2-7TD OOP Turn Strategy - Page 2 - Draw Poker Forum - Discuss Draw and Other Poker Games

Two Plus Two Forums Poker Strategy Other Poker Games

2-7TD OOP Turn Strategy

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 2 of 3

1 2 3

Page 2 of 3

1 2 3

10-27-2018 , 03:11 AM

#26

Small Balls

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 491

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScotchOnDaRocks

You can, however, have some 1cds in your x/r range

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScotchOnDaRocks

I think it's a clear mistake to not c/r some of your d1s.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScotchOnDaRocks

just check calling all D1s is a pretty weak bad play imo.

By not c/r these hands the IP player can bet with impunity even if he knows your strategy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScotchOnDaRocks

Also I would bet some pats and c/r some D1s

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScotchOnDaRocks

if you c/r at least some D1s

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScotchOnDaRocks

Anyway I think there should be some D1s in your check-raising range

Just curious. Would you ever c/r a d1?

Last edited by Small Balls; 10-27-2018 at 03:15 AM. Reason: one more!

Quote

10-27-2018 , 02:43 PM

#27

ScotchOnDaRocks

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 7,200

Quote:

Originally Posted by Small Balls

Just curious. Would you ever c/r a d1?

Because since you are betting out at times when you improve your check more often means “bet and take it”

So when you go for a c/r with a hand like 2347 it’s more often someone will be UI and they will fold or if they did improve marginally you got money in as a favorite.

Anyhow it is a pretty bad mistake to just c/c it. Either lead or c/r it.

Time well spent quoting me in every single instance ha ha

Quote

10-29-2018 , 02:39 AM

#28

Small Balls

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 491

Just messing with ya Scotch.

Interesting thoughts on the checkraise. I'm not sure I agree, but this is for sure a complicated spot. Don't you think if you were checkraising a lot, villain would (and should) start checking back his 2-card draws? Even if you weren't checkraising a lot, I don't see a lot of incentive for villain to bet unimproved. Wouldn't his expectation from checking be higher than betting, since the only hands he gets you to fold he has about even equity against?

I know you're a pretty mathy player so I'll hand that over to you to figure out

Quote

10-29-2018 , 11:38 AM

#29

ScotchOnDaRocks

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 7,200

Quote:

Originally Posted by Small Balls

I know, I have a sense of humor

Anyway, earlier on in this thread I quasi proved that even when the IP player more or less knows that the OOP is employing a check 100% strategy that the IP still almost has a profitable bet even when his cards disappear when he his called or raised. Therefore when we have a bet out range our checks will more often mean "bet and take it" and in theory IP should be incentivized to bet out UI more.

We don't want our lead out range to be all 1cd and c/r be all pat, so the natural consequence would be to do some shifting of pats into bet out and 1cd into c/r.

Quote

10-29-2018 , 01:27 PM

#30

Small Balls

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 491

I agree with your card disappearing explanation, but I’m not sure if it makes more money than checking. By checking he gets a free look vs all the whiffed check-raises and ~50% equity vs all the 2-card draws, so that’s a pretty decent expectation already.

Quote

10-29-2018 , 01:41 PM

#31

ScotchOnDaRocks

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 7,200

He does far better by betting since our defend rate is lower with mixed strategy but should be checking around 20% if the time signaled by the times he’s seen just one or no blockers

Quote

10-29-2018 , 01:50 PM

#32

ScotchOnDaRocks

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 7,200

The IP player can bet just as much against an OOP player employing a 100% check strategy that does not c/r 1cd

Quote

10-31-2018 , 09:04 AM

#33

Small Balls

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 491

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScotchOnDaRocks

He does far better by betting since our defend rate is lower with mixed strategy but should be checking around 20% if the time signaled by the times he’s seen just one or no blockers

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScotchOnDaRocks

The IP player can bet just as much against an OOP player employing a 100% check strategy that does not c/r 1cd

You very well may be right about the first part, but I disagree with the second. I've done an EV calculation, giving both players xx832 on the 2nd draw. Checking has an EV of 0.73 BB while betting has an EV of 0.43 BB.

Assumptions:
I haven't made any mistakes

Discards: 9,T,T,J,J,Q,Q,K,K,A
No river betting
OOP player pats all J+ when IP checks behind
OOP c/r all 10+ when IP bets
OOP c/c all 1cds including T832
OOP never snows

Quote

10-31-2018 , 02:13 PM

#34

ScotchOnDaRocks

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 7,200

Quote:

Originally Posted by Small Balls

Discards: 9,T,T,J,J,Q,Q,K,K,A
No river betting
OOP player pats all J+ when IP checks behind
OOP c/r all 10+ when IP bets
OOP c/c all 1cds including T832
OOP never snows

Thanks for posting this as it illustrates a good example

When I say I'm betting with same frequency against either strategy it doesn't mean I'm always betting IP. I think the IP player should bet around 85% of the time give or take

The times I'm betting is when I've paired and/or have three card seven

I'm definitely checking after seeing those discards, which as you have shown (I trust your numbers bud!) it is better to do so

Quote

10-31-2018 , 06:39 PM

#35

DeathDonkey

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 12,875

Quote:

Originally Posted by SetofJacks

I strongly disagree that opponent is always betting turn after checking the flop.

I also think we're missing loads of equity by checking the best d1 in the game, especially when we've let the pot sit so tiny thus far. We have a great hand, build the pot.

This is a poker theory fallacy. When the pot is extraordinarily small, making thin value bets is not very important, inducing a bluff goes way up in merit. Imagine the game were NL and think about what happens when you lead turn here with 2347 against a good player. Btw, in this small a pot, if villain raises turn with a jack (which I think is generally a bad play) he is PRINTING money against 2347. You put in two bets badly just to make back like 0.1 bets in river implied odds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by / / ///AutoZone

sometimes it's also good to risk passing on some thin value to preserve some semblance of balance to your game. if you're betting everytime you improve, villain would be correct to bet 100% when you check.
in other words, if the vbet your'e making is so thin as to be hoping for a fold, it's not worth destroying your range over imo.

Good post

Quote

10-31-2018 , 07:08 PM

#36

ScotchOnDaRocks

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 7,200

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeathDonkey

Not in this case if you look at the math of how much equity you are giving away to a 2cd even in small pots

Limit poker is about winning pots and not bets and the math doesn't add up at all if you are making them live to entire pot by "trapping them" for a partial bet

In theory you are correct if it is NL, but its not

Quote

10-31-2018 , 07:30 PM

#37

DeathDonkey

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 12,875

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScotchOnDaRocks

Villain is more likely to be pat than unimproved. The times he is pat we get crushed. Feel free to check the math

Quote

10-31-2018 , 07:33 PM

#38

ScotchOnDaRocks

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 7,200

Quote:

Originally Posted by Small Balls

Discards: 9,T,T,J,J,Q,Q,K,K,A
No river betting
OOP player pats all J+ when IP checks behind
OOP c/r all 10+ when IP bets
OOP c/c all 1cds including T832
OOP never snows

Just to add that I think it's noteworthy that this check out strategy still allows us to make a profitable bet even with the nut low discards seen. It's just that checking is better so we check.

However if you crunched your numbers to have the OOP c/r 1cds to an 8 or better it would be losing. This is why I think a check all strategy that c/r's certain 1cd can work as well but mixed is probably best of all

Quote

10-31-2018 , 07:40 PM

#39

ScotchOnDaRocks

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 7,200

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeathDonkey

Villain is more likely to be pat than unimproved. The times he is pat we get crushed. Feel free to check the math

I did bud even in the case where we see QQ, KK, and AA as discards...the check all strategy can't overcome the slim amount the bet needs to work out (even in a 2.25 bet pot) plus the equity realized when 1cd does not c/r

Now when the IP only bets around 85% when it either improves or has seen blockers the OOP check all strategy is really up against it

Quote

10-31-2018 , 07:57 PM

#40

Small Balls

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 491

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScotchOnDaRocks

Does that take into account river betting where you may have turned your range face up? Or do you sometimes lead with your junkiest 1-card draws too?

Quote

10-31-2018 , 08:04 PM

#41

Small Balls

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 491

Also, if IP bets 85%, he's almost always going to be pat or drawing 1, and 3-betting part of his range that's got you crushed. Is your 1-card draw really doing so good against that range?

Quote

10-31-2018 , 08:12 PM

#42

ScotchOnDaRocks

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 7,200

Quote:

Originally Posted by Small Balls

Also, if IP bets 85%, he's almost always going to be pat or drawing 1, and 3-betting part of his range that's got you crushed. Is your 1-card draw really doing so good against that range?

to avoid jumping around and possibly causing confusion what strategy are we playing from OOP?

Quote

10-31-2018 , 08:26 PM

#43

Small Balls

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 491

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScotchOnDaRocks

to avoid jumping around and possibly causing confusion what strategy are we playing from OOP?

I generally check 100%. If you're doing a mixed strategy, I could see how IP's extra incentive to bet could make c/r'ing a 1cd feasible but I haven't done any work on that.

If you were playing a clone of yourself, what hands would you bet IP and what hands would you check back?

Quote

10-31-2018 , 08:46 PM

#44

ScotchOnDaRocks

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 7,200

Quote:

Originally Posted by Small Balls

Yes, exactly as a mixed strategy more often means "bet and take it" when we check..but as a counter measure some 1cd draws can be held back and we can also c/r pat queens. I think it's needless to snow because there are plenty of queen combos and if your opponent is defending close to GTO then you will win roughly the same amount of time, however you will lose one less bet when he makes a ten or jack that would have called to pick off snow but checks back river

Quote

10-31-2018 , 09:36 PM

#45

Small Balls

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 491

I still think we need to snow some, or villain can exploitively fold against our value bets. If he never adjusts and continues with GTO, then yeah, I guess the Q strategy makes sense.

Quote

10-31-2018 , 09:52 PM

#46

ScotchOnDaRocks

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 7,200

Quote:

Originally Posted by Small Balls

I still think we need to snow some, or villain can exploitively fold against our value bets. If he never adjusts and continues with GTO, then yeah, I guess the Q strategy makes sense.

Good point and I think we should snow sometimes anyway such as when we have been getting smacked with blockers

Quote

11-02-2018 , 02:10 PM

#47

SetofJacks

veteran

Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 2,378

Check-raising pat Q's? Are you referring specifically to pat Q's that can't draw again (like QJxxx or Q3456)?

I assume we're never patting a Q OOP with a decent draw behind it (e.g. 8245), right?

Quote

11-02-2018 , 03:21 PM

#48

ScotchOnDaRocks

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 7,200

Quote:

Originally Posted by SetofJacks

Check-raising pat Q's? Are you referring specifically to pat Q's that can't draw again (like QJxxx or Q3456)?

I assume we're never patting a Q OOP with a decent draw behind it (e.g. 8245), right?

Yes certainly, I probably should have been more clear on that but partly
because I have not yet worked on attempting to solve the breakpoint of the best 1cd underneath that we should eschew in order to stay pat.

Quote

11-02-2018 , 10:07 PM

#49

Small Balls

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 491

Doesn’t checkraising Qs force you to check/call the river with really weak hands?

Quote

11-03-2018 , 04:25 AM

#50

ScotchOnDaRocks

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 7,200

Not tremendously wider than if you weren’t

Quote

Page 2 of 3

First

1 2 3

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 2 of 3

First

1 2 3

Last