I just railed the great game of pot limit triple draw and watched a big hand go down between Trueteller and RaúlGonzalez.

($100/$200 USD) - 2017/05/02 18:52:06 ET
Seat 1: RaúlGonzalez ($41858.64 in chips)
Seat 4: Trueteller ($59957.36 in chips)
Trueteller: posts small blind $100
RaúlGonzalez: posts big blind $200

*** DEALING HANDS ***
Trueteller: raises $400 to $600
RaúlGonzalez: raises $1200 to $1800
Trueteller: calls $1200

*** FIRST DRAW ***
RaúlGonzalez: discards 1 card
Trueteller: discards 3 cards
RaúlGonzalez: bets $3597
Trueteller: calls $3597

*** SECOND DRAW ***
RaúlGonzalez: stands pat
Trueteller: discards 2 cards
RaúlGonzalez: bets $10791
Trueteller: calls $10791

*** THIRD DRAW ***
RaúlGonzalez: stands pat
Trueteller: discards 1 card
RaúlGonzalez: checks
Trueteller: bets $32373
RaúlGonzalez: calls $25670.64 and is all-in



Any of you familiar with this game and can break down the plays?

This is the first time I've seen this game and thought I'd give it a go after seeing this hand and managed to win 2 buy ins at the $50 table. Seems like a fun game with lots of action.

Trueteller got very lucky and his turn call is atrocious. Raul played it well imo.

Id say the re-raise pre-draw and the call after first draw seems weird enough. Guys must have been in spew-mode pre-game.

But by truetellers NL-HE experience Id never put him on a bluff after third draw with the bet size post second draw.

You think Rauls reraise pf was weird? His play was standard all the way iyam.

You don't think Trueteller bets worse/bluffs the river enough to c/c?

Well ok, Raul seemed to have a good read to 3x post-draw with a draw to 96, probably started with 9543x and figured he could take the pot before showdown but...

edit: Also getting into awkward spots on turn a lot of times.
With that much invested I think Trueteller was going all for implied odds since a 97 won't beat Raul's hand. On second draw when trueteller takes 2cards has about 30-46% (through both second and third draw) chance of beating Rauls hand depending on what the first card Trueteller got from the two discards on second draw.

By calling second draw both players are pot-committed and Raul should know that.

I could see the sense in calling if they was playing in lower limits but these dudes are the types that would kill their best friend for a +1BB. I just can't see TT calling turn with the aim at bluffing the pot on river because it would take a lot of time to grind that money back vs Raul.

edit: Like getting called with a pot-sized bet on turn in PLO and river falls a str8 or flush.

So I was trying to analyse Truetellers turn decision and if the call would be +EV. I have done the following exploitative EV calculation let me know if I made a mistake:

If Raul had pat8 (with a 6 or 5) and TT is drawing X7432 and the pot is 1.
Assuming that when he hits his 7 he will bet pot and Raul calls.
The EV of calling = (.83)(-1) + (.17)(1 + 1 + 3) = +.02 pots

If Raul had a pat9(6/5) (or similarly a pat87(6/5))
Then assume TT will bet pot with a 7 and check an 87.
The EV of calling = (.73)(-1) + (.17)(1 + 1 + 3) + (.1)(2) = +.32 pots

That is assuming Raul always calls. If he c/c 50% of the time to defend optimally and truteller is bluffing 8.5% of the time then how is this included in the EV calc of the turn decision. I know on the river it is 0EV to bluff but should you take the % of bluffs into account and not count it against the loss of 1 pot for the call?

E.g When Raul has 8pat:
EV of calling = (.745)(-1) + (.085)(0) + (.17)(1 + 1 + 3(0.5)) = -0.15 pots
So against this hand specifically it is a negative play but against his whole range of 85-97 it is probably +EV to call here and draw.

Edit: In this spot 0.15 pots could equal a $4855 (24bb) mistake!!!

There seems to be an interesting balance in this game between how expensive it is to draw and the implied odds of hitting. Makes it even more valuable to be in position and you can bluff a lot more given the size of the bet amounts.

PL 2-7TD almost never runs at any stake. I was unaware nosebleed tables even existed for this game. Does anyone have any idea or guess why these two guys decided to duke it out in such an obscure game?

Quick comment on the bluffing frequency. If he's only gonna value bet when he makes a 7, that's 8 cards so, assuming he's betting pot on the river, he can only bluff 4 cards, which would be like top pair and the 4 of spades or whatever or whatever. If he is betting his 8 also he can add the rest of the 4s since he will have 12 value cards.

One guy sat. Then the other guy sat and they started to play. I'm guessing RaulG sits at the top of this niche pyramid (and a couple others), with Trueteller being a big dog to exactly nobody in any game bc of his hard work and natural poker mind. He seems as quick to adapt to different games as anybody out there (and at HS/nosebleeds no less).

If they weren't so deep the hand would've been over on the turn. But the massive implied odds (which are partly informed and certainly increased bc other times Trueteller snows), and having position and a smooth draw gave Trueteller a reason to continue.

I've played a few thousand hands and it's not a game for the faint of heart if you're playing deep. Compared to fixed limit 2-7, bluff-raising in position, quick patting rougher hands, and fold equity play bigger roles in pl td 2-7. Whereas, your x/r frequencies need to really be on point bc being OOP gives your opponent an edge in drawing decisions.

For ex sometimes in fl 2-7 td we can x/r a 3:2 against an aggressive opponent if we've made a strong D1 (though leading might be standard). But if you x/r that same spot in PL 2-7 td w a bunch of money behind can be a very bad play, esp against a sticky big bet player.

I'm going to Hijack this thread with a hand I played to see what you think.

50NL 7 handed PL TD:

SB HERO [2s 3s 3c 7s 4h] 105BB eff.
UTG VILLAIN raises $0.75 to $1.25
HERO raises $3 to $4.25
VILLAIN calls $3

*** FIRST DRAW ***
HERO discards 1 card [3s]
Dealt to HERO [2s 3c 7s 4h] [8c]
VILLAIN discards 2 cards
HERO bets $8.55
VILLAIN calls $8.55

*** SECOND DRAW ***
HERO stands pat on [2s 3c 7s 4h 8c]
VILLAIN discards 1 card
HERO bets $24.80
VILLIAN raises $74.40 to $99.20
HERO calls $17.90 and is all-in

POT - $111.50

*** THIRD DRAW ***
HERO discards 1 card [8c]
Dealt to LD Villain [2s 3c 7s 4h] [Ac]
HERO stands pat


I think pre and first draw are standard. I'm ahead and don't want to give free cards. The turn is where I think it could have been played differently. As played when I get raised I thought I had the odds to call and draw as I am guessing a 76 would be good enough to win as I've seen him shoving 86/85 plenty of times more so then 7s so he often draws to the 8. I am going to do some work on the turn decision to bet and see if maybe checking or drawing would be better. He is never raising here with a draw and rarely a 87.

Is the EV of the call = (.155)($111.50) - (.845)($17.90) = $2.157 ???

What do you think in this spot?

I think I like betting smaller so that I can fold 87pat as I have twice as many pat7s in my range in this spot and if I get shoved its an easy call and easy fold of the 87. Half pot bet leaves a half pot bet on the river. So with the 7s its a bet/bet or bet/call line. The 87 will be a bet/check or bet/fold line. This will also allow me to snow some small percentage of the time that is easier to calculate on the flop.

You cant break the perfect 87. It's way too strong in PL 2-7, even given the action. The money is going in, so your in-position opponent can take a free shot and if he gets you to break then he can pat his J or 10. If you don't break then he can draw.

There's not very many opponents I'd ever break that hand to in fixed limit.

^
This

EDIT: I have never seen him raise all in with worse here so I just didn't think he was capable of bluffing me with weak pat+redraw. Every time he raised all in it was 86+ unless it was D2 v D2. If we never fold a pat hand here is it not exploitable?

What do you think about the bet size as the pat hand?
Should we always bet pot to deny the odds to profitably call smooth 8 and 7s?

I'm not used to playing in these multi-street draw situation so I'm struggling to grapple with the game theory of these games. Should you think about the range and defending some % of them or just go for pot odds vs. villains range.

Example: As the Villain on the turn v a pat and facing a pot bet. Should you fold 50% of your range or defend more? Should you just def the hands you get the implied odds for and the strongest pat hands? In this spot you will have some % of 8 and 7 one card draws and if you call all the pats then you could probably fold all but the 7 draws and still def 50% of your range. Is balance only important on the river?

I'm not sure what your strat is based on, but you are not applying the "theory" aspects of your approach in a practical way.

Because this game is so rarely spread, 10 poker players can give you 10 different answers in questionable spots (I don't think your spot is all that close). Therefore, your reads, which are so much more important in a non-standard game, make the math of trying to figure out whether villain should defend 50% of his range to a turn pot bet an exercise in futility (see your edit).

I think in a $50 game that yes, you should prob just bet pot when you make your pat hands and SPR is less than 2. Balance and protecting your range are always important - the tougher the opponents and the more info as to what proper theory looks like for the particular game, the more important that is. But in a game like this, just try not to make any obvious drawing or action-related mistakes yourself while probing for opportunities to maximally exploit your opponents. If/when you get to the 20k game w trueteller and raul then go to whatever these labs are and start solving for all the spot.

If his range makes it so it's right to break 87 perfect then you probably aren't getting the right price to draw and should just fold. I would call and pat.