Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fold or call?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fold or call?

    P Button
    S 25k
    B 50/100
    H Qc10c

    MP raise for 300, with a late position call. I call, and Villain calls from the SB. Pot = 1200

    Flop came Ks, Js, Jc

    Everyone checks round to me, so I bet my open ended straight draw to build a pot if I hit. It's a wet board, which suggests betting bigger, but no one really takes much notice at these levels, and I think I am getting a call from anyone with any piece of this, so I just stick with my standard 1/2 pot, and bet 600.

    SB calls, others fold. Pot is 2400

    Turn is 9h, and I hit my straight.

    SB checks, and I bet 1600. He calls. Pot is 5600.

    The river is 5s

    SB leads out for 4k

    Villain has not shown any real aggression in any hand so far- but it is early. He has also shown that he is a bad player by calling too light- however here he has led out.

  • #2
    He is not bluffing, and it does not look like a blocking bet. The only likely boats are KJ, J9, 99. KK seems unlikely, but you can never predict bad players. Most players would call with 99 on this board against a possible button steal, 55 is highly unlikely.

    If he is really bad he might just have a King, but very unlikely. He might just have a J, but there are not many lone J; AJ, QJ, JT maybe a few J8.

    You bet flop and turn, so he must think you have something, he might think you just have a King.

    He called two bets on a paired board, but bad players do this with their flush draws.

    There are a lot more flushes and boats than a lone J.

    If we say he either has a J, a boat or a flush then it is a fold. Because the flushes and boats way outnumber the J.

    You are getting 2.4 to 1, but I think the flushes and boats outnumber the J by at least 4 to 1.
    Last edited by Patrick O; 04-01-2017, 11:00 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      With bad players, call call bomb means you lose. Read it, learn it, live it.

      Comment


      • #4
        Not sure what villian would call you down with, then blast on the river, as a bluff or missed hand. From his perspective, a straight, flush, and boat all got there. Why would he lead into you after your two barrels with two pair or even trips?

        fold.

        Guess the follow-up question is -- if villian checked, do you value bet or just check behind? For me, too much got there for a bet if I think the villian is capable of a check-raise.

        Comment


        • Andy Watson
          Andy Watson commented
          Editing a comment
          When the flush draw made it I planned to check behind.

      • #5
        Interesting that all the replies so far so fold.

        That's what I did- but I deliberately folded face up in the hope of him reciprocating and showing me his hand (I felt I would gain far more information than he would- and it would help me induce bluffs from him in the future). My ploy worked, and he showed.............. A-10o!!!

        So yes, he bluffed me.

        The reason I posted this hand is that stimulated quite a lot of conversation around the table about whether I should have called or folded my straight- particularly between 2 players who I thought were pretty decent.

        One argued that a good player would fold here (I like him!), the other that I should never fold a hand as strong as a straight there. I still think it was a good fold, and I made the right move- although this was perhaps made a closer decision as the player turned out to be a total maniac (and if the 2nd player in the conversation knew that, then it might have influenced his opinion).

        Comment


        • #6
          ^^ it seems to me that villian got away with a reckless bluff, as opposed to a good play. But curious what others think.

          Comment


          • #7
            Given the information, i'd say that this player may not be as bad as you say. It sounds like two things. 1) He's one of the kinds of LAG's a gambler possibly, loose REG maybe. 2) More importantly you need to look into your reverse read. If i'm correct here, your game may be out of balance, you may have a betting tell, or are making obvious folding errors.

            Don't take this as a criticism but a backstop to make sure you're not doing something that is making you exploitable. I see a lot of players misreading situations due to their own biases and many of these players don't understand what villains are doing against them making them exploitable.

            The betting line and live read as I conveyed is correct but that is only half of that story. Call call bomb against good players is a polarized bet. I think your player read may be off.
            Last edited by XBobLove; 04-02-2017, 01:38 PM.

            Comment


            • #8
              Originally posted by XBobLove View Post
              Given the information, i'd say that this player may not be as bad as you say. It sounds like two things. 1) He's one of the kinds of LAG's a gambler possibly, loose REG maybe. 2) More importantly you need to look into your reverse read. If i'm correct here, your game may be out of balance, you may have a betting tell, or are making obvious folding errors.

              Don't take this as a criticism but a backstop to make sure you're not doing something that is making you exploitable. I see a lot of players misreading situations due to their own biases and many of these players don't understand what villains are doing against them making them exploitable.

              The betting line and live read as I conveyed is correct but that is only half of that story. Call call bomb against good players is a polarized bet. I think your player read may be off.
              It was very early in the tournament- about 25 minutes in or so, and so I didn't really have much on him as far as specifics go.

              There was 1 very memorable hand (think it was the 3rd hand played) where he got caught as the 3rd wheel in an AA v KK all in pre battle. He opted to call for his entire stack against 2 all ins with A-Jhh! So I knew he was bad-and prepared to gamble- but he had seemed up until our hand to be passively bad. This was the first time I had seen him make an aggressive move, so felt I ought to give it credit until I got more information. He certainly wasn't playing to exploit me. He might have thought "if a flush draw hits I will rep it by betting", but I really don't think he thought more than a single street at a time. I ended up sitting next to him the whole night as he went on a massive heater and we both made the final table! One hand he called my 4X (standard 3X raise +1 for a limper) in the SB (I was on the button) with 6-2o. I remember the hand because he hit 2 pair and check called every street when I flopped tptk! Anyway, this is starting to sound like a general rant about him- it isn't.

              I don't think much of this is relevant, as the hand in question was so early in the competition that it wasn't really possible to make significant detailed categorisations of new players yet. That means that he also didn't have the required information to make his play as a direct exploit against me as I doubt he had seen me bet enough to spot any patterns I might have. I'm certainly not in the habit of folding straights! I still think in a vacuum it's a good fold.

              Finally- don't be shy about being critical- we all need it to get better!

              Thanks to everyone that took the time to respond.

              Comment


              • #9
                The 62o hand makes him look bad. But maybe this is his thing. He calls with garbage in the hope a bluffing opportunity arises, and sometimes the garbage turns into the nuts.

                For him, being OOP is an advantage because it gives him the chance to bluff lead.

                Calling two bets with a gut shot on a paired board with a two-flush looks pretty bad. But maybe he always intended to bluff the river if he didn't hit the gut shot. He probably thought you just had a king, and the spade draw gave him extra bluffing outs.

                I think this player does think more than one street at a time.

                Illustrates that we can't judge players by our own standards, we have to see the game through their eyes.

                Harrington says that the chance of a bluff against any player in any situation is at least 10%.

                Players who bluff a lot always think other players bluff a lot, which explains why you saw him make a very loose call in another hand.
                Last edited by Patrick O; 04-02-2017, 05:54 PM.

                Comment


                • #10
                  In the original exposition, villain was described as bad. If he made it to the final table, the guy knows what he's doing so bad is the wrong descriptor. He sounds like a good gambler, frankly. If i'm on a heater, i'd call raises with 62x as well if I think my card read is dialed in.

                  Let's talk about AhJh hand. This hand is 30% against a range, he blocks AX hands and covers hearts, chops straights. Yes this is very loose, especially in a shooting match and certainly not optimal. Encroaching in a pair war is only mathematically terrible against the actual holdings. While certainly not in my book, it's loose but not suicidal. OK it's sort of suicidal, but not "bad", loose? yep, passive? arguably. Gambling to acquire a stack, 100%

                  Upon reading the additional comment, I still think you're being exploited. He called your raise in the SB with 62x!!! He has you labeled as a (fill in your favorite adjective) and figures you'll pay him off. You're underestimating this guy.

                  Comment


                  • #11
                    AJs is a hand players hate to lay down, because it is so pretty when SPR is large. They forget that in an all in situation AJs is not a whole lot different than AJo.

                    Comment


                    • XBobLove
                      XBobLove commented
                      Editing a comment
                      Which is 30% against a range...

                      This 30% threshold is how you identify the gamblers. The better gamblers will take that price to the flop and continue through the streets with reasonable equity. The anticipation is to stack you. They have reasonable reading skills and are playing a form of hit and run looking to run it up quick or go home.

                      Jonathan says something more reasonable along these lines. The jist is that you want to play to acquire a stack to win versus nit-ing your way to a min cash.
                      Last edited by XBobLove; 04-02-2017, 07:30 PM.

                  • #12
                    I think you're overestimating him............

                    The Friday night game I play in is small relative to other games available. I think ascribing him the level of thinking that you do would make him easily one of the best players in the game. He isn't! Don't be fooled by him making the final table- this week (for some reason) there were only 3 tables in the tournament!

                    I have no idea where you get a 30% range from against 2 players. In that hand all players had a stack of over 500BB. I can't recall ever seeing 2 players AAPF without one of them having aces, and the other having kings. I might be able to remember someone with queens, once. In fact after the hand I was musing to myself whether the guy with KK should have folded, since he is effectively calling for a chop whilst crossing his fingers the raiser didn't have AA. The only vaguely possible interpretation I can see is he thought if I have an ace, maybe they both have KK- which would get him to 36%. Most other even vaguely sensible hands (AKs?, QQ?) drop him down closer to 10%. I think you are taking Jonathans teachings out of context- he is also looking to minimise variance where he feels he has an edge.

                    The 6-2 hand can almost never work out well for him. He is calling a big raise OOP. He is 67% to miss, and 28% to make a weak or middle pair- both of which I am possibly best against. Even in the 2% of times he flops 2 pair, his hand is vulnerable since most of my range is overcards (even my suited connectors are likely overcards) or pocket pairs. In fact to get paid he needs almost this exact scenario, where he hits hard (3% inc. 3 of a kind) and I hit top pair (24%), and the board doesn't run out too scary where I might opt to check behind, or I opt to pot control. So yes, his 1% (3% of 24%) chance came in, and he made 3 1/2 pot bets of profit against me. I think by this stage he was simply using his big stack quite well by seeing a lot of flops, and managed to run hot enough to keep getting paid off due to his image. He was definitely a gambler, and even roulette players show a profit sometimes!

                    I'm not sure how I can be exploitable in the original hand- especially as you made the same decision I did! Whilst I gave him credit here, without much information, it quickly became apparent how he was playing. I might still have folded to an 80% pot bet here- since I need to be right over 40% of the time to break even, and everything got there (I would have called his bet if the river hadn't been a spade). I doubt many people are bluffing 40%+ there, but maybe he is, once you account for hands like A-J/J-10 value betting). He doesn't have any info on me yet from patterns- it's too early in the game. Maybe he made a "stereo-type" exploitative play on me as a middle aged white man playing in a low stakes comp? That's possible I suppose, but that level of sophistication doesn't fit with what I observed later.

                    Did I have a betting tell? well that's always possible. In fact it's something I worry about as I continue to educate myself. I have noticed that I take longer on some decisions than others- normally when I am trying to think WWJD? (What would Jonathan do- as someone wrote in another post!), but these are normally pretty polarised spots- getting max value from the nuts for example. Since I am IP, he doesn't get to see this before his lead bet on the river. I would hate to think I winced when the river landed! I have to give myself some credit here and assume I am a better player than that!

                    ps If I come across as defensive in any way- it's not meant. I am simply trying to get my head around this hand, the player and my own play.

                    Comment


                    • #13
                      I came to the same decision you did based on the information you provided. As more info has been presented, the situation changed and his bet went from an easy bet/call to a polarized tough decision. This back and forth between is more discussion to try to isolate the issue. It does sound like it's still a call but maybe not, with all due respect, I'm not sure I trust your reading skills. I'm weak on math because I was taught to play old school intuitively. That's not a factor here.

                      I'm going to focus on the fact you said, you said the 6-2 hand can never work out well. I'll tell you with 100% certainty that there are skill sets that only come with experience that allow you to play winning poker with any 2 hands ala Dwan, Farha, Hansen. It's high variance play.

                      Comment


                      • #14
                        Let's try this, here is an anecdote. Donkey and I went to the local casino where the play is terrible but there more action than a Vegas brothel. This day wasn't hoppin so the betting was sane. Opening bets were $12 on a 1/2 game. Pots averaged about $60 with 3/4 people going to flop every hand. There were a reasonable mix of TAGs, REGs, and fish. Donkey and I were head and shoulders the best at the table (we're winning 3/5 players) with one guy bringing a challenge.

                        So one of the bad regs was hitting cards like a fiend, he pulled several puts chasing a set with 3 overs/wet flop hitting his turn card and holding; Going runner runner flush against donkey on his flopped 2 pair turning over a JXs with a back door straight draw; and pulling a few small pots with top pair. We come to this hand where I have AsJs in EP and lead $12 taking the challenger, the bad reg, donkey and blinds to the flop. Flop hits AxQs7s. I value cbet to thin the field, bringing the challenger and the bad reg to the turn. The turn hits 7x and now I'm worried. I read the challenger for the AX, KX or pair but am more worried about the bad reg because I can't figure out what he's continuing with. I decide to lead $20. The challenger falls by the wayside and the bad reg flats. I dunno now. Nothing makes sense, trip 7? 7 what? I don't care if he's chasing the flush. Chop? Am I losing to a better A? So the river blanks and I always check in these 'I dunno' hands. So he bets $35 for $150 orso in the pot. I take the price as opposed to listening to my voice saying call call bomb means you lose and he shows quad 7s. Yep, that now makes sense.

                        Now at this casino they have a 3/5 shooting match where you would think people are playing Pokerstars free money cash game. In short stints, these guys win huge, long run, they are all net losers. I won't play that game but those guys cut their teeth in this 1/2 game and have learned how to gamble. Along the way, they've shared their tricks and the key is folding and playing position. Donkey and I go to a better game in Oakland because people still play too many hands but they know how to fold unlike here where it's just a limit game for stacks.

                        Maybe that's the important piece of info. How many rivers is this guy getting to with garbage and winning. How many hands is he folding? The relative frequency will determine whether he he a good gambler or bad reg. The other frequency to be aware of is how many pots is this guy pulling and with what hands. Back in the rules days and this is still a rule I hold but to a lesser degree, is if a guy is hitting, stay away from him. You probably need to hone this awareness.

                        Comment


                        • #15
                          Originally posted by XBobLove View Post
                          I came to the same decision you did based on the information you provided. As more info has been presented, the situation changed and his bet went from an easy bet/call to a polarized tough decision. This back and forth between is more discussion to try to isolate the issue. It does sound like it's still a call but maybe not, with all due respect, I'm not sure I trust your reading skills. I'm weak on math because I was taught to play old school intuitively. That's not a factor here.

                          I'm going to focus on the fact you said, you said the 6-2 hand can never work out well. I'll tell you with 100% certainty that there are skill sets that only come with experience that allow you to play winning poker with any 2 hands ala Dwan, Farha, Hansen. It's high variance play.
                          To be clear, I didn't say it can never work out well- I said it can "almost never" work out well. I also am not convinced by the parallel between 3 of the best LAG players in the world and this guy! Notice there is no AG aspect to the 6-2, only L. He missed a lot of value by not raising me on the river on a board that made 2 pair very unlikely. Maybe he had a plan if it missed- personally I'm not so sure. And lets not forget the limper that was also in the pot when he called- this means he is OOP v 2 opponents, so even if he does think he can outplay me, he can't ignore the 3rd player for 4BB with junk. There's a big difference between 6-2o and set mining with 77.

                          I think OPK had it closer, when he said the guy was reckless, and got away with it. This seems to sum up his strategy- and it was pretty effective at putting people to big decisions much of the time. However he was also dicing with his tournament life. If he didn't have such a big stack he wouldn't have been able to absorb the hits he took. On the plus side for him he almost always got his value hands paid off. If it sounds like I am complaining about this guy, I'm not- those 2 hands were the only significant pots he took off me all night- and he was sat directly on my left until the final table. Actually, I just remembered that was a lie- he knocked me out in 5th calling my 12BB shove with 10-10, but that was standard.

                          I agree with an earlier statement you made being check/call, check/call, bet being polarising- but on a paired board with a flush draw completing, how often does the bluff component reach 40% which is needed to be B/E in this case?

                          My personal thoughts are he was thinking- I've got a gutshot & an ace which might be good- so I'll call the flop. And the turn. Hmm, I missed- I better throw out a bet and represent the flush.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X