Dont give me percentages. I want to see what you think an avg 2/5 player's range is for calling a $115 3 bet. We can go from there.

I gave you a large enough sample range.

I used your TT-KK, AK
which came out to them averaging 62% them calling depending on how they think

and a loose one I speculated KK-77,AKo-ATo,KQo-KJo,AKs-ATs,KQs-KTs,QJs-QTs,JTs
This range averages 55% calling again depending how they think.

I included your 2 cards as dead in the hand.

And remaining hands of that spread should simply fold to a lower sized bet.

Okay. I've bolded what I consider the most important scenarios, but there are a variety of outcomes that change drastically depending on your bluffing frequency, villain's reads, and your exact 3-betting range.

So first let's assume your range is 95% {TT+, AK} and 5% let's say {A5s, 87s}.

On QdTd7d, AhTh wins 31.25%, ties 3.1% and loses 65.55%

If you C-bet 100% it greatly simplifies the math.

EV(Vcall) = .3125*(300+295) + .031(295/2) - .6555(300) = -6.14

If you're really 3-betting that tight, then the call is slightly bad, absent reads. But if villain (correctly) suspects you might be bluffing, even if he is unsure, then the call is correct. And overbets tend to look suspicious.

This decision is also extremely dependent on your 3-bet range. If you were to add 99, for instance, it becomes

EV(Vcall) = .3720*(300+295) + .0298(295/2) - .5983(300) = 46.25

In addition, you might not shove some of your strongest hand-combos, such as QQ and TT (though probably would on a monotone flop), instead betting smaller or even checking behind. If that is true, then the result is

EV(Vcall) = .3530*(300+295) + .029(295/2) - .6325(300) = 24.56

It's a close situation. But at worst the call is slightly bad (barely 1BB lost). I can easily see how someone with AT might want to call you here, particularly if they've picked up a read you're 3-betting lighter than usual, even if it's just a slight feeling.

Let's see what happens, for instance, if villain thinks there is a 20% chance you're bluffing {A5s, 87s} and 80% you're on {TT+,AK}.

EV(Vcall) = .2(.8394*(300+295) + .056(295/2) - .1045(300)) + .8(.2785*(300+295) + .0294(295/2) - .6921(300)) = 65.20

If we add 99 and remove your set combos, this could be as bad as

EV(Vcall) = .2(.8394*(300+295) + .056(295/2) - .1045(300)) + .8(.3864*(300+295) + .0262(295/2) - .05874(300)) = 268.19

This hand is a good example of how reads affect the decision. If villain has no read and puts you on the first range, where you're only bluffing one time in twenty, he should fold, though it's close. But if he has even a slight suspicion you're bluffing more than that it's a good call. We saw if he thinks you're bluffing just 15% more often than usual, the call is significantly +EV. Overall, given all the different scenarios, I like villain's call here. I think he should have folded pre-flop, but after hitting 2nd pair top kicker he should probably look you up.

It's also worth noting that you hit this flop much harder than you would a random flop. In general, I don't think 3-bet stealing light is a good idea if it creates an SPR near 1, as it then becomes correct for villain to look you up with any piece of the flop.

And as Winky51 has pointed out, you're better off betting a lesser amount here when you miss. There's nothing villain is folding for $300 he wouldn't also fold for $200 (and probably $150).

OK, I think we've beaten this one enough. Let me just end with.....now you know how I get paid off. There's no need to make big bluffs at all when people make these kinds of calls. After this hand I turned to my neighbor (who was still in shock that the guy called) and I said "That guy will never fold to me again". It was only 45 mins or so later when I shoved all in with a set and he called me with 95 on a 963 board for more money than he made off me on this hand.

There was no way in hell I was leaving this table until I could use my image created here to get my money back. In general though, I dont need to create a maniac image to get paid off. People just call way to much so I bluff less and less every day.

I got called down the other day by 52o triple barreling in a raised pot on KT2T3. And I hadn't played a hand in the two orbits since the guy sat down. That's a bad call. Your villain's call was at worst break-evenish, and if he had any kind of read on you whatsoever +EV. Calling a C-bet with 2nd-pair top kicker and an SPR of 1 is hardly terrible, and certainly not shocking.

The statements in bold are kind of contradictory. You're implying people just make these calls in a vacuum, but at the same time you got paid off because of your maniacal image. People only make these kinds of calls because they think you might bluff. Bluffing has value far beyond the immediate hand. This is why we don't pay off OMCs--they never bluff. And it's why we're happy to call down maniacs with 2nd pair--they bluff too much.

As long as you continue to hit sets and flushes etc. you may get paid off, but to get paid off lighter you need to bluff. Or just have horrific calling station opponents. But of course you play in the toughest room in Florida so that might be tricky.

What did you even have in this hand?

I didnt mean I get paid off all the time because I have a maniac image. I said I was never leaving THIS table because I had a maniac image with these random players and I wasnt going to waste it. These were all Holiday rec players. The room wasnt tough at all over the long weekend. It was a fish fry. Most of them I had never seen before. The villain is question I play with about twice a month at most.

I meant that in general I get paid off a lot without buffing much at all. Winky51 has asked me several times "How do you get paid off?". I have no idea. I just keep betting and they keep calling.

I either pick the worst spots in history to bluff or my image is such that I dont need to bluff because I get called way too often for bluffing to be profitable, except vs some of the daytime nit OMCS who can be bluffed off of most hands.

I had 8c7c in that hand

Had no idea you had a PGC thread, subbed obviously.

I played a short session yesterday that ended with a small double digit win. I probably had 5-7 hands where I had JJ/TT and flop had overcards or I had AK/AQ and flop had rags and lost them all. Some I Cbet, some I didnt. Not too many hands of note.

1) I open $20 AsAd in MP. Old guy to my direct left calls and BB calls. Both are unknowns
Flop ($60) KcQc6c. Blah! BB checks. I check. Old guy bets $60. I call HU
Turn ($180) 8d. He shoves $260 out of turn. I check to make his bet binding and then think for a few secs and call. He seemed so eager it looked to me like he wanted me out of the pot....but I was wrong. He had 7c5c.

2) I open to $20 Kc9c OTB. Solid player in BB call.
Flop ($40) Qs7s4s. He check/calls $25
Turn ($90) 2d. X/X
River ($90) 8s. He checks. I check behind. He had KsQc. A certain person keeps telling me to bet in these spots because villain will only have a spade X% of the time. My response is always....he may only have a spade X% of the time based on there being 3 spades on the flop, but once he calls the flop bet, the chances he has a spade...and a big one...go up exponentially. Bluffing here is not profitable IMO.

3) UTG limps. I limp AsKs UTG+1. Short stacking, angling, piece of garbage who is banned from one local casino and got caught stealing a black chip at this casino and still wasnt banned....raises to $30. UTG calls. I call. His range here is TT+ and AK

Flop ($95) Kh5s3s. UTG checks. I check. Villain bets $100 with $150 behind. Now he has AK or AA. Nothing else. UTG folds. I call.
Turn ($295) 7s. I check..he checks behind.
River ($295) brick...I shove and he beats me into the pot and then flings his AA across the table. This guy once called the clock on me after 10 seconds and he wasnt even in the hand. He is a low life beyond which I could ever describe here.

4) 2 EP limps. I raise $30 AhQd. BB whale and one limper call.
Flop ($95) Ac9c4s. They check. I bet $65. BB whale calls.

In another hand this guy just called $210 all in on the turn with just a str8 draw and hit it. Pot was like $400 to him. In another hand he had QJ in a raised pot and called a bet and then a check raise on a Q55 flop. Then called a large turn all in. Other guy had 88.

Turn ($225) Kh. He leads $60. I shove $360. He tank/folds and shows an ace. I put him on a FD but Im surprised he folded an ace.

5) UTG ($600) raises $30. Im UTG+1 ($800) and call with 44. This is really a fold for me almost always. I called because UTG is never ever folding an overpair to me. We end up going 6 to the flop.
Flop ($180) 6c5d3c. Blinds check. UTG checks. I check. Next guy (same guy from hand #1) bets $200. BB calls $95 all in and to folds back to me. He and I are both about $750 deep at this point. I really really wanted to crai. Im putting him on something like TT-77. Will he fold it? I wasnt sure so I chickened out and folded.

He had 65 and the river was a 4. I seriously doubt he wouldve folded so I guess my fold was correct, but I wouldve won a monster pot. Blah

1) This is pretty bad. Why so eager to pay the old guy off? The lightest he could possibly be shoving here is AK and there are exactly 3 combinations we're solidly ahead. There are 3 combinations with the Ac, but even here old man has 11 outs. There are 9 combinations KQ. 3 combinations KK, 3 combinations QQ, 3 combinations 66, and dozens of likely club combinations. Moreover, he bets out of turn, and you check to make sure it's binding? Why? What are you possibly beating here besides AcKx?

2) The chance he has a spade once he calls goes up linearly according to Bayes Theorem, but I get your point. Still, monotone flops are excellent bluffing spots heads-up, as most villains do not continue without a strong spade or a strong made hand. He happened to have the Ks + top pair. It happens. Your flop bet is fine, and you correctly shut down after that. Note he actually has a spade on the flop 1 - 37/47*36/46 = 38.4% if he plays every spade, but against a raise he should tend not to have most hands with one low to medium spade, so in practice he has a spade he'll continue with maybe 20% of the time. You're being very results-oriented about your bluffs IMO.

3) This is dicey depending whether villain always pays you off when you hit, and whether he'll bet the turn again on a non-spade. If your read is accurate then calling is probably correct, but it's a high variance call.

4) Whale puts you on AK, I figure, because obviously there's nothing else you could have there...

5) Good call pre-flop IMO. Good fold OTF. One card straight draws are quite weak 6-way, particularly when you're not on the high end of that straight draw. CRAI is a massive mistake here given stack depths. A lot of your outs are likely dirty.

1) My call was definitely marginal...bordering on bad, but there are a lot more marginal spots at 2/5 than 1/2 where you need to call. If I had watched this guy play longer, I would've snap called this one. Some of the hands he played were atrocious. I didnt have that info when I played this hand so you're right, I should've folded. I'm just saying, its not as cut and dried as you say.

The day before I raised T9s to $30. Flop was Tc9c3c. I bet $55 into $60 pot and got shoved on for $310. I called and hit a boat. I saw the Ad in the guys hand as he mucked so I was clearly way ahead. These are the kinds of things Im talking about when I say that reads and "feel" are more important than math in some spots.

2) I was talking about bluffing the river being bad. Not the flop. I know people who insist that bluffing the river is correct here because he only had a flush 38% of the time, but my point is that you have more information about his hand once he called the flop so while he has a flush 38% of the time when I bet the flop, the odds go way up once he calls the flop. Id say he has a spade at least 75% once he calls the flop.

3) My call with TPTK and nut flush draw is a high variance call? The only question is whether to call to shove.

5) This is hand where I think your analysis is wrong when the stakes are higher. Playing 5/10 Im crai here every time. Playing 2/5 I'll do it sometimes. Playing 1/2 Ill do it pretty much never unless villain is very obviously playing scared money.

People play more hands aggressively at higher stakes. The higher the stakes the more chance this guy has hands like TT/99/88/86s/87s/76s/65 and other hands that Im ahead of or flipping with. Stacks are just about the right size to get him to fold a lot of hands if I crai.

Against TT/99/88...I have about 41% equity which is just about correct even if I had zero FE, but he should fold those hands at least 1/3 of the time.

Against 86s...I have 38% and he should fold more than 75% of the time
Against 87s..I have about 65% equity plus FE
Against 76s..I have 31% plus FE
Against 65s... I have 37% equity.

This guy called a raise OOP earlier with 97 offsuit so he has plenty more combos in his range. Actually we can probably throw in JJ and maybe QQ here also because I doubt this guy is 3 betting preflop with those hands. Especially not an UTG raise.

Its also wasnt 6 ways when it got back to me. It wouldve been HU with the guy who bet $200 with $180 in dead money in the pot preflop and another $95 from the guy who is all in.

Check out this HH
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/17...-99-a-1674617/

No. It was bad. It has nothing to do with stakes. "If I had watched this guy play longer, I would've snap called this one." implies later you have some kind of read that makes calling here correct. That's irrelevant, and if you think otherwise you're being results-oriented, again. With the current information you have, calling is very bad.

With which hands does it make sense for the old man to call a raise pre-flop, pot the flop, then overbet OTT OUT OF TURN?

Roughly these: {KK-QQ,66,KQs,AcKc,AcQc,AcJc,KcJc,QcJc,AcTc,KcTc,QcTc, JcTc,Ac9c,Kc9c,Qc9c,Jc9c,Tc9c,Ac8c,Jc8c,Tc8c,9c8c, Ac7c,9c7c,8c7c,Ac6c,8c6c,7c6c,Ac5c,7c5c,6c5c,Ac4c, 6c4c,5c4c,Ac3c,Ac2c,KQo,AcKd,AcKh,AcKs,AcQd,AcQh,A cQs}

You have 15.22% equity against this range. You lose 84.78% of the time.

EV(call) = .1522(180+260) - .8478(260) = -153.46.

Without some reason to believe this guy is *completely* ******ed (which you don't have at this point), calling is horrible. What's even worse is you trapped the guy into shoving. If you were unsure where you stood, you could have shoved the turn, and if old man called, taken back your shove and x/f since your bet is not binding (if I understand this correctly).

Everybody makes mistakes. Learning from them is what's important.

A) Is this the same villain? If not, it has minimal relevance.

B) You had top two here, not one pair. Even if behind, you have boat outs.

C) You have less information about villain's range since this is just on the flop. A flop bet into the PFR + turn shove out of turn is super strong.

D) There are actually plausible hands you could be ahead of, like 24 combos JJ-AA, 3 combos AcTx, and possibly quite a few combos of strong draws like AcTx. It's actually not likely he flopped a flush here as unless the flush were very weak he would flat your bet, then try to get it in on the turn or river.

E) Witnessing he had the Ad doesn't prove much. For all you know he had AdAc. In any case, it shouldn't affect how you treat this spot except against this exact player.

I don't get it. The math says you should probably call with T9 and fold AA. Your "feel" was wrong and cost you a lot of money. You had tons of information telling you to fold as well as the opportunity to read villain perfectly. But you had AA and didn't want to fold cuz AA. I get it, but it's bad.

75% is way off.

Bayes Theorem: P(A|B) = P(B|A)*P(A)/P(B)

P(spade|calls) = P(calls|spade)*P(spade)/P(calls)

In my previous post I estimated P(spade) = .2

Let's suppose he calls when he connects with the flop, which in general happens about 35% of the time. So P(calls) = .35

P(calls|spade) is hardest to estimate as it's villain dependent. It's less than 1, as for instance the average villain will not call with nothing but the 2 here. I'll do one calculation with P(calls|spade) = .5 and one with P(calls|spade) = .8. These should reflect how nitty/stationy villain is respectively.

Nitty case: P(spade|calls) = .5*.2/.35 = .285

Stationy case: P(spade|calls) = .8*.2/.35 = .457

Even if villain always calls with a spade he has a spade 57% of the time.

I think for most villains you will find they have a spade once they call the flop bet between 25% and 50% of the time, I suspect close to 33%.

Bluffing here is okay or not, depending on villain's tendencies.

Yes. I just wanted to point this out since you've previously elected to avoid high variance situations when they were more +EV.

In particular if villain can have any of the sets calling is more marginal and high variance. But provided your read is accurate calling is of course good.

I stopped following your math because a)it's not right and b)it doesn't actually answer whether going all-in here is +EV

I didn't do any analysis in the previous post because I thought it obvious a CRAI here is horrible. This should be really obvious 6-ways with the low end of a 1-card straight draw, jamming 720 into a 475 pot with one guy already all-in. I'm aware some people have folded. 6-ways it is just way too likely that somebody has a better draw than you do or a made hand way ahead of you.

On this board, vs. 5 RANDOM hands you have about 21% equity compared to average of 16% for the rest. That's how crappy your draw is. But they are not random. They were good enough to call raises. This board smashes most players' calling ranges. That makes your draw even worse.

I expect you are against a range possibly as wide as this: {JJ-77, 6d6h, 6d6s, 6h6s, 5h5s, 5h5c, 5s5c, 4d4c, 3d3h, 3d3s, 3h3s, 87s, KcQc, AcJc, KcJc, QcJc, AcTc, KcTc, QcTc, JcTc, Ac9c, Kc9c, Qc9c, Jc9c, Tc9c, Ac8c, Kc8c, Jc8c, Tc8c, 9c8c, Ac7c, Tc7c, 9c7c, Ac5c, 8c5c, 7c5c, 6h5h, 6s5s, Ac4c, 7d4d, 7c4c, 6d4d, 5c4c, 6d3d, 6h3h, 6s3s, 5h3h, 5s3s, 4d3d, Ac2c, 4d2d, 4c2c, 6d5h, 6d5s, 6d5c, 6h5s, 6h5c, 6s5h, 6s5c}

You have 36.92% equity against this range. But mostly I suspect you are against 2p+, overpairs, and combo draws with 12+ outs, as in reality, the weaker flush draws would rarely bet out here, and neither would just the OESDs.

Something like these 68 combos: {QQ-33,74s,63s+,53s+,43s,8c7c,Ac6c,9c6c,8c6c,7c6c,7c5c ,Ac4c,65o}

Against this you have 33.13% equity: win .3092, lose .6466, and tie .042.

But we also need to look at the range that calls an all-in, which this deep is probably something like these 43 combos: {66-55,33,74s,63s+,53s+,43s,8c7c,Ac6c,9c6c,8c6c,7c6c,7 c5c,Ac4c,Ac3c,65o}

And the BB will probably call with any decent draw or made hand: {JJ-33,74s,63s+,53s+,42s+,KcQc,AcJc,KcJc,QcJc,AcTc,KcT c,QcTc,JcTc,Ac9c,Kc9c,Qc9c,Jc9c,Tc9c,Ac8c,Kc8c,Tc8 c,9c8c,Ac7c,Tc7c,9c7c,8c7c,Ac6c,9c6c,8c6c,7c6c,Ac5 c,8c5c,7c5c,Ac4c,Ac3c,Ac2c,87o,65o}

So we can shove and face both players or just the BB. When both players call I'm going to treat the big blind as dead money even though he has substantial equity because the math just gets really complicated as there are six outcomes, and this is more than enough to prove the shove is bad.

EV(shove) = P(call)(P(WinvMP)*995 + P(TievMP)*275/2 - P(LoseVMP)*(720)) + P(fold)(P(WinvBB)*475 + P(TievBB)*455/2 - P(LosevBB)*95+ 105)

EV(shove) = (43/68)(.3064*995 + .0401*275/2 - .6517*720) + (25/68)(.3759*475 + .0354*275/2 - .6064*95 + 105)

EV(shove) = -15.58

Note this actually *drastically* overstates our EV because I treated the BB as dead money when it's 3-way when in reality he has 31.85% equity with these ranges. I'm just not sure how to calculate, for instance, the probability we beat MP but lose to BB, in a way that doesn't take an insane amount of time.

I am certain however this would be a terrible shove. Even treating the BB as dead money, it's -EV. I would guesstimate accounting for the BB drops our EV another 100 or so dollars minimum. Our odds of winning the main pot when called are terrible (closer to 1/5 than 1/3).


Come on Mike, this is not even close to the same thing.

A) Your hand is initially 6-way. This hand is initially 3-way. It is FAR more likely someone has a better draw or made hand 6-way than 3-way.

B) In your hand you flop a ****ty pair and the lower end of an OESD. In this hand, he flops an overpair and the higher end of an OESD.

C) In your hand you're 150BB deep. In this hand he's 100BB deep.

D) There is a club draw in your hand. There is no flush draw in the other.

E) People are way more aggressive in 5/t. How many players in 2/5 are bet/folding $200 into 6 players including the PFR without a serious hand?

F) There are still many people who think this hand is a marginal spot, and some say fold it. Yours is an OBVIOUS FOLD and no it's not even close. The low end of a 1-card straight draw is just ****. Especially 6 ways to the flop. It's seriously awful that you would consider shoving here.

If you really think 100BB deep with 99, 3-ways on 678r is even comparable to 150BB deep with 44, 6-ways on 356tt, then I don't know what to say to you besides what I've already said.

Use some common sense man. Risk vs. reward. Don't shove 720 into a 475 pot with the worst possible draw you could have on a board rich with draws. That is just spew. If you had the nut flush draw I'd seriously consider it. If you had a OESFD, sure, jam. But you don't. You have dog ****. Just fold.

Shai

No he can't take back his bet.

If Mike checks now, old man's bet stands. Old man has to shove.
If Mike bets, old man can call, raise, or fold. Since action changed.

Mike can't change his own action. He can bet fold of course. But he can't bet, old man shoves and then say oh I want my bet back.

Dunno what you are thinking. Brain spazz I guess.

Misunderstood something he had said to me previously about out-of-order actions being unbinding.

Still, why check to make it binding? If I think I might actually be ahead but am unsure, this might be a rare case where an "information bet" might actually be useful. Or at least engage the man in conversation and try to glean why he's so eager to shove. Not that I'm good at that kind of thing, but maybe Mike is.

But no way in hell we are ahead.

Shai,

You've played what? 50-100 hours of live poker? Why do you speak like you're some kind of expert?

Im not going to argue with you about every point listed. Its like arguing with my teenager who thinks he knows everything at 18.

Get back to me when you have a couple 1000 hrs at 8+BB/hr

No, I'm not a live poker expert and don't pretend to be. I do have millions of online hands, theoretical understanding likely surpassing your own, and am a mathematics expert, if not a "live poker expert." As there is no fundamental difference between online play and live play, you should consider being less blithe in dismissing the work of others, particularly when such people have poured many hours into in-depth analysis of your play, identifying potential leaks at no benefit to themselves.

But if your ego is so large you can only take advice from a proven live "crusher," so be it. I'll get back to you when my live sample size satisfies your arbitrary criteria. Or maybe I won't, because there's not much point if you don't value my analysis or see me as a peer.

Regardless, I bid you good luck, and may you continue to run good with your "unorthodox lines to live poker success."

There is a very big fundamental difference between online and live poker. Not in the odds of hitting a flush or getting dealt AA, but in the way people play. Its an entirely different game and online crushers get destroyed playing live all the time. The number of online crushers I see come and go is amazing. There's a couple in my room right now that are spewing chips all over the place and Im sure will disappear soon just like plenty of others have.

If my ego was as big as you seem to think , I wouldnt be posting my mistakes for all the world to see now would I? I said my AA call was pretty marginal and that's the category I would put it in. Not "pretty bad" category you put it in. Either way, its a mistake. The level of mistake depends on the villain and this villain was terrible. If I posted 5-6 other hands he played, you would not be so sure my call was "pretty bad", trust me.

PS...I said 8BB/hr+. At 1/2, if you are as good as you think you are you should be able to surpass 10-15BB/hr.

Mike,

This isn't a stat thread. So if you don't want discussion about hands, that's fine. It's your thread.

From a reader's perspective, the AA hand wasn't borderline bad. It was horribad. From the sounds of it, you beat exactly AcKx.

It's up to you whether you want discussion or simply want the readers to take you word for everything and learn. Sounds that way. As I said, that's fine. It's your thread.

I'll chime in on the AA hand since I am between Mike and Shai being a half math/half read player/good tell reader. I have played over 1,000,000 hands online and I played a good chunk live. But not nearly as close as Mike.

Reverse the hand from that player's perspective. What are the two hands he thinks you have when you check call the flop $60? That is a fairly big bet for him.

I would venture to guess he thinks either you have the Ac, are trying to hit a high hand, or the nuts. Because all these guys love to slowplay the nuts and they probably assume the same.

So when he blasts overshoves the turn he literally isn't bluffing like ever. You don't have the Ac so like Shai said about his worst hand is AcKx. His whole range has huge equity vs you.

Now take into account that you and I agree when someone puts $200 in the pot that is almost always an indication they have a strong hand. In this case the flush.

Not to mention this guy being OMC. I don't think he is overplaying a Kx hand.

Generally on average a player has a 2 pair+, flush or NFD on a mono board ~13% of the time. Little less for tighter little more for looser -+1.5%

If they call a flop bet now their hand super skews to something way stronger than yours or with lots of equity. A tighter player will have more flushes than Ax and loose player will be roughly 50/50. But that is considering some guy who players all suited hands that can make a straight vs a range and any ace.

"He seemed so eager it looked to me like he wanted me out of the pot....but I was wrong. He had 7c5c."

You weren't wrong that he wanted you out of the pot. I'm sure he did - you have the Ac in his mind. The 4th flush card always comes in these spots. In their minds.

I will add here.... that live play is nothing like online.

Exploitive play, generally even if it's bizzare, are often correct vs many of these clueless players. Also understanding how poor they play and how faulty their logic is.

Im fine discussion about hands, but Shai wasnt discussing the hand. He was telling me how bad I played the hand. Even that wouldnt be that big of a deal except that a person with 50 hrs of live experience playing 1/2 live should not be talking in absolutes about a 2/5 and when they werent even at the table. I guess he doesnt believe me, but trust me when I tell you there is a massive difference between 1/2 and 2/5. At least where I play. Theres a reason why my win rate in pure dollars is close to the same at 1/2 and 2/5 even though 2/5 is 250% higher stakes. The games are NOT the same. People dont play the same. People bluff a lot more at 2/5. They play bigger pots with different ranges. There are nowhere near as many scared money players at 2/5.

Shai listed the guys hand range basically as every combo of a flush, every set, top 2 pair and any hand with the Ac. The flop was KcQcXc. There are plenty of 2/5 players who after I check/call the flop and under rep my hand, will shove any pair on this turn especially if they have any club, because it looks like I have the Ac and possibly nothing else. Few 1/2 players will do that but plenty of 2/5 players will.

Having said all of that, I probably still shouldve folded which is why I said my call was pretty marginal. But its not a horrible call. Thats why I told him to get back to me when hes played a couple 1000 hours live (preferably at higher than 1/2) and hes seen what Ive seen. Then he will be better informed.

Very true.

Later in the session....

Couple limpers. Someone raises to $20 and they go 4 to the flop
Flop ($85) Qc5s5c. Checked to preflop raiser in LP who bets $50. EP calls and then MP check raises to $150. Preflop raiser folds. EP calls.
Turn ($435) 7d. EP checks. MP shoves $300. EP calls with QJ and busts MPs 88.

MP was the same guy from my AA hand. You still think the only had he can have that I beat is AcKx? Some people are just crazy and while I do think folding one pair hands to very large bets is smart most of the time, sometimes you cant give up so easy. This guy was no OMC. He was just an old guy. Theres a difference.

I tool the last 2 days off and played a short 3 hour session today. I was stuck $300 after 20 mins but made a comeback and left up $150.

1) Button straddle. SB limps. MP limps. I limp 8c8s in LP.
Flop ($40) 5h4h3d. Checked to me. I bet $25. SB calls HU
Turn ($90) Tc. He check/calls $50
River ($190) 3h. X/X. He had JJ

2) 2 limps. I raise to $30 AcQs. 1 limper calls HU. Hes one of the biggest calling stations I know
Flop ($75) Ad6d5h. He checks. I bet $50. He has a $175 stack and cr to $125.

Ive said it a million times... "You will be better off long term if you fold EVERY time you get raised and dont have a monster yourself or odds to draw". Forget about fear of being exploited. Just fold.

In this case, I dont think I can really fold because even if he shoved I would need 29% equity to call. Against 2 pair Im fairly close to that so if he ever does this with a FD or a weaker ace, its a call. So I got it in and of course he had A5. I still wasnt very far off equity wise, but its just more reinforecent of my rule.

3) A new maniac sits at the table. This guy is one of the top 3 maniacs in the room. Hes a special kind of maniac though. The kind that honestly thinks he can outplay anyone. He makes all kinds of stupid calls to take the pot away later in the hand in spots that will never work.

Maniac straddles button. I call with 99 in the SB. We go 6 to the flop. Maniac doesnt raise
Flop ($60) Ac9c2d. I check. It checks to the cutoff who is pretty solid and he bets $40. The maniac calls $40. I decide to take a risk and just call as the calling station from hand #2 already has chips in his hand. I call as does EP calling station.
Turn ($220) Ad. I check and it checks thru which shocked me to be honest. The cutoff bet into 5 other people without an ace?
River ($220) Td. Backdoor flush hit. If nobody has an ace or the back door flush, Im probably not making any more in this hand so I check. It checks to the maniac OTB who bets $150. I call. I know he doesnt have an ace and maybe someone else will call if I dont raise. The other 2 guys fold and I beat the maniacs 23. LOL.

No other hands that were all that interesting.

Mike.

I guess this is one of those, ""you had to be there"

You said you had no reads, I thought. Cop to it was a bad call and you have cred. As a poster. Not as a player. You're win rate speaks for itself. Or write better to describe the whole scenario. Lol.

I've played everywhere too. Isles might be tough or not. Whatever. We still run into the same type of players everywhere. Including your own style. It's not unique. You have it tune like a Steinway. But I've seen it. I incorporate some of same techniques. (My problem is I take it to extremes , like implied odds in calling, and use it to play more hands. Lol. Kinda serious, mostly joking.) but all other types - most of us have seen it all.

Here's a perhaps rhetorical question. Don't you think if you had Shai's math aptitude, you'd make even more?