Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStarr
This makes no sense to me. There's no way he has a hand he can call with 55% of the time. No possible way. At least not a sane opponent that should be folding AhTh. If I realized this guy was THIS bad, I wouldve just checked and given up.
The pot was almost $300 on the flop. If I have any actual hand...like the ones I said he could call with, Im just shoving in. Im never betting less when effective stacks are only $300 left. So why would I bluff less than all in? Im bluffing here like once in a purple moon. Forget about a blue moon.
Id like to know what hands you think a avg player has in his range that call a $115 3 bet. Lets start there.
I think the point is villain's calling range is inelastic here. You're better off bluffing a smaller amount than shoving as you risk less and he folds close to the same frequency.
Also agree with Avaritia. At low stakes players often get sticky on the flop but play more straightforwardly on the turn and even more so on the river. Many players will chase weak draws to the turn, and some to the river, but they will just fold to like 2/3 pot river bets way, way too often.
But I'm not sure it was a bad call from villain. From the other player's point of view (the hand he had AT), you are likely C-betting most flops. Yet you often miss the flop. The call is actually fine unless you don't C-bet much. Players will fold to flop C-bets more often if there's the threat of additional bets. In this hand he just has to be ahead of you over 1/3 the time to justify calling.
Suppose you C-bet 70% of the time. Generally you connect with flops about 35% of the time. On this specific flop of QdTd7d, it might be a little higher, but the player with AT has some blockers also, so let's assume 35%. You bet $300 into $295.
Let's look at the EV of calling from the other guy's POV.
P(C-bet | connected) = P(C-bet AND connected)/P(connected)
You likely C-bet 100% when you connect with the flop, so P(C-bet | connected) = 1, i.e.,
P(C-bet AND connected)/P(connected) = 1
Therefore P(C-bet AND connected) = P(connected)
We need to calculate P(connected | C-bet)
P(connected | C-bet) = P(connected AND C-bet)/P(C-bet), which by substitution is
P(connected | C-bet) = P(connected) / P(C-bet)
P(connected | C-bet) = .35 / .7 = .5
Now how many of your "connects" actually are ahead of AT? Maybe 1/2?
Then P(Vbehind) = P(connected | C-bet) * 1/2 = 1/4
And P(Vahead) = 3/4
So villain should be ahead about 3/4 of the time when you C-bet. For simplicity we assume villain wins when ahead and loses when behind (correcting for this makes little difference as he should catch up when behind as often as you do)
EV(Vcall) = 3/4*(300+295) - 1/4(300) = 371.25
From villain's perspective, calling with AT is massively profitable.
For it not to be profitable, we need EV(Vcall) < 0, which happens if P(Vbehind) > 119/79 ~ .6648
How rarely must you C-bet that villain should fold? Set
P(Vbehind) > 119/79 or P(connected | C-bet)*1/2 > 119/79 or P(connected | C-bet) > 119/158
Equivalently, P(connected)/P(C-bet) > 119/158 or .35/P(C-bet) > 119/158
P(C-bet) < 79/170 ~ .4647
So if you C-bet more than 46.47% in this spot then it's a good call from villain.
Some aspects of this model might be a little off, but it's not really the point. If you C-bet anywhere close to how often most players would, it's a good call with AT.
And note this doesn't mean you should just check/fold here necessarily, but due to the amount of dead money in the pot 2nd pair + Ace overcard + BDSD is plenty to call IMO. Again, unless you would rarely C-bet here. And if villain thinks you might slowplay truly strong hands like a flush or a set then he has even more reason to call.