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 08-16-2018, 07:43 PM   #1
HeHadWhat
stranger
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 5
"Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

I've run this hand through my mind so many times now it's almost painful. I come to the same conclusion every time however - I was bound to lose my stack. For the sake of attempting not to think in terms of absolutes like "Always" and "never" though, I think it's worth revisiting the hand again in hopes of gaining additional perspective.

Background:

Star City Casino, Sydney Australia.

The game is 2/3 NLH, Buy in $100-500. Generally this game attracts predominantly recreational players who bluff for the thrill and spew because they know no better. You see some truly crazy stuff, which keeps it interesting, yet nonetheless makes the game truly soft even for live low stakes standards.

I arrive intending to play 1/1 as the $100 max buy-in suits my pocket better. I'm informed upon visiting the sign-up desk however that the game is no longer running as it was simply a promotional game to get people into the poker room. I'd spent nearly an hour on public transport getting to the casino, and I wasn't about to leave or play blackjack instead, so I decide to hop in the 2/3 with the $230 I had in my pocket and play tight.

Needless to say within the first orbit I double up. I pick up Ac5c in the BB and get a great price to call after an UTG+1 open is called by 6 people. (That's a defining characteristic of this game - people love seeing flops and there is rarely 3-betting unless the person holds a premium.) I flop middle 2-pair, turn a boat (AA555) and get paid on the river. Bink, bink, bink, standard stuff.

I'm sitting with about $420 in front of me now and the thought comes to leave. Being a gentleman (or an idiot if you like,) I decide not to be a hit-and-run artist (because I hate when people do it) and at least see/fold a few more hands before I rack up and leave.

Two hands later I pick up 5d5c in UTG+1. Now here is my first mistake I believe; winners tilt. It's important to remember that people love *just calling* pre-flop in this game and there is a distinct lack of 3-betting. So my rationale for opening pocket 5's to $15 in this spot (5x is standard raise size in this game) is that if I get many callers and flop a set, I can get paid. With this in mind and still riding the adrenaline of doubling up, I open the hand. I get 5 callers - both MPs, CO, Button and SB.


Pot: $78

Flop: 7d 5s 3c

SB checks to me I bet $50. Folds to Button (who Is sitting very deep, at least 300bb) and he flats. SB folds.

Pot: $178

Turn: 10d

I lead again for $120 leaving approx. $235 behind. Button hos and hums, ums and awes, as if he has a super-tough decision, and pushes all in. I take half a second to check I did indeed flop middle-set, and virtually snap call. He gives me a very quizzical look and I say, "I've got a set." He says, "Which one? Fives or threes?" He turns over 77 for flopped top set. The river is Kh, I show my flopped middle set, and the table kind of "bad lucks" me around.
The main questions I have are about my line and bet sizing. Flop lead/size and turn lead/size. The turn call after villains jam seems standard yet also I can’t help but think that it seems unlikely he would jam with any value hands worse than mine besides a set of 3’s, *unless* he decided to get tricky and not 3-bet a premium like AA or KK pre flop. He wouldn’t have many bluffs besides Ad2d and Ad4d which should just call (Right?)
Thoughts, criticisms, sympathies?

TL: DR

Middle vs Top-set situation. Wah wah, stop looking for attention, you got coolered and you were definitely going broke.

Last edited by HeHadWhat; 08-16-2018 at 07:55 PM.
HeHadWhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2018, 08:18 PM   #2
m0mmy
journeyman
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 324
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Pre is marginal, im the type to fold but i dont hate opening all pairs from all positions if the game is in fact that good. Size up on flop and turn then snap call. I would expect to be beat here a small portion of the time, catch some spazzy bluff some of the time, and see JJ+ AK most of the time. Nh

Sent from my Z851M using Tapatalk
m0mmy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2018, 08:23 PM   #3
8o8
veteran
 
8o8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,885
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeHadWhat View Post
Button hos and hums, ums and awes, as if he has a super-tough decision, and pushes all in.
this is the biggest piece of info you missed. from non-sophisticated players this is almost always the nuts (or close to).

welcome to the forum.

try to post more succinct context/background to get more responses. (see other threads)
8o8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2018, 08:34 PM   #4
HeHadWhat
stranger
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 5
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Quote:
Originally Posted by 8o8 View Post
this is the biggest piece of info you missed. from non-sophisticated players this is almost always the nuts (or close to).

welcome to the forum.

try to post more succinct context/background to get more responses. (see other threads)
I've probably over-emphasized villains behaviour here. He definitely umed and awed and had a pained look on his face but not for very long. I mostly play online so come from the perspective that while live-reads are a thing they don't rank too highly on my list of considerations. That being said I'll keep that in mind.

I will be far more succinct in the future. Wanted my first post to be a bit of a story as well as hand analysis.
HeHadWhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2018, 09:42 PM   #5
Buster65
The Situation
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Livin' on Bluff Rd.
Posts: 2,240
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

If you never spend one second worrying about the times you get set over set, you will be much happier and more well adjusted. And, at the end of your poker career (ie. your deathbed) as you look back at your lifetime graph, you will never even notice these minor blips in your winrate.
Buster65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2018, 09:57 PM   #6
8o8
veteran
 
8o8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,885
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeHadWhat View Post
I've probably over-emphasized villains behaviour here. He definitely umed and awed and had a pained look on his face but not for very long. I mostly play online so come from the perspective that while live-reads are a thing they don't rank too highly on my list of considerations. That being said I'll keep that in mind.

I will be far more succinct in the future. Wanted my first post to be a bit of a story as well as hand analysis.
in that case never folding here
8o8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2018, 11:46 PM   #7
branch0095
adept
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 901
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

I'll echo the sentiment that PF is marginal, but it's fine really. Once you see the flop with <150bb , it's just all going in. Getting over-setted happens and it's obviously annoying, but it doesn't happen often enough to ever give it much thought with these stack sizes. You need strong history with a specific opponent to ever consider folding or pot controlling in a spot like this.
branch0095 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 12:10 AM   #8
Minatorr
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 5,226
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Fold pre

Ap postflop 6-way and he jams ott we should probably have a pretty close decision. There should be a lot of 64s/1010/77 that play this way but dunno if we can actually fold here

For those saying it’s unlucky to get set over set there’s also 4 combos of 64s we lose to and some freq of 64o we lose to, so it’s at least 10 combos we lose to ott. Ofc he can have 33 too. Not saying this is a fold but any means but it aint a snap call

Last edited by Minatorr; 08-17-2018 at 12:19 AM.
Minatorr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 01:16 AM   #9
Buster65
The Situation
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Livin' on Bluff Rd.
Posts: 2,240
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minatorr View Post
Fold pre

Ap postflop 6-way and he jams ott we should probably have a pretty close decision. There should be a lot of 64s/1010/77 that play this way but dunno if we can actually fold here

For those saying itís unlucky to get set over set thereís also 4 combos of 64s we lose to and some freq of 64o we lose to, so itís at least 10 combos we lose to ott. Ofc he can have 33 too. Not saying this is a fold but any means but it aint a snap call
Way too mubsy. We raise to lessen the likelihood of 64. I would count maybe 1 combo for that.
Buster65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 01:33 AM   #10
Minatorr
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 5,226
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster65 View Post
Way too mubsy. We raise to lessen the likelihood of 64. I would count maybe 1 combo for that.
Whats too mubsy? That we lose to some freq of 64o? Itís true. Even if it is 1 or 2 combos.

We lose to 10 combos of 64s/1010/77. Throw in 64o and we get 11-12
Minatorr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 01:53 AM   #11
hyperknit
veteran
 
hyperknit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 2,167
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Not sure why u think itís a spot to always lose your stack, why open 55 UTG+1 this is a leak imo, u can get 3b (I know u said itís unlikely but still) or u can just nit flop a set and c/f (will happens very often), or u can flop a set and not get paid (will happens some) or u can get over setted (and lose everything, will happen more often than u oversetting someone else because 55 is a small pair). I would consider opening 77 here and for sure 88 the fact that they over set the smaller pairs is a big consideration in deep stack cash game and should inform your preflop strategy.
Once we get to the flop itís lights out. Never fold


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
hyperknit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 03:22 AM   #12
HomelessPizza
grinder
 
HomelessPizza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: LA
Posts: 599
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Can't believe everyone even suggesting fold pre ....This is the ideal table to open small pp's from any position...lots of calling with wide ranges and never any squeezing or merged 3betting.

AP, I think turn sizing is a little too big especially holding the 5d...but when he jams its impossible to get away especially from the BTN who can easily have T7s and 33 in his range.

Even if he shows you 64s face up, you are still getting odds to draw.
HomelessPizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 03:44 AM   #13
Minatorr
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 5,226
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

^^ open 22-44 is definitely lighting money on fire from UTG, UTG +1, UTG +2

55 is still bad

First time actually calculating pot odds, so correct me if i'm wrong. we are getting 2.74:1 on our call (643/235). Calling 235 to win 643. So we need 27.4% to breakeven on a call? Vs 64s we have 22% equity, so i dont think we can actually call if he shows us 64 face up.

I mean im still always meh calling but it isnt a snap call imo

Last edited by Minatorr; 08-17-2018 at 03:59 AM.
Minatorr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 03:58 AM   #14
HomelessPizza
grinder
 
HomelessPizza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: LA
Posts: 599
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minatorr View Post
^^ open 22-44 is definitely lighting money on fire from UTG, UTG +1, UTG +2

55 is still bad
At a tough or tight table, its an easy muck up front.

But not at this table.

I think raising 22 UTG here is waaaaaaaay more profitable in this game then,say, flatting a TAG in LP with 22. TAG never pays us off like we can get paid off in this loose passive game.
HomelessPizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 04:06 AM   #15
Minatorr
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 5,226
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomelessPizza View Post
At a tough or tight table, its an easy muck up front.

But not at this table.

I think raising 22 UTG here is waaaaaaaay more profitable in this game then,say, flatting a TAG in LP with 22. TAG never pays us off like we can get paid off in this loose passive game.
I'd rather flat 22 if TAG opens UTG and gets 2-3 fishy callers, and I have 22 OTB. Than say open 22 UTG. Anyday. Now if TAG opens UTG and there are no callers or say 1 decent reg cold-calling, ofc I am mucking 22 in the CO/BTN.

22-44 just have zero playability outside of flopping a set postflop. At least with 55-66 you get more straights or straight draws, and there's a chance you overset 22-44. Plus even in a loose passive game, people will be 3-betting KK/AA a lot, and even JJ/QQ/AK at maybe say 20-60% frequency. With 6-8 people behind that's a decent amount. The main reason is just that 22-44 have no playability postflop and we are always going to be OOP. OP's game is just your typical loose passive game, it's not like he said they're literally only 3-betting KK/AA.

Also just because you flop a set doesnt mean you win postflop. There are still plenty of ways to lose, whether it be by getting oversetted, flushed, losing vs straight, or even getting bluffed on bad runouts. Plus let's say opponent has TPTK but the board runs out bad, and we don't get that much money in the pot. These are things that so many players always overlook.
Minatorr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 04:13 AM   #16
HomelessPizza
grinder
 
HomelessPizza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: LA
Posts: 599
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minatorr View Post
I'd rather flat 22 if TAG opens UTG and gets 2-3 fishy callers, and I have 22 OTB. Than say open 22 UTG. Anyday. Now if TAG opens UTG and there are no callers or say 1 decent reg cold-calling, ofc I am mucking 22 in the CO/BTN.

22-44 just have zero playability outside of flopping a set postflop. At least with 55-66 you get more straights or straight draws, and there's a chance you overset 22-44. Plus even in a loose passive game, people will be 3-betting KK/AA a lot, and even JJ/QQ/AK at maybe say 20-60% frequency. With 6-8 people behind that's a decent amount. The main reason is just that 22-44 have no playability postflop and we are always going to be OOP.

Also just because you flop a set doesnt mean you win postflop. There are still plenty of ways to lose, whether it be by getting oversetted, flushed, losing vs straight, or even getting bluffed on bad runouts. Plus let's say opponent has TPTK but the board runs out bad, and we don't get that much money in the pot. These are things that so many players always overlook.

Very mubsy outlook. Funniest thing you said is that we have to be worried about loose passive V's at 1/3 turning their made hands into bluffs on certain runouts ...

and if V flops TPTK and we raise, how are we not getting the money in?? This only happens if you slowplay the flop which would be a big mistake.
HomelessPizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 04:25 AM   #17
Minatorr
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 5,226
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomelessPizza View Post
Very mubsy outlook. Funniest thing you said is that we have to be worried about loose passive V's at 1/3 turning their made hands into bluffs on certain runouts ...

and if V flops TPTK and we raise, how are we not getting the money in?? This only happens if you slowplay the flop which would be a big mistake.
Where did I say loose passives V's turning their made hands into bluffs on certain runouts? Lmao.

They could bluff missed straight draws on flush completing turns where flop started 6-way or say in rare occasions 4 to a flush. Or they can bluff on straightening cards when they miss their FD. You're going to call down every time and will never get bluffed off a set like other people have a number of x times? lol.

It's not mubsy. It's reality. It's facts that we don't always win the max when we flop a set, although you may feel entitled to. What, you've never had a hand where you flopped a set multiway, cbet, and everyone folded? LOL. It's a fact 22-44 are -EV opens in a vacuum from UTG, whether you want to believe it or not.

You can lol all you want or call me a mubsy nit but it doesn't change the fact that on no planet 22-44 is a +EV open on more than 10% of your typical loose passives 1/3 tables from UTG.

If V flops TPTK and we raise. Hm. That means he would have to donk lead if he were OOP. Is this often? No. What if he's IP? That means we're c-betting, and he's probably not raising often either.

Let's say your scenario is true. OOP donk leads TPTK (A10) on 1072ss. We have 77. He's still folding vs a reraise x% of the time, or he flat calls and x/f on a flush completing card, A, K, Q, J, or even blank at x% frequency. That's how we don't get stacks in.

I never said anything about slowplaying for any reason. I never advocate slowplaying anything
unless we flop quads or just locked the board down so hard, and am a huge advocate of just betting straight for value when we have a monster.

You basically put words in my mouth in your entire post that have zero relevance and made a completely useless post.

Last edited by Minatorr; 08-17-2018 at 04:37 AM.
Minatorr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 04:41 AM   #18
wait
banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 1,115
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Whole hand fine. Just unlucky and have to lose sometimes.
wait is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 09:14 AM   #19
shorn7
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 4,497
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

I would flame you if you DIDN'T go broke here. You have 140 blinds pre....raise or not pre is debatable, but the rest of the hand is standard. You would need to be at least 300 bb's deep when button shoves to even consider folding.

As another said, set over set should even out over time so don't worry about it. One famous poker pro also said "if you never folded after you flopped a set, you probably aren't making that big a mistake."
shorn7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2018, 01:24 AM   #20
8o8
veteran
 
8o8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,885
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

wrt raising small pairs up front, in a game like this open limping is likely to be most +EV assuming enough deep-ish stacks at the table. folding probably close 2nd. i don't see the point of raising 22 or 55 from up front when we expect a cascade of calls.
8o8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2018, 06:28 AM   #21
HeHadWhat
stranger
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 5
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minatorr View Post
it doesn't change the fact that on no planet 22-44 is a +EV open on more than 10% of your typical loose passives 1/3 tables from UTG.
Assuming the game IS one of those especially loose passive ones (I believed mine was,) is opening 55 UTG+1 not +EV then?
HeHadWhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2018, 12:06 PM   #22
8o8
veteran
 
8o8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,885
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeHadWhat View Post
Assuming the game IS one of those especially loose passive ones (I believed mine was,) is opening 55 UTG+1 not +EV then?
doubtful. it makes no sense to build up a pot pre-flop with presumably a bunch of callers coming in with a hand that has very limited multi-way post-flop playability. at LP tables with 55 up front we want to see flops cheaply or fold.
8o8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2018, 04:38 PM   #23
Badreg2017
veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,900
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

So his act on the turn is super nutted. If you had an overpair for instance you could consider letting let it go, this hand on this board is too strong to fold though.
Badreg2017 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2018, 05:25 PM   #24
m0mmy
journeyman
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 324
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Quote:
Originally Posted by 8o8 View Post
doubtful. it makes no sense to build up a pot pre-flop with presumably a bunch of callers coming in with a hand that has very limited multi-way post-flop playability. at LP tables with 55 up front we want to see flops cheaply or fold.
The only reason we prefer hands with more postflop playability like T9s over hands with more "hard" equity like 55 is because we can realize our equity more when the hand has playability. All that is thrown out the window in loose passive games. The loose ranges allow us to actually get action from worse holdings and the passiveness lets us realize our equity by never getting raised off hands while losing the minimum when we get out flopped. There shouldnt be any absolutes in poker. Every strategy is merely a counterstrategy. And the counter strategy to playing with loose passive opponents who call with bad hands pre and dont apply pressure post. Is to play hands with more equity and less playability like pairs and Ax because lets face it. All hands are playable against these guys.

Sent from my Z851M using Tapatalk
m0mmy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2018, 05:27 PM   #25
Dizzyqtp
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Dizzyqtp's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 7,365
Re: "Always" going broke here? - 2/3 NLH

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minatorr View Post
^^ open 22-44 is definitely lighting money on fire from UTG, UTG +1, UTG +2

55 is still bad

First time actually calculating pot odds, so correct me if i'm wrong. we are getting 2.74:1 on our call (643/235). Calling 235 to win 643. So we need 27.4% to breakeven on a call? Vs 64s we have 22% equity, so i dont think we can actually call if he shows us 64 face up.

I mean im still always meh calling but it isnt a snap call imo
for someone who posts in the manner that you do pretty funny that you didn't know how many straights JT made nor how to calculate pot odds lol...

we need 26.5% (235/888)

vs TT, 77, 33, and all 64 offsuit/suited combos we have 26.8% so no we can never ever fold this lol... it's a SNAP call

add in T7s, 75s, drop 64o which is much more realistic and we have 45% (+he can have spazzes/rando bluffs too)

don't fold sets peeps. now i'm back to not posting in strat threads anymore
Dizzyqtp 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 03:54 PM.


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