So last night basically sucked. It was a 6 hour session filled with 2nd best flushes, straights with boards that couldn't be bet, all types of pocket pairs never hitting sets, and ruining into sets about 6 times..two of those times when I held pocket aces...all in all, just an annoying night that consumed 3 bullets. One positive, I never got on tilt and played solid..small victories I guess.

Anyways, interested to get some feedback on this hand the took place.

Player 1: bb, roughly $300 behind
Player 2: sb, $250+ behind

Preflop
4 limpers, sb completes, bb makes it 22, all fold but sb.

Flop
A,k,x rainbow
Sb checks, bb leads out for 25, sb calls

Turn
A
sb and bb check

River
Brick, sb checks, bb puts together a bet during which sb pushes remaining stack to the bet line which bb sees prior to putting 40 out.

Odds bb has an ace here?

So are you asking us what the odds are that you had an Ace in this spot? Or are you the angle shooter in this hand?

If you're the sb, faced with the call..do you make it? Also should have noted player 2 (sb) has KTo

What's the relation between you getting coolered and a random hand history of unknowns? I think I could answer your question better if I knew what you were trying to get out if it. Are you trying to assign ranges to complete unknowns? In that case, just note what happens at showdown and go from there. To me, the most crucial info on villains thus far is that sb is getting "out of line" with the river x/massive overshove. If sb is hero, I'd sure hope there's a solid read on bb that made us take such a weird line. If hero has any reads, they should be posted. If hero is not making reads on opponents, then that's the first thing that should be fixed before sitting for the next session.

SB should have turbomucked preflop to the 22$ raise, so villain shoudnt have been in that situation in the first place.

BB have alot of Ax in his range cause of the big raise preflop. I dont think its unreasonable for BB to check the turn with an A, in an attempt to get payed off a solid bet on the river.BB also have all the nutted hands in his range like AA,KK and AK.

Thanks for the feedback guys I tried to make this as vague as possible so that it was hard to tell what I thought the answer should be but I was one of the players and this was not just a random recap of a hand I was not a part of.

That being said I agree that SB should have folded preflop, if nothing else when he called he said "I'll give you some action".

I thought for sure there was no way he could call the river seeing how every possible Ace imaginable should belong to me,the bet smelled of "value"..especially seeing his fake posture by putting remaining chips in front while I was assembling the river bet.. but none the less he called my bluff. I was shocked that the rest of the table thought I was not logical in thinking sb could think I had anything but an ace..I thought the story was completely believable but second guessed my thinking based on table chatter..hence this thread

In the op You left the part out about the bb being super tilted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well I would have included that if it applied in this situation

Didn't read the specific hands. However when I read people losing big money with second best flushes, AA running into sets and playing fit or fold set mining, my thought is that you need to work on your game. It might have been better if you did tilt. You'd probably do something about these leaks.

Fair enough..for the record I didn't necessarily say a lost big pots in these situations..the two sets vs AA the money was in preflop and both heads up and each time villain had <100. Also never stated I was playing fit or fold top set mine, but when you have a pocket pair isn't that generally the "hope" going into a flop?

People who make assumptions are funny

Lesson that should be learned from this hand:this is a prime example of why you shoudnt be bluffing callingstations at 1/2 NL. It doesent matter if the bluff make sense in your head, or what "your repping". The majority of the 1/2 droolers doesent think on that level anyway, and then they click the "i know deep down i am beat but call anyway button".

Agree, ambitious attempt on my part once the preflop raise got called

I think the SB played fairly reasonably here. If I were him, I wouldn't have pushed (unless I had a read on you), but after your turn check, I would snap call the river.

What? BB is the one who raised, right? He has lots of Aces in his range. Many players at this level will raise any Ace, in which case that's 93 combos. More passive players tend to raise AK, AA, maybe AQ, in which case there are 7 combos.

Let's say he raises {QQ+, AK} like a lot of weak tights. In this case P(Ace) = 7/16 ~ .4375

If he is relatively solid he might raise {QQ-44, 22, AdAh, KdKs, KdKc, KsKc, 3h3s, 3h3c, 3s3c, QTs+, JTs, T9s, 98s, AdKd, AdQd, AhQh, KdQd, KsQs, KcQc, AdJd, AhJh, KdJd, KsJs, KcJc, AdTd, AhTh, KdTd, KsTs, KcTc, Ad9d, Ah9h, Ad8d, Ah8h, Ad7d, Ah7h, Ad6d, Ah6h, Ad5d, Ah5h, Ad4d, Ah4h, Ah3h, Ad2d, Ah2h, AdKs, AdKc, AhKd, AhKs, AhKc, AdQh, AdQs, AdQc, AhQd, AhQs, AhQc, AdJh, AdJs, AdJc, AhJd, AhJs, AhJc}

In this case, P(Ace) = 40/135 ~ .296

If he's LAG and not positionally aware, he might raise as wide as {QQ-44, 22, AdAh, KdKs, KdKc, KsKc, 3h3s, 3h3c, 3s3c, QTs+, JTs, T9s, 98s, 87s, AdKd, AdQd, AhQh, KdQd, KsQs, KcQc, AdJd, AhJh, KdJd, KsJs, KcJc, AdTd, AhTh, KdTd, KsTs, KcTc, Ad9d, Ah9h, Kd9d, Ks9s, Kc9c, Ad8d, Ah8h, Kd8d, Ks8s, Kc8c, Ad7d, Ah7h, Ad6d, Ah6h, Ad5d, Ah5h, Ad4d, Ah4h, Ah3h, Ad2d, Ah2h, QTo+, JTo, AdKs, AdKc, AhKd, AhKs, AhKc, AdQh, AdQs, AdQc, AhQd, AhQs, AhQc, AdJh, AdJs, AdJc, AhJd, AhJs, AhJc, AdTh, AdTs, AdTc, AhTd, AhTs, AhTc, Ad9h, Ad9s, Ad9c, Ah9d, Ah9s, Ah9c, Ad8h, Ad8s, Ad8c, Ah8d, Ah8s, Ah8c, Ad7h, Ad7s, Ad7c, Ah7d, Ah7s, Ah7c, Ad6h, Ad6s, Ad6c, Ah6d, Ah6s, Ah6c, Ad5h, Ad5s, Ad5c, Ah5d, Ah5s, Ah5c, Ad4h, Ad4s, Ad4c, Ah4d, Ah4s, Ah4c, Ad3h, Ad3s, Ad3c, Ah3s, Ah3c, Ad2h, Ad2s, Ad2c, Ah2d, Ah2s, Ah2c, KdQh, KdQs, KdQc, KsQd, KsQh, KsQc, KcQd, KcQh, KcQs, KdJh, KdJs, KdJc, KsJd, KsJh, KsJc, KcJd, KcJh, KcJs, KdTh, KdTs, KdTc, KsTd, KsTh, KsTc, KcTd, KcTh, KcTs, Kd9h, Kd9s, Kd9c, Ks9d, Ks9h, Ks9c, Kc9d, Kc9h, Kc9s}

In this case, P(Ace) = 93/270 ~ .344

But once he bets the flop, the probability he has an Ace goes up due to Bayes Theorem.

P(Ace | betflop) = P(betflop | Ace)*P(Ace)/P(betflop)

Let's look at the weak tight example for simplicity.

P(Ace) = .4375
P(betflop) is an estimation. How often does villain C-bet in other words? This is based on your reads, but most at this level don't C-bet when the miss enough, so let's say P(betflop) = .4
P(betflop | Ace) is also an estimation dependent on your read of villain, but most villain's will bet their Aces here given he has at least TPTK, but some will trap or play passively, so say P(betflop | Ace) = .7

Therefore P(Ace | betflop) = .7*.4375/.4 = .766

So, with these assumptions, villain has an Ace 76.6% of the time.

Making these calculations at the table is borderline impossible, so just remember this:

• Proportionately, the more villain's range contains Aces, the more he has an Ace after betting the flop.
• Proportionately, the more likely villain is to bet his Aces on this flop, as opposed to slowplaying or passively checking, the more he has an Ace after betting the flop.
• Inversely proportionately, the more villain C-bets all hands on this flop, the less likely he is to have an Ace

It's impossible to say how likely he is to have an Ace given you have listed no reads of the villain, but the general process to figure it out is to put him on a range, figure out the number of Ace combos and total number of combos, then estimate how aggressively he plays his Aces here, and how often he would C-bet this board in general, and use Bayes Theorem to arrive at a pretty accurate answer.

If he plays like a typical weak-tight, he probably has an Ace. If he plays LAG, he is somewhat less likely to have an Ace, and if he plays TAG, he is even less likely to have an Ace.

If you give me a read on villain's range, how often he C-bets on this flop, and how likely he is to bet an Ace here, I can do the calculations and figure this out more precisely.

----------------------------

By the way, running bad for 6 hours is nothing, and I'm not sure you were even running that bad.

For instance, how often should we hit a set per 6 hours? Well, you get a pocket pair every 17 hands. When your pocket pair gets to the flop, you will hit a set or better 1 in 8.5 times. So you should expect to hit a set every 145 hands or so. Say you're dealt 30 hands per hour. That's 180 hands.

P(set or quads) = 1 - (7/8.5)^(180/17) = .87

So 87% of the time you should get at least one set over six hours if you play ALL pocket pairs. So you ran a little bad regarding sets.

What about Aces? You get Aces once every 221 hands. You played about 180 hands and got Aces twice. So you ran good as far as getting Aces.

I'm not disputing you ran bad, but it's probably not as bad as you think. Due to the slow pace of the game and a general lack of understanding of probability, most players think they should be getting certain hands and connecting with the flop more often than they should.

So next time you run a little bad, don't sweat it. It's completely normal, and you should expect losing sessions pretty often no matter how good you are. Try not to let it bother you. Just focus on whether you played well and got the money in good.

Thanks for the in depth response..I was the bb/player 1..I should of "had" the ace..

Don't want this to get lost. I wasn't necessarily saying I was running bad just frustrated that's all.

You were the BB? You asked how often BB has an Ace. Ugh. This is why you should label hands with Hero/Villain.

Anyway, yeah, SB should credit you with an Ace often, but don't expect other players to be rational. Also, SB has an Ace more than you would think. Maybe I'll figure this out later...

My bad, I was attempting to get an unslated view.

I hear ya about sb hacking am ace too, but knee this want the case when he checked the turn

I think people will give you an unbiased view as long as you don't give the results of the hand or any action past whatever action you're unsure about. The way this hand was posted was confusing, at least to me.

As for whether the SB has an Ace on the turn, I think you're right, but I wouldn't be so sure. Many weak players take the line check/call check/call with their very strong hands. It's pretty common with passive players or trappy players. Since you bet the flop, SB might expect you to bet the turn and then checkraise you, or he plans to check/call the turn and then shove the river.

Obviously when you check behind on the turn and SB checks again on the river, he doesn't have an Ace, but I wouldn't be sure based on the action up to and including the turn.

But you then checked back the turn. It's at least possible that SB checks turn with an ace hoping to check raise you on the turn. Once you check behind turn you basically never have an ace. I'd call you with a good K too probably.

OP your line looks exactly how most players in my game will play a king. I'm completly unsurprised SB called you. Your line had zero fold equity against a K and SB is going to show up with a lot of AX too.

Bad board to bluff with that line. Betting flop and turn will get some KX to fold but most players will be suspicious that you don't have an Ace as two are on board. Triple barreling is certainly going to get folds from KX but you'll never make up for all the times you get called down by AX.

This is a great situation when you have the ace and a bad one when you don't. Unless you have some history that says otherwise the "I'm going to call any bet" act is usually pretty honest. You usually need to over bet/shove to get a fold at that point. I would expect he has a garbage ace or decent KX. He has a hand that he thinks is best but wants to see the showdown cheaply if possible. He doesn't bet because he knows he can't really get called by worse or get better to fold.

The thing about the prebet act is that it is usually a villain trying to get you not bet. But when you do bet they will talk themselves into calling anyways because they convince themselves that you might be bluffing because they acted weak by trying to get you not to bet. If villain is a regular angle shooter it's more likely they are actually weak and will fold or have a huge hand and are trying to get you to bluff into them.