Depends, of course. General rule of thumb I use for suited A's is minimum 25x. The reason is you run into RIO, you need to peel a lot to make a hand, or you won't always make enough on the hand to make up for when you whiff and have to fold.

We're playing against short stacks. Even in the miraculous scenario where we flush over flush someone (which is extremely unlikely, given that we block many combos in the open raiser's range), we don't even win a big pot.

To put it in general terms, we don't want to be calling open raises from tight short stackers very often.

I copied and pasted a part of your text below some of the stuff I posted. Then I selected the text that I copied and pasted, and clicked on the quote button right below where it says "hand history converter." It's yellow, next to the button that looks like this: #

Not sure how much that helps btw but hopefully it does.

I'd call in a limped pot and almost always fold the hand to raises. If the raiser is raising a lot of hands and is likely to fold to a 3-bet, then I might consider 3-betting instead of calling in an attempt to win the pot right there.

Assuming this is 1/2 and not 1/1 I think a call preflop is "ok" if we have strong postflop play. It's really not the dynamics we want for a hand like this (prefer to be multiway and deeper) but we're playing a pot in position vs fish that will likely play their hands face up.

Given villain descriptions I like a raise on the flop. Most of the time neither villain is super strong. We can get it in here vs worse draws. Calling is fine too since we are getting the right price. There isn't as much value in calling as there would be if we had deeper effective stacks.

Yes,
I will break it down for you. But in person. When we have an hr.

As to the hand. Venice is right on money.
You butchered this hand from the word call.

Fold pre. (Although calling is just slightly -ev)

-you have great table. Why play speculative hand, after someone has shown aggression. You can wait for next hand and continue to run over table. DON'T give action to tight/fish!!!!!!

-you arnt deep enough
-likely never to get paid (tight table)
-stealing post flop is unnecessary risk after he shows interest in pot (wait till they show weakness)

Flop is terrible

- He has now shown interest in pot twice. You don't have much fold equity, and don't need it!!!

-He offering a great price to draw at nuts.

Reraise and call on flop are gross. Haven't done math but think you have odds to call.

DO NOT JAM!!!!!

You are never ahead of his calling range. If he is to chicken **** to put money in. Then save yourself the cash.

He is never folding after calling $80 cold. Doesn't matter what cards come. Don't help him out by re-raise

So fold pre. Continue to run them over on next hand

Call flop!!!!
Never 4 betting flop!!!!!

Let that weak tight as$ , put money in first

F.w.i.w
When at a table where we can show a profit by simply raising pre, and making c-bets. I am not looking to ever put myself in spots , where we are calling a preflop raise. Hoping to flop gin or a draw.

If table is super aggro and deep. Then I don't mind calling suited hands hoping to flop draws or gin.

At super passive tables. Wait till we have position. And watch them crumble.

I agree 100%.

One added thing: the above strategy is low variance.

Chasing draws is pretty much the definition of high variance luck-box poker.

The only way a call is profitable pre is if you can at times win the hand with air postflop. Chasing draws is fine if we are getting the right odds to chase them. Whether or not a line is high variance or not should be of no concern to us as long as we are getting the right odds to call.

In this example, we are getting the wrong implied odds to chase preflop but are getting the right implied odds to chase postflop.

Ya, but he messed up his. Implied odds by raising.

He butchered every street.

[QUOTE][In this example, we are getting the wrong implied odds to chase preflop but are getting the right implied odds to chase postflop./QUOTE]

So, if we go by DCFT mark of 25x, then V1 needs to have a stack of about $175 to make it correct to call pre. Am I right so far?

Does that change things if V2 comes along for the $7 also? Let's say, for the sake of argument, that we are more than 50% sure at least 1 other Villain will also come along for the $7 raise. Does that make it any less bad? (I can't say that entered my thought process at all, but that's what was happening)

How do my implied odds go up after the flop? ( I had NO IDEA that V1 would push his OESD until I eliminated any Ks and Js from his hand.) Wouldn't I just be getting the right direct odds to call after V1 flatted?

sorry if some of this stuff is rudimentary, I'm more into playing against specific players and how THEY play their hands, especially post flop, regardless of the math. I used to have the head for it, but have long since been out of practice. thnks

I don't have a general rule of thumb for suited aces. Perhaps I should but a lot of factors vary my decision. One of the great things about the suited ace is that it's power lies in being able to target the entire field due to the nutty nature of the draw whereas other speculative hands generally just target the strength of the preflop raiser's hand.

Given that, what I'm looking for more or less are opportunities to play the suited ace in multiway pots. So even if the preflop raiser only has 10bbs, that can be ok if we are going to the flop 6 ways because we can target other speculative hands with our suited aces (including worse draws, flushes, straights, sets, 2 pairs, top pairs, etc).

Yes, that helps but still 3 ways to a flop with a suited ace is not that good. Often times a weak suited ace is dominated by our opponent(s) range in 3 way pots. We can't really be thrilled even if we flop an ace.

All your odds go up after the flop simply because you flopped good.

That's just a math question. FWIW, I only read the original post and not the action that occurred afterwords. When considering flush draws the odds that really matter are the implied odds..in other words combine the value of our direct odds with the additional value we will get on future streets if we bink.

Also, sometimes we should consider that we will only get to draw to one card essentially cutting our direct odds in half. For instance in a spot where we think villain is likely super strong and will shove all turns then we have to bink on the turn and the odds of hitting on the river are not relevant to our decision making process.

Implied odds go down but we have fold equity (aka we can cause better hands than ours to fold) here which is why a raise is fine. If we thought villain was never folding then raise would be terrible obviously. Also the fact that the other villain is short stacked and likely to chase worse draws even when we raise makes this a better spot than most to raise.

Love tables that play like that. Was there at Sam's Town Gold River in Laughlin when they debuted 1 -- 3 limit Hold 'Em. Made over $200 at $3.00 a clip and seldom ever held a hand. It was just rob, rob, rob. Raise it 3.00 with ATC and pick up the blind and dead money: it was that automatic.

Last weekend, had a game that played almost the same. Made over 50bb without showing a single hand. Pop it from the HJ, CO, or BTN with ATC, take it down. One fishy player noticed, he even told a new arrival to watch out for Kyuubimon because he "plays position". Didn't stop him from playing like a nut scared rabbit though. Games like this make Poker look easy.

Not lovin' this call. If V_1's that much scared money, and he finally picked up a hand he can open with, that's time to LOOK OUT! He finally found pocket rockets. I also don't like speculating when stacks are short, opponents nut scared rabbits. What happens if your 0.4% ship comes in? You lead into an all-clubs flop, and watch 'em run! You're never getting implied odds here, like ever. $7.00 is two orbits. You can find better steal opportunities later if they don't wise up and adjust.

Nut scared rabbit playing scared money finds a bet: time to cut your losses. Yeah, that NFD looks tempting, but that's a 35.38% proposition, meaning you miss 64.62% of NFD attempts. If another club falls off, they'll run faster than a rabbit with a stoat on his tail. More RIO. If the club comes on the turn and V_1's still in there, and the river pairs the board, prepare to be looking at a Full. If the club doesn't come, which it won't more often than it will, that's even more lost orbits and opportunities to steal at little risk.

Why take unnecessary chances when it's obvious you don't need to?

This is terrabad. They're fish. They're not thinking about what looks like a weak steal attempt. They're thinking: "I can has three kings!": that's it. They're nut scared playing scared moiney. What else could they possibly have here, given the read so far?

Get out now. This hand has cost you much more than enough.

Nothing more than wishful thinking at this point. Why would you blow off your entire stack against these yutzes? I hope you lucked out and didn't get that NFD rammed down your throat. You played this hand like a fish. Sorry, but that's how I see it.

This logic sucks. It looks like a weak steal attempt because it is a weak steal attempt. Why are you trying to rep a weak steal attempt with ace high? Makes no sense. In order to maximize fold equity for made hands like Jx we need to raise large just as we would with a set.

Not sure why you didn't see that as a possibility before you raised to $25.

You need to be more accurate and detailed in your post regarding effective stacks, pot size, and the math that justifies your decision. We shouldn't have to waste our time doing math for you particularly when you provide us with inaccurate data. For instance:

V2 goes all in for $93 total but only had $90 to start the hand minus $7 pre.
V1 has $45 behind or $138 total but only has $110 to start the hand minus $7 pre.

In general we should be sizing this such that on the flop that we are never folding vs short stackers. Our goal is to maximize fold equity but one of the positives side effects is that even in worst case scenarios we will always realize our equity as we will be priced in to call all shoves. However, you sized your raise just terribly enough that this may actually be a fold in this spot.

(sorry, I already started doing the math with bad numbers and am not going to compute them again. I have personally never put myself in a situation like this).

If villain had $140 EFFECTIVE STACK

Implied odds go down on flop. Implied odds preflop are effective stack 140:7. Implied odds on flop are 163:10 after he bets on flop. So preflop you are getting 20:1. Post flop you are getting 16:1, but have a boat load more equity, and less RIO

To answer question from before. You will flop trips 1%, flush 1%, straight .5% and flush draw 12%. So about 15% of time you hit a flop you truly like.

^^^against opponent having AA^^^^

The terms can be a little confusing (especially equity which can have multiple meanings) but essentially what is important is that the value derived from implied odds is higher on the flop than preflop. We would need a lot of things to be just right preflop to give us good implied odds. On this flop we just need to hit one club and it's reasonable to expect we will get additional value from this hand.

Should really Google implied odd calculattion. Learn them. Then I can help you with some tips that make calculating them quickly at table.

Most players that take the time to learn the math. Don't do the exact math. We quickly get rough ball park and go from there

For example in this hand. I would know there is $20 in preflop. He bets $10 and roughly has $90 behind. So $30+90= $120

So I am getting 120:10 or 12:1.

I know I have roughly 33% equity(18% that we hit on turn). Only need 10%equity to make call profitable (assuming we stack him 100%).

So obviously we are calling.

[QUOTE][/QUThis is terrabad. They're fish. They're not thinking about what looks like a weak steal attempt. They're thinking: "I can has three kings!": that's it. They're nut scared playing scared moiney. What else could they possibly have here, given the read so far?OTE]

lol Thank you guys for completely destroying my thought process, and showing me how dumb it really was. This really is the quickest way I learn. Anyone can flame, but to explain the "why" is always what I'm looking for, so thanks. Also remember, if in the future I question your opinions or information you're trying to give, I'm really not trying to argue. It's just part of MY learning process.


see, this is where I am WAY behind. I wouldn't know how much equity I have with a hand like this in this situation. I sure as hell don't know how that changes from flop to turn to river. Also, If we don't know (whether it be from inexperience, or no history with V or V's)if V's will stack off, then how can we REALLY trust EV calculations? Kinda seems like a round about idea that can change given table dynamics and Villain tendencies. Or is this also a dumb way of thinking about it?

Don't worry about ev calculations. They are used more in evaluating your play off table.

100%you need to know your equities when drawing.

Grunch:

As played: I call flop and try to allow SB into hand. Vil is giving you a good price to draw to the nut flush with an overcard (which I would not be too excited about hitting on the turn). Stacks are deep and plenty of money behind. Raising / semi bluffing this flop is not optimal. Vil will not being laying down Kx or most big Jx to a raise (maybe to multiple barrels but eh...).

not much you can do in this pot.

everyone is short stacked. just play the hand for straight value. If you miss the turn, I would call any bet for 15 or less.