Yes the fact that he waited to post his bb was enough of a detail.

He is not check/jamming QJ here which would really be our best case scenario.

FWIW I think it's funny I nearly called their exact holdings when I was pretty much just trying to make a point.

Did you say which card was the non heart?

maybe I'm just a spazz but I consider myself competent and I would be looking to c/r QJhh here. I mean you're looking to fold a set for christsakes; he's printing money

No, I don't remember/didn't take good enough notes once I realized this could be a good hand to submit here.

I would flat and probably shove any non connected or heart card. The only connected card I would be worried about is a 7. More than likely the raiser has an overpair something like 99-JJ and the other villain is probably where the draw is at. You have most of the equity and if villain has a higher set chalk it up to the cooler.

I respectfully disagree with your assessment that "I'm looking to fold a set" here. I was able to fold a set (for better or worse), but I sure wasn't looking to do so. I wanted to shovel money into this pot (as we all do with every set we flop), but stopped before I did as the action in front of me told a story I wasn't prepared for.

(Whiny bad beat story) Randomly, I just got done with a session today where I faced what on its face is a similar story - I flopped a set (Qs) on a made straight and flush draw board (KQ9) with two all ins in front of me. In that case, without the threat of being both behind and having my outs counterfeited, I gladly called the 120+ BB cr shove (with one call in front). No though of folding whatsoever, as even if I'm behind (say, JThh), I have at least some clean outs to a full house. I was facing a flush draw and an underset (99), giving me ~67% equity in a three-way ~400BB pot...about as good as it gets. Of course, the poker gods laughed in my face and threw a baby flush card on the river. $2000 pot, no bueno. F you, poker. F you.

I respect the fact you were able to fold a monster hand because you really thought you were beat. You did what you thought was right and that's all that matters.

I shove and do think it's a somewhat bad fold. I do think you've thought it out carefully and are plenty smart, I just think you have some bad assumptions and the wrong conclusion.

I'll add the following:

- V1's range is way wider than you're thinking. He could be strong and/or ahead, yes, but he's often giving away money. He's here to gamble. You're way overstating the strength of his range. He can have one-pair type hands, etc., and yes, he will call a flop bet with those and other hands.

- Let's go back to your results post, because this is important:

So let's be results-oriented... you made the wrong decision.

You have put in $80, so you have $420 left. V1 started with $300, V2 with $500. I think we all agree you have very little fold equity, so let's assume you have none. When you shove and everyone goes all in, the final pot will be $1,300. It costs you $420 to ship. 420/1300 = 32% is the equity you require 3-ways.

My Stove calculation is showing you have 35.5% equity on 8h6x5h facing 9s7s and 4h2h. Back of the envelope, by folding you gave up the positive 3.5% equity above break-even, and so you gave up roughly 0.035*1,300 = $45.

Obviously this is all results-oriented.

Ignoring the results, I don't think this is a fold. Considering the results, I don't think this is a fold.

Now you need to modify the assumptions. If you go ahead and add sets, other draws, and certainly two-pair hands like 86s and/or 65s into V2's range, and weaker hands into V1's range, it should be a snap call, and I think you could be approaching 40% equity. I'll let someone else run the numbers.

So why even bother posting if you don't want to listen to anyone?

Willyoman - Thanks for the input, and for the time you spent Stoving this! I appreciate it (and FWIW was kidding about being results oriented...I know that's not the right way to look at this).

Strangely, had I known that the villains had the exact hands that they did, I would have shoved, as against a range of hands that doesn't take away any of my re-draw outs I'd imagine (and your math shows) that I'd have the equity needed to get it in.

What I am having trouble communicating is my sense that having my outs counterfeited dramatically affects the inputs we use to get my equity. In a way, I was analyzing my odds against their two hands together, not as individual hands. I felt that there was some chance I was up against one hand I had outs against and one hand I was ahead of, but there was some chance that I was up against one hand that was beating me and one hand that had all/most of my outs for a re-draw (for example, if V2 had straight or huge combo draw and V1 had 86 or if V2 had 97 and V1 had 88/66/86). If I ascribe 50% chance to each scenario (probably not correct but good enough for example), then I had 50% equity in Scenario 1 (where I'm up against a made straight and a draw) and near 0% equity in Scenario 2 (where I'm up against a big draw or made straight and the other villain has either a bigger set or top two). Combining those gives me 25% equity (again, using bad assumption of 50/50), which is not enough to call. Again, we can't Stove this type of result because the range of one Villain is dependent on card removal from the other's range.

Obviously I'm not explaining the concept well enough, and if I can't explain it it's probably because it's not right/good. I'm hoping that someone can help me see if this way of thinking is logical or if there's a big flaw in it.

Sorry if I seem obtuse. I'm definitely listening, and trying to thank everyone for their input.

To be fair, I do think that this is a higher-level thought process and that saying things like "WTF, V2 is unknown, snap for 100BB" is not a helpful addition to the conversation. I am well aware that it is not normal to fold a set on the flop for 100BBs, especially when my read on one player is that he is fishy. I tried to put a lot of thought into both my reads during the hand and my thought process after the hand in order to spark a good conversation. I did not post this thinking I would hear "OMG, you're so great". I posted it expecting most people to call me a fish (probably true) and a scared donkey (also true...lol, folding sets), but that somewhere in there I could get a couple people who could help me clarify my thinking on the concept of how card removal affects each of the two villains' ranges (that, admittedly, I am not communicating clearly), and how the math needed to discern my equity changes as a result. I still welcome any thoughts on this, as I'm humbly trying to improve my game.

Excellent post.

Everything you're saying can be determined in Pokerstove. It's actually particularly easy to Stove in this case because we're going to shove all-in (no more future decisions), and we assume we will be called (no fold equity).

Pokerstove or any other equity application will account for card removal, etc, so you really don't need to go in circles about how villains' hands may or may not interact with each other and with you - the program will take care of that.

So go ahead - think about ranges (and V1 has to be much wider, like I said) and plug it into stove. You're not going to find a fold.

Like I just posted, this is not really true. Stove accounts for this.

Lastly, the only complex part of Stoving this is not actually Stoving it. It's thinking about your actual required equity, specifically whether V1 folds much (less "overlay") and whether V1 wins much (he's playing a smaller effective stack).

Nice post and discussion itt.

I agree with comments that you can tell a lot about BB based on appearance and behavior. What you can't tell is if he knows SB, is he fond of check-raising, is he willing to get it in here with hands like top pair + straight draw, etc.


Flop is 865hh.

97s(4), 74s(0 you can have my stack), 88(3), 66(3), T9s(4), T7s(4), etc.
I think I could convince myself to stack off with bottom set here.

You can't quite just plug it into Pokerstove blindly. You need to figure out which parts of his range V1 is folding. He is calling with hands like A8 the first time around but probably folding once you jam. You may well be a dog against their combined calling ranges but be +EV to shove because of the free money when V1 folds.

That's not that hard to do, but there is some human work to do in addition to stoving it. Honestly I think that Wily showing you that it was a call even if they turned their hands face up should end this discussion. There aren't all that many set combos and they are roughly cancelled out by 2pr combos. Then since he can likely have combo draws (many of which you have about 60% equity about) its less close than I thoguht it was.

Clear lacking of ranges and proper use of stove itt.

Unfortunately I forgot to come back to this last night (ironically I spend more time on 2+2 at work then in my free time), and I will be playing tonight, so if this thread has any life left by Thursday eve I'll come back with stove and rationale.

But basically, yes, you need >31% equity to break even when jamming and going 3 ways which is best case scenario.

So far we have stoved the exact hands and seen we will barely break even. When we add sets we will be dead. That is the point.

Seeing that we are effectively flipping with equity when we were against one of the best case scenarios is why this is a fold. Which is what I said in my initial posts.

A reasonable stove range (assuming 856 flop) would be:

86s, 34, 78, 89, A7, 79s, 67s, 66, 88

Again I don't have stove in front of me but I would guess we are <25% against that range for both villains. We are certainly <30%

What OP is trying to say about card removal is also true. I do not know how to explain this the best way, but when you see three people committing on a straight/flush board, in general 2/3 can't both have draws, bc they are blocking each others hands. So the nut good scenario here would be a straight draw (67 for example) and a flush/straight draw (34 for example)

If one has a straight but one has 86, the 86 kills our equity vs. the straight

As I've said, this is all a bit pedantic, but against a REASONABLE RANGE (I know someone is going to play with stove till it gets to 32% by adding bs like A8o), this is a fold.

The range I posted is a standard range for a kid who waited to post, and then just c/r 50% of his stack. There are certainly villains I would fist pump gii here. So again I think most itt are looking at this like "lol u haz set tho"

There is also a lack of understanding of how we use ranges itt though.

Of course will will be facing the bottom end of their range sometimes. Just bc they show up here with 67/86 for example does not mean we made an error. It means in this one iteration we were facing the bottom end of our reasonable range assumption when in this scenario. Just like seeing each have 66/88 wouldn't exactly mean we made the correct fold everytime. We just caught the top end of their range in that iteration. We would need to stove the overall range, and see how our equity fairs against that.

In the long run you're not losing a huge amount by gii here. But it is certainly an unnessary bleed if we are ~25% which I'm pretty sure we are. I also don't like flipping equities when I'm 200bb deep with an Asian so that could be a factor as well.

Grunch:

This is Horshoe Hammond against an unknown on a dripping wet board, for 100bb. A set is huge here.

People in this room are frequently raising combo draws. You are up against hand range you are in good shape against. Also, since he overcalled from the blinds pre he has plenty of 86ss in his range, which we always get max value from. Pretty easy get it in spot.

Against an unknown in Hammond: Range I'd assign is like this - Axhh, T9hh 7xhh, 66, 88, 86, 97ss, 74ss, (1/2 combos of small overpairs and 77). Looks like a pretty easy get it in spot to me.

This range doesn't even account for the times he has Gutter+ over + pair OESD and a pair he might spazz on occasionally.

Yeah I can't agree with this at all, we are still bleeding $80 everytime we fold in this spot.

Avarita, read this post.

FWIW, this would be a very good discussion if hero has 86. This should be the top of our folding range or bottom of our stacking off range given the reads on the players (or lack their of). 55 against this stoving range is a profitable stack off. Just think about the pot size already, in relation to what we've bet, along with a range we are doing just fine against, especially when he's never folding for the rest the times we are ahead.

This post makes the very flawed assumption that both villains are playing the same (incredibly strong) range here. The fish definitely does have stuff like A8o in his range imo, at least for calling the initial bet; that's why he's the fish. We don't know if he'll call your shove with stuff like that (I kinda doubt it based on description, but who knows), but either: he does, and one of the ranges you're up against is significantly weaker; or, more likely, he folds these hands to your jam, meaning a lot of the time you'll be flipping against one strong range with like $250 of overlay.

Similarly, I don't see how just the information that the BB "looks competent" allows you to confidently narrow his c/r range to something so specific and exploitably tight. Like the fish, there are other hands he can show up with here at least sometimes that he may or may not call the shove with: namely, overpairs and other "combo" draws you didn't mention like T8hh or overs+FD combos like AThh. So again, either he calls your shove with these and his stackoff range isn't as oppressively tight, or he folds them and suddenly you have some FE.

You successfully gave a set of assumptions that lead to the correct conclusion being a fold, but it required assuming a villain we've never seen play a hand yet be good enough to not overplay hands like overpairs while not being quite good enough fully take advantage of the FE of his line with a wider semibluff range, as well as assuming that the table fish is playing like a solid TAG for this hand. I'm hesitant to accept this, and it has nothing to do with "hurr durr I has set" or some other failure to use logic afaik

We disagree about what's a "reasonable range."

I do not think villains' ranges include only flopped straights, flopped sets, flopped open ended straight flush draws, flopped gut shot straight flush draws and flopped flush + straight draws type hands.

Obviously it's a fold against those monster ranges.

I think your range needs work. For one example - among many possible examples - you're giving them only one AXhh flush draw, the A7hh - that specific hand has particularly high equity because it also has a straight draw. Why is that the only possible Axhh hand you include? That seems very arbitrary and biases us towards folding, and I see no reason to think we shouldn't include other Axhh or even KQhh, etc.

Further, this is live 2/5. Your range includes nothing but monsters for both villains. I appreciate you think they are very strong in this situation. However - and this is after you add in the very reasonable Ax and other flush draw hands you've excluded and that I highlighted above - you really do need to include a few combos we squarely beat. I don't care if it's only a few % of hands, or w/e, but a hand like 77 in one villain's range, maybe a 99 that also doesn't fold.

Obviously if you give everyone a monster, it's a fold. But those ranges are really far too narrow. I could understand a reason to fold because the variance in this situation is crazy, and you just want to fold and not tell anyone because it feels thin and the outcome is binary. But if you're fully rolled and grinding and capturing your edges, don't fold here.

I presume you mean that both villains have the same range.

Board: 8h 6h 5c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 35.819% 33.28% 02.54% 76936 5866.00 { 88, 66, A7s, 98s, 9h7h, 87s, 8h6h, 7h6h, 4h3h }
Hand 1: 35.819% 33.28% 02.54% 76936 5866.00 { 88, 66, A7s, 98s, 9h7h, 87s, 8h6h, 7h6h, 4h3h }
Hand 2: 28.362% 27.78% 00.59% 64208 1356.00 { 5d5s }

Giving Hero the 5

Board: 8h 6h 5c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 34.100% 31.69% 02.41% 73254 5574.00 { 88, 66, A7s, 98s, 9h7h, 87s, 8h6h, 7h6h, 4h3h }
Hand 1: 34.100% 31.69% 02.41% 73254 5574.00 { 88, 66, A7s, 98s, 9h7h, 87s, 8h6h, 7h6h, 4h3h }
Hand 2: 31.800% 31.25% 00.55% 72244 1268.00 { 5d5h }

Stove accounts for this. As others have already stated.

Given your range, stove says shove, though it is close. I think your range is a bit narrow. At least add 77x, AX, etc. for V1 -- "...he's here to gamble".

The fact that V2 waited a hand or two to post his blind is, in and of itself, meaningless to me. I see it all the time, and I've never thought it meant I had to give villains any credit. (As an aside, when the dealer asked me if I want to post I usually say, "why?", and then follow the answer with, "well, I didn't come all this way to drink coffee." Lulz...)

You didn't read the OP then.

Hero is 200bb deep with V3. V3 folds to Hero's cbet. Hero is now only 100bb and 66bb deep.

~~~~~~~

What I find really amusing here is that if Hero had AAx, half the LLSNL readers would be saying b/shove the flop and GII. But we have a real made hand here, though a vulnerable one, and there is discussion about folding for 100bb effective. I just don't get it.

I am at a loss on how to counter so much flawed thinking all at once. I truly have analysis paralysis after reading the last three posts.

My stove range is reasonable and has yet to be posted. It is not MONSTER STRONG. It is just a reasonable range for someone who just c/r half their stack.

Lol@the range posted that includes A7s and 98s

Add some other combos if it suits you (CWIDT?), but you will see that it does little to change the range equity. i.e., adding a KQ won't change much

Also if fish did just flat 20% of his stack with A8o, which he never does, he's not calling a c/r then a jam. Our equity needs to be higher in that scenario.

The range though is super standard and not warped to prove my point. On the contrary giving bb 99 would be warping the range to prove a point.

i.e., vs non droolers, if you get face a committing c/r, your immediate thought should be "I'm facing a range of sets, 2pr, straights, and combo draws"

Also I understand Asian is not in the hand, I think you misunderstand the point being made there.