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 03-03-2014, 10:34 PM   #51
Wilverine
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Wilverine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Atlanta, Jacksonville
Posts: 6,208
Grunch:
T9, 99, QJcc 65hh, some 44/77, a little TT.
Wilverine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2014, 05:21 AM   #52
Buster65
The Situation
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Livin' on Bluff Rd.
Posts: 2,240
Re: Live 2/5: What range would you play like this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CallMeVernon View Post
As far as I'm concerned, once I make this big bet, there is no such thing as TAG or LAG anymore. There is only good or bad.
I actually agree with you right here, which is why I said earlier that I don't like this sizing as a value bet since you likely only get called by better. I certainly don't think he will float this turn OR draw against you.

I'm not really sure where I implied that you were a fish. If anywhere you got that feeling, then I apologize (internet is hard to convey feelings for sure). I actually have read a lot of your posts, I'm normally right in the groove with you, and respect you quite a lot as a poster.

The only place I can think of is when you asked Venice why you couldn't show up with certain hands here, and I said IF (if, remember) you did, then I thought your bet was fishy. I still do. I woudda flatted the 2 pair hands you mentioned, and IF I bet the straights, I woudda gone for 80-100% pot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jvds View Post
it is extremely unlikely that a good lag would check a monster here
Yeah, and if you'll read the post of mine that you quoted a bit more closely, you'll see that this is exactly what I say.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jvds View Post
3. i don't understand why someone you categorize as loose and aggressive would be unwilling to play big pots without strong hands. that style would be more accurately characterized as tight aggressive/passive.
Well, as Vernon pointed out (and it's something that I'm a big believer in), as the pot gets bigger, the TAG/LAG distinction goes away. However, I continued to use it in my posts, because until Vernon's big bet, they are still in play, and I think a TAG checks this turn for "pot control" while a LAG fires at it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jvds View Post
also consider that if V had decided to make his bet $65 range only {J8, 68}, he has OP (who he was actually playing against), and you, advising an overbet raise, so it seems like this would be a very good size to choose with a monster.
But this is a leveling play, and we have been given no information to suggest that this particular V would be leveling us.
Buster65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2014, 05:32 AM   #53
Buster65
The Situation
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Livin' on Bluff Rd.
Posts: 2,240
Re: Live 2/5: What range would you play like this?

Oh, and I'd also like to add, Vernon, that this thread was a very pleasant surprise. I almost read the OP and stopped there because I'm not actually a big fan of playing "what's my range?" However, I have thoroughly enjoyed myself. In fact, I would certainly say that this is the most interesting thread I have posted in this year. Thanks very much!
Buster65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2014, 07:06 AM   #54
CRAIerrday
grinder
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 424
Re: Live 2/5: What range would you play like this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CallMeVernon View Post
I'm sure Villain did not know this at the time of the hand, but this sizing is the smallest I would use in this spot, not the biggest. Calling instead of raising would put $260 in the pot, so putting $255 on top is basically a pot-sized raise. With stack sizes being what they are, 1.5-times-pot overbets on the turn and river would leave the river bet being an all-in. So my biggest sizing here would be something like $485. Yeah, it would frequently blast Villain out of the pot, but so would $320 according to most people here.

Why would I never use a smaller sizing? Because of how wet the board is. There are 3 open-enders, one of them only a 1-card draw, and 2 flush draws. Possible combo draws run rampant. If I size the bet too small, not only am I giving Villain direct pot odds to draw, but I'm also inviting bluffs on scare cards that don't hit him. And if I had a big hand like a set or straight I'd be tempted to call a big bet on the river, since not all scare cards can actually make his hand. So I have to limit Villain's implied odds (if he is in fact drawing) with big bet sizing.

To me, the way to adjust for the fact that Villain is often folding to a raise sized like this is to mix in a lot of semi-bluffs, not to size it smaller.

One thing about the turn raise is that I don't expect Villain to be creative enough to 3bet this raise as a bluff on the turn. (I do expect him to be capable of doing this on the flop, though.) So for example if I have 97 and I get 3bet, honestly, I'm going to fold. It might be different if I had a read that this guy could 3bet a big turn raise with worse, but how often do you see that, really?
If you're frequently "blasting the opponent out of the pot", doesn't that lose you a lot of value? I understand that you don't want him to hit, but if you're aware that the V is never going to 3bet with a bluff, doesn't that put you in prime control of all river decisions regardless (considering he will almost never slowplay his nutted hands ott, therefore leaving him with tons of draws and weak one/two-pair hands which will be well-defined by his river action and allow you to play optimally against him?)

You mention he may represent a lot of hands on the river if a scare card comes up, but realistically, would he bomb the river with T9 if the 6h comes up? Or if he has an overpair? IMO a lot of people are going to c/c and try to get to a cheap showdown with those hands, unless they know your game well enough to know that a) their hand is definitely no good, and b) you didn't like that card (which shouldn't happen if you balance your turn-raises with semi-bluffs).

Obviously you can't know his hand for sure, but by raising smaller and keeping his weaker hands in, you can put him to a lot of tough decisions on the river and extract as much value as possible. I understand that you want to build a pot, but it's tough to get 400BB stacks in the middle without some sort of cooler (at least against a somewhat competent player).

Hypothetically, if you knew that he had AA on this board and you had J8, how would you play it?



Edit: I'm not suggesting that you minraise the turn or anything, but by giving better odds which will still charge him adequately, we will be able to keep his weaker range in as well. And I'm also not suggesting that your sizing is "wrong", I'm just trying to offer a different perspective.

Last edited by CRAIerrday; 03-04-2014 at 07:36 AM.
CRAIerrday is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2014, 02:20 PM   #55
CallMeVernon
COTM Crusher
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Not Vancouver, BC
Posts: 3,444
Re: Live 2/5: What range would you play like this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRAIerrday View Post
Edit: I'm not suggesting that you minraise the turn or anything, but by giving better odds which will still charge him adequately, we will be able to keep his weaker range in as well. And I'm also not suggesting that your sizing is "wrong", I'm just trying to offer a different perspective.
I guess this is where I differ. I'm offering Villain just a shade over 2:1 here on the turn (he's facing 255 to win 516), and like I said, this board is SUPER wet. This is the smallest I can make it while "adequately" charging him. This is especially true if I am ever semi-bluffing--I need to be able to sometimes induce folds from draws that would accidentally win a showdown.

Like I said--my adjustment would not be to bet smaller; my adjustment would be to bluff more at this sizing.

Buster--you do realize, as I said above, that this is not an overbet, right? This is a ~100% pot raise. I'm raising $255 on top, into a pot that would have been $261 if I had just called.
CallMeVernon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2014, 02:29 PM   #56
jvds
adept
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 989
Re: Live 2/5: What range would you play like this?

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvds View Post
it is extremely unlikely that a good lag would check a monster here
Yeah, and if you'll read the post of mine that you quoted a bit more closely, you'll see that this is exactly what I say.
You're right, I should add that it's unlikely that any player that is correctly characterized as a LAG will check strong hands on this board

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvds View Post
3. i don't understand why someone you categorize as loose and aggressive would be unwilling to play big pots without strong hands. that style would be more accurately characterized as tight aggressive/passive.
Well, as Vernon pointed out (and it's something that I'm a big believer in), as the pot gets bigger, the TAG/LAG distinction goes away. However, I continued to use it in my posts, because until Vernon's big bet, they are still in play, and I think a TAG checks this turn for "pot control" while a LAG fires at it.
it is obvious that the distinction will diminish as the pot grows, because both a loose and tight players continuing range will narrow, with the looser players range narrowing more quickly as they both approach the range at which they are willing to be all in. it does not follow that we should ignore how tight/loose or aggressive a players is (although we should have more exploitative reads than these, of course) when designing a strategy as the pot grows.

also if you mean that a TAG is more likely to check 1p hands here (and continue with a more polarized range), then i agree. i think that it is an entirely separate issue as to how the LAG will react to a raise though.

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvds View Post
also consider that if V had decided to make his bet $65 range only {J8, 68}, he has OP (who he was actually playing against), and you, advising an overbet raise, so it seems like this would be a very good size to choose with a monster.
But this is a leveling play, and we have been given no information to suggest that this particular V would be leveling us.
it is not a leveling play outside of the fact that you made some assumptions about his $65 betting range here (not necessarily incorrect ones), and how it would react to a raise, and then moved to exploit those assumptions.

my example was to contradict the assertion that a good LAG would necessarily be overbetting here, because, as it turns out, choosing a small sizing has induced a drastic counterstrategy (making the bayesian probability that he is good larger). maybe he has population reads to suggest this would happen.

alternatively, he might have just chosen to have a few bet sizes on the turn, and semi-balanced the different sizes. if his range looked like {J8, 99, AA/KK/QQ, and some assortment of combo draws and gutters}, he would be able to react to a raise (even a large one) well, while still allowing a good chunk of his overpairs to valuebet against your flatting range.
jvds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2014, 03:32 PM   #57
Lapidator
LLSNL Frequent Flyer
 
Lapidator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: lying dog-faced pony soldier
Posts: 13,763
Re: Live 2/5: What range would you play like this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CallMeVernon View Post
Buster--you do realize, as I said above, that this is not an overbet, right? This is a ~100% pot raise. I'm raising $255 on top, into a pot that would have been $261 if I had just called.
If you had made it $265, it would have been (131+65+265)=$461 with $200 to call. 2.31:1.

Your raise of $320, it would have been (131+65+320)=$516 with $255 to call. 2.02:1.

I'm not sure the difference in the offered pot odds is significant.

However, I think $265 accomplishes the same thing as $320 in most cases. Especially since most of the time we're not doing the math that precisely at the table (e.g. trying for 2:1 or 3:1 or whatever, but never trying for 2.5:1)

I could be wrong.
Lapidator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2014, 06:06 PM   #58
Buster65
The Situation
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Livin' on Bluff Rd.
Posts: 2,240
Re: Live 2/5: What range would you play like this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CallMeVernon View Post
Buster--you do realize, as I said above, that this is not an overbet, right? This is a ~100% pot raise. I'm raising $255 on top, into a pot that would have been $261 if I had just called.
Oops, you are right, I dropped 100 bucks somewhere in my addition. My apologies, I would show up sometimes with sets/straights at this size bet.
Buster65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2014, 02:29 AM   #59
CallMeVernon
COTM Crusher
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Not Vancouver, BC
Posts: 3,444
Re: Live 2/5: What range would you play like this?

Since it's been requested, here's an update with partial results. I still will not reveal exactly what I had, but:

Spoiler:
CallMeVernon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2014, 07:12 AM   #60
B&E
grinder
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 466
Re: Live 2/5: What range would you play like this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CallMeVernon View Post
Since it's been requested, here's an update with partial results. I still will not reveal exactly what I had, but:

Spoiler:

I think the best draws to be semi-bluffing with are the non-NFD and non-pair draws.
With the NFD, calling preserves your chance at flush over flush against lesser FD's that would be forced to fold to the raise.
With draw+pair hands, especially with V's small bet size OTT, there is a chance that your hand is best, and we preserve the chance to realize that equity when it goes check/check OTR.
With non-nut, non-paired draws, you have no SDV, and it would be a great result for higher flush draws to fold. This would include straight+FD such as KJ or QJ.

To me, this would be the way to get the most value out of your range of draws.
B&E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2014, 11:46 AM   #61
Lapidator
LLSNL Frequent Flyer
 
Lapidator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: lying dog-faced pony soldier
Posts: 13,763
Re: Live 2/5: What range would you play like this?

There are only 2 reasons to draw:

1) We have the right immediate odds to draw for the next card. (Or we know we'll see 2 cards for the current price.)

2) We have a reasonably good expectation of getting paid correctly out of implied odds when our draw hits.

I think that against non calling stations and non maniacs, fold equity is easily as valuable as implied equity -- and many times it is more valuable given our range, not just our cards.

Generally speaking, I'm almost always happy to get folds and not have to draw. Villains almost always underestimate the amount of equity they have in a hand, and getting them to let it go is a much easier and more profitable way to play LLSNL.

IOW, getting weak opponents to give up their equity is better then trying to maximize our equity against strong opponents.
Lapidator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2014, 12:52 PM   #62
discgolfing
journeyman
 
discgolfing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 366
Re: Live 2/5: What range would you play like this?

Not gonna read any replies before posting so not to have any bias.

1. I'd weight villain's range to something fairly decent, he doesn't sound like the kind of player who's going to blast $25 out there to steal the blinds. So I'm taking a standard approach, I'm not 3betting him light and and I'm sticking to a pretty narrow calling range.
Calling range: 22-99, AJs, ATs, KQs, KJs, KTs, QJs, JTs
3bet range: TT-AA, any AK/AQ
I like defending w/ big suited connectors and not so much w/ big unsuited cards because A. calling might entice the blind(s) to come in which will create a nice muli-way pot in position and B. If we flop one pair we might be dominated so I think it's important to have hands that can flop flushes/straights/flush draws/straight draws. Since we're playing against a LAG we can get a lot of value from him if we make 2 pair +. Meanwhile our 3bet range is pretty standard imo, I feel like those hands will do really well in position vs. his range and we should take the initiative and start building a pot with them.

2. I'm a fan of keeping our range super wide here and simply not raising with anything. Call with sets, call w/ flush draws/straight draws, call w/ any pair. If we always raise our strong hands and call with our weak ones it's going to be exploitable in the long run. I think it's necessary to be tricky vs. this villain in the long run. We're not scared of anything if we have a really strong hand, there's a tiny chance he has a flush draw but it's not likely enough to merit raising because of it. And raising w/ air never makes sense vs. this villain either. If you flatted AK or AQ pre you could maybe call with those hands as well, but that would be really thin.

3. The turn play is the interesting part where I think you could make decent arguments for a few different lines. Let's say you have a combo draw like AT or JT, you could easily call or raise with those hands. His range isn't 100% over-pairs and big hands; it includes 88, any AX, any , any T, maybe even QJ/98/87. So I'd sometimes call and sometimes raise my combo draws here. With a top pair hand and no draw like AT or JT I'm not loving it but he's made it pretty cheap for us to call. So I'm calling. 3:1 isn't terrible for any flush draw either, so I'd call w/ those expecting to get some value on the river if we hit and if we have a flush draw w/ over cards those pair outs could be live as well.

4. Definitely value raising any 2 pair+ hand now. We could get value from an over-pair and we can't let him hit a cheap flush or straight card. You never know, if we have TT or 99 we could be getting value from weaker sets as well.

5. As stated before, AT-JT could be a good spot to semi-bluff/merge raise. He can fold a similar hand w/ a T. The plan here would be to fire just about every river card. He probably isn't folding JJ to a raise on the turn, but if JJ doesn't improve on the river there is a pretty good chance he will fold it. So if played correctly we can probably get a decent amount of over-pairs to eventually fold.

6. I think you're accomplishing exactly what you want to accomplish with that sizing. It's big. If you're bluffing, there's a pretty good chance that he will fold since this villain doesn't like to play big pots without a big hand. If you're not bluffing and you have the TT or whatever, your protecting your hand and your setting yourself up to get paid big time if he continues. Basically, your raise is going to narrow his range fantastically and allow you to play the rest of the hand almost perfectly.

7. You could pretty much show up with anything, I wouldn't be surprised to see a you do this with a very wide range. I think a good player will show up with lots of different made hands/semi-bluffs here and will take down the pot a majority of the time. I just don't think you should show up with complete air though
discgolfing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2014, 01:13 PM   #63
discgolfing
journeyman
 
discgolfing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 366
Re: Live 2/5: What range would you play like this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CallMeVernon View Post
Since it's been requested, here's an update with partial results. I still will not reveal exactly what I had, but:

Spoiler:
Personally, I would say any combo draw. Any pair+flush draw like TX, any straight+flush draw like QJ or 65. I don't like raising with a bare flush draw or weak pair/straight draw hand like 88 or 98. We're drawing much thinner with those hands, 9 or 10 outs is a lot different than 14+ outs. 9 outs is ~4.1:1 while 15 outs is ~2.1:1. Big difference. If our raise is called we're just so much more comfortable playing the bigger draws b/c we hit more often, we have disguised outs, and if we miss we still have some showdown value if we already have a pair. So I'd only semi-bluff weaker draws if I had a strong read that villain is folding a huge % of his range to a raise, which is not the read I have in this particular situation.
discgolfing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2014, 12:34 AM   #64
CallMeVernon
COTM Crusher
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Not Vancouver, BC
Posts: 3,444
Re: Live 2/5: What range would you play like this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by discgolfing View Post
Personally, I would say any combo draw. Any pair+flush draw like TX, any straight+flush draw like QJ or 65. I don't like raising with a bare flush draw or weak pair/straight draw hand like 88 or 98. We're drawing much thinner with those hands, 9 or 10 outs is a lot different than 14+ outs. 9 outs is ~4.1:1 while 15 outs is ~2.1:1. Big difference. If our raise is called we're just so much more comfortable playing the bigger draws b/c we hit more often, we have disguised outs, and if we miss we still have some showdown value if we already have a pair. So I'd only semi-bluff weaker draws if I had a strong read that villain is folding a huge % of his range to a raise, which is not the read I have in this particular situation.
This is faulty logic.

If you expect to be called often, why are you semi-bluffing at all? It means you put more money in with minority equity.

If I don't expect to have a lot of fold equity, then why wouldn't I just fold the 4:1 draws and call with the 2:1 draws, since I am getting 3:1 pot odds?
CallMeVernon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2014, 01:41 AM   #65
jesse123
adept
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,078
Re: Live 2/5: What range would you play like this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dgiharris View Post
As played, sizing feels like a semi-bluff.
Very nice!
jesse123 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 02:47 AM.


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