Protecting your hand question

[Griffin]

In SSH page 96 the following hand is described....

Hero is MP1 with Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif

UTG limps, UTG+1 raises, Hero cold-calls, SB cold-calls, BB cold-calls, UTG calls.

Flop (10sb): J/images/graemlins/club.gif 7/images/graemlins/spade.gif 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif

Checked to UTG+1 who bets, Hero.....

The text advises that raising is the correct play for our Hero.

In all the other examples of protecting your hand, I understood the value of the raise/bet. Frequently, you are not only protecting your marginal hand or draw, but you are also buying outs or in some cases raising for value. In one example you're raising the button's bet when you think it's "reasonably likely" your hand is best at the moment.

What confuses me about the Q7 example above is how does raising help if Hero does not have the best hand (UTG+1 could have AA-99, AJs, KJs, AJ or KJ...assuming he follows SSH Loose Games preflop raising chart /images/graemlins/wink.gif ) against which Hero is a serious dog. Also, raising does not protect his hand from overcard draws in that UTG+1 is sure to call if he happened to be raising with AK, AQ, AT, or KQ (suited or not) and the raise gives UTG+1 the correct odds to call a turn bet to catch an Ace or King (assuming Hero's hand is currenty good).

If the pot had not been raised preflop, but were still large due to a bunch of limpers, I clearly see the value of Hero raising. I understand the pot is large due to the preflop raise, but I feel like this hand is not strong enough to merit continuing against a preflop EP raiser.

Am I missing something or just still thinking too weak-tight?

(FWIW, in all the other examples of aggressive flop/turn play in the book, I understood the reasoning behind them. For some reason the above hand just "feels" different.)

[PotatoStew]

Cold calling an EP raise from MP w/ Q7s? Am I missing something here? Isn't that generally a little ill-advised?

[Griffin]

The example is from the text, and it is made clear that the cold-call is a mistake. However, it also says that folding on the flop is a mistake.

I see how calling the flop bet is wrong, but I don't yet see how raising is better than folding.

[Ed Miller]

Cold calling an EP raise from MP w/ Q7s? Am I missing something here? Isn't that generally a little ill-advised?

Of course. It's in the intro to the postflop section. Our hapless hero plays terribly. He cold-calls the raise with Q7s and then he calls the bet again on the flop.

The commentary then tells you that both calling the raise and calling the flop are errors, but the obvious one, the preflop call, is the smaller error of the two. It is more important to raise the flop than it is to fold preflop!

[PotatoStew]

Ah! Ok, that's good to hear. I plan on getting the book, but was going to have second thoughts if a Q7s cold call was held up as an example of good play. Glad to hear that's not the case.

As for a flop raise, I don't get it either.

[Ed Miller]

I see how calling the flop bet is wrong, but I don't yet see how raising is better than folding.

Folding is a huge error! You have middle pair and an overcard kicker. You also have a backdoor flush draw. There are 11 BETS in the pot! You have around a 6 out hand. Folding is horrible.

Besides, your pair of sevens will sometimes be the best hand.

[Ed Miller]

Also, raising does not protect his hand from overcard draws in that UTG+1 is sure to call if he happened to be raising with AK, AQ, AT, or KQ (suited or not) and the raise gives UTG+1 the correct odds to call a turn bet to catch an Ace or King (assuming Hero's hand is currenty good).

The raise isn't designed to get the preflop raiser to fold (though we wouldn't complain if he did). There are three other players in the hand. You want THEM to fold. Say someone behind you has ten-eight (for a gutshot draw and two overcards to your sevens). Do you want him to call for a single bet in a twelve bet pot?

Also, the preflop raiser (or anyone else for that matter) could have TT, 99, or 88. There is a solid chance such a player will fold before the river. But if you don't raise, then he can't fold.

[Griffin]

Thanks Ed,

It is going to take some time for me to overcome some of the "scared" play strategies that have become habit for me.

In the case of this hand, what I see is that most of the time I'm behind to the preflop raiser, and therefore my raise is going to get 3-bet.

That's weak-tight thinking which I'll stop doing right....NOW. (Man, I wish it were that easy).

Next time I'm in a big pot with a hand like this, I'll raise it and report the results. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Ed Miller]

In the case of this hand, what I see is that most of the time I'm behind to the preflop raiser, and therefore my raise is going to get 3-bet.

Hands that don't 3-bet you:

AK : 16 ways
AQ : 12 ways
AT : 16 ways
TT : 6 ways
99 : 6 ways
-------------
56 ways

Hands that might 3-bet you:

AA : 6 ways
KK : 6 ways
QQ : 3 ways
JJ : 3 ways
AJ : 12 ways
--------------
30 ways

You are almost a 2-to-1 favorite to put the preflop raiser in an unpleasant situation by raising him.

And that's assuming he raised with a reasonable hand, which is not a fair assumption. Add in all those times he raised preflop with A2 or KT or 22... and you got him way more often than he has you when the flop comes J75.

Remember all those times you raised preflop and flopped nothing? Remember all those times you bet the flop anyway and someone raised you? Remember all those times you groaned and tried to find the fold button?

YOUR OPPONENT COULD BE THAT GUY!

[Randy Burgess]

I am one of three people on the East Coast who have not read Ed's book. But in any case a) yes, preflop cold-call bad, and b) flop raise good here, and you don't even have to think about it that long or hard. The utility just seems unquestionable.

I was playing in a tight-preflop, loose-bad postflop game last night in a NYC club, and several times found myself making this sort of play - not the Q7s cold-call, but flop and even turn raises to protect relatively weak hands that had a shot at being best and would benefit from knocking out other players and getting headup with the preflop raiser. In this particular example it's worth noting that the flop is very raggedy - this plus your outs seems decisive.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

The correct play is for hero to fold that hand preflop even if there isn't a raise. Cold-calling a raise with it is (I can't think of language strong enough to convey this) hideously terrible play.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

I understand the point of the flop raise, but I have a bigger issue with this hand. Does the writer not do the new player a disservice by using this as an example? This is a hand that should have been in the muck preflop even in an unraised pot. Doesn't this example make a new player think "OK, I now understand that if I cold-call a raise preflop with Qxs I can make this fancy play later and win."

Wait a minute. This is from *your* book???

[sthief09]

the money already in the pot is like a head start, or a bonus. if you win the hand, you win all future bets AND you win the pot. if there was no pot to win, then you'd ideally want to only raise if you felt it was likely you have the best hand and will have the best hand.

but there is a pot. you don't have to win 50% of the time for plays to be profitable. basically the pot is your margin for error.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

I realize all this now, but my reaction before still holds. I think I know enough about human nature to believe that there will be X% of the readers out there who will start cold-calling raises with Qxs because they now "know" a way to get the most out of the hand post-flop.

[RickDecker]

I'm just curious. What if the Jack on the Flop was a Spade? I would be inclined to fold that Flop. What do others think?

[Griffin]

I think I know enough about human nature to believe that there will be X% of the readers out there who will start cold-calling raises with Qxs because they now "know" a way to get the most out of the hand post-flop.

The text makes it very clear that the preflop coldcall is a mistake. Ed is using the two mistakes (the coldcall and the flop call) to illustrate that of the two, the flop call is the bigger mistake.

Elsewhere in the text he clearly discusses the relative costs of preflop versus postflop mistakes.

If there is an X% who do that, it will be a very small number of people who didn't read the book thoroughly.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

That sounds reasonable. I'll accept the fact that since I haven't read the book, just this thread, that I've missed a good deal of context. That and I'm sure Ed didn't mean to mislead anyone.

Besides, however small, that X% is welcome in any game I'm in. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[stir]

You have a point. Many readers will miss the fact that as Ed explains in this thread Hero made a mistake pre-flop and instead think NPA is reccommending a type of p-f play.

[Griffin]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm just curious. What if the Jack on the Flop was a Spade?

[/ QUOTE ]

What if BB bets and UTG+1 raises?

What if Hero is holding 99 instead of Q7?

What if Hero is holding Q7o instead of Q7s?

These are the types of questions that I have to figure out before I will feel comfortable that I'm using the raise instead of fold play correctly.

The book has the answers, but I'm going to have to read it one or two (or seven) more times to absorb it all.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

The flop raise part is easy. The preflop raiser can have a range of hands, about half of which you're behind (you're way behind JJ) and about half of which you're ahead of. You are likely a bigger dog against the entire field, but they will probably not call a double bet. Thus by raising, you increase the probability that you will win the hand even though you may not have the best hand now. Obviously, your dream scenario is that the raiser has AQ and Q falls on the turn. Regardless, you now have a chance to push him off AK or TT on the turn, or improve and beat his big pair.

[charlie_t_jr]

...out of this example. The Q7 example is a way of illustrating where the money is made and lost at small stakes.

Its very clear our "hero" is bumbling his way through the hand. Cold calls pre-flop, calls bet on flop. As an introduction to "POST" flop play, Mr. Miller is trying to explain the biggest mistake is made POST flop. Hopefully by understanding why, in this example, where the biggest mistake occurs, we can learn to adjust our post-flop play.

Most players can see clearly the mistake made pre-flop, but the biggest mistake is made on the flop...can you see why?....thats why I'm reading the book /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Hallett]

This is a very interesting thread. While reading it, I was playing some 2/4 on Party, and had this hand come up. I have played a number of hands with the pre-flop raiser, and he is loose aggressive. Is this similar? I wasn't planning on check raising, until after he had bet the flop. I thought I could isolate him,, but the SB wouldn't go away. I think I just got lucky.

Comments?

Party Poker 2/4 Hold'em (10 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif, A/images/graemlins/club.gif.
UTG folds, <font color="CC3333">Hero raises</font>, UTG+2 calls, MP1 folds, MP2 folds, MP3 folds, CO folds, <font color="CC3333">Button 3-bets</font>, SB calls, BB folds, Hero calls, UTG+2 calls.

Flop: (13 SB) J/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="blue">(4 players)</font>
SB checks, Hero checks, UTG+2 checks, <font color="CC3333">Button bets</font>, SB calls, <font color="CC3333">Hero raises</font>, UTG+2 folds, Button calls, SB calls.

Turn: (9.50 BB) 6/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="blue">(3 players)</font>
SB checks, <font color="CC3333">Hero bets</font>, Button folds, SB calls.

River: (11.50 BB) T/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="blue">(2 players)</font>
SB checks, Hero checks.

Final Pot: 11.50 BB
<font color="green">Main Pot: 11.50 BB, between SB and Hero.</font> &gt; <font color="white">Pot won by Hero (11.50 BB).</font>

Results in white below: <font color="white">
SB shows Ad 8d (high card, ace).
Hero shows Qh Ac (high card, ace).
Outcome: Hero wins 11.50 BB. </font>

[Ed Miller]

You have a point. Many readers will miss the fact that as Ed explains in this thread Hero made a mistake pre-flop and instead think NPA is reccommending a type of p-f play.

This is a very valid concern. I worried about this effect a LOT in the book. In fact, I believe this is the only area where I have "hero" making any mistakes at all. I tried to phrase it clearly, but I suppose this example could end up being harmful.

Not to single books out, but this is a much bigger concern for Middle Limit Holdem Poker (Brier &amp; Ciaffone) and Internet Texas Hold 'em (Hilger). In both of those texts, the authors use hand examples drawn from real hands played. The problem with doing that is you get this effect all the time.

Yes, both books tell you, "Hero may have made mistakes earlier in the hand... ignore those and concentrate on the decision at hand." Well fine. But after you see hero cold-call a raise with ace-king like thirty times in MLHP, you get the message, "Maybe I should simply cold-call instead of 3-bet with ace-king." B&amp;C never tell you to do that, but of course that's the message you'll get simply through repetition.

Hilger has a similar problem... a lot of the hands are taken from someone who clearly plays too loosely preflop. At the top of p.182, the example features hero who cold-calls a raise with ace-nine (offsuit). Yes, he says it's a "bad call," but for the reason you guys have stated in this thread, I don't think that cold-call belongs in the book at all. I'd estimate that about 10-15% of Hilger's examples feature these "bad calls." That's too many, in my opinion.

BTW, I haven't discussed Matthew's book much, so I'll give you my quick opinion. When I evaluate a hold 'em book, my most important criterion is:

If I am in the intended audience for this book and apply all the concepts and advice given (i.e., I don't cherry-pick the good stuff and avoid the bad... I apply the good and the bad alike), will I learn to be a solidly winning player?

For Hilger's book, I believe the answer is definitely yes, which puts his book easily in the top ten. There aren't many other books that I can say yes to that question. There are a couple of problems (the other main one being that he advocates not raising with big suited hands like ATs in way too many situations). But on the whole his book is a solid guide capable of making you a quality, winning player. I'd probably give it an 8 on the Mason scale. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

If Hilger fixed the preflop passivity and "weak call" examples for a second edition, I'd probably give it a 9.

[Ed Miller]

That sounds reasonable. I'll accept the fact that since I haven't read the book, just this thread, that I've missed a good deal of context. That and I'm sure Ed didn't mean to mislead anyone.

Kurn,

Let me give you the context for this example. It appears in the Introduction section to the Postflop Concepts chapter. The idea of the example was to show people who think they play well simply because they play tightly preflop that they are probably making a ton of expensive postflop errors.

[ QUOTE ]
[W]hile it is relatively easy to judge good preflop play from bad, it is much harder to do so for postflop play. Look at this hand from the perspective of a poor player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then we relate the hand... Q7s cold-call... flop call.

[ QUOTE ]
Our hapless hero has made two plays so far, and he has gotten them both wrong. Most people instantly identify his preflop play as an error. It is clearly incorrect to cold-call the raise with queen-seven. But a much smaller percentage of poker players could identify his error on the flop. Yet, of his two mistakes, his flop error is worse by far!

[/ QUOTE ]

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Ed,

Yeah, I realized after I'd made the first couple of replies that there had to be something left out of the original post.

Is the book going to on the shelves here in the east anytime soon or should I just order it? I drop into Borders a couple of times per week and keep getting disappointed.

[Ed Miller]

Is the book going to on the shelves here in the east anytime soon or should I just order it? I drop into Borders a couple of times per week and keep getting disappointed.

It'll probably be available at Borders on the East Coast by next Monday. Though that's just a guess obviously. But Mason shipped the books to Borders' warehouse last Monday.... that's all I really know for fact.

[ScottTheFish]

So what's my play if I raise and get 3-bet by UTG+1? My first instinct would say call the 3-bet and fold the turn unimproved if he bets into me again...Standard?

[Ed Miller]

So what's my play if I raise and get 3-bet by UTG+1? My first instinct would say call the 3-bet and fold the turn unimproved if he bets into me again...Standard?

If everyone folds, the preflop raiser 3-bets you, and you call, the pot will now contain 8 big bets. The turn is the 2 /images/graemlins/club.gif. When he bets, you are getting 9-to-1. Should you fold?

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Grácias

[ScottTheFish]

[ QUOTE ]
If everyone folds, the preflop raiser 3-bets you, and you call, the pot will now contain 8 big bets. The turn is the 2 /images/graemlins/club.gif. When he bets, you are getting 9-to-1. Should you fold?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm, guess not. If I count 4 Q's and 2 7's as outs, I only need about 7:1. But I should still fold because everyone knows my 6-outers never hit, only my opponents' do /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Saborion]

[ QUOTE ]
Hmm, guess not. If I count 4 Q's and 2 7's as outs, I only need about 7:1. But I should still fold because everyone knows my 6-outers never hit, only my opponents' do

[/ QUOTE ]
I'd love to have 4 Q's outs in addition to my 2 7's here.

[Randy Burgess]

Aren't you throwing off your outs calculations by assuming that his three-bet would always mean he has a made hand that beats you, e.g. a big pocket pair?

You may think that because he's out of position he's not going to play back at you--but if he's a strong player (or even LAG) he is looking at the same board you're looking at, and may conclude you are putting a bit of a play on him. This increases the chance he will play back at you, especially if he has a read on you as someone who likes to make "smart" folds. My guess is that this sort of thing is more common in live games, but obviously it happens online too.

[PotatoStew]

I've been thinking about this whole scenario a lot the past couple of days. Some additional questions:

1. If it's checked to you (say the preflop raiser checks, or maybe he's acting after you instead) do you bet out with your second pair? Or just check? It seems a bet alone is unlikely to drive out the non-raising players and therefore wouldn't limit the field.

2. If nearly everyone calls your raise (or even only one or two extra people), you are unimproved on the turn, and the preflop guy bets out again, are we raising again? Or is it time to toss the hand?

3. Is this the sort of play where (for example) 4 out of 5 times it'll fail and you'll showdown a losing second pair, but then when you win on the 5th time it makes up for it?

[fsuplayer]

[ QUOTE ]
If everyone folds, the preflop raiser 3-bets you, and you call, the pot will now contain 8 big bets. The turn is the 2 . When he bets, you are getting 9-to-1. Should you fold?



[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hmm, guess not. If I count 4 Q's and 2 7's as outs, I only need about 7:1. But I should still fold because everyone knows my 6-outers never hit, only my opponents' do


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I'd love to have 4 Q's outs in addition to my 2 7's here.


[/ QUOTE ]

I was thinking the exact same thing. I am just to the part of SSHE talking about "Partial Outs", isnt this one of those situations.

I'd say your Q outs are good much more than 50% of the time, but certainly not everytime. So you could maybe count those as 75%-80% outs. There are also the time or two where you may hit a Q or 7 and still lose if he has QJs, QQ, or JJ.

So if you have 5 outs and they will win maybe 85% of the time, I would say you have 4 "outs" and need about 8 or 9-1 with your implied odds on the river, so I call.


Plus I prefer to call when its very close bc simply its more fun.

fsuplayer

[Griffin]

I'm the person least qualified to answer your questions, but I'm going to try because it will help me think this through.

I've been thinking about this whole scenario a lot the past couple of days.

So have I. I have two other posts I plan to make on issues related to the protect your hand move. It represents a radical change in the way I play.

1. If it's checked to you (say the preflop raiser checks, or maybe he's acting after you instead) do you bet out with your second pair? Or just check?

You bet. Checking allows someone with T7 to bet and scare you out of the pot. You bet because you want the next guy, holding J3, to question his kicker and fold. You bet because it was checked to you and you have a marginal hand that needs protecting.

It seems a bet alone is unlikely to drive out the non-raising players and therefore wouldn't limit the field.

But not betting has zero chance of limiting the field

2. If nearly everyone calls your raise (or even only one or two extra people), you are unimproved on the turn, and the preflop guy bets out again, are we raising again?

Did the turn card hit anyone? Those left to act cold-called two on the flop with something. Ace, King, Jack, Ten, and even maybe 6 or 3 could have helped someone, so with most cards I'd be inclined to just call, and fold to a raise that comes after me.

Or is it time to toss the hand?

With people coldcalling your flop raise, you'd be getting proper odds to call the turn bet to try to improve.

3. Is this the sort of play where (for example) 4 out of 5 times it'll fail and you'll showdown a losing second pair, but then when you win on the 5th time it makes up for it?

I think this is the critical question that gets at the heart of Ed's book. If you can get it headsup, and thus improve the chances that a pair of sevens will be best, then I think the answer to your question is "yes". If you don't raise the flop, but showdown second pair, you'll beat the preflop raiser's AK, but not the other players who saw the turn for one bet.

If I'm wrong in any of my answers, someone please correct me.

[fsuplayer]

[ QUOTE ]
2. If nearly everyone calls your raise (or even only one or two extra people), you are unimproved on the turn, and the preflop guy bets out again, are we raising again?

Did the turn card hit anyone? Those left to act cold-called two on the flop with something. Ace, King, Jack, Ten, and even maybe 6 or 3 could have helped someone, so with most cards I'd be inclined to just call, and fold to a raise that comes after me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Looks good except for this part. With a raise behind you after you call the turn, you are getting over 12-1 on the call, folding here would be very bad, unless he showed you QQ or JJJ.

fsuplayer

[Griffin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2. If nearly everyone calls your raise (or even only one or two extra people), you are unimproved on the turn, and the preflop guy bets out again, are we raising again?

Did the turn card hit anyone? Those left to act cold-called two on the flop with something. Ace, King, Jack, Ten, and even maybe 6 or 3 could have helped someone, so with most cards I'd be inclined to just call, and fold to a raise that comes after me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Looks good except for this part. With a raise behind you after you call the turn, you are getting over 12-1 on the call, folding here would be very bad, unless he showed you QQ or JJJ.

fsuplayer

[/ QUOTE ]

Doh! /images/graemlins/blush.gif Yeah, calling the raise is obvious now that I think about it.

[Randy Burgess]

Again I think people are relying on their literal counting of outs far too much. This is a mistake not only when you undervalue your hand, but when you overvalue it as well.

A turn raise is usually (though not always) more indicative of a big hand than a flop raise. It also depends who makes the raise and how they tend to play. And at some point if you don't pay attention to these factors it's a huge mistake which no "low limit formula" is going to correct.

In this case, let's say you failed to pick up your flush draw or otherwise improve on the turn. Let's say UTG+1 bets out again and there are players behind you to act. You decide to call (which I'm not addressing here) and it gets raised behind you.

Depending on who it is who has raised, there will be many times you should fold even if UTG+1 does not reraise. This is because your average passive or ABC player will not raise here unless they have you (and possibly UTG+1) beaten so badly you can't catch up except with a 7 - and possibly not even then. This is a judgement decision and not prone to being solved by rote application of book knowledge.

If you disagree and feel you should call a raise here automatically, OK, but you can't justify it on the basis of outs alone. You're going to have to come up with additional arguments.

[fsuplayer]

Yes, obviously you should not blindly call a turn raise from a tight passive player, but in MOST situations, a turn raise does not have to mean a set, so calling the turn raise would be okay in THAT situation.

But yes, if you have a read that a passive player made a raise which could only mean a set on that rainbow board, then yes, obviously a fold is in order.

fsuplayer

[Griffin]

Hmmm...so I guess the answer is...."it depends." /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Who'dve thunk it. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

What the turn card is and the nature of the raiser, in addition to odds and outs, must be considered before calling the raise.