hand 1

any suited K
KTo

Hand 2 4 town

If they do its terrible

My main concern is exposing my hand as to what flops are "mine" so to speak. So, if you call here, you call with AKs, and possibly QQ imho. Haven't run the numbers.

yeah, sorry about that. twas a full ring game, live, 10/20.

thanks for the thoughts on the hand.

20-40

button raises, a straightforward medium aggressive player. I have J-10o in the small blind, and theres a whale in the big blind

??

3 bet

22 in bb

4 limps + sb limp. Anyone raise here thinking the deuces are live?

I'd fold JTo and check the 22.

Lol you're joking about folding for free I hope. But seriously, the players that limped are very unlikely to have a deuce.

Add: I tapa as someone limps otb w 32o and wheels it in.

Maybe a bit too aggressive. I'll number crunch it later.

He meant he would fold the JTo in the previous hand asked about. I usuallly would as well, but it does depend on the players. I don't see the point in raising the 22.

Odds of flopping a set is 2/50*3, or 12%. BUT, the deck is richer in deuces since they limped, so it's 2/42*3 or 1/7 or 6-to-1 against, so if there was one more limper then it's worth it to flop a set. Though you do have the info that people fold so it's not quite as deuce heavy. Live cards is usually a stud concept.

Deuces only have flopping a set going for them. A hand like sixes can make more straights, hold up as the pair, and put you in more potential bluff spots. In other word, sixes have more ways to win and therefore are more worth raising.

I would 3 bet on the button with JTo to a CO raise, but definately not in the SB unless I had a more favorable read assuming a button raise.

But, theoretically, and perhaps I am taking this too far, sixes are not as live as deuces are, so given that there are several/many callers, you can more safely say they do not have deuces in them than you could say with sixes.

Explanation of maths, flopping a set

It's the probability of the door card being of a matched suit times three. Why? Because there are three ways to arrange door cards. So with 50 cards left, it's 2/50*3 percentage to flop a set. NOW, with the information that others have called, and the unlikelyhood that they have deuces in their hand, you can adjust it (w five callers) 2/42*3, which equals 1/21*3, which equals 3/21=1/7,or 6-to-1, so with 22, you are roughly getting odds to flop the set!

Now, with sixes, it is not as clear how live they are, so you might not be getting odds, because people play 56,67, etc, but almost never 23. So in that circumstance you are not getting odds to flop a set.

Haha, is this crazy?

Lean towards folding in both scenarios. JTs against weak player in BB I may cold call.

Why would you want to make an even money raise when you can check and hit a set for free? Checking = infinite drawing odds. Raising = charging yourself to draw. Seems to me that the former is clearly superior.

Also, I'd check 66 there too.

I love making analogies. Here's another:

The free realization of equity in the blinds is equity that we could not realize vs a tougher lineup that would raise preflop and charge us to hit a set and or bluffcatch with the small pairs. When they limp in, we realize that otherwise costly equity for free. This is the gravy of poker profits. It's extra goodness that you're saying no to by raising the 22 preflop. Do you not like gravy? I do for sure. I pour that **** on my meat and potatoes with a smile on my face. I feel the same way about checking my option in the big blind with hands that I would be forced to fold or call with in a tougher lineup. This is profitability that shouldn't be ignored nor dismissed by raising such hands preflop.

so you would 3bet JTo vs. a CO's narrower range when you have to put in 3 small bets, but would fold that same hand vs. a much wider BTN range when you have to put in 2.5 small bets? my default opening percentage from the CO is 30% and from the BTN it's 50%. that's a pretty big difference. obviously, absolute position is super valuable, but is it that valuable?

This math is wrong cause A2, K2, Q2s, J2s, 22, 32s, 42s, 52s, etc. With 5 limpers the odds of a deuce in one of their hands is likely pretty good.

But you don't play 66 solely for set expectation, you play it to make an overpair, a straight, or best second or third pair. All of those are much harder with 22 than 66. And 66 also has one substantial advantage over 22, it can overset 4 pairs, deuces can't overset anyone.

The easiest way to analysis this is the brute force way, run it against 6 limper ranges. When I do it, deuces is slightly above average equity (14.5% vs. 14.2%). 66 is well above average equity (17.6%).

Now this is hot/cold equity so in reality we know both hands have a lot of RIO. They have to fold lots of ugly boards where they still might be best and have good equity, so neither can really achieve it's equity in real world play. But we know that 66 has less RIO, because
a) it can continue on a some boards that deuces can't (55TT, A573) and every board deuces can.
b) it's significantly less likely to be over-setted and fewer of it's straights are dummy ends.

and 66 actually has more IO, it can win lots more extra bets than deuces because of it can over-set worse pairs, over-house worse full houses, and make higher/better straights.

When the more playable hand also has significantly more hot/cold equity than the less playable hand, you know the equity gap between them is even more substantial than raw equity is telling you, and even though the worse hand makes slightly more sets.

DC, very thoughtful post, and I'm not disagreeing, but isn't it more likely someone plays 56,67,64,68 than K2,Q2,J2? A2 will be played? Also overpair chances of 66 are very small, but it does fair noticeably better in paired board situations which is considerable when combined with the overpair possibility. The chance of being outsetted also will slow down your value plays as it's easier to jam with mid-set than bottom-set. I'm guessing in a sim, the deuces do come-out to be more live, but still not quite worth raising.

I'll rephrase what I said. I would 3 bet a very laggy CO with JTo. I probably wouldn't against you.

I would fold close to always from the SB with JTo even though the buttons range is wider. I think being OOP is too problemic with J high unsuited.

You're probably right that you'll flop a set slightly more often with 22, but the effect is probably negligible. Search "card removal effects" in the theory and probability forums for more on the topic.

The only time I saw any significant equity spikes due to card removal was when I did the equity calculations for coldcalling in the small blind. However, I decided that 0-3% more equity that 54s had over 98s, depending on the opener's range of course, just wasn't enough to make up for the high card value and floppabilities of 98s. Thus I included 98s in my coldcalling range and eliminated 54s even though in some of the simulations the 54s had more equity because the outs were more live.

no, raising is really bad

ty.

In before 100k views. Awesome thread. Thanks for doing this everyone.

----

"Pop quiz hot shot."

How about buying the button vs a straddler? Does our ev go up or down relative to buying the button no straddle configuration?

How about posting 1bb+.5bbdead in the cutoff vs a dead small blind, a big blind, and a straddler 7 handed?

Four limps and a small blind to you in the big blind with 77/88/J9s. No peeking at Leader's charts, which are a bit loose imo, until after you think about it a bit.

Couldn't help myself.