Weirdest hand of the day - Lawdude 20/40 live hand 1CDNF on board with 3SF - Micro Stakes Poker Forum

lawdude · 08-02-2012, 11:23 PM

Weirdest hand of the day:

20/40 at commerce, only player at the table who is decent is sitting to my immediate left and is the villain here.

Hero is in the small blind with As9d.

5 players limp, Hero completes, BB checks.

Flop 9s7s4s.

Hero bets, BB raises, everyone else folds, Hero calls.

Turn 8s

Hero checks, Villain bets, Hero raises, Villain 3-bets.

Ruh-roh.

Hero calls.

River is a brick.

Check-check.

MHIG.

lawdude · 08-02-2012, 11:36 PM

There's 3 straight flushes out there (2 of which are extremely likely to be checked pre-flop and the third of which could be), and I just check-raised the turn after betting the flop AND have the ace of spades, so we'd have to believe that despite all that he would 3-bet a king or queen of spades? It makes little sense.

I seriously think you cannot 4-bet or donk the river here without a pretty good read. (PS remember there is no cap so a SF is going to 5-bet us or raise the river.)

A_Schupick · 08-02-2012, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lawdude

There's 3 straight flushes out there (2 of which are extremely likely to be checked pre-flop and the third of which could be), and I just check-raised the turn after betting the flop AND have the ace of spades, so we'd have to believe that despite all that he would 3-bet a king or queen of spades? It makes little sense.

I seriously think you cannot 4-bet or donk the river here without a pretty good read.

I think that the king of spades or the queen of spaedes is pluasible. You have on 3 combos that beat you and at least that if not more of kxsx. I think one more bet has to go in at least. I need a good read to not cap turn. Him being decent is not tht read. Not even close.

lawdude · 08-02-2012, 11:52 PM

Schupick, take a step back. Look at the flop action AND the turn action. What is in my range that takes both actions? Now, do you think a typical player holding the king of spades thinks that his hand is good?

Also, consider something else. Let's assume we 4-bet. Are we still getting value from a King of spades? Or does this give him the opportunity to fold while allowing a SF to get 2 more bets in?

Finally, you should consider one more thing about a king. This guy raises his stronger kings, especially the suited ones, pre-flop, and also raised the flop. Now maybe it was a free card raise with the king of spades, but he also got check-raised so he knows I'm not afraid of the 4 spades on the board.

In other words, a king of spades isn't actually all that likely. In contrast, this is EXACTLY how at least 2, and maybe all 3, of the SF hands would be played.

He was repping a straight flush. He didn't have it, but I don't think he had a king either. I actually think he knew I had the ace of spades when I x-r'd the turn. This was some sort of FSDR.

augwest · 08-03-2012, 12:15 AM

lawd - just curious, would you just play TsTx same?

Edit: didn't mean to say "just" - obv quite a few other made sf hands, Asxs hands

lawdude · 08-03-2012, 12:21 AM

Aug:

TsTx is a pre-flop raise.

We have 3 streets of action. What fits all 3 streets?

lawdude · 08-03-2012, 12:37 AM

BTW aug, it's actually hard for me to have a SF here, because I didn't 3-bet the flop which I would do to get value from a big spade and to prevent a free card play with a made flush. That's part of the imbalance here-- I basically almost always have the ace of spades or a bluff, while villain can (and perhaps should) have a SF and if he doesn't, has something that wants a free showdown if it doesn't improve.

Zeke Ferrari · 08-03-2012, 12:39 AM

I still think one more bet should go in. Maybe not on the turn, but donk river? Obv I don't know villain at all. Did you recently watch The Cincinnati Kid by chance?

augwest · 08-03-2012, 12:57 AM

what the hell, it's quiet in here anyway...

would you sometimes b/call flop c/r turn with QsTs ? KsTs?
I assume you would just c/c Ts9x on turn..
That leaves a hand full of As combos - A9-A2 (or are you only leading into the field with
As9, As7, As4?)
Obv hands obv - QsJs, Ts6s, 6s5s

lawdude · 08-03-2012, 03:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by augwest

what the hell, it's quiet in here anyway...

would you sometimes b/call flop c/r turn with QsTs ? KsTs?
I assume you would just c/c Ts9x on turn..
That leaves a hand full of As combos - A9-A2 (or are you only leading into the field with
As9, As7, As4?)
Obv hands obv - QsJs, Ts6s, 6s5s

I 3-bet the flop with any made flush other than (perhaps) an ace high flush on this board. The reason is very simple-- I am not allowing my opponent to take a free card on the turn with the ace of spades.

I'm not likely to x/r a hand like Ts9x on the turn (though I certainly would bet-call it on the flop) because I don't think there are that many flushes in the villain's range that I beat with the Ts and if the villain does not have a flush, I'd rather let him keep firing. I could, however, b/c this flop and x/r this turn card as a bluff with a 9 in it and no spade. I'm not doing that very often, but that's the only balance I can offer to my range.

I'm betting the ace of spades and any card on this flop. Had there been a third player in the hand, I would have 3-bet this flop as well, but with a single raiser and no other caller, it's a bet-call.

I guess it's possible that I could have the king of spades and a 9 here, or maybe even the queen of spades and a 9. But I also might just call down these hands not wanting to blow a smaller flush out of the water with a x/r.

It's fair to say I never have a straight flush and have a polarized range between the ace of spades with a small or medium size kicker, and 9x turned into bluffs. Those are the only hands I can have here, and the range is unbalanced in favor of the ace of spades.

lawdude · 08-03-2012, 05:35 AM

Since this thread is getting strat-y, I might add that this hand is a great example of how the exploitation inherent in multiway poker can drag a player away from GTO poker. I'm not much of a heads up player, but (let's say) in a bvb situation online against a good opponent, I would probably have much more balanced range bet-calling the flop and x/r'ing the turn, including some bluffs and semi-bluffs, some flopped flushes, and some turned flushes of different strengths, while also balancing my calling range with some good made hands and some bluffcatchers.

But in a multiway pot, I have flopped top pair and the nut flush draw out of position against several opponents, all but one of whom are fish. I want to make sure that money goes in the pot in this situation, and therefore I have to lead into the field, but I can't balance this range because I am out of position and it would be incinerating money to do this with weak hands, especially since I don't know that I'm going to get the hand heads-up. So the only balance I can really offer against my strong hands is a semi-bluff with the ace of spades and no pair, and against several players I can't even really do this with the king of spades, because a non-nut one card flush draw is so much weaker in a 7-way pot than the nut one card flush draw is.

Since my flop range is, by necessity, extremely unbalanced, that leaves me in a situation where I really have little chance of playing a GTO-style game heads up if I end up against the one good player in the pot. There's just nothing to balance with except if I turn a top pair hand into a bluff on a spade turn. But overall, given the game conditions, I think I make more money long term playing exploitative against the other 5 guys than worrying about balancing against this guy.

And I think that's actually a common and instructive situation in small and mid-stakes poker games.

bellatrix · 08-03-2012, 05:42 AM

I think you should be very careful throwing around terms like "GTO" mixed in with "multiway poker". You get into very complicated parts of game theory, where Nash equilibria exist, but they don't imply the maximization of value for every player involved. There are clear deals between the parties involved without implicit collusion. It already is really hard with 3 player pots.

I know people don't like it, but I often compare it to physics, where the 2-body problem is easy and fully worked out, but the 3-body problem has no analytical exact solution and can only work in approximations (e.g. one body is really undermassive -> Lagrange points).

augwest · 08-03-2012, 10:10 AM

I think that's what lawd was saying - basically that the multiway action pf->flop puts him in a situation HU where GTO is thrown out the window cuz he's already narrowed his range too much

lawdude · 08-03-2012, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bellatrix

I think you should be very careful throwing around terms like "GTO" mixed in with "multiway poker". You get into very complicated parts of game theory, where Nash equilibria exist, but they don't imply the maximization of value for every player involved. There are clear deals between the parties involved without implicit collusion. It already is really hard with 3 player pots.

I know people don't like it, but I often compare it to physics, where the 2-body problem is easy and fully worked out, but the 3-body problem has no analytical exact solution and can only work in approximations (e.g. one body is really undermassive -> Lagrange points).

No, I understand that GTO is not necessarily optimal in multiway pots. But my point is that the hand I posted evolved into a heads-up situation postflop against a good player where, all things being equal, one would have liked to have more balance in one's range, but I didn't have it because of how the hand started out.

A_Schupick · 08-03-2012, 02:16 PM

I honestley think you are making a huge mistake by discounting kxsx