NL5 AQ tptk 146bb deep

[machine1984]

$0.02/$0.05 Ante $0.01 No Limit Holdem
6 Players
Hand Conversion Powered by weaktight.com

Stacks:
UTG ($7.32)
UTG+1 ($7.50)
Hero ($10.26)
BTN ($9.78)
SB ($5)
BB ($8.53)

Pre-Flop: ($0.18, 6 players) Hero is CO
[UTG+1 posts $0.05]
UTG calls $0.05, UTG+1 checks, Hero raises to $0.33, BTN calls $0.33, SB calls $0.31, 1 fold, UTG calls $0.28, UTG+1 folds

Flop: ($1.48, 4 players)
SB checks, UTG bets $0.36, Hero raises to $1.60, 1 fold, SB folds, UTG goes all-in $6.98, $5.38 to Hero ($8.33)?

villan is 45/5/46% over 22 hands

[StarGrinder]

Step 1: http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...ge-177508.html
Step 2: http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...ll-173396.html

Sample range {AQs,AQo,A2h+,KQ,etc} = equity %
Math: bet size/(bet size + pot size) = equity %

If equity is larger in step 1, then a call is +EV.

PS - Planning for SPR for top 1-pair type hands also helps, but villain is apparently a fish so...

I'm hopeful OP can figure this out before anyone else replies with analysis ITT.

[BLURI]

First thing i want to remind you of is that you have to put the villain on a range.

Villain is based on his stats a typical passive fish, so after he 3-bet jams on the flop we can narrow his range dramatically. These types of players tend to check/call most of their hands post flop.

As of the fact that we don't have any information of his stacking of range, we just have to give it our best guess. Something like: 56h, 9Th, 87, 87s, 8Qs, 7Qs, QK, QJ, 77-88.


We need 5.38/(5.38+14,2)= 0.3788... ~38% equity to make this call profitable.

When i put that range into Pokerstove i get about 48% equity, which is more than 38%. It means that this would be a +EV call. Even if i take away QJ from his range we have 39% equity.


sigh..... was writing my reply and didn't see your post Stargrinder.

[StarGrinder]

Meh, w/e... just trying to help OP *think* about poker... we've all been there.

[machine1984]

oh no i was thinking about his range here ofc and doing the math on the spot i knew it would come down to whether villan can make this play with KQ. I guess my question was can he do this with KQ?

[machine1984]

surely the pot size is 5.38/5.38+10.06=34.8%

got that same answer the other way round of working it out to.

[philly and the phanatics]

surely the pot size is 5.38/5.38+10.06=34.8%

got that same answer the other way round of working it out to.

lol unless you have seen him go nuts with top pair like this id err on the side of folding..hes donked 3way and then 3b shove your raise looks pretty fucking strong to me

[!Luck]

Hint: If a 45/5 (passive fish) raises, your TPTK is almost never good. so did he have 77 or 88?

[HarleyGuy13]

Hint: If a 45/5 (passive fish) raises, your TPTK is almost never good. so did he have 77 or 88?

This

[machine1984]

the 46% indicates aggression 45/5 is only a representation of his preflop aggression but seems like everyone agrees on fold.

[philly and the phanatics]

the 46% indicates aggression 45/5 is only a representation of his preflop aggression but seems like everyone agrees on fold.

lol 22 hands is not going to be enough to get an accurate read on his aggression frequency....

its not enough to tell for sure what his true vpip/pfr is but if he has limped/called 10 hands and only raised 1 time its pretty clear that hes a loose passive noob who is calling too much preflop with too wide of a range

[oskar]

Step 1: http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...ge-177508.html
Step 2: http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...ll-173396.html

^^



We still haven't got a range.

[machine1984]

like i said before its all about whether villan can do this with KQ and apperently people are leaning towards no

[Carroters]

No offense bra, but it doesn't hinge exactly on whether he can do this with KQ. It hinges onwhat his range is as a whole. As I'm about to show you this is a call even if he doesn't have KQ (which he may have sometimes) and the reason why this is the case is that he has a bunch of draws here.

Since noone can be assed actually putting him on an accurate range and getting an answer, here's a range that gives him some of the combos of possible draws, but nowhere near all - bear in mind how wide a guy like this will limp/call random hearts preflop - and assumes he plays Q8o but not Q7o and Q8s + Q7s.

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 38.205% 30.23% 07.98% 11073 2921.50 { AdQc }
Hand 1: 61.795% 53.82% 07.98% 19714 2921.50 { 88-77, AQs, AhJh, AhTh, Ah9h, Ah7h, Ah6h, Ah5h, Ah4h, Ah3h, Ah2h, Q8s-Q7s, JhTh, Jh9h, T9s, 87s, 7h6h, AQo, Q8o }

Overall this range is on the tight side, and given his small donk/shove, I wouldn't be surprised to see more draws than this here. Yeah he's 40/6, but this doesn't mean his range has no draws on a very drawy flop. It's over 20 hands, we haven't seen him play postflop, we can't just assume he's hella passive post flop based on this when he takes this line. The min-donk can be indicative of some kind of draw pretty often with fish and the over riding instinct they have to snap check very strong made hands weights this away from the nutted range you all seem to wanna fold vs. At the same time if he wanted to protect his nutted hand and didn't have the instinct to check them i think we'd see a bigger lead pretty often.

Given he could have a flush draw more often than this, and also could have shit like T9o every once in a while, and may not have Q8o, and may not play his nut hands this way all the time,given whatisaid about so many guysd auto checking them yet leading small with draws, this is a pretty tightish pescimistic range. Note no KQ - don't think we see that too often, although defo a non 0 amount of the time vs a random bad player.

We need 34.8% equity to call this off. Pretty easy call.

Next time try posting the range you come up with so people can actually critique it and see how accurate it is rather than "I've done all the work and came to X conclusion."

[Carroters]

First thing i want to remind you of is that you have to put the villain on a range.

Villain is based on his stats a typical passive fish, so after he 3-bet jams on the flop we can narrow his range dramatically. These types of players tend to check/call most of their hands post flop.

As of the fact that we don't have any information of his stacking of range, we just have to give it our best guess. Something like: 56h, 9Th, 87, 87s, 8Qs, 7Qs, QK, QJ, 77-88.


We need 5.38/(5.38+14,2)= 0.3788... ~38% equity to make this call profitable.

When i put that range into Pokerstove i get about 48% equity, which is more than 38%. It means that this would be a +EV call. Even if i take away QJ from his range we have 39% equity.


sigh..... was writing my reply and didn't see your post Stargrinder.

Slight mistake in your calculation.

Equity needed to call = 5.38/(5.38 + 5.38 + 1.48 + 3.20)

5.38/15.44 = 34.8%~

[StarGrinder]

Carrots nailed it. Not sure he goes ape shit like this with a naked straight draw but he's most definitely doing this with his nut flush draws. A ton of fish think their flush draws are the nuts and play them accordingly. Other fish just chase. However, I think villain is repping the A-part of his ABCD range having limp/called then donking into you in a multi-way pot and then 3-bet jamming. That said, when we consider his entire range this is most definitely a call but villain's line leans more towards his nut holdings imo.

To the OP, def just post a range next time. Even if you're way off base, it's better than nothing and you'll get more out of it. Go through your DB and find 10 hands where you had to call an all-in and wasn't sure what to do. Use the formula in the Step 2 linkage. After you do this a few times, things will start to become a lot clearer.

[Carroters]

The donk bet is tiny, it's not indicative of nut hands, it's a very common thing for fish to do with draws, they don't care if they're multiway or not.

The T9s is a bit meh and he may not have all combos of T9s. That isn't the point though, T9s is there to account for other random fish spew and because I've included absolutely 0 worse top pair or random fish spazz with weaker draws.

[kiwiMark]

meh I'd agree with carrots if we were 150bb deep, but as it stands stacks are just too shallow

[philly and the phanatics]

meh I'd agree with carrots if we were 150bb deep, but as it stands stacks are just too shallow

no offense carrots, but i dont see him doing this with draws at all. This type of player typically plays draws passively, and until i actually had evidence of him doing otherwise, then the amount of times i have seen passive players with similar stats call Psb after psb with FD's without ever raising or goign nuts definitely makes me think that this is like sets and 2 pairs...i would think its more likely for him to be spazzing with Qx than draws because he has toppest pair and an actual made hand

[Carroters]

Assuming he has no draws seems extremely silly simply based on the fact he's 40/4 preflop over a tiny sample. There are plenty of players with stats like this who are more aggro preflop with good draws. The min donk here is also defo more indicative of draws than made hands, idk why people aren't picking up on this. How often do you see fish donk small with nut hands vs with fds etc. I don't think giving him only nfds would be unreasonable at all given how many other draws this guy could potentially have in his range. Against only better hands, AQ and nfds alone we have 34% and that accounts for no random spazz from other draws/worse top pair from a likely bad player we have no read on whatsoever post flop who's just taken a line that fish take fairly commonly with a draw on a board where a wide limping range will contain every draw under the sun.

Yes we should be folding lots to passive players postflop when they shovel money in, but honestly we don't even know how passive this guy is over 20 hands. Fish are bad, dumb and should be assigned at least some sort of a spazz factor in a lot of spots until shown to be really passive postflop

[Carroters]

Obv if OP has seen villain play a draw passively before or just display passive postflop tendencies then we can discount draws heavily, but seriously guys, with a very small portion of all possible draws it's a call, have a think about how much of a spazzing/semi bluff range he actually needs to have for us to call with 34% equity - not very much.

[shallam]

Well....yuck. My personal experience with hands like this is that you are beat and should fold. But just for the heck of it I'll go thru a quickie analysis using a pot odds vs hand range thought process.


I would put my opp on three types of hands, sets, flush draws and misc (two pairs, overpairs, etc). Against a set you are in terrible shape around 2%, or 49 to 1, yuck. Against a flush draw you are about 50-50, many flush draws will also have an overdcard, pair, or gutshot. The last category is the toughest, the middle of this group is something like two pair 8-7 type hand, you are a 3 to 1 dog against this hand.

Here is the summary:
Group 1 = 2%
Group 2 = 50%
Group 3 = 25%
---------
Mean = 26%


This is about 3 to 1 and you are getting only about 2 to 1 from the pot.


In the absence of specific knowledge about this player playing recklessly I fold.

[philly and the phanatics]

Well....yuck. My personal experience with hands like this is that you are beat and should fold. But just for the heck of it I'll go thru a quickie analysis using a pot odds vs hand range thought process.


I would put my opp on three types of hands, sets, flush draws and misc (two pairs, overpairs, etc). Against a set you are in terrible shape around 2%, or 49 to 1, yuck. Against a flush draw you are about 50-50, many flush draws will also have an overdcard, pair, or gutshot. The last category is the toughest, the middle of this group is something like two pair 8-7 type hand, you are a 3 to 1 dog against this hand.

Here is the summary:
Group 1 = 2%
Group 2 = 50%
Group 3 = 25%
---------
Mean = 26%


This is about 3 to 1 and you are getting only about 2 to 1 from the pot.


In the absence of specific knowledge about this player playing recklessly I fold.

this would work but there isnt an equal amount of combos in each group so you cannot just take a straight up averaage like that

[shallam]

this would work but there isnt an equal amount of combos in each group so you cannot just take a straight up averaage like that

Actually I would argue that a straight hand combo analysis is less accurate because it doesn't take into account game situations. While a set may be statistically less likely, based on available hand combininations, it is MORE likely based on the known game situations.


My analysis takes into account the probabilities of BOTH hand combination probabilities AND game situations.


Plus, I'm away from poker stove right now and it was a quickie analysis.

[Imthenewfish]

Actually I would argue that a straight hand combo analysis is less accurate because it doesn't take into account game situations. While a set may be statistically less likely, based on available hand combininations, it is MORE likely based on the known game situations.


My analysis takes into account the probabilities of BOTH hand combination probabilities AND game situations.


Plus, I'm away from poker stove right now and it was a quickie analysis.

no.

[kiwiMark]

Sweet location, levelfish

[shallam]

And here's why.......


First a little background. There are two types of conditional probabilities that are relevant in poker. One conditional probability is hand combinations, and it's purely mathematically. For example, I know that there 16 ways to make AK but given the condition of an A on the flop I know there will only 12 ways to make AK. Hand combinations are one VERY important variable to consider. But not the only one. The second type of more qualitative conditional probability is game situation. It is important to take into consideration how the hand is played. Is the play of the hand consistent with the particular hand in question ? If not the probability must be adjusted.


So let's look at the hand in question. In order to simplify the discussion Let's assume that there are only two types of hand that our opp may have, sets and flush draws. Let's start with a hand combination analysis.

1. Nut flush: ace-x suited in hearts (AK, AJ, AT, A9, A7, A6, A5, A4, A3, A2), 10 combinations.

2. Sets: QQ = 2 combos, 88 = 3 combos, 77 = 3 combos...total = 8 combos.


Notice that I haven't even considered non-nut flush draws, specifically pair plus flush draws --- and I already have flush draws as more heavily weighted (more likely) than sets. If I include other flush draws the hand combo will increase. So if anything I'm understating the excess weighting error for flush draws. As we'll see more clearly below.


Next let us consider our second conditional probability, game situations. Let us say that based on extensive HH analysis I know I will more frequently be shown sets than flushes because my opps play flush draws more passively than sets. More specifically, I might be able to determine that based on HH in game situations like this --- opps with a nut flush draw only go all in 1/4 or maybe 1/5 of the time while sets go all in nearly all the time. This is game situation conditional probablity knowledge. And it is important.


Based on this knowledge it is clear that using only a hand combination approach will be *wrong*. Instead I must re-weight the likelihoods in favor of sets. If you never give any thought to game situations and only consider hand combos you are making a mistake.


In this case you'll make the mistake of underestimating sets.

[Carroters]

Then just create what you think his range is on stove and then remove combinations of nfds to create the weight with which you think he has sets more often. If he only does this in your opinion with nfd's 1/4 of the time and never with non nfds (which I defo don't agree with) then take out 3/4s of the combos of nfds and stop being awkward and vague about it. This will more quickly and easily show what you feel his range is and not confuse or get fish into bad habits of your crazy method.

[shallam]

You are confusing my simplified explanation of why using hand combinations alone is wrong with my original post. My original post essentially does what you describe. You seem to have missed the point of the conditional probability post. The point of the post was not these specific numbers are "right". Instead the point of the post was that hand combinations alone can lead to error. A point which you seem to agree with.

[oskar]

The Good: You're doing something
The Bad: You're doing it wrong
The Ugly: You're looking for excuses rather than accepting that it was a mistake and moving on.

[shallam]

You have said nothing more than you have some negative feelings about something. Let us know the second you have something intelligent and substantive to share.


Good luck!

[oskar]

Carrotz already told you. I'm telling you to listen.
If you would stop making excuses like a school girl and started learning... that would be pretty substential. So I think I'm good.

[dneureiter]

Not a whole lot to add but seriously how is counting hand combinations ever doing it wrong? Like carroters says, If there are 12 flushdraw combos and you think they go in 1/3 of the time count that as 4 combos of flushdraws; ez game. I mean I see your point that not all fds go in but just mishmashing appoximate numbers together without counting combos in what is probably a close decision won't do it. edits: especially the part about being 50:50 vs a flushdraw. most of then are A- K,J,T,9 etc. no gutshots an few overs.

I do agree that this line kindof looks more like a set to me than a draw but it's really opponent read dependant and 22 hands just gives us the barest idea about our villain. I think some fish get that donking small induces raises and I feel like he'd bet a real amount if he wanted fold equity 4-way with a draw.

Also I think it's fair to give him a taarping range so out of 3 combos of AA and 6 of KK villain might well trap 2 or 3 combos of that.

without postflop reads I'm folding, I need to have seen him do this with a draw before or somehow be spazzing.

[daviddem]

^^ What he said

You are confusing my simplified explanation of why using hand combinations alone is wrong with my original post. My original post essentially does what you describe. You seem to have missed the point of the conditional probability post. The point of the post was not these specific numbers are "right". Instead the point of the post was that hand combinations alone can lead to error. A point which you seem to agree with.

I don't find it confusing. You still use hand combinations as usual for villain's range, but you remove an appropriate number of combos based on the game situations and what you think your opp's tendencies are. That's called discounting and is a well established practice when analyzing hands (see Spoon's posts and videos about Pokerstove). If you think it is less likely that he does that with FD's than with sets, discount an adequate percentage of the FD hands, i.e. remove some of them from his Pokerstove range, and be careful not to remove only the strongest or weakest draws in the process so as not to skew the equities - unless of course you think he does that only with his strongest draws...