Why do you care if your opponents think you are "there to play poker" and "serious about playing". Leave your ego at home. If anything, portraying this image will negatively impact your expected results.

Wrong. So wrong! It has nothing to do with ego. When you sit down at a table the first thing opponents do is size you up. If they think you're sittin' in the game light, lookin' for a quick 'hit & run' or playing with scared money, they will step on you.

The very same thing happened at the 1/2 table I was at last night. $20 open was common & $5/$10 straddles happening. Young couple sits with $100 each. Realizes what's goin' on & picks up.

Why anyone would sit at a table with <100 BBs in a 2/5 is beyond me. Unless they're lookin' to sit & wait for premiums, hit & build it up. Seasoned 2/5 players know this & play you accordingly. They can estimate in no time what you've got in your pocket. I'm talking about the players who play for 8-10 hrs & don't pick up and call it a day when they've got 2k+ in front of them & are in the game for only $500.00.

Maybe I'm wrong........but those who sit in a 1/2 game with $100 are usually stepped all over.

Shot taking isn't equivalent to scared money. If someone sits in your game with 80bb and is a good player, you aren't going to be able to own them because they have no money in their pocket.

Do you realize how wrong you are with bold statement?

Both opponents checked to Villain, so his options are:

1. Check.

2. Bet.

If he was up against 2 better hands and FE is not considered, which do you think has better pot odds?

Yes, so we can probably eliminate QQ+ without better information.

So he's calculating that on the fly, that he is a huge favorite against draws and underpairs and that you are implying he's value betting small to get calls?

V would have to be much better than average players in LLSNL with HH as support before I'll make that assumption, and he could just very well be that good.

I don't know what you are trying to say in the above sentence that we "know" what V has.

I don't even know what those examples mean...

Ok, so what is his range on the turn?

But you have yet established what his range is on pre, flop, or turn.

You are simply saying that Ace is a scared card.

Not really.

You failed to acknowledge any of V's post-flop tendencies as EV decisions whether to 3bet or just call.

Well that's kind of obvious. You don't want to be playing scared money.

But the idea of taking shot is that you are risking more than you would in a smaller game...

And when he buys in $240 for 1/3, that's 80bb.

But what's the point you're making here?

Like what Teddy KGB said?

"TEDDY: Very aggressive. A new day, and you won't be pushed around."

But dude, what is "play poker," and how do you let someone know that you are doing that?

Oh ok, so playing poker isn't to pay attention to the table specifically, but to pay attention to how people perceive how much money you brought by constantly topping off.

How exactly does someone "step on you"?

And why is that a bad thing?

Lastly, if someone "sized" you up, then proceeded to "step on you" and you do something in response...

Isn't that all just EGO, Anton Ego?



Oh ok, so table discourages recreational players to play by straddling a bunch, and therefore if you are a rec player, you should either find a new table, or don't let them "step on you" by buying in more.

Well, you got the beyond you part correct.

Do yourself a favor and google Ed Miller 60bb.

I am confused.

Are the 8-10 hr guys "seasoned" or are they the guys who will be "stepped on"?

So if a guy can sit for 8-10 hours and don't pick up after winning $1500+, he will "step on you" if you don't buy in max?

Ya, just maybe.

But if I were to play in your table, can you please wipe your shoes before you step all over me?

I had another 500 in my pocket i was topping off with and the cap at my game is 500.

Thank you sneaky pete, for saving me time. Didn't read all you had to say, but his posts where tilting me.

OP be careful what info you take from these forums.

Not topping off is fine. Especially when taking a shot. Just sitting at a table with 60BB and getting your feet wet is well worth it.

However, don't change the way you play to cut down on variance. It will likely be a disaster.

As played, I would fold for reasons stated.

I totally agree. I guess I have a different definition of 'shot taking.'

I define sittin' in a game with 80bb & hopin' to not go bust due to variance as 'gambling.'

When I 1st started playing poker again 2 yrs ago & started out with a 2k bankroll in 1/2, I was playing kinda' 'scared' because I understood how easily I could lose it. I didn't chase slim margins, instead waiting for the 'big margins' that come quite often in those games.

Checking of course. However,

* OP says this is a feeder table, so it's possibly not full & OP did not mention how many players were at the table.
* OP didn't say what seat V was seating at in relation to the button.
* OP did say V "iso-raised" to $25.00 pre, so I had to assume OP had a reason to believe V may have been raising light. A8 fits the bill.

Since OP posted the flop as 832hh, I had to assume it was 8x,32.

Now V gets 2 callers pre & bets ~53% of the pot. I take that [if V doesn't have a made hand] that he is trying to tell his 2 opponents that he wasn't kiddin' pre, he really has a hand. However, it doesn't work as he gets 2 callers.

The turn bet is what leads me to believe the above, because he only bets ~35% of the pot on the turn. His bet ott is almost twice what it was otf but a smaller % of the pot.
Unless: he flopped a set, or turned trips. However, flopping a set on that board & then betting over 50% of the pot doesn't make sense either.
Unless: his opponents have seem him raise in late position & c-bet the flop for 70+% of the pot & is concerned that if he bets much less than 50% that his opponents will smell a rat & fold.

Again, we don't know. We don't know anything about the players.

If not:

*Maybe he doesn't want to bloat the pot with just one pair.
*Maybe he figures the possibility of 1 of 2 players having a flush draw is slim and is not concerned about the favorable odds he is giving a flush draw with his small turn bet because he isn't concerned about one being out there.
*Maybe he is concerned he will get c/r ott and wants to be able to get out cheap if that's the case. - Is he concerned UTG+2 limped in with A3 & called pre since OP did & is now waiting to c/r? We don't know anything about that player either, so who knows.

We don't know anything about the V except that OP thinks he "iso-raised" pre.

I don't play 2/5, but in 1/2 it is rare to see someone bet so light ott with a flush draw possible when they have QQ+. I don't know of anyone who would bet that light. They usually also bet more than 1/2 the pot otf.

My response was in reference to OP's statement "Think V few value hands here. KK and QQ are checking back river imo and AA is possible but unlikely. Think that leaves 88 and the nut flush draw for this river bet."

So, I find it unlikely that V has QQ+. I think he either raised with a pair [since OP says he 'iso-raised, that could be 22] & boated up, or, he has A8.

Both possibilities fit the bill, IMO, for betting small ott.
1. It's obvious he'd want to entice them to tag along if he boated up.
2. If he has a pair of 8's & the nut flush draw, he has 14 outs going into the river, if nobody has a 3 & nobody has a flush draw themselves.

Ott I'm not implying that he was value betting. If that's what I said, then I misspoke. What I was saying, was that absent trips or a boat, he is betting his draw at a price that gives him the right pot odds to draw to the number of outs he has, while at the same time giving his opponents the opportunity to fold.

By betting so small ott, if his opponents are thinking & holding a pair, they may think his small bet ott is trips, if they think he was raising light pre & may have A3. This stops them from a c/r. Also, they may want to make sure that's the case, since the bet was so small, so OP calls.

However, we don't know anything about the players except that OP thinks V "iso-raised" pre & that OP thinks his opponents label him as a TAG. If V does have OP labeled as a TAG, he would think OP doesn't have much since he didn't 3! pre or c/r the flop.

For him to believe he's up against 7 outs vs. his QQ/KK, he would have to assume that one opponent has an underpair & the other has A8 or A2, not suited in hearts.

In that case, instead of 46 unseen cards going into the river,, there are only 42. Reason being is that even though he doesn't know the specific pairs, he is assuming one has an ace to go with his that paired the board and the other is an underpair to his QQ/KK.

So with 42 unseen cards, divided by 7 outs, you get 6. One of those times his opponents will improve, so he is a 5:1 favorite. I find that extremely easy to do 'on the fly' in even more complicated situations.

Furthermore, the only reason I gave this scenario, is because OP thought V might have QQ+ which didn't make sense to me.

2nd scenario:

Now let's say V has A8 & is betting based on being behind but with outs. He discounts two of his flush outs, as he assumes 1 opponent is on a flush draw & the other has a pocket pair.

So, he has 7 outs to the flush & 5 outs to 2 pair or better for a total of 12.

Again, there are only 42 unseen cards, because V is "assuming" what the other 2 have, just like we "assume" when we put someone on a range of hands.

12*3 = 36, leaving 6; add a zero to it & 12 goes into 60 five times. That's 3.5. One of those times V will improve so his odds of improving are 2.5:1.

I find that very easy to do at the table, on the fly. Furthermore, I rarely lose track of how much is in the pot, because I rarely play more than 5 hrs without a 1hr+ dinner break.

So, if they call, he didn't bet so much that he isn't getting the wrong price to draw, while at the same time giving his opponents the opportunity to fold.

Would he do that? Give his opponents to c/r him?! Hell if I know. I don't anything above V, except that OP thinks he "iso-raised" pre.

Side note: I did not mean to sound insulting to OP for taking a stab at 2/5. It just doesn't make sense, to me anyways, to sit down at a 2/5 game with only $400.00

However, we now know due to a subsequent post by OP, that he had money in his pocket that he was willing to put into the game. This info, however, was not made available in the OP as was so much vital info that was needed on OP's opponents.

Lessons learned:

1. Be sure I don't sound insulting.
2. Be more concise in my posts.
3. Never, ever post a response to an OP that is as shallow as this one was. There is just too much info missing & as you see from the above, I had to do a helluva' lotta' assuming.

To the OP: My apologies if I sounded insulting.

I don't quite follow how above would establish premise to your argument.

You said that:

How can V bet with weaker hand and give himself nice pot odds?

Hero can give V nice pot odds by betting too small with a stronger hand, but V can't do it to himself.

It's clear that you don't fully understand how the two differ.

Again, I don't follow how above establish any premise.

What are you trying to say?

We do not have anymore information than what was provided in OP, so there are really only two ways to make assumptions.

1. We use our general knowledge of players in LLSNL to make assumption.

2. We use specific knowledge derived from our own unique experience and cite it as our assumption.

We agree on this assumption, hence we could lower probability of V holding strong hands.

You are not painting a full picture. You are merely adding hands that are convenient to your predetermined assumption.

Consider how V might cbet his entire raising range on the flop, then consider his bet sizing on turn.

What does he have left in his range at this point?

Do you think V would semi-bluff with AhXh draw on the turn when it is a non-threatening turn card? What about his AxXx range?

Add those combos in whatever you think is in V's range that would make a weak bet on turn, then consider how many of those would make a bet on river.

If bluff/weaker hands vs value hands make sense relative to pot odds, then call.

Rest of your post follows similar patter and characteristic of your earlier post, sort of muddle and not concise.

If you want to do the exercise right, examine V's range starting with pre-flop and simply list out every hands that you think are in his range. You may group them from low probability to high probability if you like, and maybe even write down your reasoning why certain hands belong into certain group. Carefully examine those reasonings and their related traits, and put them to the test in the real game.

If it sounds complicated and time consuming, because it is.

Doesn't make sense because you don't understand why, or that in your opinion, doesn't seem like an optimal decision?

If you don't understand why it could be a good idea to shot take at 80bb or even 60bb, feel free to ask, or take my suggestion and google Ed Miller 60bb.

How on earth does Hero have more money in his pocket matter, besides the possibility that having access to another bullet could affect his psyche?

The whole "getting stepped on" thing is just non-sense crap. If people are trying to run you over at the table, then simply tighten up.

There are very easy adjustments to make when someone is playing unbalanced style against you, and it isn't to literally tell them that you have more money in the pocket...

It is a lot more enjoyable reading your debates with others, where you attempt to prove that you are the brilliant one & they are the ones with their heads up their ass. Therefore, I am done debating the subject.