Quote:
Originally Posted by niss
I don't disagree with you much, but let's have a go here.
When you do disagree with me, my first impulse is that I’ve probably made a mistake.
Quote:
I think folding is a terrible option.
If UTG does not have a full house, his check-raise puts him in a bad spot thanks to his position (although he may not know that).
The check-raise by UTG (Villain) seems (to me) a rather strange bet.
You’d think that if he wanted to bet the hand, he would have just bet it. Or if he wanted to slow-play it, he’d continue to do that.
But on the other hand, Villain may be confused by Hero’s mini bet. Having seen Hero raise ~88% of what was possible before the flop, Villain may have fully expected Hero to bet the flop, sort of a continuation bet. And Villain may have psyched himself into a check-raise mode. Then when Hero makes the mini-bet, perhaps Villain is unable to adapt and he goes ahead with the original check-raise plan.
Villain manages to get enough into the pot ($16.75) on the second betting round so that if Hero calls, Villain will be able to go “all-in” on the third betting round. Maybe Villain so fully expected Hero to bet that he planned on raising enough to manage to get “all-in” on either the second betting round or the third. Maybe that was his thinking from the outset of the second betting round.
Quote:
But first let's start with assuming he has a full house. You can bet that he will put his whole stack in, and he pretty much has to given his position, irrespective of turn and river.
I think Villain either has
• A9YZ (the nuts),
• 99YZ (a vulnerable full house),
• AXYZ (trip aces – sort of a semi bluff in this situation),
• a club draw (a weak semi bluff),
• none of these (perhaps simply a bluff or over optimism).
Any of the above is possible. How possible depends on the opponent. I’d guess he probably has one of the first three listed.
Either one of the first two, A9YZ or 99YZ is just as likely to have been dealt as the other, if Y and Z are neither aces nor nines. You’d think Hero would have a greater chance with 99YZ, and he does, but it’s not much of a difference. Hero has about a 25% equity either way. That is, Hero should expect to win about one time in four if Villain already has any full house. (That’s very crude, but in the ball park).
If Villain has AXYZ without a king, then Villain has four more outs to make a full house than Hero, but Hero has the edge if nobody makes a full house. Overall, Hero has the edge if Villain has AXYZ without a king.
So worst case scenario has Hero with about a 25% equity if Villain already has a full house and even better if Villain doesn’t. That's as simulated and surprises me. I thought it would be lower.
There will be $47.50 in the pot if Hero calls the $15.75 raise, and Villain will be able to put his remaining $46.55 into the pot on the next betting round.
Thus Hero is getting implied pot odds of 78.3/15.75 = ~4.97 to 1 to call. Let’s call it 5 to 1.
- (47.50-15.75+46.55)/15.75 = 4.97
So one time out of four, Hero wins five and three times out of four Hero loses one.
By gosh you’re right again, Niss! Thanks for the correction.
Hero should call.
Quote:
OP thus is getting 10-1 to call when he has about 25% equity against an A-9-x-x hand where x-x is not a King or a Queen. So calling the $15 extra dollars seems correct.
He does have about a 25% equity but he’s only getting 5 to 1 to call, I think. No matter, with 5 to 1 implied pot odds, it’s a clear call, and if we throw in the times Villain won’t have the nut full house, Hero’s equity is even better than 25%.
It’s a definite call.
Quote:
Now what if he doesn't have a full house? Well, if he leads the turn for the full pot, we have to give him credit for a full house and fold if we have not hit. So it is as if he had a full house, and calling was correct. Similarly, if we hit ... and he may be reluctant to fold given how much he's already put into the pot. But then you throw in the added benefit of the possibility that he might check -- not unlikely if he figured OP was weak with the $1 and figured he might steal the pot with a big check-raise, as who would call a check-raise after betting or calling $1? -- and you either can take a free card or bet depending upon what seems correct.
Agreed.
Quote:
So in my opinion calling is never wrong and folding is never correct.
Agreed.
Quote:
Maybe I've completely butchered this, I don't know. I am not very good and looking at these things on a screen.
I think you got the pot odds wrong, but I think your conclusion is correct.
Thanks for the correction.
Buzz