villain over 130 hands: 33/16
3bet: 2.1%, 4bet: 0%
agg: 2.1


Grabbed by Holdem Manager
NL Holdem $1(BB) Replayer
SB ($123)
BB ($21.50)
UTG ($138)
UTG+1 ($27.05)
Hero ($105)
BTN ($28.60)

Dealt to Hero K K

UTG raises to $4, fold, Hero raises to $12, fold, fold, fold, UTG calls $8

FLOP ($25.50) 2 6 J

UTG checks, Hero bets $15, UTG raises to $45,

more preflop, fold flop.

preflop is standard

why fold flop? only 2 hands are beating imho us, AA and JJ?? shove is very bad in this kind of situation?

call and shove non clubs turn

Shove, not even close.

eh i think more then 2 hands in his range beat us. more like 4. but i agree, shove.

Against a 33/16 I'm not particularly worried about being behind here. Only question is whether there's more value in shipping, or calling and allowing him to bluff-ship on the turn?

With the remaining spr I don't think calling is even an option.

What the heck does SPR have to do with calling the flop raise?

Anyway, +1 to ATC's line of shoving.

shove pretty happily against someone with those stats.

preflop is absolutely standard

and this

resulting spr on the turn.

You only calculate SPR on flops mandinga. Ron's post about calling instead of shoving has nothing to do with SPR anyway.

BTW, you're little light bulb thing is pretty cute considering you don't know what you're talking about.

Wat?

I'm sure it has something to do with SPRs. With low SPRs, Villain is less likely to bluff turn w/ airballs because it looks like we are committed. By the same token, shoving the flop becomes better with low SPRs because he is committed with inferior hands. You might not be thinking about the hand in these terms (I don't either), but it's still correct.

From Professional No Limit Hold 'Em Volume One by Ed Miller, et al. pg. 173

Stack to pot ratios, or SPRs, are defined at the flop and only the flop. They are always defined in relation to the smaller stack.

I know that, but I doubt that is what the other poster was getting at because he wanted to fold the flop.

I've never read the book but I'm pretty sure there's a pot and a stack on the turn when you can bet so that's why I said that.

i see these stats a bit differently. isnt this a sort of weak tight or wait till i have the goods to raise kind of guy. not much 3 betting, but on the lose side. seems to me he like to look at falls and act according to hand strength, i might fold

He looks like a fish and fish overplay hands/draws.

I know they wrote the book and all, but that's incredibly idiotic. The authors probably inserted that caveat because they didn't want to confuse people. For instance, I've heard that their book (I haven't read it) contains examples like "SPR of 4, stack off TP2K" or some **** like that. Without writing it again and again, they probably wanted to convey that this "SPR of 4" rule doesn't extend to when you make TP2K on the river and somebody checkraises you. As jessyj says, there's still a stack and a pot, there's no reason why you can't talk about SPRs, and the concepts still extend (e.g. big SPRs, need a stronger hand to stackoff), even if they don't translate perfectly.

Overall, imo, SPR is just another in the long line of deeply flawed models that lose precision in favor of intuitive simplicity. You can think about "eagles" and "jackals" and "protecting your hand," and thinking about them will pull you through 25-50NL, but the fact is that these models fail to produce the most profitable decisions in many many instances.

Oh wow, you're right. That's so terrible lol.

Well I'm not going to get in arguing about how Ed Miller and Matt Flynn think about the game because they win at much higher limits than I currently do. That being said, there are some serious flaws with the book and Miller et al's book Small Stakes No Limit Hold 'Em addresses them. However, I don't believe their first book or second book is close to being the best book written on NL. I'd have to give that crown to Slow Habit and/or Baluga Whale.

That being said, I believe you're right in assuming that the reason that they don't take it past the flop is for simplicity and because mid-level SPRs play very differently if you're facing a river c/r, and that should be pretty obvious.

However, in this case shoving the flop is totally rational play, SPRs be damned....