Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. 2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler.

07-15-2018 , 07:58 PM
Hero - 900 EFF. has the most aggro image in the table but, pretty balanced.
UTG - 900 EFF. the tiltable rec who made a overpot-sized shove with gutter OTT against Hero 2 days ago, He got there at the time lol. seems enjoy giving a bad beat.
+3 - 400EFF, Tight-passive rec who only raises with over-pairs.

2/5 500max 10R

UTG straddles, +3 limps, LJ limps, hero raises to 60 with AhKh on SB,
UTG calls, +3 calls.

Flop Ad9d7d <195>
Hero bets 120, UTG calls, +3 shoves 340, hero ?

I wonder what's the best decision for the hero in the spot having the particular player on UTG in behind of hero.

1. UTG could flat with his flopped flush combos or 99, 77 though. Given situation, I thought that his flatting range OTF seems pretty weaker than Hero's AKh.
Like any broad way combos w/diamonds draw, weaker A

2. Should hero shove there to push UTG's equity out or go for the side-pot
if Utg makes a call?

3. I think that Hero can check OTF in a bloated pot OOP to control the pot and
protect hero's cheking range.
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-15-2018 , 08:05 PM
Have you considered folding? A Tight-passive rec who only raises with over-pairs just raised. No overpairs are available, so we assume from this description that +3 basically has a range of 77/99 and flopped flushes only, no?
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-15-2018 , 08:10 PM
Just don’t see you being ahead here when +3 shoves 340. What a suck-me-in flop for AKhh.
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-15-2018 , 08:13 PM
Your read on +3 is really important here. Some players have a range of exactly (99,77,10d8d, KdQd) and against that range you're obviously folding. If you add to that the fact that you have another player behind you I think its probably a fold
against most tight players.
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-15-2018 , 08:49 PM
Fold as played.

Flop - check evaluate from SB.
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-15-2018 , 08:50 PM
$60 is too small. Learn to calculate psb, then do more then that here.

Check flop.
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-15-2018 , 08:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avaritia
$60 is too small. Learn to calculate psb, then do more then that here.



Check flop.


Is this a joke? If anything, he should be raising to $40-45 pre over 3 limps.
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-15-2018 , 08:58 PM
^
Straddle is on … There's $57 of dead $ in before the raise.
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-15-2018 , 09:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by samo
^
Straddle is on … There's $57 of dead $ in before the raise.

Oh nevermind, should be in the $75 range then I guess.
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-15-2018 , 09:14 PM
I think the sizing is fine there is 37$ of dead money. +3 is a player the player in the UTG +3 position. There weren't three limps. It was UTG Straddle, UTG +3 (I'll call him MP) limps, LJ limps and then action on hero. Hero raises to 60 and then UTG and MP call while LJ folds
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-16-2018 , 01:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garick
Have you considered folding? A Tight-passive rec who only raises with over-pairs just raised. No overpairs are available, so we assume from this description that +3 basically has a range of 77/99 and flopped flushes only, no?
Even if the UTG wasn't behind of hero, I would still call given that price against +3's shoving. I assume that +3's shoving range is like 77, 99 and chop for AKs, AKo(scared of Kd though ) and AQs, AQ and Flopped broadway flush. I got like 26% pot odds so, I would still call against +3's shoving.

나의 SM-G935F 의 Tapatalk에서 보냄
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-16-2018 , 01:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by samo
Fold as played.

Flop - check evaluate from SB.
Yeah I like checking OTF

나의 SM-G935F 의 Tapatalk에서 보냄
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-16-2018 , 08:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by twisting
Even if the UTG wasn't behind of hero, I would still call given that price against +3's shoving. I assume that +3's shoving range is like 77, 99 and chop for AKs, AKo(scared of Kd though ) and AQs, AQ and Flopped broadway flush. I got like 26% pot odds so, I would still call against +3's shoving.
That range does not match at all what you said about +3. You said he "only raises overpairs." Even if we widen his range to AxKd and AxQd you're still not getting the price you need.

Against a range of 99,77,KdJd,KdTd,QdJd,QdTd,JdTd,AcKd,AsKd,AcQd,AsQd you only have 13.9% equity. Plus he limp/called, so he likely has a few more flushes in his range. Add in Td8d, 8d6d, and 6d5d and you're down to 12% equity.
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-16-2018 , 10:11 AM
I think OP is correct, that this is a tough situation, and I am very uncovinced that checking the flop is correct. They advocacy feels very much to me like post hoc justification. Hello Monday morning quarterback.

Let’s try and work through it. I have roughly 100 combos I raise out of the SB with versus a limper.

77+, A9s+, A5s, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, T9s, AQo+

This flop is really great for my 3 bet range, with a ton of strong value TPTK+

Strong value:: 30 combos :: AA, 99, 77, AKs, A9s, AdQd-AdTd, Ad5d, KdTd+, QdTd+, JdTd, Td9d, AKo

One thing that is interesting about this flop texture versus my 3-bet range is that I don’t have a lot of bluffs: QJ, QT, TJ of H, S, C and AK and AQ w/ a D. So 15 combos.

So I’m leading on this flop 45% of the time (45 out of 100 combos), which seems reasonable, perhaps a little onthe low side. Unless you want to make the case you should check 100% of the time on this flop in a 3 bet pot. To make that case I think it will require a good bit of discussion, which I would welcome, but not a naked statement.

When raised, it is now $220 to win $775. Minimium Defense Frquency isn’t a great measure versus a tight passive player but it indicates you should continue with 77% of hands here. I’d reduce pretty aggressively since +3’s range is much narrower here than a typical villain.

You need to fold at very very mimimium at least 10 combos here. The easy folds are the bad bluffs the non-DQJ, QT, TJ which 9 combos. I’m definitely not folding an ace with a big diamond which is the rest of my “bluffs”.

Which pushes me into my strong value range which is my non-D AK. Which another 9 combos. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to fold all of those, but certainly you should be folding some of them depend on how tight and passive +3 actually is.

The second villian in the hand makes it a little interesting, especially since he is a “gambler”, but I think I’d just fold and a find a better spot. Easier said than done.
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-16-2018 , 03:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garick
That range does not match at all what you said about +3. You said he "only raises overpairs." Even if we widen his range to AxKd and AxQd you're still not getting the price you need.


Against a range of 99,77,KdJd,KdTd,QdJd,QdTd,JdTd,AcKd,AsKd,AcQd,AsQd you only have 13.9% equity. Plus he limp/called, so he likely has a few more flushes in his range. Add in Td8d, 8d6d, and 6d5d and you're down to 12% equity.
I mean he only opens or raises on preflop with over-pairs. my bad didn't write it exactly.
+3 was on tilt and he's the fish who over-evaluate his hands. So, I would still call against 9c9h,9c9s,9h9s,7c7h,7c7s,7h7s,AcKc,AsKs,AcQc,AsQs, KdQd,KdJd,KdTd,QdJd,QdTd,JdTd,AcKd,AcKh,AcKs,AsKc, AsKd,AsKh,AcQd,AcQh,AcQs,AsQc,AsQd,AsQh.

Actually, I didn't give a **** to +3 at the time. For +3's shoving I would still easy call with my top range. The main intention of this thread was that I wondered my best action in the spot having the paticular play on UTG.
Nobody get the point lol.
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-16-2018 , 04:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by twisting
I mean he only opens or raises on preflop with over-pairs.
No such thing as an overpair pre flop, maybe this is why everyone missed the point.
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote
07-16-2018 , 05:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GusMcrae
I think OP is correct, that this is a tough situation, and I am very uncovinced that checking the flop is correct. They advocacy feels very much to me like post hoc justification. Hello Monday morning quarterback.

Let’s try and work through it. I have roughly 100 combos I raise out of the SB with versus a limper.

77+, A9s+, A5s, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, T9s, AQo+

This flop is really great for my 3 bet range, with a ton of strong value TPTK+

Strong value:: 30 combos :: AA, 99, 77, AKs, A9s, AdQd-AdTd, Ad5d, KdTd+, QdTd+, JdTd, Td9d, AKo

One thing that is interesting about this flop texture versus my 3-bet range is that I don’t have a lot of bluffs: QJ, QT, TJ of H, S, C and AK and AQ w/ a D. So 15 combos.

So I’m leading on this flop 45% of the time (45 out of 100 combos), which seems reasonable, perhaps a little onthe low side. Unless you want to make the case you should check 100% of the time on this flop in a 3 bet pot. To make that case I think it will require a good bit of discussion, which I would welcome, but not a naked statement.

When raised, it is now $220 to win $775. Minimium Defense Frquency isn’t a great measure versus a tight passive player but it indicates you should continue with 77% of hands here. I’d reduce pretty aggressively since +3’s range is much narrower here than a typical villain.

You need to fold at very very mimimium at least 10 combos here. The easy folds are the bad bluffs the non-DQJ, QT, TJ which 9 combos. I’m definitely not folding an ace with a big diamond which is the rest of my “bluffs”.

Which pushes me into my strong value range which is my non-D AK. Which another 9 combos. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to fold all of those, but certainly you should be folding some of them depend on how tight and passive +3 actually is.

The second villian in the hand makes it a little interesting, especially since he is a “gambler”, but I think I’d just fold and a find a better spot. Easier said than done.
1. Yeah. I would have similar range to raise on pre-flop

2. I'm quite confused that should hero check in these mono-tone flop OOP having tough V on UTG.

3. Yeah. +3's range is pretty capped. His range is like similar with hero's range like AK, AQ, 77, 99, Flopped flush combos (actually I expect him to slowplay by flatting his flopped flush combos as usually those players do) It's still not a good situation though I would still call against +3's shoving given that price.
What makes me confused is because of UTG who surely continues his range in that price if hero flats there OTF.
I was tanking to find the UTG's flatting range OTF out and shoved to push UTG out of his some diamonds draw or weaker A which makes sense of his flatting range OTF.

Thanks for the in-depth analyze
2/5 tough decision against a pure-gambler. Quote

      
m