No reads on Villain other than he is 9/0 over 11 hands...

Grabbed by Holdem Manager
NL Holdem $0.25(BB) Replayer
Hero ($25)
BB ($10.15)
UTG ($9.85)
UTG+1 ($27.72)
UTG+2 ($50.81)
MP1 ($21.05)
CO ($16.64)
BTN ($12.07)

Dealt to Hero Q Q

fold, fold, fold, fold, CO calls $0.25, fold, Hero raises to $1.25, fold, CO calls $1

FLOP ($2.75) 6 3 7

[color=red]Hero bets $2, CO raises to $4, Hero??

Call. Check turn and fold to any sized bet

A loose passive just limp called pre, and min raises your flop cbet.

I think villains has 4 hands here. 33,66,77, and 45.

1.50 flop

call as played

no read to do much else

After 11 hands is still to early to put him on such a precise range but if he continues on the turn with a big bet I also think we're beat.


why so little? It looks like we would be missing a ton of value on later streets

I think we're giving this guy a little too much credit. He's only played one out of his last eleven hands but he's a 60bb stack. I would put much more weight on the read that his stack size gives me than on the read that his stats over 11 hands give me.

Call flop minraise, get it in on a lot of turns, take a note

Agreed. I made assumptions on too little information.

minraise is usually crap imo. se a lot of guys do it in position with tpgk type hands and often back off future streets. bet/call lead looks good.

boring flop and keeps more hands of his in action/still easy to get stacks in. 55% cb is kinda std. maybe more being oop. not that big a deal tho, rly.

FWIW, when working with small sample size I try to approximate villain's stats with action in the current hand. So here, the current hand makes this guy a 17/0 instead of a 9/0 and I proceed thinking he is at least close to that number.

I usually do this when you are facing a 3b against someone I think might be an aggrotard. For instance, if they are 5% 3b (1 of 20 opportunities) and is 3b'ing me on his 21st opportunity, I assume they are going to play out as a 7+% 3bettor (idk, split the difference btw 5-10%). Cangurino or someone else who understands the maths can hopefully point out if/where I am woefully incorrect ... I never bothered to read up on confidence levels.


And, yeah, I'm calling this minraise expecting he's more likely got 88+ than a set.

Is is a mistake to get it in here on flop?

i think calling and getting it in are both pretty big mistakes, with no really useful info

CO has a $16 stack
CO limp calls pre
CO min raises

seems like very useful info to me

useful like "overplays draws", "limp calls wide pre", "stacks off light" etc

1. open 6bb in the sb/bb vs ip limper

2. 66bb stack= cannot setmine profitably in 5-6bb iso raised pots & its the same thing like not folding on overpair to a 40bb stack in a single raised pot

3. call down>>> shove due to him having alot of marginals/bluffs/medium pairs

^^0.02

from what I'm gathering is most of you are planning on calling $2 on flop and then analyzing the turn? Is this borderline spewy?

And stacking with QQ is not smart because they only call with better

i'm fine with getting QQ in on the flop vs this opponent

you do not need these discriptions to play properly against 99% of opponents and situations. a 60bb limper is especially included.

Adding to this idea; we probably won't see most of these 60bb limpers more than once so it is kind of rare that these notes will be useful ever again.

against this villain in this spot

ship > fold > call

I think calling is generally the worst option in this spot.

This player type is generally not folding once he minraises anything he thinks is good. If you think his range is sets+ then fold flop. If you think he overvalues weak overpairs or top pair or 44/55 draw hands then ship flop since he won't fold those.

Generically the main reason why you ever want to call against an unknown here is to keep his range wide if you intend to call down. This is much better if you are IP. OOP he can definitely take free cards or bluff scare cards that makes your life harder.

I think calling with the intention of folding on blanks is spewy if he can be betting worse for value. However calling down also leaves us in very uncomfortable river spots where he gets to decide if the last bet goes in, and you have no idea what his frequency and hand range for jamming various board textures on the river is.

Basically if you are going to get stacked by his monsters you want to also stack the hands that you are ahead of, and if he can pot control them later on scare cards (imagine if he has say TT and an A turns) but is willing to stack them off now, you should ship.

The main argument against shipping is that he won't call off worse and we get owned by better; I find that against this villain type they will persuade themselves to call off a lot worse here on the flop but will slow down on the turn, so you should ship.

Dump it and take a note. However, it does feel like one of those "did you miss with AK?" raises.

I hate calling and then folding the turn. There's only two cards that can come that really make us happy. I think it's best to save the $2.

this looks more and more like a ship or fold situation

the right choice in these spots is what seperates the big winners from the break evens.

i kinda like making it $6 actually

and if he calls, then what? if he ships then what?

If he calls we shove the turn, if he ships we call

I think we can play the hand fast and not be spewy. I too agree we have enough information to play our hand for fat value.

60bb players can be catergorized in the following:

Complete fish on a short roll
Competent player that is more times than not going to use stack leverage versus other semi-competent players.

Either way it would be criminal to think we have to be facing sets here. The real answer is indeed a guess with no history, but I feel we should always lean toward the value of our hand on level 1 way before we give some unknown credit. Most unknowns are bad at poker. Bad players are what we thrive on.

I too am completely fine with emptying the clip here.

My math logic is that it is very hard to flop a set. The player is going to have many more 99, 88, 55, 44, 98, 87, 65, A7 than he has precisely 77, 66, 33, 54. All of these hands make sense and all of these hands could min raise in the hands of a 60bb limp caller pre.

I believe what is preventing more of us from moving up more quickly is that we have been conditioned to play very careful due to the dynamic of games and that we fail to garner value in rare situations where someone is trying to give us their money.



Either way our opponent isnt just playing the nuts.