follow.

Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey

Is 5% too wide? I'm guessing.

I think it's incorrect to assume an unknown at these stakes is 3betting AJs, KQs, 88-99, yes.

Don't mind calling preflop given that he made it so small, some implied odds vs his range, folding is fine as well. 4betting TT against an unknown UTG vs BB @ 2NL is bad and will lose money.

Fold the flop as we'll get owned on later streets.

if we were OOP i'd consider folding w/o reads.

IP and w/ 22:1 implied odds vs what is supposed to be a tight range ( BB 3bet vs UTG) i call.

flop i fold . i called for a set ,not to play guessing games.

dont try to outplay your opp, not at these stakes cause you cant.

Originally Posted by !Luck

Fold pre.

.

[QUOTE=MadMojoMonkey;2090154]Is 5% too wide? 1 combo among 68 (with this range)

What's the point in calculating the number of hand combinations in a villains range, how does this aid the decision making process?

Do we work out the combos that we're ahead of and behind for example if we say a villain has 68 combos in his range and we're ahead of 40 of them and behind to 28 betting for value is the best option rather than checking. But what if he raises he's only going to raise hands that beat you unless he's bluffing just go with your instinct in those spots?

[QUOTE=seven-deuce;2090316]

Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey

Is 5% too wide? 1 combo among 68 (with this range)

What's the point in calculating the number of hand combinations in a villains range, how does this aid the decision making process?

There is no point, counting combos is worthless until the river unless we are doing some kind of deep analysis.

so only calculate the no. of combos on the river before calling a bet or deciding to bet yourself? It's impractical to work out on each street and isn't very useful for decision making until the river.

Originally Posted by seven-deuce

so only calculate the no. of combos on the river before calling a bet or deciding to bet yourself? It's impractical to work out on each street and isn't very useful for decision making until the river.

Put your opponent on a range and understand combos, IE like he can have X combos of sets and 2pairs or w/e it is practical it's just better to understand how your hand is doing v there range. Knowing that they can only have 1combo of X cuz u have X is obviously super useful and you should know that but counting combos in a pre-flop spot like this is pretty worthless.

Originally Posted by d0zer

River is a fold as played.

Just curious why this is? I'm trying to imagine what hands he checks the turn with after 3bet/cbet. That would be an odd line with JJ+ or Qx. I would probably *sigh* call.

Thoughts?

I'm assuming villain can easily be checking turn with JJ+/AQ because most microstakes players, regs included, are passive, weak-tight, trappy, and generally suck at getting value. bet/check/bet lines aren't bluffs often enough here to assume "lol AK I call".

I could be wrong.

Fair enough. I see that.

On the other side of the argument, he's bet ~2/3 pot on river, so we only have to win 2 of 7 showdowns to break even. Any hint of agro read on this guy and I look him up.

Originally Posted by Robb

On the other side of the argument, he's bet ~2/3 pot on river, so we only have to win 2 of 7 showdowns to break even. Any hint of agro read on this guy and I look him up.

Could you show me how to calculate this? If their is a formula could you post it please?

Suppose the pot is $3. Villain bets 2/3's pot, or $2, so it's $2 for Hero to call. 3 + 2 + 2 = $7 in the pot. So Hero is contributing 2/7's of the final pot, and therefore needs to win (at least) 2 of 7 showdowns to break even. That's just less than 30%.

Notice that our call = Villain's bet, so the fraction is:

bet / ( bet + bet + pot)

I use the fractional part of the bet, and use it to make a quick estimate.
Here are some common examples:

• If Villain makes a 3/4 pot-sized bet, the fraction is 3 / ( 3 + 3 + 4 ) = 3/10
• If Villain makes a 3/5 pot-sized bet, the fraction is 3 / ( 3 + 3 + 5 ) = 3/11
• If Villain makes a 1/2 pot-sized bet, the fraction is 1 / ( 1 + 1 + 2 ) = 1/4
• If Villain makes a full pot-sized bet, the fraction is 1 / ( 1 + 1 +1 ) = 1/3

The implication is that calls on the river are "looser" than most new players realize and it's why stations don't go broke immediately. Still, good players are very careful with their reads before making the river call, or (when betting) before making a "thin value" bet.

The equation: SUM(probability*profit) = EV
Assuming there is no tie:
(chance to win)*(gain) - (chance to lose)*(loss) = EV
*note: (chance to win) + (chance to lose) = 1
Let: (chance to win) = x, (chance to lose) = (1 - x), (gain) = G, (loss) = L
The equation for favorable EV is:
x*G - (1 - x)*L > 0
x*G - L + x*L > 0
x*(G + L) - L > 0
x*(G + L) > L
x > L/(G + L)

In this example, L = 2/3*pot, and G = pot + 2/3*pot = 5/3*pot
x > L/(G + L) = (2/3*pot)/(5/3*pot + 2/3*pot)
x > (2/3*pot)/(7/3*pot)
x > 2/7
x > 28.6%

Holy crap, Thanks guys

Originally Posted by seven-deuce

Holy crap, Thanks guys

It just seems daunting when you first look at it. After you work out a couple common examples, it's pretty basic stuff.

Same Example (correct me if im wrong)

Pot is $3. Villain bets 2/3 pot which is $2. If hero calls the final pot will be $7

Made up of the $3 pot + $2 bet + $2 call = $7

Hero contributes $2 out of $7 (do we discount previous betting rounds because that money is no longer ours and belongs to the pot?)

So hero needs to win 2/7 showdowns to breakeven or win 29% of the time. Therefore if villain is bluffing more than 29% of the time calling is +EV?

Can we work out how much EV we stand to gain from this if we know a villain is bluffing on the river 40% of the time for example? (I'm aware we can never actually know this but just as an example)

So we should just call with a selection of our stronger hands with good showdown value vs a LAGGY villains range when we need to win 2/7 to breakeven as villain could be bluffing with the best hand on some occasions and calling too frequently would be -EV?

Originally Posted by seven-deuce

Do we discount previous betting rounds because that money is no longer ours and belongs to the pot?

For simplification, yes we do.

The actual answer is a bit deeper. Suppose you make 5 bet/call/fold decisions in a hand, starting with preflop. If each one is +EV or break even, then the next one can be made disregarding what has happened before. If you get to the river having a chosen a line that is at least break even at each stage, then the 2/7's win rate is enough to break even as well.

Since we don't know villain's range exactly at any given point, errors in reads or ranges can make any decision along the way -EV, and by extension we may be -EV on the river with our 2/7's expectation. In that case, however, it's not the river call that's flawed.

wtf @ folding pre

Ah i get it now

Originally Posted by bikes

wtf @ folding pre

+1. this seems a really clear call to me. why on earth do we want to fold here people? oh and 4betting with intentions of felting (or folding, for that matter) is pretty terrible too imo. especially against his BB 3b vs our UTG open range.

why i think calling is +EV:
we have position, we (assumedly) have a skill advantage over him, he's full stacked, he has a range which gives us the most implied odds out of any of his possible 3b ranges by position vs position, we have a top 2.1% (stove calculation) hand, and he didnt even make it 3x our open. not to mention we will flop the best hand unimproved some non-zero % and i expect villains at 2nl to be A) terrible at bet-sizing and extracting value and B) terrible at handreading and folding overpairs/top pair hands vs strong ranges when they are clearly beat. so we will generally tend to lose the minimum when beat and win the maximum when ahead against these weakers players. position helps this too.