Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

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 08-20-2015, 10:15 AM   #126
THEOSU
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
THEOSU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: rigged
Posts: 11,554
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerarb View Post
Thanks for your valuable input. Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. First this isn't a regular Resteal situation it's a 3b of an iso which is usually a lot stronger.

Second I advocated flatting 4% of hands and 4betting around 4%. That's defending an 8% range which would allow hero to isolate 25% of the time on the button while remaining inexploitable to sb 3bs. That's a fine frequency with a good LAG in the blinds.

Be my guest try to defend wider that's playing into his game plan
any advice that calls for 4bet/folding as many hands as one is calling in position strikes me as poor advice.

we have the button. find ways to use it, whether it's limping behind (which i know you were not specifically advocating) or raising as needed. the concept of playing lockdown poker because we have a guy to our left that's reraising us THE ONE TIME WE HAVE POSITION is pretty lame.
THEOSU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 10:16 AM   #127
THEOSU
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
THEOSU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: rigged
Posts: 11,554
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny_on_the_spot View Post
is it at all possible that spewy mc3bettor was being spewy with his 1st 2 hands and is actually self aware and has a relatively descent hand here?

it's not impossible to think his worst hands here could be club/diamond FDs and everything else is value.

obviously it's possible.
THEOSU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 10:55 AM   #128
mpethybridge
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
mpethybridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 86.4% dead, most likely
Posts: 16,997
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny_on_the_spot View Post
is it at all possible that spewy mc3bettor was being spewy with his 1st 2 hands and is actually self aware and has a relatively descent hand here?

it's not impossible to think his worst hands here could be club/diamond FDs and everything else is value.
Anything is possible, but his line in hand 2 is incompatible with air.
mpethybridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 11:11 AM   #129
mpethybridge
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
mpethybridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 86.4% dead, most likely
Posts: 16,997
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyBuz View Post
Why is shipping > calling if we have no FE?

V's bet is laying us 2.5:1 pot odds meaning we need to extract another $300 from V if we hit our diamond (we will have $430 remaining if we call the $200).

Does it really matter if V thinks we are a fish that paid a bad price to call if he folds (most of the time) when we shove clubs and calls (most of the time) when we shove diamonds?

2.3:1 times (43%) we will hit a card on the river that should give us a +EV shove (assuming V doesn't lead/shove clubs) which is better odds than the direct pot odds (2.5:1).

Please let me know if I am butchering the concept of implied odds here, but based on how we can manipulate V based on the river, calling seems superior to shoving since we rep nothing but a full-house (or an A4/46 straight). And we would have no reason to shove the turn with a boat because we are a 96% favorite at that point and can just raise the river if V doesn't shove himself on bricks.

I'd rather save that "last bullet" of $425 when I can actually rep something (clubs) and get V off his A-high range all the same.

PS: For the guys saying Hand 2 was spew, ok I guess I get that. I thought I was making a thin value raise against the AK/AQ part of his range, but if raising Hand 2 J-high flop from $75 to $200 when I actually had a pair was spew then what would shoving this turn for $625 with 0 FE be?

PSS: Would he still be playing his hand perfectly if he was just barreling into us with AK and we meekly called him all the way to the river with our humble AA-KK?
Who said we had no FE for a shove? I specified that we DO have some FE, that V could be bet/folding unpaired hands as a bluff or for thin value, and that he'd probably fold most of those.

As for your plan to shove clubs, you have the idea of implied odds right, but you're overestimating your clean outs. The T-A of clubs are not clean (nor, for that matter, are Broadway diamonds). TT-AA are all in his range here, so he makes a boat sometimes when those cards fall. Similarly, AK-AJ type hands are in his range here, to give him top a two pair hand on a lot of Broadway cards that I don't think he'd fold OTR. Which is good for you on a diamond, mostly, but not good for your plan to shove a club.

So, imo, you should be discounting your club outs at least.
mpethybridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 11:13 AM   #130
suited fours
Pooh-Bah
 
suited fours's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 4,144
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

If I hadn't seat changed or table changed by now, I might have played the hand the same as Hero did. I would not have 4! I might have folded to the 3!. I would definitely have floated. And AP, no doubt I would've jammed. Standard or spew? idk Some thoughtful arguments have been made.

3 out 3 reraise from the SB, all 3 times it was a reraise of OP's button iso, and all signs point to cbet of entire range on this board, so going into the turn it would be reasonable to assume that SB is likely very wide here. It is also quite possible that he doesn't have a SB flatting range preflop. How much does his range tighten with the turn barrel? Claims that his range is now AA-TT make no sense to me. Would SB fire at this turn with KQo hoping to get Hero to lay down 77? He might.

Here is an EV calc against a possible profile. How likely is this profile? idk. Profile is
17% 3! range, 0% calling range, double barrel entire range on this board against this Hero. 17% range of AA-22,Axs,all suited BW,AT+,KQ,76s+. V needs 28% equity to call our jam, assuming he'll call with Ace High flush draws, all PP, trips and straights. EV of a jam against this profile is +$158.

Same profile, but he doesn't fire a 2nd barrel with 2 overs and no flush draw. (2nd barrel now just a little over 1/2 the time) EV of a jam against this profile is -$154.

I'm not claiming this is the profile we're facing. I picked 17% range because it seemed like a reasonable stab. 25% range seems more likely than 10% range to me. Relevant probabilities of 3 out 3:
10%^3= 0.1%
17%^3= 0.5%
25%^3= 1.6%

In any case, his double barrel frequency with air is pretty key, obviously.

GII!
suited fours is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 11:20 AM   #131
Lapidator
LLSNL Frequent Flyer
 
Lapidator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: lying dog-faced pony soldier
Posts: 13,763
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Welp... Probably get flamed pretty good for this, but I'm moving AI here.

I still think V is likely FOS.

V just bet $200 into $295. Pot to Hero is $495. The shove is for $705 $630.

I'm shoving here because V's range is capped at a PP really. Sure, he could have something that connects with the board, but basically the only hands we're drawing dead to are [A4s, 55], and it sucks if V has [AX].

Since we raised pre from the button, Hero's range also looks capped at PPs, but I think we see V lay down everything except QQ+.

If we are called, we still have 9 flush outs and 6 pair outs against V's calling range would would include PP and AX and draws. Make it 12 discounted outs, 26% equity.

Pot is $495, and our shove is $705, $630. (Looking at RustyBrooks' maths post elsewhere)

Sorry... correcting a math error.

0 = $495 * Fold% + (1 - Fold%)*(0.26 * ($630+$495) - (1-0.26)*$630)

0 = $495 * Fold% + (1 - Fold%)*(-173.7)

0 = 495*F - 173.7 + 173.7F

173.7 = (495+173.7) * F

F% = 26%

This seems like a lot, but since I think V's has alot of FOS in his range, and I think he folds alot.

Last edited by Lapidator; 08-20-2015 at 11:32 AM.
Lapidator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 11:23 AM   #132
mpethybridge
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
mpethybridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 86.4% dead, most likely
Posts: 16,997
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by suited fours View Post
If I hadn't seat changed or table changed by now, I might have played the hand the same as Hero did. I would not have 4! I might have folded to the 3!. I would definitely have floated. And AP, no doubt I would've jammed. Standard or spew? idk Some thoughtful arguments have been made.

3 out 3 reraise from the SB, all 3 times it was a reraise of OP's button iso, and all signs point to cbet of entire range on this board, so going into the turn it would be reasonable to assume that SB is likely very wide here. It is also quite possible that he doesn't have a SB flatting range preflop. How much does his range tighten with the turn barrel? Claims that his range is now AA-TT make no sense to me. Would SB fire at this turn with KQo hoping to get Hero to lay down 77? He might.

Here is an EV calc against a possible profile. How likely is this profile? idk. Profile is
17% 3! range, 0% calling range, double barrel entire range on this board against this Hero. 17% range of AA-22,Axs,all suited BW,AT+,KQ,76s+. V needs 28% equity to call our jam, assuming he'll call with Ace High flush draws, all PP, trips and straights. EV of a jam against this profile is +$158.

Same profile, but he doesn't fire a 2nd barrel with 2 overs and no flush draw. (2nd barrel now just a little over 1/2 the time) EV of a jam against this profile is -$154.

I'm not claiming this is the profile we're facing. I picked 17% range because it seemed like a reasonable stab. 25% range seems more likely than 10% range to me. Relevant probabilities of 3 out 3:
10%^3= 0.1%
17%^3= 0.5%
25%^3= 1.6%

In any case, his double barrel frequency with air is pretty key, obviously.

GII!
Sure, it's possible that the V was light one of those three 3 bets. But let's not forget that hero was not light for any of his three raises. We know it's not impossible to be at the top of your range three orbits in a row, because we were at the top of our range three orbits in a row. That actually does make it less likely that SB is also at the top of his range, too, but we know it is possible. FWIW, back in March I was involved in three cooler hands in my first orbit at the table. In a big enough sample "mathematically improbable" and "all but guaranteed to happen" are the same thing.
mpethybridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 11:30 AM   #133
Willyoman
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Willyoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,468
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by mpethybridge View Post
Anything is possible, but his line in hand 2 is incompatible with air.
Enjoying your posts ITT, but I have to disagree here.

I haven't yet said this explicitly, but Hand 2 is easily compatible with air.

Flop is paired J33, V bets, we raise, V calls. Sure, my first thought on the flop is NOT "V is floating us oop" ... but let's keep that in mind as a possibility for now. Turn is K, check check. River is Q, villain ships nearly 500 into 540?!

With this action on a 2-tone paired broadway high card J33 flop followed by 2 over cards on turn and river, villain's range should either be nuts or air - "air" can include a flopped club draw, Jx / worse pairs turned into bluffs, and random cards. I don't expect V to have and/or value bet with one or two pair hands like AA, AK, KQ, etc. Unless he's very wide pre, I don't expect V has a 3 that he can bet for value.

So in Hand 2, V is often very polarized to a boat with JJ,QQ,KK or a bluff.

But JJ,QQ,KK are just 9 value combos. Yes, V is polarized, but his nuts-to-air ratio by nature of combinatorics / mathematical frequencies COULD easily be skewed towards bluffs. Is it? We're not sure. Not enough of a read. But it's for sure possible.

Also, let's think of HERO'S range in Hand 2... from what hand is V trying to extract MAX 150BB value? Our range is most heavily skewed toward two types of hands: 1) Flopped Jx, which got destroyed by run-out, and 2) Airy hands, which called pre and bluff raised the paired flop. When we consider hero's range, a V river shove is also easily consistent with a bluff rather than a value bet. A consideration of hero's range also offers further evidence V is polarized; really only a boat stuffs the river like this for value hoping hero has something (anything!) to station down.

The fact it's a 2-tone paired flop with one broadway high card where hero and villain stuck around following a flop bet + raise provides a compelling picture of V's possible range as heavily weighted to air by the end of the hand.

Should hero have actually called in Hand 2? No.

It was just V's second 3-bet, so we're still in read-generation mode... JJ,QQ,KK were consistent and possible, however combinatorically unlikely.

But once we get to hand 3, alarm bells need to be going off... and that brings me back to Hand 2. In Hand 2, we gave villain credit for a group of combinatorically unlikely hands. We shouldn't have raised the flop, but folding the river was the right play at the time. Now that V is 3-betting and cramming chips into a pot for the THIRD consecutive time, we have to reassess our reads and analysis of Hand 2 and our actions in Hand 3.

And I shove.
Willyoman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 11:32 AM   #134
mpethybridge
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
mpethybridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 86.4% dead, most likely
Posts: 16,997
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lapidator View Post
Welp... Probably get flamed pretty good for this, but I'm moving AI here.

I still think V is likely FOS.

V just bet $200 into $295. Pot to Hero is $495. The shove is for $705.

I'm shoving here because V's range is capped at a PP really. Sure, he could have something that connects with the board, but basically the only hands we're drawing dead to are [A4s, 55], and it sucks if V has [AX].

Since we raised pre from the button, Hero's range also looks capped at PPs, but I think we see V lay down everything except QQ+.

If we are called, we still have 9 flush outs and 6 pair outs against V's calling range would would include PP and AX and draws. Make it 12 discounted outs, 26% equity.

Pot is $495, and our shove is $705. (Looking at RustyBrooks' maths post elsewhere)

0 = $495 * Fold% + (1 - Fold%)*(0.26 * ($705+$495) - (1-0.26)*$705)

0 = $495 * Fold% + (1 - Fold%)*(-209.7)

0 = 495*F - 209.7 + 209.7F

209.7 = (495+209.7) * F

F% = 30%

This seems like a lot, but since I think V's has alot of FOS in his range, and I think he folds alot.
No one should flame shipping. It's best or second best depending on just how wide you evaluate V's preflop and turn barrel ranges.

Calling is really the only flame worthy play, and even calling is somewhat salvaged if we genuinely plan to bluff shove clubs if given the opportunity.
mpethybridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 11:36 AM   #135
pokerarb
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
pokerarb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,082
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Agree with mpethy again (pretty much 100% itt). Think shipping is better than calling...

It really really sucks the board is paired think it turns an otherwise okay spot really kinda crappy

Also sucks having q hi not ace high. Villain can definitely have either nfd...
pokerarb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 11:40 AM   #136
mpethybridge
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
mpethybridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 86.4% dead, most likely
Posts: 16,997
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willyoman View Post
Enjoying your posts ITT, but I have to disagree here.

I haven't yet said this explicitly, but Hand 2 is easily compatible with air.

Flop is paired J33, V bets, we raise, V calls. Sure, my first thought on the flop is NOT "V is floating us oop" ... but let's keep that in mind as a possibility for now. Turn is K, check check. River is Q, villain ships nearly 500 into 540?!

With this action on a 2-tone paired broadway high card J33 flop followed by 2 over cards on turn and river, villain's range should either be nuts or air - "air" can include a flopped club draw, Jx / worse pairs turned into bluffs, and random cards. I don't expect V to have and/or value bet with one or two pair hands like AA, AK, KQ, etc. Unless he's very wide pre, I don't expect V has a 3 that he can bet for value.

So in Hand 2, V is often very polarized to a boat with JJ,QQ,KK or a bluff.

But JJ,QQ,KK are just 9 value combos. Yes, V is polarized, but his nuts-to-air ratio by nature of combinatorics / mathematical frequencies COULD easily be skewed towards bluffs. Is it? We're not sure. Not enough of a read. But it's for sure possible.

Also, let's think of HERO'S range in Hand 2... from what hand is V trying to extract MAX 150BB value? Our range is most heavily skewed toward two types of hands: 1) Flopped Jx, which got destroyed by run-out, and 2) Airy hands, which called pre and bluff raised the paired flop. When we consider hero's range, a V river shove is also easily consistent with a bluff rather than a value bet. A consideration of hero's range also offers further evidence V is polarized; really only a boat stuffs the river like this for value hoping hero has something (anything!) to station down.

The fact it's a 2-tone paired flop with one broadway high card where hero and villain stuck around following a flop bet + raise provides a compelling picture of V's possible range as heavily weighted to air by the end of the hand.

Should hero have actually called in Hand 2? No.

It was just V's second 3-bet, so we're still in read-generation mode... JJ,QQ,KK were consistent and possible, however combinatorically unlikely.

But once we get to hand 3, alarm bells need to be going off... and that brings me back to Hand 2. In Hand 2, we gave villain credit for a group of combinatorically unlikely hands. We shouldn't have raised the flop, but folding the river was the right play at the time. Now that V is 3-betting and cramming chips into a pot for the THIRD consecutive time, we have to reassess our reads and analysis of Hand 2 and our actions in Hand 3.

And I shove.
Being able to construct an argument that V could have conceivably gotten to the river with a busted club draw in hand 2 isn't really the same thing as saying his line is compatible with air. Villains almost never bluff shove busted flush draws OTR in a 3 bet pot where we can easily have made a bluff catcher.

It's theoretically possible this V bluffed hand 2. It's possible. Do I believe it? Not even a little.
mpethybridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 11:42 AM   #137
Mr_Doomed
old hand
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,629
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyBuz View Post
Why is shipping > calling if we have no FE?

V's bet is laying us 2.5:1 pot odds meaning we need to extract another $300 from V if we hit our diamond (we will have $430 remaining if we call the $200).

Does it really matter if V thinks we are a fish that paid a bad price to call if he folds (most of the time) when we shove clubs and calls (most of the time) when we shove diamonds?

2.3:1 times (43%) we will hit a card on the river that should give us a +EV shove (assuming V doesn't lead/shove clubs) which is better odds than the direct pot odds (2.5:1).

Please let me know if I am butchering the concept of implied odds here, but based on how we can manipulate V based on the river, calling seems superior to shoving since we rep nothing but a full-house (or an A4/46 straight). And we would have no reason to shove the turn with a boat because we are a 96% favorite at that point and can just raise the river if V doesn't shove himself on bricks.

I'd rather save that "last bullet" of $425 when I can actually rep something (clubs) and get V off his A-high range all the same.

PS: For the guys saying Hand 2 was spew, ok I guess I get that. I thought I was making a thin value raise against the AK/AQ part of his range, but if raising Hand 2 J-high flop from $75 to $200 when I actually had a pair was spew then what would shoving this turn for $625 with 0 FE be?

PSS: Would he still be playing his hand perfectly if he was just barreling into us with AK and we meekly called him all the way to the river with our humble AA-KK?
I believe it was stated that we do have fold equity vs his Ace high and K high combos. I'm assuming that all the combos that don't include flush draws. By shoving we get these better hands to fold (since we only hav Q high which I think is never good) and they don't realize there pair equity. If villan ever folds AQ or KQ etc that is a big deal for us and we take away the potential river bluff shove option which is a distinct possibility. It's hard to bluff river when we are shoved on and vs our perceived range of mid pp and draws I think a river bluff shove works pretty often.
Mr_Doomed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 11:42 AM   #138
Willyoman
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Willyoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,468
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerarb View Post
Also sucks having q hi not ace high. Villain can definitely have either nfd...
Yes, it's a consideration. But not a big one in this case.

We block AQdd and ATdd. AKdd and AJdd are possible... that's 2 combos.

If V can have many more Axdd combos, then his 3-bet range is indeed wider and can contain many other hands, too.
Willyoman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 11:54 AM   #139
mpethybridge
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
mpethybridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 86.4% dead, most likely
Posts: 16,997
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by THEOSU View Post
any advice that calls for 4bet/folding as many hands as one is calling in position strikes me as poor advice.

we have the button. find ways to use it, whether it's limping behind (which i know you were not specifically advocating) or raising as needed. the concept of playing lockdown poker because we have a guy to our left that's reraising us THE ONE TIME WE HAVE POSITION is pretty lame.
Oh, no. First, for quite some time some of the best online coaches were advocating a pure 4 bet or fold strategy. I never bought into it myself, and I think pretty much everyone has a calling range now (and has for years), but it's definitely a workable strategy.

But, more importantly, 4 bet or fold is pretty much the only viable strategy for a player with a negative skill edge compared to the 3 bettor. It's second only to a table or seat change when the 3 bettor is the better player.
mpethybridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 11:55 AM   #140
johnnyBuz
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
johnnyBuz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Beast Coast
Posts: 7,058
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Doomed View Post
In your chart you put that if the turn is a 10 or Q and villan bets we are folding more often. How can that make calling flop profitable if we plan on folding when some of the better cards come off?
If V is still barreling the turn when a Q spikes then I would reasonably conclude that he has a pair of Q's beat. A Q would give us some showdown value but I wouldn't want to pay much to get there.

Diamonds are the card we need on the turn to continue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Doomed View Post
I believe it was stated that we do have fold equity vs his Ace high and K high combos. I'm assuming that all the combos that don't include flush draws. By shoving we get these better hands to fold (since we only hav Q high which I think is never good) and they don't realize there pair equity. If villan ever folds AQ or KQ etc that is a big deal for us and we take away the potential river bluff shove option which is a distinct possibility. It's hard to bluff river when we are shoved on and vs our perceived range of mid pp and draws I think a river bluff shove works pretty often.
I get that, but that requires having a better idea of V's 3! range. If his 3! range is all value then we are just dumping 125 BB's and he is snapping us off. Is he really going to shove his A-high into us on the river after we call his 3!, call his flop, call his turn? I don't know, but I highly doubt it.

I think having $425 behind + position wields more options than just blindly shoving the turn repping nothing but a PP at best.
johnnyBuz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 11:59 AM   #141
Willyoman
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Willyoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,468
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by mpethybridge View Post
Being able to construct an argument that V could have conceivably gotten to the river with a busted club draw in hand 2 isn't really the same thing as saying his line is compatible with air. Villains almost never bluff shove busted flush draws OTR in a 3 bet pot where we can easily have made a bluff catcher.

It's theoretically possible this V bluffed hand 2. It's possible. Do I believe it? Not even a little.
Not even a little?

In Hand 2, our most likely hand is indeed a weak made bluff catcher - Jx - and it got destroyed by run-out. Yes, hero could have improved to two pair that beats the board two pair (KJ, QJ), but those hands are easily still bluff catchers facing a 100BB villain river shove taking this line.

Our flop raise + turn check in Hand 2 suggests a non-nut showdown hand. A villain bluff makes a lot of sense. In fact, in villain's shoes, you have to wonder if hero is folding close to 100% of his range on river to a shove.

OP, who I expect plays a solid game, couldn't find a call with his actual hand, TT, which is very similar to Jx (biggest differences aren't that big - TT doesn't block Jx or beat any Jx bluffs). In fact, I don't know what, if anything, is in our calling range, by the river... JJ exactly?

We discussed earlier that hero having strong hands will have some blocking effect on villain's ability to have strong hands. Hand 2 is a great example. By the river, we can account for 2 T's, 1 J, 1 Q, and 1 K. It's hard to get strong 3-bet hands 3/3 times in consecutive spots. It's that much harder when we are taking the cards V needs to make those hands out of the deck.

Probability-wise, there's a cumulative effect of the significant amount of card removal in Hand 1, 2 and 3 on villain's likelihood of being light. Without card removal, there's a meaningful X% chance V is light... with all this card removal, X% is... guesstimating... 30%+ higher.
Willyoman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 12:08 PM   #142
mpethybridge
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
mpethybridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 86.4% dead, most likely
Posts: 16,997
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyBuz View Post
If V is still barreling the turn when a Q spikes then I would reasonably conclude that he has a pair of Q's beat. A Q would give us some showdown value but I wouldn't want to pay much to get there.

Diamonds are the card we need on the turn to continue.



I get that, but that requires having a better idea of V's 3! range. If his 3! range is all value then we are just dumping 125 BB's and he is snapping us off. Is he really going to shove his A-high into us on the river after we call his 3!, call his flop, call his turn? I don't know, but I highly doubt it.

I think having $425 behind + position wields more options than just blindly shoving the turn repping nothing but a PP at best.
I think he shoves some of his K high hands OTR. I think with his A high hands he has some shoves, some check/folds and some check/calls in his game plan. I don't think, for example, that if the river is a 2 or a 5 or maybe even a 3 that he just blindly shoves A high. I think he stops and thinks maybe he has some SDV. Any non-broadway card is actually a good check/call candidate with Ace high in his shoes, but 2s and 5s are the clearest examples of cards that would have him considering the SDV of ace high.

In his shoes, KQ is the worst hand i'd (realistically) consider check/calling OTR. I can recall contemplating a few hero calls with KJ and KT in big pots, but I've never actually sacked up and done it. With KQ, OTOH, well, it's not routine, but I have done it a few times with good reads.
mpethybridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 12:15 PM   #143
Willyoman
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Willyoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,468
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Also, and with no offense to OP, our flop raise in Hand 2 is so incredibly FOS.

I can't think of one hand we'd have and raise. We nearly rep a null set - only air.
Willyoman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 12:21 PM   #144
johnnyBuz
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
johnnyBuz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Beast Coast
Posts: 7,058
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willyoman View Post
Also, and with no offense to OP, our flop raise in Hand 2 is so incredibly FOS.

I can't think of one hand we'd have and raise. We nearly rep a null set - only air.
I mentioned it in another post, but my reasoning was a thin value raise vs. the 32 potential combos of AK and AQ (vs. 18 combos of AA-QQ). I was thinking ...

1) If I flat, he can easily double barrel me off the best hand on the turn

2) I'm unlikely to improve further, so winning now is not a bad outcome

I think the raise looks like exactly what it is, a PP from TT-55 that can't stand up to further pressure.

Since everyone has an opinion on Hand 2, what was the right play?

Flat flop, fold turn unimproved?
johnnyBuz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 12:38 PM   #145
mpethybridge
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
mpethybridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 86.4% dead, most likely
Posts: 16,997
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyBuz View Post
I mentioned it in another post, but my reasoning was a thin value raise vs. the 32 potential combos of AK and AQ (vs. 18 combos of AA-QQ). I was thinking ...

1) If I flat, he can easily double barrel me off the best hand on the turn

2) I'm unlikely to improve further, so winning now is not a bad outcome

I think the raise looks like exactly what it is, a PP from TT-55 that can't stand up to further pressure.

Since everyone has an opinion on Hand 2, what was the right play?

Flat flop, fold turn unimproved?
Yes, unless he half pots again on the turn, which might edge it toward a call. You flopped a bluff catcher. Doing anything other than catching bluffs with it was spewy.

Rule of thumb in 3 bet pots: TPTK and < is only ever a bluff catcher. The lowest possible overpair is usually a bluff catcher, but not always, as some people lose their minds with weak top pairs.

The reason is because perceived ranges are tight. If you call a c-bet on Jxx, the V will always put, say, AJ in your calling range. If he bets again, he's telling you he beats AJ, which means he has at least QQ, so if you have QQ, he's more or less telling you he beats that, too (except for the aforesaid mind losing when he has AJ or KJ). With those hands, you only win when he's not telling the truth.

So when you're bluff catching, you have to stop calling and fold on whatever street where his bet size denies you pot odds to profitably call based on the number of bluffs in his range. For some villains, that is the flop (if you've never folded QQ to a c-bet on a Jxx board you're leaking) and for some villains it is close your eyes and call him down (I called a guy down holding 66 on a board that ran off KT98J and MHIG).

This is why I mentioned upthread that the key to calling 3 bets in position is to identify the specific post flop tendency you plan to exploit, and if you can't identify one, to go 4 bet or fold.
mpethybridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 12:41 PM   #146
Willyoman
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Willyoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,468
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyBuz View Post
Since everyone has an opinion on Hand 2, what was the right play?

Flat flop, fold turn unimproved?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpethybridge View Post
Yes, unless he half pots again on the turn, which might edge it toward a call. You flopped a bluff catcher. Doing anything other than catching bluffs with it was spewy.
Agreed. Flat flop and fold turn unimproved.

I don't think I'd even call a turn 1/2 PSB, but yes, those are the kind of distinctions (bet sizing, etc) you would possibly need to make, as well.
Willyoman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 12:46 PM   #147
pokerarb
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
pokerarb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,082
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Another good mpethy post against general population. As he mentioned you have to make adjustments based on reads.

Against good agro guys folding top pair to a medium sized db is bad. TT though is a notch below that and can go either way.

Keep in mind if there are draws on the flop you can double float some showdown stuff ip and if the draws come in and he checks you can turn pairs into a bluff. This only works against excellent hand readers of course. In the TT hand you can sometimes rep a flush otr if he checks or bets very small
pokerarb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 01:28 PM   #148
suited fours
Pooh-Bah
 
suited fours's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 4,144
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by mpethybridge View Post
Sure, it's possible that the V was light one of those three 3 bets. But let's not forget that hero was not light for any of his three raises. We know it's not impossible to be at the top of your range three orbits in a row, because we were at the top of our range three orbits in a row. That actually does make it less likely that SB is also at the top of his range, too, but we know it is possible. FWIW, back in March I was involved in three cooler hands in my first orbit at the table. In a big enough sample "mathematically improbable" and "all but guaranteed to happen" are the same thing.
I don't disagree with what you're saying. However, 3 3bets in a row is quite different from 3 out of a possible 3 ever. And against this guy, it's "ever". That doesn't make it mathematically improbable, but perhaps fairly unlikely.

The way I would look at it, say 5 guys were waiting for the open seat to our left and 4 of them 3bet from the SB with a 10% range and 1 of them 3bet from the SB with a 25% range. The floor randomly sat 1 of the 5 in that seat. This would mean 80% of the time we see the turn in this hand we're against a 25% range. ((1/5 * 16) / (4/5 * 1) + (1/5 * 16))

Now, maybe we want to say the floor had 17 guys to choose from and only 1 was 25%wide, and thus we're only against a 25% range 1/2 of the time.
((1/17 * 16) / (16/17 * 1) + (1/17 * 16))

otoh, it could be V has a very tight range but always blasts the first orbit to set up an image.

I agree that we could be against a tight range. But based upon available evidence, I believe a wider range is more likely.
suited fours is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 03:15 PM   #149
Mr_Doomed
old hand
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,629
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

I can't support calling pre and calling flop if we are simply folding turn when we make a pair. Calling flop with the intention to fold turn if we don't pick up back door equity or bluff clubs seems bad. Folding top pair on the turn vs a player we have seen 0 showdowns from doesn't seem like a recipe for success. If turn is a Q or 10 and villan holds 88-JJ we don't think he is double barreling? A Q and a 10 don't make up a particularly large part of our perceived range.

My point being that it is conceivable hat villan will bet turn for value with worse hands than top pair. I see no argument that could convince me that calling flop with air, then making a top pair only to fold it to a 2nd barrel is a good decision. I do understand that villans 3 betting range is unknown, but we don't have a lot to go on we create a wide ish range and go from there.

As far as your comment about how we are unsure if villan even has A high or K high in his pre flop 3 betting range seems absurd. This threads title is facing a possible light 3 bettor. We have to at least include some A and K high hands because we are suspicious of villans sb 3 betting frequency.

Last edited by Mr_Doomed; 08-20-2015 at 03:27 PM.
Mr_Doomed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2015, 03:33 PM   #150
johnnyBuz
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
johnnyBuz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Beast Coast
Posts: 7,058
Re: PAHWM: 2/5 NL - QTs On The Button vs. Possible Light 3-Bettor

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Doomed View Post
I can't support calling pre and calling flop if we are simply folding turn when we make a pair. Folding top pair on the turn vs a player we have seen 0 showdowns from doesn't seem like a recipe for success. If turn is a Q or 10 and villan holds 88-JJ we don't think he is double barreling? A Q and a 10 don't make up a particularly large part of our perceived range.
No, I don't think he is double barreling a Q turn if he doesn't have a Q beat. That's the point. V double barreling a 5 turn is way different than double-barreling a Q or Q.

Why wouldn't Q's and T's be part of our perceived range? If big cards and big pocket pairs aren't in our perceived range than what the hell is?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Doomed View Post
Calling flop with the intention to fold turn if we don't pick up back door equity or bluff clubs seems bad.
Does it seem bad or is it bad? We are getting 3:1 pot odds on the flop call and our odds to hit a diamond or club on the turn are 2.2:1. To me, that is a simple pot odds call if we plan to steal later when clubs hit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Doomed View Post
As far as your comment about how we are unsure if villan even has A high or K high in his pre flop 3 betting range seems absurd. This threads title is facing a possible light 3 bettor. We have to at least include some A and K high hands because we are suspicious of villans sb 3 betting frequency.
I have no idea what you are trying to say here. I never said he doesn't/can't have A or K high in his range, I said we don't know how wide he really is so shoving 125 BB's as a huge semi-bluff against his potential A-high hands could be a massive mistake if A-high only makes up 10% of his 3! range, but if he does have A-high, it would be much easier to bluff him off of it on the river after we can see another street of action from him and potentially pick up a club (if our diamonds brick).

I think the value from utilizing river position and seeing V's action on the river > the small value gained in FE vs. an unknown # of combos of A-high that will fold on the turn

Why shorten the hand and give up our remaining advantages (position, stack depth)? If there was a time to shove, I'd think it would be a check/raise OOP but I just don't see the point here.
johnnyBuz 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 10:50 PM.


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