My next Kings hand, better?


PokerStars - $0.02 NL - Holdem - 9 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

CO: 80.5 BB (VPIP: 12.09, PFR: 6.59, 3Bet Preflop: 1.67, Hands: 184)
BTN: 46.5 BB (VPIP: 31.03, PFR: 0.00, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 30)
SB: 121.5 BB (VPIP: 37.50, PFR: 31.25, 3Bet Preflop: 14.29, Hands: 16)
BB: 102 BB (VPIP: 28.57, PFR: 0.00, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 14)
Hero (UTG): 101.5 BB
UTG+1: 140.5 BB (VPIP: 68.18, PFR: 22.73, 3Bet Preflop: 10.00, Hands: 23)
MP: 34 BB (VPIP: 25.00, PFR: 6.25, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 16)
MP+1: 100 BB (VPIP: 12.50, PFR: 6.25, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 16)
MP+2: 100 BB (VPIP: 17.72, PFR: 6.33, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 81)

SB posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has K K

Hero raises to 3 BB, fold, fold, fold, fold, fold, fold, SB calls 2.5 BB, BB calls 2 BB

Flop: (9 BB, 3 players) A 2 J
SB checks, BB checks, Hero bets 5.5 BB, SB calls 5.5 BB, fold

Turn: (20 BB, 2 players) 2
SB checks, Hero bets 19.5 BB, SB calls 19.5 BB

River: (59 BB, 2 players) 4
SB bets 28.5 BB, fold

SB wins 57 BB

Betting this flop mutliway on the flop is likely pretty awful. Potting the turn is even worse. Funnily enough folding here after taking such a bad line is probably good but flop and turn are so bad that isn't too beneficial.

If you did this as a result of your feedback from the previous thread you have some pretty glaring holes in your basic understanding and need to ask more (basic) questions.

keep the pot small, you're missing the ace in your hand

hahaha

https://www.pokerlistings.com/strate...-equity-equity

Have a read of this. This should help you understand why, in hand 1, even though villain was only 30% likely to win on the turn, folding would have been a cataclysmic blunder. Of course he can’t know he’s exactly 30% to win but can estimate that he has at least the flush draw outs and perhaps an A or a K, even if you’re never bluffing.

In hand 2, have a think about what villain’s range is when your flop bet is called, and then talk us through why you bet turn. What range of villain’s hands do you think calls the turn bet and how does your hand do against that?

It's kind of a huge disconnect in logic though. To essentially accuse us all of being incapable of independent thought but to also wonder why some of us might be biased by knowing the outcome.

In fairness to him, I do think a lot of posters on here understand things well enough to try and ignore results, but it's also hard to ignore, and I've seen plenty of threads in the past where people will start advocating for crazy folds and razor thin calls when they can see villain's hand. It clutters threads. Ideally, no results and everybody grunches on their first post in a thread.

fixed, kind of.

2+2 has a lot of good books. 'The Theory of Poker' by some old guy I can't remember is pretty good. Also 'Small Stakes No-Limit Hold'em'.

Also I would suggest reading books like these will be more helpful than posting here for a while - not that you shouldn't post here too. A lot of the comments you get will reference ranges and equity and other stuff that won't be too useful until you have a solid grasp of why they are important and more basic fundamentals. It's just going to be confusing.

I'm not sure how to Quote properly, I know nooooooob... fair enough. I'm here t learn so I did the what I think villain calls with in hand 2. (never done this before so please forgive and possibly point out errors)

When villain calls on flop I think he has (AA JJ raise pre-flop I think ) 22 AK AQ AJ Ax KQ K10 QJ Q10 (all these could be clubs too) 2x Jx 45 35 34 22 33 44 55 109 10c9c XcXc

So I can see now why I shouldn't be so confident with KK even if he is massive fish, because even though an A is unlikely for him to be holding he has a lot of alright hands, even some massive draws with top pair like AcKc.

So now I should explain the turn from my side, at the time I thought he doesn't have an ace and he could have a flush draw like before but it just missed so now make him to pay to hit the draw. Pretty basic and now knowing how many hands he can still have a lot of outs with it looks pretty bad.

Is that the sort of conclusion I should've come too?

Reading it now, thankyou I appreciate anyone taking the time to help me

I went and had a look using this hand as an exercise in trying to work the pot odds out. Again first time doing this so... I could be wrong please tell me if I'm on the right track here

On the Flop - I bet 60c into 135c giving villain just over 3:1 pot odds. His chances of hitting (just flush) on turn are roughly 4:1. To me that doesn't exactly price him in... BUT... if you factor in villain is just under 2:1 to get there by river then it makes sense.

On the Turn - I bet 88c into 255c giving villain pretty much 4:1 pot odds and now he's the same 4:1 (just over) to hit on river making him even money... no?

Let me know if this is a fair assessment and I have left out the pairs because with my 4 Bet it's KK or AA so he only gets one and doesn't know which one so from his perspective (if he was thinking) the flush is the only hand he knows he's ahead for certain on.

You're on the right lines, but it's often the case that he has 6 outs to top pair as well (e.g. when you have queens). You might even be barreling with another AK and then he's freerolling. No one folds AKss in that spot.

You don't just calculate pot odds but what he/you expect to win, on average, should he hit his hand too. Implied odds are much more important in no-limit. ^ No one is folding when they get somewhere around immediate pot odds to call and can then bet into you when they hit for a chance to win more. Unless you are folding TP every single time a draw comes in and can but him squarely on a draw.

Also you tend to have much better implied odds in position, which makes position a huge factor in NL. The deeper you are, the more important it is.

So, when you say immediate odds you mean break even right? Okay so I go away and look at implied odds too or stay at this line of thinking for now until I make some better decisions. I only play 2nl

When I say immediate pot odds I mean the chance to hit your hand on the next card compared to the price you're getting from the pot. This is less relevant in no limit because what you should be considering is the chance to hit your hand on the next card, relative to the amount you expect to win on future betting streets should you hit your hand - i.e. implied odds (draws are also powerful in NL because you can apply pressure with them by raising while retaining equity, but this is another topic).

This amount you can estimate to win will depend on your position, the skill of your opponent, the stack sizes, and how obvious your draw is. For example if you're against a skilled opponent, out of position, with an obvious flush draw, and the opponent is unlikely to have a strong hand that can call a bet when you hit your flush, then your implied odds will be low and closer to pot odds. If you're in position against a poor passive player who raises the flop and figures to have a great hand like a set, and you both have large stacks relative to the pot, and you have a disguised draw like a straight draw, then your implied odds are huge and you can call the raise with nowhere near close to immediate pot odds.

Yeah just read a bit more, especially a small stakes NL book. You're on the right track and will improve a lot with a bit of research. Stick around at NL2 and keep stats on your game and post on the forums, focus on playing well and keep a lot of buyins for your level just for playing poker - like 100 bucks should be good. This will allow you to not worry about bad beats and coolers and is a great habit for moving up. I've found that a lot of people's problem is not a lack of skill but a lack of good money management. I know at NL2 it doesn't matter as much but start the habit now.

I have like 50 bucks, been up to 90 down to 30. Tilt control and only playing when focussed and on the ball is real pivotal for me.

Having fun going through my hands on pokertracker and analysing them from this pot odds vs card odds perspective. Makes you wonder why anyone calls at all! ha ha, just kidding. Thanks for the feedback super noob but love the game... even the coolers

Everyone? No. Most? Yes. Also, almost all of us naturally think that OP's generally lost the hand they decided to post and therefore villain likely had the nuts or close to it. That (mostly true) knowledge doesn't generally affect responses so not sure why actual results do?

FWIW, I completely understand the intent behind the "don't post results" thing/rule. I just don't think it generally affects what people will post and it's sort of rude to tell people what or what not to do, especially when they are new posters.

Let's take an extreme example to prove my case. You have AA and the board runs out A7xx7, is anyone seriously going to tell the poster to fold to villains river jam on an otherwise clean runout just because the poster shows the result that he actually had 77? The answer to that question is no with no serious debate worthy of having.

From sticky at top of forum.

"5. Do NOT post results!!!

Don't include the results (i.e. your opponents final action) when you post your hand. This influences the responses you will recieve because people get results oriented, which is very bad poker. You should chop your hand history at the point where you want to ask what to do. For example, you get bet into on the turn, and you want to know whether to fold, call or raise. In reality, you folded, but if you put that in your post then people will see that you folded and make all sorts of judgements about what you should have done and how you play weak etc etc. If you just leave it so you don't show what you did, your responses will be much more positive because people will be forced to think about what they would do, rather than what you did.

Again there are exceptions here. If you want to ask about a line, ie. all decisions which you took from beginng to the end of the hand, then post the whole hand. BUT - STILL DONT POST RESULTS. You can reveal results to everyone once the discussion has run its due course."

I don't think it's rude to encourage good thinking habits in new posters that will make them a better player, it's rude not to.

Your example proves not much.

Thank you, well explained. Makes sense...

Are you thinking of this hand or is it pure coincidence?

Because I had a discussion on Facebook about this where a guy was advocating that Selbst should fold, and a lot of the argument was "You're only saying that because you know she had quads".

No way to know if he was biased or not (I actually know the guy pretty well, and he made a strong case) but it definitely would've been better if none of us had known the outcome of the hand.

Use whatever example shows that an easy decision is still an easy decision regardless of whether you know results.

My point is if a rule is actually pointless or has little effect on outcomes, i.e., people are smart enough to know what the nuts are and that villain can have actually it, while simultaneously giving advice for a players ranges in spot, then continually pointing it out is rude.

That sentence wasn't pretty but if something in reality something causes no harm, in most cases competent people will give the same advice regardless of results, then the rule is silly and enforcing it is beyond silly.

In all seriousness worldzmine whilst I have no issue with this conversation, even though I think you're wrong, this isn't the place to have this conversation. Make a thread if you want to talk about it.

You'll get better and more feedback and not derail a thread. I know the derail isn't too important in a hand thread which has already been spoke about.

Yeah but it does cause harm and you're wrong. What more is there to say?

It doesn't though. Somebody isn't going to click a spoiler to confirm their suspicions that villain showed up with the nuts then say fold your AA to a x/r on Q73r in a 4bet pot because duh obviously villain has a set. To the few people that seeing it would effect their decision vs an average opponent they have a lot more to work on conceptually if they are so results oriented in a spot that should clearly be profitable long term. This is what I'm talking about.