Ace considered a brick in this spot vs loose/passive?

[Micro2Macro]

Villain is 33/0 over 9 hands. Seen him OPEN-LIMP Q8o on the Button.

Put him all in on the turn? I think I might be able to classify the ace as a brick but I'm not sure.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.05 BB (9 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

MP2 ($6.10)
MP3 ($3.05)
CO ($10.24)
Hero (Button) ($5.05)
SB ($5.02)
BB ($6.24)
UTG ($6.57)
UTG+1 ($10.98)
MP1 ($6)

Preflop: Hero is Button with K, J
1 fold, UTG+1 calls $0.05, 2 folds, MP3 calls $0.05, 1 fold, Hero bets $0.30, 1 fold, BB calls $0.25, 1 fold, MP3 calls $0.25

Flop: ($0.97) 7, 9, J (3 players)
BB checks, MP3 checks, Hero bets $0.65, 1 fold, MP3 calls $0.65

Turn: ($2.27) A (2 players)
MP3 checks, Hero bets pot?

[Revolver123]

I think that would be a standard play to put him all in on the turn given his stack size. Especially considering your read is that he really sucks but given that, he could have any two cards, including J9 or J7.

I think the ace is a brick in most situations but then again, it is 5NL and it's not outside of his range to have A7 or A9 either. I would probably push him all in, I don't see how you could check behind this turn.

[POKEMONS]

I definitely bet/fold the turn.

I don't think you need to full pot the turn, but just a standard 2/3 pot sized bet gives him bad odds to draw to a flush/straight and he will call you with worse a good % of the time.

[dranger7070]

I definitely bet/fold the turn.

I don't think you need to full pot the turn, but just a standard 2/3 pot sized bet gives him bad odds to draw to a flush/straight and he will call you with worse a good % of the time.

ROFL

Seriously, you're willing to put in ~$2.50 and fold to a 30 cent reraise? Please tell me you're kidding. If you are willing to bet 2/3 and fold when he ships for a fraction of the pot, you must be leaking money out the ass.

It's either push or check, I advocate for checking tbh. Just because he open limped Q8o doesn't mean he can't have an Ax hand here. People like to get "tricky" and check/ship with all sorts of nonsense.

Check behind, if river bricks, see what he does. If he just shoves I think its a pretty easy fold. If he just checks bet around half pot and call his shove.

I say bet pot, because I don't think some of his Jx hands will call an open shove, but will be willing to call a smaller bet. (It's ridiculously flawed thinking, I know, but trust me lol.) You will get a lot more value out of his Jx rag hands and not be limiting his range to Ax or two pair+ like you would be if you just shove turn imo.

[dranger7070]

Sorry in that last paragraph I meant "I say bet 1/2 pot" not pot.

[POKEMONS]

I definitely bet/fold the turn.

I don't think you need to full pot the turn, but just a standard 2/3 pot sized bet gives him bad odds to draw to a flush/straight and he will call you with worse a good % of the time.

ROFL

Seriously, you're willing to put in ~$2.50 and fold to a 30 cent reraise? Please tell me you're kidding. If you are willing to bet 2/3 and fold when he ships for a fraction of the pot, you must be leaking money out the ass.

It's either push or check, I advocate for checking tbh. Just because he open limped Q8o doesn't mean he can't have an Ax hand here. People like to get "tricky" and check/ship with all sorts of nonsense.

Check behind, if river bricks, see what he does. If he just shoves I think its a pretty easy fold. If he just checks bet around half pot and call his shove.

I say bet pot, because I don't think some of his Jx hands will call an open shove, but will be willing to call a smaller bet. (It's ridiculously flawed thinking, I know, but trust me lol.) You will get a lot more value out of his Jx rag hands and not be limiting his range to Ax or two pair+ like you would be if you just shove turn imo.

Woops didn't look at stack sizes lol. I'd just put him AI FWIW and expect to get a lot of folds, get snapped by Ax, and get called by worse jacks/draws often.

[Micro2Macro]

Even though hands like Ax are in his range, looking back I don't see him having an ace alot. The thing is though, what am I getting value out of by putting him all in on this particular turn card? He might even fold a J if he's scared of the A, so in a way I turn my hand into a bluff, but he might be bad enough to call with garbage anyway.

I ended up checking behind, and I'll add the rivercard in a moment to initiate some more discussion.

Also, the note on him open limping Q8o from late position is a good indication that he's limp calling my raise with a bad hand.

[dranger7070]

Yes, I know why you stated that he limped Q8o on the button. A3o is a bad hand as well. Isn't possible that he could have A-rag and limp it?

The best part is, when they do have A-rag and the ace hits one of two things happen:

1.) They play it like the nuts.

2.) They are too scared of better Aces to bet it, which totally negates the reason for calling with it PF lol.

(Those two points have nothing to do with this conversation, I just think its funny )

I'm glad you advocated checking behind here. That is exactly what I would have done, and is the same thing I posted before, and it was for the exact same reasons. Can't wait to see what the river brings lol.

[Micro2Macro]

dranger he may very well have A rag coming in preflop, but alot of them aren't in his calling range on the flop since all he will have is Ace high - no kicker. That's why I think I maybe should have bet, because really the only aces we'll see in his hand at this point will include a jack, 7, 9 or maybe a 10.

[dranger7070]

I can agree with that, but it wouldn't shock me to see him call with A7 or A9 on that flop, or even AT looking for the gutshot.

Also, I'm not saying his range is comprised of ONLY Aces here. I think you are right that he will not have an ace as that flop misses him the majority of the time. I just feel that you will get more value by checking back the turn then bet/calling the river.

[POKEMONS]

I can agree with that, but it wouldn't shock me to see him call with A7 or A9 on that flop, or even AT looking for the gutshot.

Also, I'm not saying his range is comprised of ONLY Aces here. I think you are right that he will not have an ace as that flop misses him the majority of the time. I just feel that you will get more value by checking back the turn then bet/calling the river.

I disagree here because of the numerous number of draws villain can have on the turn.

[dranger7070]

Numerous? REALLY? He has a backdoor and a gutshot. That doesn't seem too numerous to me. If he really wants to call with a backdoor flush draw on flop, please, be my guest. And I'm willing to give up a POTENTIAL one street of value vs. a gut shot and get more value out of his TPNK hands on the river.

[Micro2Macro]

I can agree with that, but it wouldn't shock me to see him call with A7 or A9 on that flop, or even AT looking for the gutshot.

Also, I'm not saying his range is comprised of ONLY Aces here. I think you are right that he will not have an ace as that flop misses him the majority of the time. I just feel that you will get more value by checking back the turn then bet/calling the river.

I was thinking the same thing when I checked behind. Okay here comes the river:

River: ($2.27) K (2 players)
MP3 bets $0.95, Hero says: Gazadooks!

How wide of a range could we assign villain to bet here after we checkkkk the turn. Remember he's loose/passive, so I'm sort of stumped on to what he would bet into us vs what he would just check call. I believe he has a bluff frequency of near 0% based on how I saw him play a hand before, so he's got something. I'm looking for some input on what you guys think his betting range is here so I can run the EV calculation on calling.

[POKEMONS]

Numerous? REALLY? He has a backdoor and a gutshot. That doesn't seem too numerous to me. If he really wants to call with a backdoor flush draw on flop, please, be my guest. And I'm willing to give up a POTENTIAL one street of value vs. a gut shot and get more value out of his TPNK hands on the river.

First off we aren't getting value out of TPNK. We are getting value out of Jx / 9x and draws.

Second of all as for the number of draws villain can have here:

Straight draws on the flop, all of which given OP's reads are likely to peel the flop.
KQ, QT, 86, 56, T6, KT, 85, 98, JT, 78, T7, Q8, T9

Villain can show up with random clubs in this spot just because of the wide range of hands he's peeling with on the flop. For example many of the straight draws he has may contain two clubs he could easily have Jx or 7x with two clubs in his hand as well.

[Micro2Macro]

Numerous? REALLY? He has a backdoor and a gutshot. That doesn't seem too numerous to me. If he really wants to call with a backdoor flush draw on flop, please, be my guest. And I'm willing to give up a POTENTIAL one street of value vs. a gut shot and get more value out of his TPNK hands on the river.

I think he meant on the turn, because theres an OESD and a FD. Plus whatever other outs he has if he's got a pair. We're talking about checking behind on the turn here not the flop remember.

[dranger7070]

Numerous? REALLY? He has a backdoor and a gutshot. That doesn't seem too numerous to me. If he really wants to call with a backdoor flush draw on flop, please, be my guest. And I'm willing to give up a POTENTIAL one street of value vs. a gut shot and get more value out of his TPNK hands on the river.

First off we aren't getting value out of TPNK. We are getting value out of Jx / 9x and draws.

Second of all as for the number of draws villain can have here:

Straight draws on the flop, all of which given OP's reads are likely to peel the flop.
KQ, QT, 86, 56, T6, KT, 85, 98, JT, 78, T7, Q8, T9

Villain can show up with random clubs in this spot just because of the wide range of hands he's peeling with on the flop. For example many of the straight draws he has may contain two clubs he could easily have Jx or 7x with two clubs in his hand as well.

You are 100% correct and I apologize. I was just looking for the most obvious draws lol (even though some of those should be pretty obvious).

I still advocate for checking the turn despite this.

[POKEMONS]

Numerous? REALLY? He has a backdoor and a gutshot. That doesn't seem too numerous to me. If he really wants to call with a backdoor flush draw on flop, please, be my guest. And I'm willing to give up a POTENTIAL one street of value vs. a gut shot and get more value out of his TPNK hands on the river.

First off we aren't getting value out of TPNK. We are getting value out of Jx / 9x and draws.

Second of all as for the number of draws villain can have here:

Straight draws on the flop, all of which given OP's reads are likely to peel the flop.
KQ, QT, 86, 56, T6, KT, 85, 98, JT, 78, T7, Q8, T9

Villain can show up with random clubs in this spot just because of the wide range of hands he's peeling with on the flop. For example many of the straight draws he has may contain two clubs he could easily have Jx or 7x with two clubs in his hand as well.

You are 100% correct and I apologize. I was just looking for the most obvious draws lol (even though some of those should be pretty obvious).

I still advocate for checking the turn despite this.

Fair enough, but just keep in mind that there are many river cards that can come that put you in a shitty spot.

Micro, I just shove river here. The river card is a good card since only one draw hit and you're ahead of Ax now. You will definitely be behind sometimes but this guy will show up with Ax and worse 2pairs enough to make it a profitable shove. I doubt he is ever folding any piece of this board in this spot too.

[dranger7070]

Ok, like you said, villain obviously has something because I don't think many 33/0's decide to think "O hell I bluff!" although I don't think we can COMPLETELY discount it. Maybe like 5% of his range is bluffs.

QT is definitely in his range and I would actually expect to see this fairlyoften.

Weaker two pairs (K7, K9, etc)

An Ace still wouldnt surprise me.

I don't expect to see a naked K for the most part just for the simple fact of why would he call a flop c-bet with K high? I mean I guess it could be a float, and checking the turn opens it up for him to bet the river, but I don't think thats the case. Or maybe KT or KQ for the gutshot with overs, but I still don't like it. Although it could explain him waking up on the river all of a sudden.

Ok so here is the range I am assigning him (this is pretty tight for the micros and I expect to be surprised a lot lol)

Ax (usually A7 or A9), Jx, QT, KT, KQ, K7, K9, QJ.

I'm sure that some of you will be able to come up with a much wider range, but my handreading skills aren't very premium lol, and I figure these are the hands that we will see the most. Also, I don't think he's going to be bluffing his missed draws here very often.

I'm eager to see what others have to say about this.

[dranger7070]

Scratch QJ, I don't think he will bet a J on the river when another over hit.

Also I like POKEMONS advice to shove the river. He doesn't have much left and we kill the majority of his range.

[POKEMONS]

Ok, like you said, villain obviously has something because I don't think many 33/0's decide to think "O hell I bluff!" although I don't think we can COMPLETELY discount it. Maybe like 5% of his range is bluffs.

QT is definitely in his range and I would actually expect to see this fairlyoften.

Weaker two pairs (K7, K9, etc)

An Ace still wouldnt surprise me.

I don't expect to see a naked K for the most part just for the simple fact of why would he call a flop c-bet with K high? I mean I guess it could be a float, and checking the turn opens it up for him to bet the river, but I don't think thats the case. Or maybe KT or KQ for the gutshot with overs, but I still don't like it. Although it could explain him waking up on the river all of a sudden.

Ok so here is the range I am assigning him (this is pretty tight for the micros and I expect to be surprised a lot lol)

Ax (usually A7 or A9), Jx, QT, KT, KQ, K7, K9, QJ.

I'm sure that some of you will be able to come up with a much wider range, but my handreading skills aren't very premium lol, and I figure these are the hands that we will see the most. Also, I don't think he's going to be bluffing his missed draws here very often.

I'm eager to see what others have to say about this.

I think this is a good range to give him on the river. Only thing I would mention is I think we see A8/AT about as often as A7/A9. Of course a 33/0 can also show up with AK/AQ here too.

Against this range we have 64% and I doubt he folds any of it to a shove.

[dranger7070]

Just realized, don't count out a set, a lot of micro players will "slowplay" their flopped sets in hopes that someone else will bet for them. And yes, calling on the flop with a set would be standard for them, hoping we bet the turn A and be able to shove over.

So my new range would be 77, 99, JJ, A7, A9, Jx, A8, AT, AK, AQ, QT, KQ, K7, K9

Our equity vs. this range is ~61% so easy river shove over.

[Micro2Macro]

Guys his check/calling range may be wide but his betting range is tight. Remember, he's very, very passive. I'm ruling out bluffing because even though it looks like I just made a standard c-bet, missed, and am preparing to check it down, the turn and river both hit my raising range well. However, his range makes so many 2 pairs + that straight that I think the most I can do is call, in fact TBH I considered folding which is why I pondered about betting the turn since it would eliminate any decisions to be made on the river. I don't think shoving into this opponent is a good play because of his narrow betting range on the river.

Due to this I think the only top/pair type hand I'm getting bet into here would be AT.

[dranger7070]

If you look at the range I assigned him, it is almost nothing but sets, two pairs, and big ace hands. For the Jx I put in like 2 or 3 random J's like JT or J8, but I also put in J7 and J9.

You are crushing his range so hard right now folding shouldn't cross your mind. The majority of the range I gave him are two pair+ hands.

I still thinking shoving here isn't going to be -EV. If you lost the hand, thats unfortunate, but I think you will be ahead of him more than often enough to make that shove profitable.

[Micro2Macro]

The outcome doesn't matter. I'm thinking about EV here. I think your range is good, but I'd drop KQ and AK and Jx because he isn't betting KQ, or Jx other than Jx's that make 2 pairs and let's just assume he raises AK preflop.

(sorry if it sounds like I'm 'instructing' here on his range, I just realized that I'd never do analysis on spots like this if I didn't post them on FTR, plus this has got to benefit some folks reading)

Your def. right about shoving if we are ahead of his range though because he's calling 100% of his betting range here for sure.

[dranger7070]

Even though you are pretty much weighting his range to be what I think is pretty much the best he will show up with, we still beat it with 57% equity. Still a river shove.

[Micro2Macro]

How's this range:
Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

75 games 0.005 secs 15,000 games/sec

Board: 7h 9c Js Ac Kd
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 65.333% 62.67% 02.67% 47 2.00 { JJ, 99, 77, AJs-A9s, A7s, KJs, K9s, QTs, J9s, AJo-A9o, A7o, KJo, K9o, QTo, J9o }
Hand 1: 34.667% 32.00% 02.67% 24 2.00 { KsJh }

Pot = $2.27 + $0.95 = $3.22 facing $0.95 to call, which is roughly 3:1, which works out to 25% in percentage form. So we need greater than 25% equity to shove right? Or is that wrong.

[dranger7070]

No, I think its just 25% equity to call and break even. If we shove, we still get called by roughly the same range, plus you have to factor in fold equity (no matter how small it may be) and I think it is fine to shove the river.

Ok, I just went to spoon's new website and figured it out like we were calling his shove not shoving ourselves. According to his equations we do this:

We take our equity % (32) and multiply it by the amount we will win ($4.37). Then we multiply the villains equity % (68) and multiply it by the amount we will lose ($2.10 if we are just calling his open shove, which we aren't but for the sake of argument go with it).

.32*4.37=~$1.40
.68*2.10=~$1.43

Then we subtract the second equation from the first so:

1.40-1.43= -.03

So it would be -$.03 to call an open shove on the river. Since we aren't doing that, and we are the one putting him all in, I think this play is breakeven, maybe slightly profitable. But the point is is that it isn't a bad move to put him all in here. It's pretty much a toss up in calling or shoving. I advocate for shoving since a (small) % of the time he will fold his bluffs (even though we have discounted those from his range).

[Micro2Macro]

Ok just a couple things:

We have no fold equity here ever - this guy isn't folding a better hand if we shove (which is basically a min raise given his stack size)

If we raise, we're assuming he calls 100% of his betting range because it's so tight. Because of this, as long as we're >25% equity we can shove to get more money in the pot when we're ahead.

About him open shoving river - if it's break/even we lose to the rake. This type of player would never do that without the nuts though.

Because pokerstove just equally considered every possible holding, I think to do a more in-depth analysis, we need to add weights to specific hands. In that case, I'm weighing more like 60% straights and sets and 40% 2 pairs + AT. In that case, I think we may be facing a -EV decision on calling his bet. I'm also thinking about eliminating 97 from his range.

[dranger7070]

omfg... this thread is bordering on the verge of ridiculousness now. ITS 5NL. You have fold equity where in the craziest ass spots. A guy could literally put all but one cent of his stack in and fold for that last cent. I don't think you realize how stupid some of these guys are.

You obviously lost this hand and are trying to make it -EV to call or even shove over because that is what you want to hear. Seriously, you are weighting his range so heavily toward the nuts that its disgusting.

Like I said, its $5nl, these guys arent 200nl regs here. They are fucking dumb, and will bet/fold here with a bluff, and call with so much worse it is +EV and I am willing to bet any amount of money on that.

[Muzzard]

I guess I don't hate shoving turn, but I'd probably check. Sure he's probably dumb and will call you with worse anyway. But sometimes he may fold something we beat here, that will call a river bet.

Check behind, bet river if checked to. Call if he bets ldo.

[dranger7070]

And if you think ANY 33/0 at 5nl will fold 2pair like 97 you SERIOUSLY do not understand the game you are playing. I mean come on, did the fish at 2nl ever fold this? Sure its a lil out there for US to call with 97 to a PF raise, but to these guys its, "well i could hit a flop." Please, read through your last posts and tell me that it isn't getting sad how much you want him to have the nuts.

[dranger7070]

Also you stated that you wanted to know the EV of calling his bet. Well, I gave it to you, yet you continue, to dispute that it is a -EV call which I don't understand. But whatever. You seem to have a decent amount of knowledge in your game, please use it and understand the level of players you are playing. He's a 33/0, he is loose as hell, he will call with worse more often than better.

Villain calling with worse = +EV.
Villain bet/folding to our river shove over= +EV
EVEN THE RARE OCCASION WE ARE BEAT BECAUSE WE ARE AHEAD THE MAJORITY OF THE TIME= +EV

[Micro2Macro]

omfg... this thread is bordering on the verge of ridiculousness now. ITS 5NL. You have fold equity where in the craziest ass spots. A guy could literally put all but one cent of his stack in and fold for that last cent. I don't think you realize how stupid some of these guys are.

You obviously lost this hand and are trying to make it -EV to call or even shove over because that is what you want to hear. Seriously, you are weighting his range so heavily toward the nuts that its disgusting.

Like I said, its $5nl, these guys arent 200nl regs here. They are fucking dumb, and will bet/fold here with a bluff, and call with so much worse it is +EV and I am willing to bet any amount of money on that.

Fold equity means we're folding out a better hand. We do not have fold equity here, what better hand is folding here?

If we're going to do the generalize thing and make assumptions based on $5NL players overall, if anything 'because its $5NL' we're getting called with alot of crazy shit because of the gross amount of stations. We do not have fold equity in this situation period, only worse hands will fold. If we deicide to raise his river bet it is strictly for value.

I'm weighing his range so heavily toward a better hand given the information I have on him: He is very, very passive and he does not bluff. This situation changes so much if you put a TAG in here. In fact, if we were facing a TAG this situation wouldn't exist because he would have raised the EP limper preflop.

You can't just say 'oh its $5NL he's betting garbage here I snap call'. Look at the player, consider what a bet means from that player, and then adjust. When facing a very passive, cautious, meek player, a bet is usually an indication of strength. Relatively, on this board our hand isn't that strong.

I know some players will b/f here but this guy doesn't fit that category. We're seeing a showdown if he's betting the river, he's a loose/passive cautious type of player and he's showing up with a real hand when he bets. FWIW because of all this information I ran the timer down here before my decision so I could think about what types of hands he is playing following his line of [preflop: limp/call raise Flop: check/call Turn: check River: Bet], I don't just auto-call because '$5NL players are donks'.

[dranger7070]

I never once said, "o its only 5nl, snapcall" What I was trying to say was, he isn't going to have nut every time. And you have NINE HANDS on this guy. WOW what a sample. Thats what one WHOLE orbit? Dude, omfg that means he's played 3 hands, none of them for raises. WOW LOOK OUT. HES GOTTA BE A LOOSE/WEAK PLAYER WHO DOESN'T HAVE THE MENTAL CAPACITY TO BET WITHOUT THE NUTS.

Spare me. If you had 40-50+ hands that said that this player was weak (including Aggression Factor) then i might be a little more swayed by your argument of him being so weak he doesn't know where the bet button is.

[Micro2Macro]

And if you think ANY 33/0 at 5nl will fold 2pair like 97 you SERIOUSLY do not understand the game you are playing. I mean come on, did the fish at 2nl ever fold this? Sure its a lil out there for US to call with 97 to a PF raise, but to these guys its, "well i could hit a flop." Please, read through your last posts and tell me that it isn't getting sad how much you want him to have the nuts.

No he's not folding 97 postlfop because he has 2 pair. He's folding it preflop because he's timid and I made a big raise.

How is it bad that I'm weighing him more towards a big hand? He's passive and timid, the draw got there, he checked the first 2 streets to us. This looks alot like a set or a straight to me at worst some sort of 2 pair hand, given the information about the player.

[dranger7070]

It's not bad you are weighting him towards a big hand, but his range isn't going to be ALL BIG HANDS like you seem to want it to be, the majority of which beat us.

And also, I never once said he's folding 97 on the flop or PF. I said some people (a 33/0 being one of them) could definitely call a preflop (thats wut PF means) raise with it especially if its suited and with a caller in front (if he's even thinking about that).

[Micro2Macro]

I never once said, "o its only 5nl, snapcall" What I was trying to say was, he isn't going to have nut every time. And you have NINE HANDS on this guy. WOW what a sample. Thats what one WHOLE orbit? Dude, omfg that means he's played 3 hands, none of them for raises. WOW LOOK OUT. HES GOTTA BE A LOOSE/WEAK PLAYER WHO DOESN'T HAVE THE MENTAL CAPACITY TO BET WITHOUT THE NUTS.

Spare me. If you had 40-50+ hands that said that this player was weak (including Aggression Factor) then i might be a little more swayed by your argument of him being so weak he doesn't know where the bet button is.

I don't think 40 or 50 more hands would make much of a difference. After seeing him play another hand where he went to showdown I have a pretty good idea on what this player is like. All of his lines he took weren't that of a strong player. So even though it's only 9 hands, I'm pretty sure we can still make some assumptions because of how bad he's played so far.

[dranger7070]

Yes you can make SOME assumptions, but sample size is certainly a factor in this situation. It obviously matters how he played a hand before, but I would prefer more than ONE hand, and before I'm "sure" of a read I like to have more than one orbit on the table with the guy.

I like to think I'm fairly decent at picking up on when a player is good/bad loose/tight strong/weak but its the rare occasion when I can figure that out within 9 hands.

[Micro2Macro]

Open limped Q8o on button, checked all three streets heads up vs BB.

That's enough information by itself to know this player is weak. You don't need a big sample to realize that this guy is bad. Strong players do not make plays like this period.

How is this player not obviously weak? Oh right only 9 hands...might as well ignore everything he does until I've seen it 100 times. He can't be weak just because he open-limped Q8o without any intention of bluffing at the pot postlfop.

[chipblight]

i bet more on flop to chase him out and like 3/4 pot to fold on turn but who am i

[dranger7070]

I never once said that he isn't a weak player. I simply stated that having one instance is not enough to know for 100% fact that he is INCAPABLE of bluffing. Seriously, I hope to one day sit at your table. You will be so easy to exploit if you get reads this fast. Change gears after every orbit imo, so you are so sure of your read after ONE hand. Good luck with that.

[Micro2Macro]

I didnt' say he was 100% incapable of bluffing.
But he is 100% for sure a weak player.

Judging by the way the hand was played out and the texture of the board (which clearly you don't take into consideration since you're the OMG I HAVE 2 PAIR SWEET type player), KJ is looking all that great.

FWIW I don't automatically get reads this fast. It just depends. Sometimes it will take a long time to figure someone out, othertimes they just give alot away early.

What's your Stars SN?

[dranger7070]

dranger7070, same as my name on here. PLEASE look me up on a 6-max table some time. I actually had respect for your game before this thread, now not so much. You are obviously pretty weak/tight if you considered folding this river. And no, I'm not the "OMG I HAVE 2 PAIR SWEET" type of player but obviously your reads are so rock solid off the get go, theres no way I'm going to convince u otherwise which works out great for me.

[Micro2Macro]

I'm weak tight because I considered folding when a player who I assumed to be very, very passive bets and I had a draw weighted heavily in the range I assigned to him? Ok... I wasn't folding anyway but w/e.

Against a different player my thought process would have been different.

Anyway it's fine if you don't respect my game. But please, if you're going to berate me, at the very least you should be a good player.

[dranger7070]

lmao, wutever i must be a terrible player because im grinding up from $10 right? I must be a bad player because I've managed to turn $10 into $100+. Dude seriously, screw it, I was trying to help you out, but apparently your "amazing reads and superior thought processes" are beyond me, so by all means continue to play your game without any outside help. I thought thats what this forum was for.

[Micro2Macro]

BTW you play 6-max...full ring is more of a nut-camp so you're probably used to seeing more aggro-donk players and even more trashy hands showing up here.

[dranger7070]

I do play 6-max but I've also played a lot of FR. Especially during January so I'm not completely oblivious.

[Micro2Macro]

I've turned $50 into $270. You don't have to be that good to beat the micros. So when I say please be a good player before you berate my game, winning some money at $2NL or $5NL doesn't make you good enough to start trash talking someone who's at the same level you are.

I didn't claim that I always have superior reads on everyone so if you could please stop putting words into my mouth that'd be great. Just because I feel like I have a strong read here doesn't mean I always do.

And for you thinking we actually have fold equity by raising the river bet...that's almost more ridiculous than If I were to fold this river. Maybe you don't know what Fold equity means?

[dranger7070]

I understood fold equity to mean how sure we are that the villain will fold to a bet/raise. Obviously, I could be wrong. But if I am shit happens, it equates to the same thing. People will fold after putting the most ridiculous amount of money in on a bluff, especially at the stakes WE are playing. And I'm not putting words in your mouth, I am merely trying to show you how u are presenting yourself. You refuse to think that this guy could have less than a nut hand because of how he played Q8o on the button.

This shit is laughable. And I never said I was a good player either, in fact I'm quite certain I'm NOT that good which is why I decided to do my operation, so I could get better as I moved up the stakes. You however, have this superior attitude towards me which I still don't quite understand. I'll admit I have turned into an asshole the last couple of posts, but that is only because you refuse to acknowledge an outside way of thinking. I was offering an alternative way of thinking/playing the hand and apparently according to you I'm so far off I might as well be brain dead lol. Apparently you only listen to the people who have more posts or something, idk. Whatever it is, I wish you luck on your operation. Seriously, if you aren't willing to accept a different view, you will need it when you get higher stakes.

[dranger7070]

O and for what its worth, just searched definition of fold equity, I wasn't wrong.

Fold equity- is the equity a player can expect to gain due to the opponent folding to his or her bets.

I may have used it using a flawed definition (that fold equity is how often an opponent will fold) but it equates to the same thing for the simple fact that you take into account how often an opponent will fold when using fold equity.

[Micro2Macro]

Hopefully we can put these hard feeling aside and move on. I really don't want to be enemies with you or anything.

I apologize if it seems like I'm trying to defend my side here too much and not listening enough to what you have to say. You probably had the right to start getting a little mouthy at me since I didn't acknowledge your contribution the way I should have just because I felt a different towards weighing the hand ranges etc. I didn't mean to make it sound like my thoughts were absolutely correct (I'm going to try harder not to do this now that it's been brought to my attention), I was just trying to go beyond assigning a simple range and thinking a bit more on weighing different hands in the range and how it could change our expected value.

I apologize once again for basically taking shots at every response you wrote. Post count is meaningless IMO. Your posts are of good quality so it wouldn't matter if you had 10, 500, or 5000. If you had 5000 though I'd have to admit you probably would have shut me up earlier since it would be more intimidating to challenge someone whos been here for years, but I try not to be biased in that aspect. I'll try to start making an effort into challenging repsonses less from now on and do more listening because I don't want to start heat again, and I also want to get better.

I hope what was said in this thread doesn't affect the way we will help each other out in future posts. Again sorry for the whole crazy-debate thing. I can't stress this enough because I don't mean to come off like a know-it-all. Thanks alot for wishing me luck in my operation. I also wish you luck in yours and I hope you achieve your target so you can make a new one .

[dranger7070]

Hey dude, I totally agree no hard feelings. I'm not saying don't challenge another's post, bust don't take so far to say that it isn't possible. Obviously, I am guilty of the same thing on here as we can both see. We both failed to recognize the other's point of view and that is a shame, because I think we both made fairly valid points.

And like I said before, I have some respect for your game because you seem to know what you are talking about the majority of the time. And LOL at saying you would have shut up if I had 5k posts.

It did escalate kinda quickly though huh? Like one minute, going along fine, the next its like, "NO NO FUCK YOU!!! YOU'RE WRONG, I'M RIGHT, END OF STORY!" lol. I got into a pissing match like this on the table with a 52/4 and I realize it was dumb now, but the moron wouldn't stop calling me a fish after I rivered a gutshot straight draw after it was checked through on the flop and turn and I stacked his stupid ass lol. It was amusing but I hate having shots taken at me by someone who is obviously a god awful player.

And nah, this thread wouldn't stopped me from posting and helping you out in future threads (although I probly would have been a little bit of a dick and been weighted towards disagreeing with you lol).

See you at the midstakes some day.

[Micro2Macro]

Well its good that we both learned something.

The funniest thing about this thread is it's posted on the internet so everyone can laugh at our arguement.

[dranger7070]

Meh I'm not too worried about it. They can go ahead and laugh but the point of the matter is they probably won't take place in something like this

1.) Because they don't care enough about learning to get this involved.

2.) It's some of the higher stakes regs who have probly been in something like this before.

3.) I'm glad to see that there is someone else on this site that is devoted enough to learning as much as possible about this game as I am and wants to succeed just as badly as I do.

[Micro2Macro]

I bet if we played heads up there'd be some sick leveling going on for us being microstakes players lol. just for the record im not implying id want to play u heads up since id really prefer preserving my bankroll.

[Erpel]

I read a bit of the discussion and skimmed the drama with a laugh. I'm laughing because this is all so ironic. If you go back, ignore all the drama content and read the actual strategy posts this an excellent, excellent thread for BC. The level of analysis is very good.

Right, I don't agree with all hand ranges etc, but the main point is that ALL THE RIGHT QUESTIONS ARE BEING ASKED and all the relevant factors considered. I'd pat you both on the back, if I didn't feel the urge to pat you on the head instead.

Couple things to still address. I read a post recently which made the point also raised in this thread that fold equity relates directly to getting better hands to fold. I couldn't find it, so I give you this.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/69...l-50nl-367707/
Read the section on bluffing there and think fold equity. And I'm giving you this.

Think logically about the whole thing. Fold equity is equity realised by making the opponent fold. There is money in the pot, you bet, the opponent folds and you benefit. The opponent can fold with a better hand than you or with a worse hand than you. If the opponent is holding a worse hand than you you have the option of betting now to make him fold or take a free showdown and win the showdown. When the opponent has a worse hand than you you could say that you take the pot by betting and him folding but you are not actually gaining anything by betting.

While semantically you can argue that he's folding and giving you the pot therefore it must be fold equity it's important to note that you do not actually gain any equity from his fold. For you to gain equity from a fold you must be behind. I think fold equity is only a useful term if it is used strictly to refer to the times when you gain equity by giving your opponent a chance to make a mistake by folding when he is otherwise ahead.

Second there is this: Calling vs shoving river. I think it's fair to assume that there is literally no fold equity here. As in, if we shove the river there is no hand better than ours that will fold. There may be some hands that are worse than ours that will fold, and there may be some hands worse than ours that will call. The hands worse than ours that would fold to a shove we get the exact same value out of if we shove or we call. If we shove we win more from the hands worse than ours that call and lose more to the hands that are better than ours. It is profitable to shove only if we are ahead of the villain's shove-calling range.

At some point I noted a post that went unremarked where someone concluded that if we are priced in to call a shove then we can safely shove. This is incorrect. The street as a whole may be +EV if we shove, but it can be more +EV to call. If we have less than 50% equity but get pot odds that make it profitable to call we must do at least a call portion. If we then raise with less than 50% equity we are just losing more on that additional voluntary investment than we are winning. I think we need an example. Completely unrelated example to follow.

River. Pot 10bb. Stacks 8bb. You can put villain on exactly 3 hand combinations, one of which you beat and two which beat you. Villain bets 5bb.
Call EV: Win 15bb once, lose 5bb twice: Total EV +5bb.
Shove EV: Win 18bb once, lose 8bb twice: Total EV +2EV.

On the actual hand: In play mode I'd probably misplay the hand, but in analysis mode I agree with a turn check and a river call. I think Micro is overwhelmingly correct in pointing out that the board actually only gets worse for our hand against the opponents range.

We are behind: AJ, A9, A7, JJ, 99, 77, QT, T8
We are ahead: K9, K7, J9, J7, 97, AT
We are splitting with: KJ

Against that range we have 42% equity, and I'm just not convinced villain would bet out here with all of the hands that we beat every time. The hands we are behind will play this way the vast majority of the time. Maybe the sets will bet out on the flop, but not often. While there are lots more weaker hands that we can consider calling us on the flop they are all very unlikely to lead the river. I think that range is pretty accurate, even if it does include all suited and offsuit versions of all hands. I certainly think we are behind but good to call.

The fold is not quite as far fetched as it might seem. If we take AT, 97 and J7 out of the range we are down to 23% equity against the range. However, on balance I think the times this villain decides to play bottom two pairs passively here are offset by the occasional time he spews with air or a weak ace.

[dranger7070]

rofl yea i know dude. Trust me. I have this friend who is doing the same thing I am, he's just not a member on FTR, (not that I haven't tried pushing it on him ) and we'll sit down at the same table sometimes and it gets pretty crazy. I feel bad for the other players sitting down with us because between me and him we just completely blow them out of the water.

Its pretty fun though, he's called down with 22 on a very drawy/high card board and taken it down vs. me knowing that I am capable of double and triple barreling with air and I've called down with a AQ high vs. him under similar circumstances. We 3 and 4-bet with ridiculously wide ranges and its almost impossible to know if you're ahead.

We always have AIM open when playing like this so we can send the other the HH if it doesn't get to showdown (which it rarely does) and the other is curious enough to ask (which we often are ). He always claims I would beat him in a HU game just because I can be so aggressive and make good folds, but the guy is just as bad. When I first started playing with him he was such a nit, but after I sweated him a couple of times he's started to open up his game and he's really doing well.

He's up to ~$200 as of now. But he plays a sick amount of hands (compared to me). Maybe when we get up to 25nl or something we could do a $2.20 HU sng

[dranger7070]

Thanks for the analysis of the thread daven. I guess I was wrong saying that shoving over the river would be profitable... but I figured that his bet/calling range was the virtually the same as his betting range. But the way you presented it makes sense. Why would we make more money just because we shoved? No reason lol. I feel kind of like a jack ass for raising such a big stink about it, but ah well. Happens to me a lot imo .

Thanks for taking the time to write out that well thought out post. And the example you gave really clarifies the shoving vs. calling question.

[dranger7070]

Also, one thing that I still can't seem to grasp. Why is the river so bad for our range? I mean we just turned our hand into a decent bluff catcher, but I just don't get why this board is so bad for our hand that we have really poor equity when the river comes and it bricks the majority of his drawy hands.

Also it just crossed my mind that villain could be putting US on the draw for the simple fact that we c-bet then checked behind on the turn. So might it be possible for him to be opening his betting range thinking we could fold our busted draws? I'm obviously not very solid on this but it's just a thought.

[Erpel]

Edited because I'm an idiot

Your thoughts are good, but I still think Micro's read is key here. I know what he means when after seeing just one signature hand from someone and the time he took to react on decisions etc that you just have him completely pegged. If he says he's passive, he's passive.

And when you include the read and look at the board in its entirety I think quite simply that a passive villain will check a lot of weak made hands on the river for a cheap showdown. I can see an argument for villain betting any ace on the river for value from our K, J, 9 or 7 - if I was villain. A passive villain however is less inclined to do so.

River is bad for our range because the most likely aces in our villain's range are A7 and A9. I'd go so far as to say that the line on every street corresponds most closely with A9/A7 but that is probably overstating the point. Even passive villains bet two pair and sets some of the time, which has to discount the hand combinations that were two pair on the flop (that we now beat) and emphasises the A7/A9 two pair combinations that were one pair on flop when he check/called.

Hands that beat us on the river that we beat on the turn: A9 (9), A7 (9), QT (16) = 38 combos
Hands that we beat on the river that beat us on the turn: K9 (6), K7 (6), J9 (6), J7 (6), 97 (9), AT (12) = 45 combos

The point is that even though we made two pair on the river our hand strength against the range of hands that are likely to make that river bet and subsequently call a river shove was only slightly boosted by the river - not hugely boosted. It didn't change much.

The range I posted is not intended to be 100% accurate but rather to be representative. For every case you can state that he would play occasionally with a ragged ace or similar I'll quote a case where he'd fold AT on the flop or J7 preflop. I think those situations where he sometimes plays exactly like this with a hand that is not listed is almost exactly outweighed by the times he plays differently than exactly this with one of the hands listed. Even though some of these discounts apply to the hands that beat us the line he took chimes most cleanly with the hands that beat us and less cleanly with the hands that we beat.

I've deliberately included hands like J7 and T8o-97o even though you could certainly argue against both simply to provide the buffer for wacky plays from a relative unknown. By this I mean - I've included a lot of hand combinations that could be discounted but we need to be fair and if we discount T8o because he wouldn't even play that, we have to discount 97o, J7, maybe J9o and 97s etc. Instead I leave them in the same way I leave in AT to represent "the occasional raggy ace".

[dranger7070]

Ok, I had to drive to work to take a test (SUPER GAY, but wutever) and on the way back I started going over this hand in my head again asking myself WHY its good to shove turn, but not the river when our hand actually improves. Then I shit bricks and it hit me, so fucking obvious, yet for some reason I couldn't see it.

On the turn when we shove we get weaker J's to call, obviously A7/A9 will call, but there are also a lot of draws (as POKEMONS pointed out, but I was blinded to that information for some reason) that will call us. Backdoor flushes aren't going away, a bunch of his OESD's will also call.

On the river, he's obviously not calling with any of his draws except QT which hit, but al lot of the hands that we were beat by on the turn still beat us on the river minus a couple of weaker two pairs.

Don't ask me why it took me so long to realize this, but now I REALLY understand why it would be best to just shove the river. Thank you all for your help in this (even tough I wasn't the one who posted), I think this is going to really help me out in spots like this.

[Erpel]

Don't ask me why it took me so long to realize this, but now I REALLY understand why it would be best to just shove the river. Thank you all for your help in this (even tough I wasn't the one who posted), I think this is going to really help me out in spots like this.

Shoving the river is only best if you are a favourite against his shove-calling range. I don't personally think you are. I'm willing to accept that it may be close, but I think it's perfectly reasonable to take a variance reducing call here.

[dranger7070]

O God, no Erpel I meant shove turn there. I'm such a moron. I've been up all night and I made a typo lol.

It should read "..., but now I REALLY understand why it would be best to just shove the turn."

If you read it like that I think it makes a lot more sense in the context I put it in lol.

[Micro2Macro]

Erpel thanks for posting such a detailed analysis. There's no way I could top that.

After going over this hand too many times I'm completely stumped between whether we should pot the turn or check behind.

His akward stack size makes this turn a difficult spot because we're putting him all-in if we bet, but because he will have to call himself 'all-in' it's hard to judge how much value we would gain by betting the turn as opposed to checking behind. When I was faced with the decision I figured I wouldn't get many weaker hands calling due to the turn card, however Pokemons pointed out that there's so many draws that can be made by the river - all of which are likely in villains range.

Seems like there are valid points for both betting and checking so I suppose either one could be correct?

[RML604]

Solid thread. I laughed, I cried, and I learned something about poker.

[Erpel]

On the turn there is $2.27 in the pot and $2.1 behind. In terms of commitment, I am committed and I am just trying to figure out how most effectively to extract value from hands weaker than mine.

And that's why I check behind.

Another way of looking at it is to look at the turn card. It's an ace. It's a scare card. If I was bluffing I'd be betting at it. In other words, I expect there to be value in bluffing at the ace. I expect him to fold weak hands if I bet at the ace.

But I have pretty good showdown value here. I don't want to bet to make him fold. I want to bet at a time when his weakest hands will call and pay me off. I don't want to scare them off. That's why I'm cautious about betting the turn.

I don't think shoving the turn is wrong, but I really like checking it, hoping to extract more from weaker on the river. I think the flop bet got rid of most if not all unpaired aces in the villains range anyway, so the ace is imo as the post title asks actually a blank here. It doesn't really change anything. Ok, so it puts A7 and A9 ahead of us, but that's pretty much it. Everything else is basically the same as on the flop.

Btw, just to clarify if there is any confusion. That link I included in an earlier post is not to something I wrote but just to something I found recently that relates to this discussion as reparation for not finding the post about fold equity I was half-remembering.

[dranger7070]

Its funny because now I'm really in to just shoving the turn, instead of just checking behind. Most people aren't going to fold any of their draws, obviously if he has a pair of J's he'll more than likely fold them now unless we are behind two pair, but if you look at the numbers on the turn and the river, our equity is almost cut in half from ~60% to 32% so I think we should get it in while we're getting it in good vs. his range.

Obviously, checking behind the turn is also good, but now that all the draws bricked on the river and he bets out, you are just calling right? You are only getting value out of weaker two pairs, and the times he is spewing with nothing (which we all pretty much determined isn't going to be very often.) Like Micro2macro wrote, his betting out range is usually going to be pretty tight here, so I think just calling on the river is too weak, but also shoving over isn't good either because, like we said, its maybe breakeven at best.

I talked to mcat on IRC this morning and he said he would have just shipped the turn, just for the simple fact that the river is going to be something we don't want to see so often that we won't know what hits him and what doesn't, so we should get the money in while he's more than likely still on the draw.

[dranger7070]

Wow, ok I just assigned the villain this range on the turn that he might call with if we shove:

JJ, 99, 77, AJ-A7s, KTs, QTs, J9s, J7s, T8s, 97s, 86s, AJo-A7o, KTo, QTo, J9o, J7o, T8o, 97o, 86o.

Against this range we have ~37% equity.

Obviously, I elminated pretty much all the gutshots with out a pair, and some of them with a pair, like JT which he still MIGHT call us with, but I think this is a fairly solid range of what he would call with if we shoved the TURN.

Now I figure that the other gutshot and single pair hands that he wouldn't call us with = ~10% of his total range. So he will fold 10% if we shove and he will call with this 90% that I assigned him.

Note: I just estimated that the part of his range would fold = 10% its not an exact figure.

So here's how much we will make if he just folds the 10% of his range.

.10*2.27= $0.23 per decision.

Now with the other 90% of his range that he would call with we have 37% equity.

.37*4.37= $1.62 per decision.
.63*2.10= $1.32 per decision.

$1.62 + $0.23 = $1.85

$1.85 - $1.32 = +$0.53 per decision for shoving the turn.

Now lets figure out how much we will make for just calling the $0.95 on the river.

I'm using Micro2Macro's range for the river when he bets out that range is:

JJ, 99, 77, AJs-A9s, A7s, KJs, K9s, QTs, J9s, AJo-A9o, A7o, KJo, K9o, QTo, J9o

Against this range our hand has ~35% equity.

.35*3.22= $1.13 per decision.
.65*.95= $0.62 per decision.

$1.13- $0.62= $0.51 expected value for calling 95 cents on the river.

So when we shove the turn we can expect to make 53 cents per decision.
When we just call on the river we can expect to make 51 cents per decision.

So technically, shoving the turn makes us 2 cents more on average, but it's really marginal either way. The important thing is, they are both profitable decisions and that we really aren't going wrong by doing either.

[dranger7070]

just realized that last post was my 500th, hooray for milestones lol.

[Micro2Macro]

I talked to mcat on IRC this morning and he said he would have just shipped the turn, just for the simple fact that the river is going to be something we don't want to see so often that we won't know what hits him and what doesn't, so we should get the money in while he's more than likely still on the draw.

This is why I thought shipping the turn may have been better than checking back. Dranger it looks like u did a pretty sweet analysis of betting the turn in your latter post, im just too hungover to actually understand anything with a percent sign right now so ill take a look at it later on.