nut nutty combo - slow flop cos vs sets etc? 25nl

villain seems all loose-passive over small sample, so pretty much has 2pr ++ here all day right? and balance is irrelevant cos we're never going to tangle ever again, right? super standard with the disguised gutshot outs? i've been playing too much omaha lately so i'm confused

$0.10/$0.25 No Limit Holdem
9 Players
Hand Conversion Powered by weaktight.com

Stacks:
UTG ($30.67)
UTG+1 ($10.30)
MP1 ($30.76)
hero (MP2) ($25)
MP3 ($29.55)
CO ($30.79)
BTN ($25.01)
SB ($16.71)
BB ($39)

Pre-Flop: ($0.35, 9 players) hero is MP2 :5s: :7s:
3 folds, hero raises to $0.50, 3 folds, SB calls $0.40, BB calls $0.25

Flop: :8s: :2s: :4d: ($1.50, 3 players)
SB checks, BB checks, hero bets $1.20, SB folds, BB raises to $3.25, hero calls $2.05

I'm a big fish with combo draws like this and I'm stacking off on flop pretty much 100% of the time here, we're rarely under 40% equity and we must have at least some fold equity. We lose a shit ton of equity on turn if we brick, so get it in now while it's probably +ev imo.

Yup.

well we must sometimes be under 40% equity because there are a lot of higher spades than the two we have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gingerwizard

well we must sometimes be under 40% equity because there are a lot of higher spades than the two we have.

---

That's why I said rarely, but when we're spade dominated, our 7 and 5 are live, so we're not in awful shape.

I don't particularly want to get it all in on this flop though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gingerwizard

I don't particularly want to get it all in on this flop though.

---

I do! If I'm not prepared to get it in on this flop in this spot, then I'm not prepared to raise 75s in MP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

I do! If I'm not prepared to get it in on this flop in this spot, then I'm not prepared to raise 75s in MP.

---

what hands do you think he;s calling with if we jam?
what do you think he will do on a 6 turn if we call?
how about a spade turn?
this hand was posted to check if my take-a-deep-breath-think-before-shoving policy is working out ok. Not sure. But you should pause before stack decisions sometimes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daven

what hands do you think he;s calling with if we jam?

---

Sets, 2pr, overpairs, nfd and some smaller flush draws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daven

what do you think he will do on a 6 turn if we call?

---

He'll pay us off, but that's 3 clean outs for the gutter, hardly worth banking on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daven

how about a spade turn?

---

He slows down with his sets, 2pr and overpairs, drools over his flushes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daven

But you should pause before stack decisions sometimes

---

You're very probably right here, I'm not pretending I don't have any leaks, but I stand by my assertion that stacking off on this flop is rarely -ev, though obv sometimes it is because he's never folding a set and we're not in great shape against a set, and sometimes he's drawing on a bigger flush. The rest of his range though, we have great equity against, and he'll sometimes fold overpairs like 99/TT because we raised pre and we rep monsters when we play the flop with massive aggression.

When we raise 75s, we're already bluffing, I don't see many better flops than this when we make the desicion we made pre. Why stop bluffing now we have a huge draw?

Preflop seems too loose, are you trying to play a pot with the fish? Maybe I miss value here since we have position/skill edge with a playable hand.

Rest looks good, we have no fold equity and good implied odds since he has a strong range but can't hand read so we'll take his stack often. Position also helps.

All the hands that call a shove have us beat. Some hands that beat us will fold but there are not that many of those (Is he folding that many overpairs? Can he at these stakes?)

I'm not sure there is enough fold equity to make shoving correct. And just because I played this hand pre-flop doesn't mean I should play it incorrectly post-flop.

if villain is truly passive, then getting it in here with no FE is not optimal. call, and benefit from the mistake the fish will make on the turn (either bet wayyyy too big, too small, or check the nuts)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d0zer

if villain is truly passive, then getting it in here with no FE is not optimal. call, and benefit from the mistake the fish will make on the turn (either bet wayyyy too big, too small, or check the nuts)

---

we have a winner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

I do! If I'm not prepared to get it in on this flop in this spot, then I'm not prepared to raise 75s in MP.

---

this is poor logic

Maybe my logic is poor, but am I making a mistake? Am I losing money by stacking off here against a range of 22 44 88+ 42s 84s As3s-As7s As9s+, assuming villain always calls? I realise that stacking off with absolutely zero fold equity is not going to be our most ev play, but it's still not -ev is it, and I'm factoring in some fold equity since he can have Kx flush draws and weaker, plus he might sometimes fold some pocket pairs such as 55 and maybe even 99... my point is we don't see many better flops than this one when we raise 75s, I just don't know why we bother to raise it at all if we're gonna bottle it when we hit hard. If we have zero fold equity against him because he sucks, why are we min raising his blind with a marginal hand?

We raise to juice the pot. If your range is right it is still a mistake (because you lose EV compared to the optimal play), but it might still be +EV.

Basically, just because a play is +EV, doesn't mean it maximises expectation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gingerwizard

We raise to juice the pot. If your range is right it is still a mistake (because you lose EV compared to the optimal play), but it might still be +EV.

Basically, just because a play is +EV, doesn't mean it maximises expectation.

---

I realise this. I just think we have more than zero fold equity, and when I'm wrong, I'm still making a +ev move by jamming. It's the easier path for me.

Quote:

---

why are we min raising his blind with a marginal hand?

---

Because he will play badly on later streets, this kind of hand isn't usually the best to play vs fish but if daven feels he has enough skill/position edge to make up for this then it's probably ok.

This kind of spot is why we try to play vs fish, his range is well defined and by shoving/3betting we don't allow him to make that many mistakes, it might still be +EV to shove with all our equity but calling with a good price/position and a chance to win his whole stack is more +EV

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

Maybe my logic is poor, but am I making a mistake? Am I losing money by stacking off here against a range of 22 44 88+ 42s 84s As3s-As7s As9s+, assuming villain always calls? I realise that stacking off with absolutely zero fold equity is not going to be our most ev play, but it's still not -ev is it, and I'm factoring in some fold equity since he can have Kx flush draws and weaker, plus he might sometimes fold some pocket pairs such as 55 and maybe even 99... my point is we don't see many better flops than this one when we raise 75s, I just don't know why we bother to raise it at all if we're gonna bottle it when we hit hard. If we have zero fold equity against him because he sucks, why are we min raising his blind with a marginal hand?

---

read ds' no limit holdem theory and practice if you do not understand why we raise preflop

Call, don't 3-bet the flop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d0zer

if villain is truly passive, then getting it in here with no FE is not optimal. call, and benefit from the mistake the fish will make on the turn (either bet wayyyy too big, too small, or check the nuts)

---

glad that this time my logic made sense (see KK HU hand i posted at the same time for my logic being fucked)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

Maybe my logic is poor, but am I making a mistake?

---

i thought that jamming would be a mistake at the time, hence the call. I wanted more opinions on it during hand session review, hence this thread. I'm now even more comfortable that calling is the best option

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

Am I losing money by stacking off here against a range of 22 44 88+ 42s 84s As3s-As7s As9s+, assuming villain always calls?

---

-> poker stove -> post the results

taking the max-EV line is usually the best decision. Shoving is at best a breakeven high variance play. Calling with direct pot-odds is rarely a bad play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

I realise this. I just think we have more than zero fold equity, and when I'm wrong, I'm still making a +ev move by jamming. It's the easier path for me.

---

calling with direct pot odds is a pretty easy play. It makes the next street pretty easy too!

dozer nailed it for me. fwiw, i cant be fucked doing the maths but i imagine jamming would be slightly -ev given how much we would depend on our pot equity (due to the small SPR). regardless, calling and playing IP against an utter fish with a mega draw and some $ behind is way better.

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

43,560 games 0.031 secs 1,405,161 games/sec

Board: 8s 2s 4d
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 39.506% 39.51% 00.00% 17209 0.00 { 7s5s }
Hand 1: 60.494% 60.49% 00.00% 26351 0.00 { QQ-88, 44, 22, AsQs, AsJs, AsTs, As9s, As7s, As6s, As5s, As4s, As3s, 84s, 42s }


---

Discounted AsKs KK+ since he flats pre, we can probably discount QQ for the same reason, he'll have some Kx flush draws and worse, and air >0%. It's around 40%, as I suspected. Though I can see now it's not the best play, that's clear. I think I need to be more realistic about how much fold equity we have, this guy isn't folding nfd or 88.

To my surprise, our equity doesn't improve when villain folds 88 99 and all flush draws except As3s and As5s, those sets own us too much. We need more fold equity than I realised.

I should play with stove more.

*edit - I can see why our equity doesn't improve even when he folds when he should, the only folds we can hope for are hands that we're flipping with anyway, we're not folding out anything we're actually behind to. That's a fucking epiphany right there, folks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

I can see why our equity doesn't improve even when he folds when he should, the only folds we can hope for are hands that we're flipping with anyway, we're not folding out anything we're actually behind to. That's a fucking epiphany right there, folks.

---

nice
remember d0zer and i when you make your first million (in b4 accusations of double-dipping)

So has ongabonga come out of this, credibility intact?

*bites tongue*

Who the fuck needs credibility? I learned something, I'm happy, don't give a toss about the blah blah.

that's the spirit bonger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

Who the fuck needs credibility? I learned something, I'm happy, don't give a toss about the blah blah.

---

u tell em tiger

wauw i happened to tumble into this. This is never a raise vs a passive tard just call. sigh and call. If he does something retarded like checking check behind turn ( loldonk megaslowplayset). if he bets masisvely ( like a psb or overbet) consider folding. I don't care whether a passive drooler might in a vacuum be exploiting me cuz truth is he is extremely likely to simply be valuebetting you with better hands so and gonna pay u off if you hit. Suppose he bets turn like 2/3 pot. u call u hit ur flush he is very likely to check/call a bet ( zomg a flush on the board i check) and call of big bets. If he checkraises river i'd prolly fold unless i'm committed. which might be the case. I honestly don't think he ever has a flushdraw. It's a set/2 pair. flushdraws these guys usually always chechk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d0zer

if villain is truly passive, then getting it in here with no FE is not optimal. call, and benefit from the mistake the fish will make on the turn (either bet wayyyy too big, too small, or check the nuts)

---

was going to say something but this ^^^ sums it up better then i could say it.

basically in this tread onga was trying to prove that taking the least optimal EV+ line can still be EV+. what an eyeopener. Might start looking in HEM for hands where i can take the least optimal EV+ line. For balance yo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLongGrind

basically in this tread onga was trying to prove that taking the least optimal EV+ line can still be EV+. what an eyeopener. Might start looking in HEM for hands where i can take the least optimal EV+ line. For balance yo

---

not quite accurate. In a specific spot there can be multiple options that are +EV, but we're after max-EV in spots like this one