GG I think you miss the crux of this


we call the $80 and V3 calls making a pot of 480$ pre flop

V1 has some combo of a's k' q's
so there are 10 left in the deck
roughly 25 % of the time one will come out on the flop
of that 25 % its 50-50 on if a K or Q helps V1
if he bets we fold
if V1 checks he will fold to out to our shove of $255
V2 will 90% call this
V3 maybe 30%
so we call off and put 33% of our stack in pre
not great but apr: 80 % of the flops V1 will check and we shove while way ahead of V2
making a pot of $990 or $1215 if V3 calls
we started with $375 and can triple up better than 75 % of the time.

so we know its -EV to shove pre
but is it + EV playing this route with our reads ?

complex math and I can't put the formula together.

Your play can’t be that bad. If you have seen him 3bet aq that makes me like not folding more. I have notice some peoples 3 bet is queens plus and an occasional ak. So vs that, I like folding. even if we are getting a good price. I think I like calling better than jamming. One advantage of jamming is maybe he 3 bet folds aq which is good for us. Obviously villain had to jam this flop. He probably getting a decent price for him to call it off for his pair draw

I love when GG and I actually agree that complicating the game tree makes us error susceptible


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As I stated, I did not know if V1 would 3bet. And if you are not at least calling $10 pre in this game w/ TT, you should not be sitting in the game. There is a $10 - $15 straddle 90% of hands -- mainly from V2.

Funny thing is that I thought of every "branch." I took everyone's actions and the reads I had on them into consideration, the price I was being given, and how I would react to V1's action on the flop. It was worth $80 more in this specific instance, especially given the game and the gambliness of it and the level of play. You really do have to take those things into consideration playing live. Sometimes you might have to risk a little more to win more.

Also as stated, if V1 had played his hand appropriately pre, I would have folded to a normal size raise.

That he possibly wanted to raise is not nearly reliable enough for me to not open TT on a 37bb stack.
When 3bet, I´d fold HU vs him, but with the dead money and the fish in there just jam. It´s really not a complicated hand.

If you've somehow managed to convince yourself that you're tripling up 75% of the time and losing only your preflop call the other 25% of the time, then preflop is obviously fine. But I think you are *way* off on your estimation.

ETA: I mean, if he's a scared money nit in the blinds, the hands he is likely wanting to raise preflop (let alone 3bet) is probably somewhere around JJ+/AK, so right off the bat he has 50% more big pair combinations than he does AK (so he'll be cbetting far more often than he'll be checking). And, yeah, some of the time he'll check an overcard flop with an underpair, but that doesn't mean we just take down the pot every time he checks (as often we'll be jamming into someone else's better hand, or someone else will bet an overcard flop forcing us to fold). And even still when we encounter those rare best case situations (such as the one we actually ran into, or when we flop a set against V1's AA) we still lose our stack a non-trivial amount of the time (we're never getting in our stack postflop with 100% equity). The idea that we are "tripling up 75% of the time" is an absurd overestimation in itself, let alone doesn't factor in any RIO.

GimoG

This...

I'm not sure I've ever played in a game where 10-10 is a through ticket more than 40% of the time, let alone 75%.

Most of the time you'll be called with overs, in which case you'll be flipping.

Then on occasion you'll run into a bigger pair...1-4 dog.

Sometimes you get lucky and get a sticky opponent calling with a smaller pair, or suited ace.

And that's heads up getting it in preflop.

Most of the time a flop will come with an overcard or a draw and you'll have to fold to aggression or make a soul read/hero call.

Multiway closer to even EV.

maybe I didn't type it clearly
the 75 % is when checked to and we jam flop as we will still lose a % of the time to V2 or V3 and I randomly picked 25%

I think V1 bets a flop 20-25% of the time but on some of those we might flop a set and proceed.

hence the complicated math equation.
sure we can toss away any skill advantage we have post flop and just shove pre;
But I as does OP believe we can lose less and win more by seeing a flop .

everyone is stating either reads are wrong or incomplete.
given this lack of ability to read an opponent then sure but if reads are correct then it seems to me we should make use of them.
otherwise why bother trying to improve reading skills at all.
playing ABC will net you 1-2BB hr win rate overall but aren't we striving for better than that

Ah, ok, I thought you meant 75% of the time we see the flop we triple up.

Still, thinking V1 cbets the flop 25% seems pretty low to me. If he has a range of JJ+/AK, that means he has a big pair 60% of the time; and the 40% of the time he has AK, a decent part of that time an A/K flops. And yeah, he won't always cbet JJ on an A high flop (keeping in mind he may check AA on those flops too), but we don't just win a huge percentage of these cases either thanks to the pot still being 4way. I mean, we have a solid crushing plan on AJx flops when checked to us (with V3 still to act behind)?

GcluelessingeneralnoobG

here is OP post ????
Hero? V1 has AK or a big pair, maybe AQs. Regardless, I know I’ll find out on the flop. I also know if I hit or I have a favorable flop I can shove, I will get paid by at least V2. Do I shove and let V1 see five cards with AK and/or call with a better pair, flat and evaluate flop, or fold and wait for a better spot?

so by shoving pre V1 gets to see 5 cards
on the flops V1 checks and we shove V1 folds there-by giving up any/all equity .
so is shoving pre <> EV then calling and using our read info to proceed post-flop
I think our EV is greater by seeing flop even for 1/3 of our stack than by shoving pre. at the very least our variance should be less

I'm not arguing for a shove preflop? I'm saying I doubt calling 1/3rd of our stack preflop is profitable. Especially when you consider that (based on the numbers I presented above) we're probably facing a cbet like ~2/3 of the time, and most other cases aren't going to be as straightforward as the one we ended up facing.

GcluelessNLnoobG

ok so lets look at this twelve times
your saying 2/3rds so 8 times we put in $120 and fold for a loss of $960

4 times we put in $375 for a total of $1500 ad we win 3 of those at 990 each for a win of 2970-1500 = +1470- the $960 in folds leaves us with a $530 profit or +Ev of 46$ each time

I realize it is difficult to break down the numbers so I'm not hatin', but I'm not agreeing either.

Just cuz V1 checks the flop doesn't mean we automatically shove and print 3 out of 4 times. V2 will bet some of the time and there will be a bunch of boards we won't be able to continue on (are we continuing on a board containing a single overcard if V1 checks and V2 bets with V3 still behind us?). What about a board with one or more overcards and it checks to us with V3 still behind us? And the nature of shoving is that if we get called we're mostly up against a hand that has at least some equity (and sometimes they're crushing us); while if everyone folds we only get the $360 everyone else put in preflop (we're not tripling up each time we shove).

I realize TT ain't 44, but in *some* regards (admittedly not all) it ain't all that different in this situation. And yet we'd never think calling for 1/3rd of our stack with 44 (I hope).

GcluelessNLnoobG