Kidds play is sooooo standard;
really, whats the big deal??
he planned on taking the pot away, and followed through w/ it.
if he got caught, he go caught. street by street analysis won't get it done, Kidd's right.
If anything the A is a good card on the turn , if V does have it;
he'll know that Kidd knows he may have it, and he's still shoving??
Kidd thought it was a profitable play, and he had the read that this was the case.
we will never know if it was profitable or not. you can pokerstove forever, and you will never know. there are simply too many variables.
we don't know what poker will be like in 5 years, either.
maybe a lot that we take for granted as to whats 'correct' will have changed AGAIN, and most of what we are arguing about todays game will be meaningless.

for exemple, a discussion of the profitabilty of c-betting today, and 5 years ago are two totally different discussions. 5 years ago, no one knew what a c-bet was.

my point is, don't focus on setting things in stone, or looking for panaceas to answer all your questions as to what is correct.
it's always contextual, and the context is sometimes more all-encompassing as we imagine it is.
even the poker landscape, and how it changes year to year, is part of the context, is what i'm getting at.
so this whole rigid mind-set is just GARBAGE, imo.


my take on the hand has'nt changed from my initial gut-reaction, which was
that it did'nt sound hugely +EV, but not bad, either.
I think I gave you a 56 or 76 type hand, so the JT is not too far off.

56 and 76 are way off from JT, when analyzing the whole 3 streets, imo

and i think just analyzing the risk vs reward for how often this needs to work would give some idea as to how profitable it is, similarly i dont think its too hard to construct general ranges villain would make diff plays with, so i guess i disagree with you? lol

they all 3 have next to no value.
they are all hands that Kidd is never folding PF vs. this Villian IP??
i just meant that i did'nt think he had a value hand.
just a hunch, anyways, it does'nt mean anything.

I mentioned 56/67 because they flopped gutters.

I think it's a good board to rep a monster for Kidd, because these are the only draws really available,
so if Kidd is continuing, and NOT raising til the river, what do you think he has, if you are Villian??
the presence of the Ace only makes Kidds case look stronger, IMO.

^^^
page 2.

Nah I mean that 56 and 67 have a hell of a lot more equity to make this play with than JT, with some implieds, and outs when behind as opposed to JT wich needs the bluff to work. Therefore 56 and 67 are much much much different to JT when making this play.

The river is +ev with ATC, pretty much, but getting there as well, solely to make this play, is not.

but it's intrinsic to a 'general range' that it's not a specific, tangible quantity.
thats the definition of a range/ it's not fixed.
I just think it's silly for ppl to argue about something that is obviously too close to call, like this hand.

I think you missed my point.

pokerstove can never tell you if a play is profitable or not, if it's close.
poster A can argue that it's slightly profitable,
poster B can argue it's slightly unprofitable; who cares??
it's too close to be decided by stoving it, because stoving is based on ranges which are approximations only, and the distributions are just geuss-work.
I think it's there to give you general guidelines, not specifically nail down a play as being exactly X amount profitable.
If you think it is, you are fooling yourself, IMO, and you are stoving for the wrong reasons?

one thing i will stand by about Kidds hand is this:
there is no case in which it's drastically profitable or unprofitable, either one, so why even get so wound up about it??

Grunched after 4th page so forgive me if this was already addressed.

I think everyone agrees flop float is standard, and bluffing this type of board could be +EV against this type of villain, but why did you want till the river to try the bluff?

You said you expected villain to check back an Ace on the river and he usually tries to get a cheap showdown with medium strength hands. If villain checked river to bluff catch no bet you made would have gotten him off an ace unless you overbet shoved.

A raise on the turn would have cost about as much as a river bet if villain checked, only in the latter case you got no shot bluffing out an ace and if villain had air or a pp he was folding either way.

Actually most people are saying they hate the flop float because of how little our equity is. My plan was to raise the turn, but if villain has AK or AQ he's so much more likely to look me up because it's possible I'm raising with a worse A. If I flat the turn and jam the river I never have an A.

It isn't like a bunch of draws missed or something. This would be a very strange spot to check to induce a bluff. Pretty sure a less than PSB is +EV on the river if checked to.

I stoved it just because someone had to. Cliffs at bottom of post.
1,841,400 games 0.032 secs 57,543,750 games/sec

Board: 8s 8h 4c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 46.773% 45.63% 01.15% 840153 21120.00 { 22 }
Hand 1: 53.227% 52.08% 01.15% 959007 21120.00 { 22+, A2s+, K2s+, Q2s+, JTs, T9s, ATo+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo }


---

3,670,920 games 0.030 secs 122,364,000 games/sec

Board: 8s 8h 4c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 33.615% 32.54% 01.08% 1194411 39558.00 { 65o }
Hand 1: 66.385% 65.31% 01.08% 2397393 39558.00 { 22+, A2s+, K2s+, Q2s+, JTs, T9s, ATo+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo }


---

280,170 games 0.003 secs 93,390,000 games/sec

Board: 8s 8h 4c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 22.929% 20.39% 02.54% 57116 7125.50 { JsTc }
Hand 1: 77.071% 74.53% 02.54% 208803 7125.50 { 22+, A2s+, K2s+, Q2s+, JTs, T9s, ATo+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo }


---

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

558,360 games 0.009 secs 62,039,999 games/sec

Board: 8s 8h 4c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 43.792% 43.38% 00.41% 242220 2298.00 { 22 }
Hand 1: 56.208% 55.80% 00.41% 311544 2298.00 { TT+, AJs+, KQs, AJo+, KQo }


---

558,360 games 0.010 secs 55,836,000 games/sec

Board: 8s 8h 4c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 43.792% 43.38% 00.41% 242220 2298.00 { 22 }
Hand 1: 56.208% 55.80% 00.41% 311544 2298.00 { TT+, AJs+, KQs, AJo+, KQo }


---

1,116,720 games 0.011 secs 101,520,000 games/sec

Board: 8s 8h 4c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 31.617% 31.21% 00.41% 348480 4596.00 { 65o }
Hand 1: 68.383% 67.97% 00.41% 759048 4596.00 { TT+, AJs+, KQs, AJo+, KQo }


---

83,160 games 0.001 secs 83,160,000 games/sec

Board: 8s 8h 4c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 17.919% 17.44% 00.48% 14505 396.50 { JsTc }
Hand 1: 82.081% 81.60% 00.48% 67862 396.50 { TT+, AJs+, KQs, AJo+, KQo }


---


Stove Cliffs: I did two variations of stoving. I gave him a loose range because he is isoing the fish and I gave him a tight range because he is in EP. I'm only analyzing the flop float decision. Here is my equity vs his loose and tight range with each hand...

1. 22: 47% & 44%
2. 56o: 34% & 32%
3. JTo: 23% & 18%

The hand I like least here is actually 22 because a lot of turn cards will come off that villain checks. At this point I think I probably have the best hand, but would likely still have to fire two streets to get him off a pair. It can get checked down and I can lose to another small pair. If he triple barrels I could also be tempted to hero call instead of shoving, but not very often.

56 is the perfect hand to have because 6 high is never good in showdown and a straight is good a very high % of the time. It's clear I will have to turn my hand into a bluff, and I still have some equity.

JT is better than people are giving it credit for although clearly inferior to a hand like 56. It's the poor mans 56 for everything I said before about 56 minus 11%.

If you want to bluff raise it needs to be on the turn.

Villians value range can TT+, 8X, AX,44.
Villians bluff range can be very wide since your range looks so weak. If I´m calling the flop I´m calling 3 streets against a good villian since I expect to get barreled a lot on these boards, especially when the A turns. This hand demonstrates why it is a good strategy to float with overs on dry boards against good aggressive players.

Just read that you are thinking about shoving the river.... You rep a flopped boat, quads and A8 a very small range, Villian never folds an 8 and I doubt he folds a strong A.

Raising river looks much stronger than turn, since it looks like we're allowing villain to barrel as bluffs to rep the ace, as well as barrel thin value and mega value hands he may have. Raising the turn would be the cheap way to get this done but it would be bad with a real hand if we had one, since we'd never be raising Ax here and therefore be repping a super super super narrow range.

I'm raising most turn cards, but an A certainly isn't one of them.

you guys are sick

This is precisely why i abandon ship on the turn card. We have no assurance villain doesnt have a solid AK AQ and go for heavy value on river. (Not to mention now put us on Ax also) We dont know if villain will fold to river raise IF in fact he does bet big on river for value. Too many ifs now that the A falls on turn. I still for the life of me dont understand why we dont just pop the flop. (i know it MAY look bluffy, but i dont see the villain doing anything about it unless he has a pair) I think this is also where we dont see eye to eye, as i just dont see the villain insta - calling a flop raise with say AQ? Whats he gonna plan to do to a turn bet?
Call again? I just dont see it at live 2/5 and higher vs even the fairly good villains.

This is calculated suicide at best. Bankroll has to be super deep to make these moves, but as is, can be very effective when timed right. Why are people even dissecting such a blatant float ----> steal? There is no strategy to this other than pure aggression. Stop trying to pick apart why this happened, what villain has, and just shove money in. It will work enough to be +EV if timed correctly and otherwise is just stupid.

has anyone mentioned ITT that Villians line of firing 3 barrels on this board makes little sense?? what hand could he be realistically be doing this w/ ??
most Vs are checking the turn when they hit AK.

Kidds' line makes sense, or should make sense to V.

I think the A falling on the turn only makes Kidds' line look more credible, IMO. sure, he knows V can have AK/AQ, but doesn't seem to care.