Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Live Low-stakes NL Discussion of up to 3/5 live no-limit, pot-limit and spread-limit Texas Hold'em poker games, situations and strategies.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-31-2013, 03:53 PM   #101
socialrunner
grinder
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 652
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwslim69 View Post
OP what is the point of this thread?
It got a lot of really good discussion going, didn't it?
socialrunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 03:55 PM   #102
Willyoman
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Willyoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,468
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Actually Poker has a classic post about this very thing.
Willyoman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 03:55 PM   #103
Willyoman
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Willyoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,468
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Quote:
Originally Posted by socialrunner View Post
It got a lot of really good discussion going, didn't it?
Exactly, this has been the best thread of the month.
Willyoman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 03:56 PM   #104
socialrunner
grinder
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 652
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willyoman View Post
Well the flop already has a ton of discussion.

Want to move the discussion along with the turn card/action?
Would have been much better if everyone just discussed their plans on various turns and rivers.
socialrunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 03:56 PM   #105
bwslim69
I'm a Diva, Bruh
 
bwslim69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: TPS reports
Posts: 23,823
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Quote:
Originally Posted by socialrunner View Post
It got a lot of really good discussion going, didn't it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willyoman View Post
Exactly, this has been the best thread of the month.
LOL this thread is a ****ing trainwreck
bwslim69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 04:00 PM   #106
wj94
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 7,695
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwslim69 View Post
OP what is the point of this thread?
Flop sizing? It got 100 replies so obviously there's a good bit of disagreement here...
wj94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 04:06 PM   #107
socialrunner
grinder
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 652
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willyoman View Post
Actually Poker has a classic post about this very thing.
Man, I miss 2006
socialrunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 04:09 PM   #108
AncyentMarinere
journeyman
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Pacific
Posts: 279
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Agree with this line, I like the smaller re-raise here - $140 seems just right.
AncyentMarinere is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 04:15 PM   #109
daniel9861
veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,381
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwslim69 View Post
OP what is the point of this thread?
Wut? To figure out the best way to play the hand through discussion? This thread does that better than almost all of the threads here. If you don't like it there are plenty of other threads with super standard spots that just end up with the OP getting coolered.
daniel9861 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 04:18 PM   #110
bwslim69
I'm a Diva, Bruh
 
bwslim69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: TPS reports
Posts: 23,823
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Quote:
Originally Posted by socialrunner View Post
It got a lot of really good discussion going, didn't it?
This thread is why I have (and many others) shied away from making many strat threads or commenting too much in them. OP has the only real "read" on this villain and it is impossible to articulate that read in his post. For example, OP describes Villain as an spewy LAG initially. In reality this Villain is a stationey fish. That's fine; sometimes our reads are wrong.

A spewy LAG has a specific play style. Tries to outplay us, will make bluffs when he senses weaknesses, etc. Against these players we want to leave him room to bluff on this street or later street AND get value out of weaker made hands.

A station will just call when he feels like it. He will have a very inelastic calling range. He's either calling or he's not. Against these players we can blast away with little fear of losing our Villain. In fact, we want to size on the bigger side since we don't want a scare card to fall and lose our fish.

This distinction has a major bearing on the appropriate response to the Villain's flop donk. Sizing, etc, are all dependent on this read. In this thread, the actual Villain play was inconsistent with the read presented by OP.
bwslim69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 04:21 PM   #111
Richard Parker
banned
 
Richard Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Right Side of Variance
Posts: 13,951
well said, moneymaker.
Richard Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 04:22 PM   #112
bwslim69
I'm a Diva, Bruh
 
bwslim69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: TPS reports
Posts: 23,823
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Parker View Post
well said, moneymaker.
you tell 'em Dickie
bwslim69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 04:45 PM   #113
Tony74
centurion
 
Tony74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Here !!
Posts: 107
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

It's a shame that we don't know the hold cards of villain.
The villain can't have 77 or 88, does not make any sense.
He block bet otf and, IMO, he have a FD or OESD. OESDFD not because he make push on flop

If he have FD or OESD plus tilt or boredom, the call is easy.
Tony74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 04:48 PM   #114
Hand Shaker
self-banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: stalking hoods
Posts: 3,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willyoman View Post
Very nice and thoughtful post, but we obviously disagree on assumptions about villain's range, assumptions about what villain does with the hands in his range, assumptions about when and where we should get value in the hand, and assumptions about how and whether the turn and/or river cards could or could not - and at what frequency - undermine our ability to get value later in the hand. So we pretty much disagree about everything, but I do see where you're coming from.

So I have different generalized cliff notes in general - that is: people often value bet too small in general and leave tons of money on the table. They are fearful villain will fold to a larger bet (ironically, at the same time, in the same situation, they would often think a bluff would be suicidal), and so they target the weakest possible hands in villain's ranges ignoring other variables. They go for thin value when the value is fat. When in doubt, value bet larger. If texture, stacks, ranges and images compellingly suggest otherwise, there are of course many exceptions. I don't see such an exception here.

Regarding my comment in the paragraph above about bluffing... someone needs to re-paste this exact hand in 2 months. For this second posting, let's have OP hold air and raise the flop to $200 on the flop on a bluff.

OP will get totally flamed for this second post. "Villain never folds here," everyone will say. "Why are you bluffing a maniac, noob!?" And it's that type of asymmetric thinking, my friends, that truly defines weak tight: "Don't value raise to $200, he'll fold! + "Don't bluff raise to 200, that's insane, he'll never fold!

I realize in the second case (we are bluffing) villain can have more Jx, and he's less likely to fold top pair; I realize there are differences - 77 would be a better holding for such an experiment. But the point is very much a valid one.
Dude, sabr already tried to help you understand why raising small is better. Go back and reread. If villian was truly a bad lag, he would continue with the weak part of his range FAR more often by raising small.

And against the strong part of his range, well, we'll get stacks in anyways. .

Its funny that you, and so many others think that villians range is draw heavy..then, go on to say we need to get stacks in before a scare card comes. This 1/2 donk is rarely a draw.

And like slim said....V isn't Lag, he's a stationy fish. He wanted to put us on AK or a heart draw and hero call us.
Hand Shaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 04:56 PM   #115
Willyoman
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Willyoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,468
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwslim69 View Post
This thread is why I have (and many others) shied away from making many strat threads or commenting too much in them. OP has the only real "read" on this villain and it is impossible to articulate that read in his post. For example, OP describes Villain as an spewy LAG initially. In reality this Villain is a stationey fish. That's fine; sometimes our reads are wrong.

A spewy LAG has a specific play style. Tries to outplay us, will make bluffs when he senses weaknesses, etc. Against these players we want to leave him room to bluff on this street or later street AND get value out of weaker made hands.

A station will just call when he feels like it. He will have a very inelastic calling range. He's either calling or he's not. Against these players we can blast away with little fear of losing our Villain. In fact, we want to size on the bigger side since we don't want a scare card to fall and lose our fish.

This distinction has a major bearing on the appropriate response to the Villain's flop donk. Sizing, etc, are all dependent on this read. In this thread, the actual Villain play was inconsistent with the read presented by OP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hand Shaker View Post
Dude, sabr already tried to help you understand why raising small is better. Go back and reread. If villian was truly a bad lag, he would continue with the weak part of his range FAR more often by raising small.

And against the strong part of his range, well, we'll get stacks in anyways. .

Its funny that you, and so many others think that villians range is draw heavy..then, go on to say we need to get stacks in before a scare card comes. This 1/2 donk is rarely a draw.

And like slim said....V isn't Lag, he's a stationy fish. He wanted to put us on AK or a heart draw and hero call us.
Yeah I see the thought process. I wasn't focusing on the LAG read as much - it seemed tentative, at best. OP didn't say anything like, yeah, this dude is going nuts, trying to push everyone around, raising like crazy until people play back at him etc.

You're saying if he's a spewy LAG, so give him more rope, not less. Right?

Yeah, I dig that against a spewy LAG.
Willyoman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 05:12 PM   #116
11t
Bo Pelini's #1 Fan
 
11t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Spewville
Posts: 31,421
My entire problem with the 135 camp is that 135 isn't at the top end of the $ value where villain will think about folding to a raise and, imo, his continuation range to a raise inelastic to a higher value than 135.
11t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 05:12 PM   #117
Hand Shaker
self-banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: stalking hoods
Posts: 3,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willyoman View Post
Yeah I see the thought process. I wasn't focusing on the LAG read as much - it seemed tentative, at best. OP didn't say anything like, yeah, this dude is going nuts, trying to push everyone around, raising like crazy until people play back at him etc.

You're saying if he's a spewy LAG, so give him more rope, not less. Right?

Yeah, I dig that against a spewy LAG.
right. If villian was truly a bad lag, we need to give him the illusion that he can do something sexy like flat then ch/jam the turn. Or b/c then lead the turn. Or even 3b the flop. When we raise so huge, we often just fold out everything in his donking range.

If he was a good lag, his donking range would include sets bc he would expect us to raise overpairs then he would 3b flop.

This guy however would ch/r them. Same with a NFD. So we can be fairly certain he has some junky gutter or middle pair sdv hand.

Also, this range discussion is exactly why we should have a bluffing range here. Which is also why we need to raise small. In order for those bluffs to be profitable. Raise small so they don't have to work as often.

Last edited by Hand Shaker; 10-31-2013 at 05:17 PM.
Hand Shaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 05:19 PM   #118
Hand Shaker
self-banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: stalking hoods
Posts: 3,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by 11t View Post
My entire problem with the 135 camp is that 135 isn't at the top end of the $ value where villain will think about folding to a raise and, imo, his continuation range to a raise inelastic to a higher value than 135.
I think $150 is the magic number. We have two more streets. He can still blow up ott or otr.
Hand Shaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 05:23 PM   #119
SABR42
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
SABR42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: printing money
Posts: 21,953
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Stacks aren't deep.

Can easily go $135/$240/$440 and stack him, as well as giving him the illusion of fold equity.
SABR42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 05:23 PM   #120
socialrunner
grinder
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 652
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwslim69 View Post
This thread is why I have (and many others) shied away from making many strat threads or commenting too much in them. OP has the only real "read" on this villain and it is impossible to articulate that read in his post. For example, OP describes Villain as an spewy LAG initially. In reality this Villain is a stationey fish. That's fine; sometimes our reads are wrong.

A spewy LAG has a specific play style. Tries to outplay us, will make bluffs when he senses weaknesses, etc. Against these players we want to leave him room to bluff on this street or later street AND get value out of weaker made hands.

A station will just call when he feels like it. He will have a very inelastic calling range. He's either calling or he's not. Against these players we can blast away with little fear of losing our Villain. In fact, we want to size on the bigger side since we don't want a scare card to fall and lose our fish.

This distinction has a major bearing on the appropriate response to the Villain's flop donk. Sizing, etc, are all dependent on this read. In this thread, the actual Villain play was inconsistent with the read presented by OP.
It really doesn't matter that the read turned out to be wrong. All of the discussion revolved around the villain being a bad LAG. I, like SABR42 and others, like a small raise against a bad LAG; however, I think everyone would agree that a bigger raise would be better against a stationy fish. I don't understand why you wouldn't post strategy because of threads like this, there is still plenty to learn from discussing different lines even if the reads don't end up corresponding.
socialrunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 05:26 PM   #121
wj94
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 7,695
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

I have not played 2/5 with V before, so maybe he plays spewy at 1/2 with his friends while short-stacking and less LAG at 2/5. I'm about 99% sure he had no paint when I saw his cards go in the muck, looked like two cards between 6 and T, but could not have been T8 because that would have made a straight on the river.
wj94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 05:49 PM   #122
Willyoman
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Willyoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,468
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Quote:
Originally Posted by SABR42 View Post
Stacks aren't deep.

Can easily go $135/$240/$440 and stack him, as well as giving him the illusion of fold equity.
This is good. I wasn't thinking about the OP read and that obviously affects how wide villain is likely to be pre-flop, how wide he's likely to be the flop, and what he's gonna do with that wide range.

Readless live, I like my line; with the OP read, I dig the smaller raise and three streets.
Willyoman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 06:13 PM   #123
3 Bullits
grinder
 
3 Bullits's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Bum Hunting
Posts: 417
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Threads like these (with two camps, both with a differing opinion of what the most +EV line is) are the most helpful non-sticky threads in LLSNL IMO. Back and forth discussion helps remind each side that there's another way of looking at the hand (and every hand) and they may have overlooked something the first go round. Well done by all involved.
3 Bullits is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 06:16 PM   #124
11t
Bo Pelini's #1 Fan
 
11t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Spewville
Posts: 31,421
Hey sabr, what is your plan for different turns?

I'm assuming you are bet/calling?
11t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2013, 09:45 AM   #125
Lapidator
LLSNL Frequent Flyer
 
Lapidator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: lying dog-faced pony soldier
Posts: 13,763
Re: 2/5NL: JJ flops top set in a 3bet pot 180bb deep

Quote:
Originally Posted by SABR42 View Post
Stacks aren't deep.

Can easily go $135/$240/$440 and stack him, as well as giving him the illusion of fold equity.
$135 gives him 4.3:1, requiring only 19% equity to correctly call (ignoring implied odds). He can correctly draw with almost his entire range here.

$240 (on the turn), assuming he checks and hero bets, gives him 2.7:1, and 27% equity to correctly call (ignoring implied odds). This one isn't as bad as the flop raise, but getting almost 3:1 and some implied odds, Villain can correctly call and see the river with at least half his range.

IMO, we're not charging him enough to continue. In fact, he could correctly continue with much of his range even if he knew hero's hand.

For your betting structure to be correct, IMO, we'd have to assume Villain has a PP only, and never has a draw. And even if this was the case, Villain still has enough PO+IO to continue correctly with QQ+.

Am I wrong here?
Lapidator is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive