no reads on anybody yet

$2/$4
small blind posts $1
big blind posts $2
UTG folds
Everybody folds to me on the button
I raises $2 with 5h 6h
Should I have just called?
Small blind folds
big blind calls $2

pot = $9
FLOP: 6s 4h 5c

big blind bets $2
I raise $2
big blind calls $2

pot = $15
TURN: 6s 4h 5c 3c

big blind checks
I bet $4 (wrong?)
big blind raises $4
pot = $27
I assume you give the four outs to a boat full value. But how do you calculate the out-value of the ends of the straight? Are the 7s each really worth a full out? I doubt that the 2s are. Wish that turn had been a heart.

1. You correctly raised preflop.
2. You correctly raised the flop.
3. I'd put Villain on 2p+, 87-76 and no bluffing range. You have 4 outs against 33-44 and 87, 3 outs against 76, 2 outs against 55, and 0 against 66. You'll have to use your judgement as to whether he ever has 54 43 here. You also have a bunch of chop outs. You can work out what your average outs are, and take into account you should get 2 extra BBs from 87 76 55 44 33 should you bink, 0 from 54 43 if he gets counterfeited.

Off the top of my head, it's close whether you want to call 1, but you should fold the river UI.

You snap fold this preflop, given that the rake is 1Big Bet ($4) already. Even against terrible players @ 20/40 with $40 rake, how much do you tighten up OTB? You don't open 65s. I know the answer is to probably not play at all, but even playing, you need to be a bit tighter than "online normal" opening to avoid getting crushed by the drop box.

Agree with flop.

On the turn, the 7's are close to full chopping outs. The 2's are probably not, though you probably have to call a bet if you hit one.

Yeah, unfortunately this is a fold preflop in a typically raked game, barring a read that blinds are very foldy pre or postflop, which would be unusual at a 2/4 table.

This is a terrible sign. You really want this to be "UTG limps, everyone limps to me OTB".

That said, opening a steal hand in a steal spot isn't the worst -- I don't hate anything our OP did post flop. I love what he's thinking about. It isn't his fault that someone in the casino decided to spread a unfairly raked game. Good thought process should be happy-making.

Have to agree with DougL & chillrob...

Fold PF just because of the rake.

Otherwise OP thought process and how it played out +1...

Nits ITT.

65s is an open at 6/12 regardless of rake structure (NFFD / NFND / 10% / 5%). 2/4 NFFD obviously fold. But even like 2/4 10% to $4 is playable.

Cali, I'm curious what winrste do you think 5-6s has on the button in an unraised pot?

You mean if it's limped 10 ways and everyone checks to showdown? Less than 1/10, if you're asking what I think you're really asking. And also if you're asking what I think you're really asking, the answer is no, you shouldn't raise 65s after multiple limpers.

But this isn't limped multiway, it's folded to us on the button. And we're raising this in a 20/40 game so the only question is whether the rake has a big enough effect that we should change our mind.

I'm asking you, if you its folded to us on the button what do you think our win rate with 5-6s is?
FWIW, I would raise it in a 20-40 time game and fold it in a 8-16 5+2 game and fold it in a 2-4 game with a rake > $4 (I wouldn't actually fold because its no fun, but if I was really trying to win I would fold in those spots). Hi rake games you only want to play really big pots or small pots with huge equity.

1) I assume 2p+ means “two pair or better”. Are you ruling those out 64 and 53 because they are one-gappers and doubt he would play them for that reason?

2) Despite the controversy over the playability of my hand, Cali's analysis here has been quite edifying for me to analyze. It has helped me to better understand how it is possible to put somebody on a hand and how the number of outs you have against a certain hand plays into the math. So, given the same play:
- If it was 6s 4c 5c 3c would you put him on a made flush?
- If it was 6s 4h 5c 4c would you put him on a made boat?
or at least work those additional possibilities into averaging your outs?

3) When you say “You can work out what your average outs are” if you reject 54 and 43, does the math work like this:

33 - 4 outs
44 - 4 outs
87 - 4 outs
76 - 3 outs
55 - 2 outs
66 - 0 outs

total 17 outs divided by 6 hands = 2.83 outs average?

If this is not correct could you show me how to do it?
So our comparison is $27 – 4 (rake) + 8 (2BB) = 31, Then we have 31/4 = 7.75 to 1.
Then we have 46 cards left and 2.83 outs: 46/2.83 = 16.23
If I'm doing this right it doesn't look like these numbers work for a call. And they also would seem to make my turn bet pretty questionable, no?
If this is correct how do you figure out what the chop outs are worth and does that make it correct to call? The math is what my original post was asking.

Thanks so much for all the contributions to my post.

Incidentally:


Board: 465*3
*******Equity*****Win*****Tie
BU*****11.22%***8.10%***3.13%*{ 6h5h }
BB*****88.78%**85.65%***3.13%*{ 66-33, 87s, 76s, 87o, 76o }

I wouldn't bet the turn without 46, a set, or 87.

If you were really trying to win money, you wouldn't be playing 2/4 at all, especially one where sometimes the pots are less than 6 way.

The same principles apply as when we discussed open-limping. I think you should play to beat the highest limit you can beat with ABC poker, somewhere around 20/40, not to optimize your 2/4 winrate by doing things you wouldn't do in higher games.

And maybe open folding 65s has a higher winrate at 2/4 than open raising. I didn't notice if the OP posted about the rake. I think the EV is highly dependent on exactly how the rake or drop is taken. But I think it should be raised anyway, just as you should open-fold even if open-limping is more profitable.

I can get on board with that

No, I just forgot them.

Putting your opponent on a range is somewhat of an art. Some BBs will call 100% when you open the button because they're annoyed at you. Some BBs will fold 90% because they don't want to play for a small pot. Some BBs will call with AA here. Some will 3-bet 85s. Late position vs. blind battles involve two people with wide ranges and you should learn how to navigate the mine field.

If you don't know your villains well, you'll have some error in your perception of his range. You should do the calculations for a tight opponent and a loose opponent to see how sensitive your calculations are to the villain's range. Boards like this tend to have pretty high uncertainty because 73o is a real possibility for some villains.

You'd work the additional possibilities into your averages. He might have quads on a 6454 board (44) but that's 1 combination, whereas 65 is 3x3 = 9 combinations (2x2 = 4 combinations if you have 65 in hand).

That is not correct. You have to weigh things by the probability they occur. So

33: 3 combos, 4 outs
44: 3 combos, 4 outs
55: 1 combo, 2 outs
66: 1 combo, 0 outs
76: 8 combos, 3 outs
87: 16 combos, 4 outs

112 outs over 32 combos = 3.5 outs

Now redo that with like 64 53 54 43 included, or 63 or 73s or 73o or AA or whatever you think should be included or excluded. Note if AA is in his range you're actually ahead and have like 39 "outs."

Your method is right but your numbers are wrong. You should redo this calculation several times to see what the circumstances need to be for you to be right. You'll sometimes find you're almoat always right, sometimes you're almost always wrong, and sometimes you're in between.

Do a thorough job. You're not going to be doing this on the fly in the game, you're going to do it often enough away from the table so that at thw table you'll analogize to the closest analysis you've actually done.

You can count them as 1 out for half the pot or 0.5 outs for the whole pot, whichever is easier. The way you've set up the calculations, the latter will be.

Betting the turn is a different analysis. In this analysis, we knew he had raised the turn. But before we bet, we didn't know that. You count combinations the same way, but now you include hands he only calls, hands like A6o or 85s which you're actually ahead of. Calculate the ratio of ahead combos to behind combos.

If you want to be nitty, calculate his average outs against you when you're ahead and your average outs against him when behind, and when you win the pot calculate the average pot size vs when you lose.

If that's too complicated, a rough estimate of 3:2 should do. If you have 1.5x more ahead combos than behind combos, value bet. It's actually 1:1 for bet/fold and 2:1 for river bet/call and 3:2 for turn bet/calldown, but don't run before you can walk.

Wow, Calli,

Thanks for all the detail. I know that took a long time to write. Thanks to all the other respondents too!

Because of your help I have learned more in the last 24 hours than I have in five years of reading and playing. Can't thank you guys enough!

Shouldn't we put 77 in his range? He might think that would be worth defending against my steal. Then on the flop he has an OES, and maybe my PFR represents overcards, or a slight overpair like 88 or 99, which don't go with this flop, so (maybe if he's a little spewy) he tries to protect that draw with a bet. Then I raise him and he still thinks his OES is worth a call. Then the turn makes his straight. Based on my play so far he could reasonably expect me to bet so he goes for the CR and gets it, maybe even hoping for me to re-raise. The only thing he would have to worry about then is if I had 87 or (as I am hoping) I boat the river. I wish I could think of all this stuff in the middle of a live hand.

Sorry if I'm over-thinking this but you guys really got the wheels grinding in my head over this hand.

These are things you should be thinking about in hand reading. "What hands could he play the way that he just played?" You're taking his preflop range, which here could be any two cards. You're taking his flop action and then his turn action, and figuring out all the hands that he could play this way. Then you get to combo counting and figuring odds. You can also go to stove (equilab) away from the table. Here's the biggest thing Calli pointed out -- at first you won't be able to do any of this at the table, because it takes too long and too much thought. That's why you do these things away from the table. You'll get faster, and you'll get a feel for it.

You also want to put people on hand ranges when you're not in a hand. Don't guess "he has AK". Actually think about the story they tell with their bets/calls/raises. Then when you see cards, see if their final hand was in the range you assigned. It is easier with tight/reasonable players, because their ranges are smaller. Realize that you'll do much better at this when not in a hand because you don't have the stress of playing your own hand.

That's one of the things I have learned from this thread. It looks a lot easier to put him on a hand after the turn action than after the flop action, or, certainly, after the PF action. And, yes, now I know what I can gain from watching hands that I am not in (if I can think fast enough.) I'm not stupid but it looks like you have to think pretty damned fast to compete in this game. Off to the SuperBowl now.

Thanks to everybody. I am so juiced by all the stuff I have learned from all your responses to my OP.

Quoted the whole thing cus of awesome and bolded a bit for my favorite part.

The true unknown range comes with a bunch of discounting, but includes any two cards at a frequency >0%. Even if they just limp in preflop, they have AA at frequency >0%. Against unknowns, the first thing I'm looking for is hands played that I'd consider too loose for the position. Then I'm trying to figure out if they're positionally aware or that they play based on feelings.

I'll admit though that the player that sneaks up on me from time to time is the tight passive player that never or rarely raises preflop. Typical limpers play too many hands, but the tight passives have a strong range that stands up well against my standard isolation range that I play against a single limper. It takes a while to figure out if they're running hot preflop or just tight.

The other 98% of the time I'm looking to play pots in position shorthanded against bad players for multiple bets with strong hands while getting the blinds out of the pot at a decent rate. If I'm getting called in 8 spots, then I might tighten up my raising requirements with offsuit hands, but that loss of value is more than compensated by our gain from the bad players playing unprofitable hands.

You run into the "trying to play well" players who will just tell you how they think about the game. AJo should be expertly limped so that "you can trap those jerks who raise all the time" or whatever other strange thing they think of as good poker. It is amazing how much actually true poker thought gets spewed around the table. Usually most people have some theory of what to play/not to play in the games I play in -- it is never <random>, though sometimes it can be a lot of hands.

Please to be explaining this. Because it gives me a gross feeling in my stomach as worded

Isn't this the explanation that I posted?

Y'know, ZOMG, I have been told that you are a great player. And I appreciate that you might try to help me. But your posts here IMO are really snarky.

He might think that would be worth defending against my steal. Then on the flop he has an OES, and maybe my PFR represents overcards, or a slight overpair like 88 or 99, which don't go with this flop, so (maybe if he's a little spewy) he tries to protect that draw with a bet. Then I raise him and he still thinks his OES is worth a call. Then the turn makes his straight. Based on my play so far he could reasonably expect me to bet so he goes for the CR and gets it, maybe even hoping for me to re-raise. The only thing he would have to worry about then is if I had 87 or (as I am hoping) I boat the river. I wish I could think of all this stuff in the middle of a live hand.

I really don't understand how you can not understand what I posted. How much more explicitive can I be? Really?

Nope. Because twice now including the quote I originally asked about and this response you've used the word "might" when talking about someone defending 77 in their big blind.

You're not being even remotely explicit when you kept using the word "might" repeatedly in a situation where there it shouldn't even be considered.

If you're you think anyone "might" even consider folding 77 to a button raise or you "might" think about folding it yourself it's a massive, huge, gaping leak in your game.

If you think someone "might" not defend 77 in the big blind for one bet, ever, no matter the action, then there is a massive problem in your game or thinking that needs a serious rework or you're doomed forever