Imo he's got 89 not spades.

I just dont see this happening almost ever with a top pair hand or a ten either. This stinks of value like I said before. Oh, and he could have 87 and 75, those are the only two hands that are bluffing fairly often though is what Im saying.

Without semi-bluffs or Jx, Tx we're a 20/80 dog, but that's to be expected.

dude, just cuz he plays half his hands doesnt mean he cant fold a small SC to a huge 3bet. hes not a total ******.

my question for you is: why should we call here when we can find an infinite amount of better spots to get our money in against this guy? whether we are ahead or not, it is marginal.

also, why do you think that the small amount of time he has a small SC or top pair will outweigh the time he is trapping with a set or 2 pair, or hit the back door flush? donks slowplay alot, and that is what it seems like to me. he is taking you to value-town here, just fold and take all his money when he has 1pair and you have a set.

and yes, ive read all of slanksys books etc. i know that what you invest in a pot is no longer yours, its just money in the pot. but if you look at the hand as a whole, you went broke with 1pair, likely against a guy who trapped. the fact of the matter is that the reason we are so much better than the villain is that we can fold 1 pair, and they go broke with it. we put money in ahead, and fold when we are behind. were behind here

TT+,77-66,44,JTs,98s,87s,98o
We have 20%

Just by adding in 87 and 75
TT+, 77-66, 44, JTs, 98s, 87s, 75s, 98o, 87o, 75o
We have 43.5%.

Just by adding in 87 (but not 75)
TT+, 77-66, 44, JTs, 98s, 87s, 98o, 87o
We have 33%.

Note: I kept 98/77 in there which are just as unlikely.

By taking out 98/77 we go from 33% to 47% against
TT+,77-66,44,JTs,87s,87o

dude, when you get all aroused by those ranges, you forget that every hand in there is not as likely as the rest. if you properly weighted the ranges with the probabilities of him holding each hand, i think it would dictate a fold.

all you keep doing is posting ranges. i agree that ranges are important, REM, etc i know.

however, i think in some situations, you have to play by feel, instinct, logic, sense, and intuition.

the guy is trapping. fold or pay him off. hes not gonna have small connectors as often as hands that beat you

I don't use Hold'em Ranger much, but maybe you could post a weighted range and teach me how to use the prog (no sarcasm intended).

From my range, he only has to be bluffing with one hand to make this +ev. Maybe it's not a perfect range, but you have sets, two pair, better/worse overpairs and one missed draw. This prob weights itself out.

dude, im a live player mostly, i dont use p-stove, ranger, or any other range analysis program. i usually put people on ranges preflop and eliminate hands as the play progresses.

i just feel like jumping to range analyisis in this situation will improperly weight a call, when the play of the hand states that he is value betting a better hand

there are times when ranges and poker stove help alot in hand analysis, i just feel like this is not one of them

i am curious to see the result and what he had, cuz you could be completely right, just from my b&m experience from a ton of hands, it feels like a fold is correct. maybe i am being too much like doyle brunson and playing off of feel, but poker is not all about ranges and percentages ; )

ps: sorry if i have sounded like a jerk in some of my posts, my dog just knocked over my TV so i am in a sour mood

Do you call people taking this line at uNL stakes often with strong one pair hands? Im just curious if you do what your results look like when looking people up because as I said, this is usually a huge hand from what I have seen.

Live poker is no diffrent from online poker.

You put people on ranges (not a single hand) and try to maximize your ev aginst that range.

How else would you make a decision?

You prob mentally do this without realizing it.
A guy shoves the river and you prob automatically say it could be 10% nuts, 90% air and call or the other way around and fold.

Well - It's not often that I am 250bb deep when someone else is too.

If the guy is competent I might play diffently.

Where do you draw the line?
In a 3b pot for 100bb I think everyone would be saying to call a river bet.
150bb?
200bb?
250bb?

The fact that we are deep in a 3b pot makes it play similar to as if we had 100 bb in a normal raised pot as far as psr and bet sizing proportionally. That is why I asked if you would call this line normally if we assume we are 100bb deep in a raised pot.

Yeah, I'm not folding this when 100bb deep to start hand (normally, not 100% of the time, obv).

But I've been know to value bet middle pair/tpnk on the river and such and people tend to bet/look me up lighter.

i dont think its neccessary to draw a line and say "here you call, here you fold"

i think each situation should be analyzed independently

i realize that most of poker is putting people on ranges and acting accordingly, but there is more to it in single situations

here, i think, from past experiences and playing with ALOT of fish like this one (my college dorm, casino regs, etc) that he will turn up a hand better than KK

if you wanna think about it all in ranges, i just think that his range is weighted strongly towards having you beat because of his line. lots of information wieghts ranges, and there is no way in hell that all of the hands in his range that you posted have the same probability.

god i love poker. there is no other game where we can argue for an hour about a single play such as this. anyways, i think his actual range is strongly weighted away from 87 and 75 because of pf, and his line, and just my feel of the hand. i have played hands like this alot, where the villian has turned up sets, 2pairs, bd flushes, etc. rarely a busted double gutter. RARELY

..

I just wanted to say one more thing also. You say if the guy is competent this may play out differently but competent players dont usually take this line so it leaves us in a fun spot.

Just to clarify, I wasn't saying this was a 100% call (no risk!), only that it's worth considering a call. I don't think it's possible for there to be a 100% correct answer based only on the information we've been given in the OP, but I'm saying there is enough information given that I think calling or folding is a tough decision either way, and hopefully over the hands we have with this player maybe we have seen some post-flop tendencies and lines that may guide our decision.

I was writing quickly, but also add things like top pair hands and underpairs as well. You can probably discount those a little bit as well, of course.

Not really, there are many types of bad. When a loose passive player takes this line I think it's almost always a strong hand that got there, but there are certainly players that are bad in the bluffy/spewy sense as well. I don't think it makes sense to say "Oh that's level 3, he is never on that level". He can be a bad player and bluff too much in these kinds of scenarios and still occasionally get into a spot where his naturally bluffy tendencies lead to a decision that looks like a higher level than it actually is. This may or may not be the case here of course, but I don't think this is a particularly useful counterargument.

This is definitely an important point. I am assuming he can make it to the river with air sometimes based on the OP. I may be inferring too much from an off-hand statement, in which case obviously it skews the results more towards a fold. I don't know whether I'm reading too much into the OP or not.

Anyway, I agree this isn't as simple as making up a range and stoving the equity, even though it clearly is, in the abstract. The whole point is to understand how we come to decide on how heavily to weight different possible holdings in his range, based on what we know from the OP and our general experience at the level. I don't have any experience at 100nl so I'm relying more heavily on the OP. I think it's pretty understandable for a uNL player to generally weight ranges for this kind of line towards big hands than bluffs in general though, given the way most uNL games play, but there are enough indicators here to at least make us consider a call, in my estimation.

No, but even at 10nl I have occasionally found a villian against whom this is a call. The trick is recognizing him when you find him.

i understand that stack sizes change situations and dictate calls, folds and raises in different situations. ive read professional NL vol. 1, NLHTP, and every other good poker book.

i think that drawing a line like that is uneccessary and a pointless endeavor. the other situations and different and if they come up they can be analyzed.


yes i know that. i understand expectatoin, pot odds compared to odds of winning

if i thought we would beat KK less than 70% of the time then i wouldnt be arguing that folding is correct

you're not convincing me by rehashing the stuff i read in theory of poker when i bought it ages ago. i understand it, i just think he beats KK more than 70% of the time.

I see this line all the time w/ QQ or w/e when stacks are deep.

A competent player is prob not going to cR ai on the flop this deep or w/e.

I think villain has 2 river ranges: pre-bet and post-bet. His range pre-bet is broadly in line with those posted already in this thread, but his range post-bet is much narrower: namely, {bluffs and 2p+}. I think a worse made hand is an almost negligible part of the range.

So to me that leaves the basic question of how much weight we assign to a bluff? IMO adding the times he's bluffing to the odd time he has a worse hand does not make anywhere near ~70% of the time.

Add in the stuff AngryHobo has been talking about ("what does this feel like, man?") and I think that reinforces the overall picture.

To me villain's line absolutely screams a chase that got there or a backdoor special that got there.

.........

Pokey, a question. You say our wr depends on 1 or 2 big hands a day. This is something I think about a lot. I can't ever figure out if the couple of marginal/big hands we win/lose are where it's at, or whether it's the other 1,998 hands that day that make it. Instincively, I feel it is the latter because often in our big hands we are only slightly wrong in judging our equity against a range....or, to put it slightly differently, we often have, say, 30%+ equity when we felt in these spots, so it's actually not that big a hand, especially considering we'll sometimes be right and sometimes suck out.

word, i agree with chomp totally. except i also think he could have been slowplaying with a set or 2 pair. fish like to slowplay so i see no reason why we should rule that out. i think chomp just forgot to mention it as an option.

great analysis chompers

pertaining the the second part of your post chomp, i think that its the hundreds and thousands of smaller decisions we make that are better than our opponenets that make our winrate. poker is all about making a better decision than the other guy, rating the quality of the decisions based on slansky's Fundamental Theorem of Poker

and yes, i also think that the hardest decisions are usually marginal good plays or marginally bad ones. we may lose some EV when we make a bad decision, but not that much. it seems like more because the bad decisions often result in a big loss. however, on the expectation scale, its not that big of a beat. so moral of the story is that i also disagree with Pokey's statement pertaining to winrate

ICMoney--

a fish isnt gonna c/c the flop and turn with a hand like that. he will bet or raise at least once.

c/c on 2 streets indicates a draw, a week hand, or a TRAP

i like the way you get things done chompsky

This is what Im trying to get at. I think so much of that range fits perfectly upto his river action but not after which is why I said a few times that when I see this at uNL, it is almost always a huge hand.

yea dude, i think we're all pretty much in agreement, ICMoney is who we're arguing with though...

I'm a lover, not a fighter.

I call here.
I'm a fish.
Sit with me and take my lunch money.

For a weighted range:
71.47% ( TT+, 66, 44, JTs, 98s(30), 87s(30), 98o(30), 87o(30) )
28.53% ( KK )
This range isn't saying the connecting cards make up 30% of his range. Just that if he had 98s, he would make it to the river 30% like that. He would make it to the river w/ TJs, etc 100% of the time.

The question really is what % will he play AA/QQ or 98 or 78.