I just realized why...

Against decent regs

This sucks badly

POKERSTARS GAME #15259045438: HOLD'EM NO LIMIT ($3/$6) - 2008/02/13 - 12:17:28 (ET)
Table 'Artemis II' 6-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: Pacuno ($707 in chips)
Seat 2: cliff47 ($1277.30 in chips)
Seat 3: redgrape ($597 in chips)
Seat 4: WrongButton ($603 in chips)
Seat 5: berg5528 ($2064.40 in chips)
Seat 6: Xblood ($596.25 in chips)
WrongButton: posts small blind $3
berg5528: posts big blind $6
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to redgrape [Jc Tc]
Xblood: folds
Pacuno: raises $15 to $21
cliff47: calls $21
redgrape: calls $21
WrongButton: folds
berg5528: folds
*** FLOP *** [7s 7c 3c]
Pacuno: bets $46
cliff47: folds
redgrape: raises $104 to $150


While this is good

POKERSTARS GAME #15259045438: HOLD'EM NO LIMIT ($3/$6) - 2008/02/13 - 12:17:28 (ET)
Table 'Artemis II' 6-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: Pacuno ($707 in chips)
Seat 2: cliff47 ($1277.30 in chips)
Seat 3: redgrape ($597 in chips)
Seat 4: WrongButton ($603 in chips)
Seat 5: berg5528 ($2064.40 in chips)
Seat 6: Xblood ($596.25 in chips)
WrongButton: posts small blind $3
berg5528: posts big blind $6
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to redgrape [Ac Tc]
Xblood: folds
Pacuno: raises $15 to $21
cliff47: calls $21
redgrape: calls $21
WrongButton: folds
berg5528: folds
*** FLOP *** [7s 7c 3c]
Pacuno: bets $46
cliff47: folds
redgrape: raises $104 to $150

And this is ok too

POKERSTARS GAME #15259045438: HOLD'EM NO LIMIT ($3/$6) - 2008/02/13 - 12:17:28 (ET)
Table 'Artemis II' 6-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: Pacuno ($707 in chips)
Seat 2: cliff47 ($1277.30 in chips)
Seat 3: redgrape ($597 in chips)
Seat 4: WrongButton ($603 in chips)
Seat 5: berg5528 ($2064.40 in chips)
Seat 6: Xblood ($596.25 in chips)
WrongButton: posts small blind $3
berg5528: posts big blind $6
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to redgrape [Ac Js]
Xblood: folds
Pacuno: raises $15 to $21
cliff47: calls $21
redgrape: calls $21
WrongButton: folds
berg5528: folds
*** FLOP *** [7s 7c 3c]
Pacuno: bets $46
cliff47: folds
redgrape: raises $104 to $150 (not planning to stack off ldo)

And that raising the flop smaller is probably better.


Thanks Sauce.

i didn't

Why? Because when we have JcTc he can continue with a higher FD and when we have the Ac we may have more outs?

Ac xc is obviously much better than Jc Xc because our A should be an out against most hands he doesnt fold.

I dont think the higher flush draw argument makes much of a difference because QcXc and KcXc and AcXc make up a tiny part of his range at this point.

The bit I dont get is how AcJs is better than JcTc. If he raises again we have to fold both. He is marginally more likely to have missed overs when we have JcTc. And JcTc has more outs when he calls. Wheres the upside?

Wait. Are you saying we should just call with JcTc because we still have alot of outs and a raise looks alot like air/mid PP/ draw and will be shoved on alot?

But AcJx doesnt have alot of equity so we dont mind getting shoved on, and AcJc has enough that we can call a shove?

I love the second one and I don't mine the third either, but what is wrong with the first? Is it because no overs help us, and the Ac can cause us a lot of grief by shoving right there, and that's the worst possible holding he would have that shoves?

i think pelion is dead on.

I think the big questions are what will opponent fold? What will opponent Shove over with, and then where is our equity against that shove?

well the only equity different between JcTc and AcTc is when he has like TT+, or higher FD

But is this enough to justify calling here over raising w/ JcTc...im not sure

Because your only going to make a move with a certain % of hands.

Originally Posted by Alexos

well the only equity different between JcTc and AcTc is when he has like TT+, or higher FD

But is this enough to justify calling here over raising w/ JcTc...im not sure

i think so. if he does have TT+ and a T or J hits, that puts us in a really tough spot. if we have TcKc+ this eliminates a lot more difficult turns and rivers.

---
23,760 games 0.002 secs 11,880,000 games/sec

Board: 7c 7d 3c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 28.958% 28.88% 00.08% 6861 19.50 { JcTc }
Hand 1: 71.042% 70.96% 00.08% 16860 19.50 { JJ+, AcKc, AcQc, AcJc, AcTc, KcQc }


---



---
23,760 games 0.004 secs 5,940,000 games/sec

Board: 7c 7d 3c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 44.230% 44.17% 00.06% 10494 15.00 { AcTc }
Hand 1: 55.770% 55.71% 00.06% 13236 15.00 { JJ+, KcQc, KcJc, QcJc }


---

ure ranges are way off....adding 55+, and more reasonably 88-TT to our opponents range levels off the difference in equity

this is a perfect board to raise, so a solid 400nl opponent will not fold a decent mid pair here as often as you'd think (by the ranges u put in)

i just changed them a bit. and comon you think someone is shoving 55-99 there that would be bad imo.

---
38,610 games 0.004 secs 9,652,500 games/sec

Board: 7c 7d 3c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 36.251% 36.20% 00.05% 13977 19.50 { JcTc }
Hand 1: 63.749% 63.70% 00.05% 24594 19.50 { 88+, AcKc, AcQc, AcJc, AcTc, KcQc }


---

I don't think we should assume this though imo. And when the EV is that thin using your position is going to be more +EV anyway

Basically i feel if we call JT here, we can pretty much get him off any hand he's stacking off with most of the time by going bet bet on the turn and river (on most turns and rivers). The reason you wouldn't really want to do this with AT is that it's pretty +EV already and you're not sure of the players tendencies.

also it sucks if we get rebluffed by A high and we're losing.

the JTcc is alot better than the AJss, you are thinking too much

Max, put in 1-2 lower flush draws than JcTc and the ranges are much too closer to play the hand differently than you would AcTc.

Originally Posted by gabe

the JTcc is alot better than the AJss, you are thinking too much

You mean an offsuit A with the Ac (AcJs)? Did you misread or mistype?

Originally Posted by Alexos

Max, put in 1-2 lower flush draws than JcTc and the ranges are much too closer to play the hand differently than you would AcTc.

but ATcc has more FE

surely ATcc has less fold equity. When we hold JT there is less chance he holds JJ and TT (calling hands) and more chance he holds AK- (folding hands).

Apart from taking cards out of his range I dont see how our holding affects our FE

level?

His cont betting range with JT includes nfds, but less combos of JJ and TT, his cont betting range with AT doesn't include nfds, has less combos of TT and AA. Isn't this the same logic as the shoving Axs of pp's thing?

Yea i like it.... and I like this too:

POKERSTARS GAME #15259045438: HOLD'EM NO LIMIT ($3/$6) - 2008/02/13 - 12:17:28 (ET)
Table 'Artemis II' 6-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: Pacuno ($707 in chips)
Seat 2: cliff47 ($1277.30 in chips)
Seat 3: redgrape ($597 in chips)
Seat 4: WrongButton ($603 in chips)
Seat 5: berg5528 ($2064.40 in chips)
Seat 6: Xblood ($596.25 in chips)
WrongButton: posts small blind $3
berg5528: posts big blind $6
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to redgrape [Jc Tc]
Xblood: folds
Pacuno: raises $15 to $21
cliff47: calls $21
redgrape: raises $69 to $80



POKERSTARS GAME #15259045438: HOLD'EM NO LIMIT ($3/$6) - 2008/02/13 - 12:17:28 (ET)
Table 'Artemis II' 6-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: Pacuno ($707 in chips)
Seat 2: cliff47 ($1277.30 in chips)
Seat 3: redgrape ($597 in chips)
Seat 4: WrongButton ($603 in chips)
Seat 5: berg5528 ($2064.40 in chips)
Seat 6: Xblood ($596.25 in chips)
WrongButton: posts small blind $3
berg5528: posts big blind $6
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to redgrape [Ac Tc]
Xblood: folds
Pacuno: raises $15 to $21
cliff47: calls $21
redgrape: raises $69 to $80



POKERSTARS GAME #15259045438: HOLD'EM NO LIMIT ($3/$6) - 2008/02/13 - 12:17:28 (ET)
Table 'Artemis II' 6-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: Pacuno ($707 in chips)
Seat 2: cliff47 ($1277.30 in chips)
Seat 3: redgrape ($597 in chips)
Seat 4: WrongButton ($603 in chips)
Seat 5: berg5528 ($2064.40 in chips)
Seat 6: Xblood ($596.25 in chips)
WrongButton: posts small blind $3
berg5528: posts big blind $6
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to redgrape [Ac Js]
Xblood: folds
Pacuno: raises $15 to $21
cliff47: calls $21
redgrape: raises $69 to $80

you also like saying hella

zing

but for each A that becomes available he is slightly more likely to have AA and even more likely to have AK.

With 3 aces in the deck there are 3 combinations of AA but 12 combinations of AK. with 4 aces in the deck there 6 combos of AA and 16 combos of AK.

Also, we are gaining a J instead which restricts the combos of JJ from 6 to 3 so the JJ Vs AA part cancels anyway.

So really the only difference is 4 more combos of folding hands for every AK, AQ type hand he has in his range.... isnt it?

its all good, it's good w/ like sooooooooo many hands here ... but like jonny said dont need to raise too much

Originally Posted by Marshall28

its all good, it's good w/ like sooooooooo many hands here ... but like jonny said dont need to raise too much

jonny was talking about 3 betting pre, not raising the flop.

Originally Posted by gabe

you also like saying hella

zing

i say hella hella much.

Originally Posted by will641

Originally Posted by Marshall28

its all good, it's good w/ like sooooooooo many hands here ... but like jonny said dont need to raise too much

jonny was talking about 3 betting pre, not raising the flop.

yeah, i didnt realize, but regardless, i still agree w/ it. and i still agree that everything up there looks good to me.

Originally Posted by thizzSantaCruz

Originally Posted by gabe

you also like saying hella

zing

i say hella hella much.

i think its a bay area thing. maybe all of california has turned to the dark side idk. i always thought hella was the kind of word that kids said when they were like 13-15, and then kind of gave it up over time because its so stupid.

Hella is a northeast thing too. The first time I heard hella in a conversation was when I was in New Hampshire.

no that's wicked...

oh yeah oops! right

isnt hella everywhere from Cartman saying it?

nh is hella wicked

Originally Posted by sauce123

nh is hella wicked

Hey ben what do you think about the OP