99 pf

[Chris Daddy Cool]

party 3/6

like 5 limpers to me. i raise in the sb with 99. bb calls. limpers call, but the button decides to limp reraise.

i cap.

thoughts?

[thirddan]

are you planning on leading any flop?

[bisonbison]

The button has, at best, 77 or JTs. In a pot this big, forfeiting your right to check-raise the flop is probably alright, cause almost no one will actually fold their overcards or paired overcard to your nine if you c/r the flop. Out of position in a giant pot, I think this is probably a pretty close decision.

[joker122]

like i told microbob: cap for ridiculousness' sake.

seriously though, i don't understand the cap, let alone the first raise. can you explain?

[Chris Daddy Cool]

[ QUOTE ]
seriously though, i don't understand the cap, let alone the first raise. can you explain?

[/ QUOTE ]

Really?

[joker122]

really. i'd just call here. like i said, can you explain it?

[Chris Daddy Cool]

how about because I have the best hand?

[joker122]

well, having the best hand doesn't have much to do with it, because you wouldn't raise 22 here even though it figures to be best. it has more to do with fair share and what not. i just think this raise is pretty thin here given your position.

edit - on second thought, a raise with 22 here is probably for value because of the multiwayedness, but that's not what you were getting at, was it?

[Chris Daddy Cool]

multiway-ness, strong pair = easy raise

[Fnord]

[ QUOTE ]
well, having the best hand doesn't have much to do with it, because you wouldn't raise 22 here even though it figures to be best. it has more to do with fair share and what not. i just think this raise is pretty thin here given your position.

edit - on second thought, a raise with 22 here is probably for value because of the multiwayedness, but that's not what you were getting at, was it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummm... explain to me how 22 has effective pot odds against 5 better than random hands?

The argument for raising for any pocker pair in this spot is to tie players with a clue to the pot with hands that are drawing dead or close to dead to your set when you hit. You also may have pot odds to peel one. The thought is that whatever small amount of value you lose pre-flop you make up post-flop with all the extra calls when you hit.

However, with a big pocket pair, you might have effective odds. 99 is cutting it close though...

[joker122]

OK. However, I don't think it was obvious enough to warrant an "are you serious?"

[Tosh]

Seems good to me.

[Brian]

If your first raise was for value, then the cap should be for value as well, as it is unlikely the Button has a better hand than you do.

-Brian

[MarkD]

I probably do not raise this pre-flop in this spot. I certainly do not cap when everyone calls.

edit: I would raise if I was button. I'm not raising in this spot simply because of position. Although it's obvious you have the best hand pre-flop I believe this to be one of those spots where I would pre-fer to play a small pot. Your opponents have a lot of outs against you.

[J.R.]

I think the cap has value if you expect any of the limpers to fold, but without that expectation I like the call because you have already built the pot, to the extent you have the best hand your edge isn't great and you have a hand that is tricky to play postflop, as you will frequently face 2 overcrads by the river. By refering to your 99 as the "best hand", bear in mind that two unduplicated overcards are a better hand than yours- (though the money you make from this raise is comming from the worst hands, so both you and KQ would benefit from this raise, even though an unduplicated KQo is a better hand), and to the extent you aren't against two overcards the reverse implied odd your hand offers when you don't flop a set make your hand perhaps less desirable than others, even if 99 has a small prelfop equity egde in a showdown simulation.

Building this pot further just makes it more likely you will have to make marginal calls later and be less able to protect your hand on a favorable flop (although you chance of being able to protect your hand given the likely 15 sbs in the pot preflop aren't spectacular to begin with). To some extent this situation is analagous to the flop play of waiting until the turn with a vulnerable top pair on a draw ladden board in a multiway pot, where you foraske hammering on the thin edge you have now in favor of being able to either get away should a bad card turn or to exploit your bigger edge should a good card turn.

I think the preflop raise is OK but a limp may be better. From the BB I think this is a pretty standrad raise for me.

[MoreWineII]

Do you really have the best hand though? Assuming your limpers aren't playing complete trash, say A-Jo, J-10s, A-8s, and KQos - four perfectly reasonable hands - isn't KQo actually a slight favorite over your hand? And that's assuming nobody has a real hand.

Are you giving zero credit to the limp-reraise? Is that read-based? Is BB LAGgy?

I understand the raise, but the cap seems a bit much imo. I hope to find out why I'm wrong.

[Ralph Wiggum]

Against all those hands, he has the best one.

[MarkD]

It is not as simple as that.

[MoreWineII]

Right, but I'm basing my response off of this reply by CDC:

[ QUOTE ]
how about because I have the best hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you do in fact, have the best hand, it's probably not by much. Again, we are assuming nobody is slow-playing a better hand and that button's 3-bet means nothing, which is a big assumption unless you've got great read, imo. And because you are going to be out of position throughout the whole hand, doesn't that pretty much negate the slight advantage you DO have at this particular moment?

I realize you want set value. I realize that you want to tie people in to the pot if and when you hit your set.

But haven't you already done that with three bets? Why the need for the fourth?

[IndieMatty]

Although it's obvious you have the best hand pre-flop I believe this to be one of those spots where I would pre-fer to play a small pot. Your opponents have a lot of outs against you.

I don't understand how this is obvious?

[Ralph Wiggum]

The following could be right or it could be wrong.

99 vs 6 opponents. It'll win more than 1/7 times, so by having everyone put in 4 bets PF, he's building pot equity (even though it may be very slight). By capping this hand PF, he's not making any mistake and at the same time there is now enough money in the pot to most likely allow him go to the turn, and probably even the river. That gives him a better chance of catching his set and winning this hand.

[MarkD]

What don't you understand? (Serious question)

99 is better than any hand his opponents hold in this spot. The best his opponents will have is overcards to his pair. If any of his opponents held a larger pair they would have raised and if button had an actual hand he would have raised first off instead of limping.

When a hand develops like this one the limp reraise player is usuually thinking something like this, "Woohoo! Everyone wants to play in a big pot! RAIZOO!" This mentality does not generally mean that he has a very strong hand. His most likely holding is a medium pocket pair or a suited connector of some sort. And I think it should be obvious that the callers don't have good hands.

Having said all that I still wouldn't raise this pre-flop.

[Ralph Wiggum]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand how this is obvious?


[/ QUOTE ] Come on, he definitely has the best hand. Are you serious?

[MoreWineII]

(Too) often, in the casino games I play, people limp with big hands. I was limp re-raised just last weekend by KK when I held QQ.

During this same session, within an hour, I saw players cold-call raises with JJ, QQ, and KK.

I can't explain it, but it happens quite a bit in my games. Players will limp with big hands but have no problems limp re-raising (don't ask). I suppose that's why I'm having trouble saying 99 is "obviously" the best hand here.

Of course, I think CDC is playing on Party where he probably *does* have the best hand in a situation like this.

[WarmonkEd]

I think the pf raise w/ your pp is fine. You'll take a really nice pot should you hit your set.

But I don't understand why you so easily dismiss the button's raise as meaningless. What's your read on him?

If the best hand against you are overcards, are you planning to fold the turn/river if there are overcards and you don't improve?

And finally, you don't need to be an ass and reply "Really?" when someone says he doesn't understand your play. How would you feel if no one would answer your questions when you first started playing poker?

[J.R.]

No, he doesn't have the best hand most of the time here. Headsup, a pair is a small favorite against overcards, but once you start to add more opponents, high card strength takes over. You would rather have AK than 99 in CDC's spot. And this is further compromised by the reverse implied odds the 99 has and its lesser liklihood of getting to the river.

But kinda like a flush draw and a made hand in a multiway pot on the flop, where both the best draw and the best made hand make money from each additional bet that goes into the pot (because they both win more than their fair share), while 99 is often not the best hand here, it is still one of the 2 or 3 best, so it typically (but not always) makes money on the preflop bets, but not as much money as the (unduplicated)* overcards make.

* as you can see, there are cases where two overcards which are somewhat duplicated are still best, but typically, as is obvious, the more of the two overcards' outs that are in the hands of other players, the more diminished the value of these overcards becomes.

Holdem Hi: 1086008 enumerated boards
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
9s 9c 246140 22.66 838238 77.19 1630 0.15 0.227
Qd Kh 286044 26.34 798334 73.51 1630 0.15 0.264
Js Ts 266753 24.56 817625 75.29 1630 0.15 0.246
Ad 8d 285441 26.28 798937 73.57 1630 0.15 0.263


Holdem Hi: 658008 enumerated boards
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
9s 9c 124166 18.87 533170 81.03 672 0.10 0.189
Ks Qd 86016 13.07 567278 86.21 4714 0.72 0.134
3d 3h 100536 15.28 556800 84.62 672 0.10 0.153
6c 5d 81831 12.44 575505 87.46 672 0.10 0.125
Ah Kh 161004 24.47 492290 74.82 4714 0.72 0.248
Js Tc 99741 15.16 557595 84.74 672 0.10 0.152


Holdem Hi: 658008 enumerated boards
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
9s 9c 118523 18.01 538810 81.89 675 0.10 0.180
Ks Qd 124129 18.86 533204 81.03 675 0.10 0.189
3d 3h 95543 14.52 561790 85.38 675 0.10 0.145
6c 5d 79946 12.15 577387 87.75 675 0.10 0.122
Ah 2h 141304 21.47 516029 78.42 675 0.10 0.215
Js Tc 97888 14.88 559445 85.02 675 0.10 0.149

[Ralph Wiggum]

[ QUOTE ]
During this same session, within an hour, I saw players cold-call raises with JJ, QQ, and KK.


[/ QUOTE ] He didn't mention this happening at this table, so I think it's weak to believe that it's happening by default.

[ QUOTE ]
I can't explain it, but it happens quite a bit in my games. Players will limp with big hands but have no problems limp re-raising (don't ask).

[/ QUOTE ] That's a cool move, kind of the like the check-raise. People like cool moves. Who cares if it's misapplied?

[ QUOTE ]
I suppose that's why I'm having trouble saying 99 is "obviously" the best hand here.


[/ QUOTE ] I think it's pretty obvious, and I have a problem thinking it's not obvious. But obviously I could be wrong. Maybe I'm just being oblivious, cuz obviously there's always a chance someone could have a better hand. But it's obvious they don't.

[Ralph Wiggum]

CDC had 6 opponents. It's hard for me to believe that all six opponents had the quality of hands that you've given to the simulated opponents in your example. From real life experience I'd wager that his opponent's hands weren't of that quality. Even against that quality of hands in your example, the 99 are barely a loser.

[MoreWineII]

That's what I was thinking. That's why in my example of KQo, AJo, J-10s, 99, and A-5s, I said I thought KQs was actually a hair favorite over 99 (in this instance) to win the pot.

That's not taking into account how many extra bets a disguised hand might get you though, no?

I'm so confused... /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[MoreWineII]

This thread is too hard..

/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[Yeknom58]

Seems good but I'm willing to bet both plays are equally "correct".

[J.R.]

That's my point. 99 should typically raise here, but stop saying 99 is the best hand. It often isn't best if its up against two overcards in an opponent's ahnd, which is a reasonable assumption which will frequently bear true.

The quality of the other 4 worse hands is of little consequence (unless a 9 or overcards outs get duplicated), because the best 2 or 3 hands are making money off the worst hands (because 99 will often win more than its fair share, but less so than the best hand). The worse the bottom 3 or four hands are, the greater 99's win rate over its fair share will be, and that's why raising 99 in a loose 3-6 game where some truly terrible hands are played is a winning play. My point is you don't need the best hand to make raising correct. Add in deception and tying people into the pot, and there are additional justifications for the raise.

Even against that quality of hands in your example, the 99 are barely a loser.

Its not all or nothing. 99 isn't a loser against a big field of 3-6 limpers, its a winner, although perhaps not often the "big" winner. The value of a preflop raise , much like a flop raise in a multiway pot, does not always exclusive accrue to the "best" hand, and many times the best 2 or 3 hands make money off each additional bet that goes into the pot.

[Ralph Wiggum]

[ QUOTE ]
That's my point. 99 should typically raise here, but stop saying 99 is the best hand. It often isn't best if its up against two overcards in an opponent's ahnd, which is a reasonable assumption which will frequently bear true.

[/ QUOTE ] I stand corrected.

[ QUOTE ]
The value of a preflop raise , much like a flop raise in a multiway pot, does not always exclusive accrue to the "best" hand, and many times the best 2 or 3 hands make money off each additional bet that goes into the pot.

[/ QUOTE ] Well put.

[MoreWineII]

Lots of good discussion on this thread. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that 99 is tied with one or two other hands as the best hand - which probably isn't far off, no?

So then what does the cap accomplish? I'm genuinely interested so that I know what the premium play is here as I find myself in this position frequently.

The raise sounds standard, so what is the correct course of action when (unknown we have to assume) button limp re-raises? Edit: and why?

[Ralph Wiggum]

When he caps, he is making money preflop. It's sort of like having AA and capping in this situation, but with 99, it's not as obvious.

[IndieMatty]

I'm serious and don't call me Shirly...he got re-raised, when I get re-raised pre-flop, unless I have AA, I can't say "It's obvious I have the best hand"

Why do we just assume the button is building a pot, seems like he is trying to knock some early callers out? Why is it so absurd to put the button on something better then 99? Or are we that aggressive/cocky that we automatically assume he has nothing. Not to mention how many bad players limp with tt-kk in early position.

CDC could have the best hand; but I still don't get the "obvious" situation.

EDIT: I didn't catch some things, semantics aside, it is relatively obvious he has the best hand, apologies.

[MoreWineII]

So, he's making money off of the 2-3 crap hands?

[Ralph Wiggum]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm serious and don't call me Shirly...he got re-raised, when I get re-raised pre-flop, unless I have AA, I can't say "It's obvious I have the best hand"

[/ QUOTE ] Sorry, Nancy.

[ QUOTE ]
Why do we just assume the button is building a pot,

[/ QUOTE ] I didn't say that.

[ QUOTE ]
seems like he is trying to knock sb/bb and maybe some early callers out?

[/ QUOTE ] For one more bet?

[ QUOTE ]
Or are we that aggressive/cocky that we automatically assume he has nothing.

[/ QUOTE ] Are a lot of us aggressive and/or cocky? Most likely, but I don't think that's why we assumed he had nothing (or more likely, not a premium hand).

[ QUOTE ]
CDC could have the best hand

[/ QUOTE ] I'm now convinced that he actually doesn't, but that's not point anyways. Read the rest of the thread.

[Ralph Wiggum]

yup

[IndieMatty]

Finished reading it all, hence the edit. Hard to read all of this and at the same hold my job. Great post though.

[MoreWineII]

Gotcha, why didn't you just say that in the first place? /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[J.R.]

Look at this example:

9s 9c 118523 18.01 538810 81.89 675 0.10 0.180
Ks Qd 124129 18.86 533204 81.03 675 0.10 0.189
3d 3h 95543 14.52 561790 85.38 675 0.10 0.145
6c 5d 79946 12.15 577387 87.75 675 0.10 0.122
Ah 2h 141304 21.47 516029 78.42 675 0.10 0.215
Js Tc 97888 14.88 559445 85.02 675 0.10 0.149

These are all good hands, better than to be expected in a 3-6 limpfest. There are 6 hands, so each hands fair share is 1/6th, or about @16.7%. Any hand that wins more than its fair share gains (i.e. it compounds its preflop edge above its fair share by getting additional bets into the pot) preflop. Clearly, in this example, the Ah2h wins the most freqeuntly and gains given each additional bet that goes into the pot preflop. But the KsQd and 9s9c hands also gain value, although not as much as the Ah2h, becuase they all win more than there fair share, or more than 1/6th of the time. The worse the bottom 3 or four hands are, the greater the edge the better hands have over their "fair share" and the more the better hands gain fom each additional bet that goes into the pot preflop.

However, also note that 99 doesn't have a huge edge over its fair share preflop. Also consider preflop bets are small bets, and that hand values will change dramatically once the flop comes. So it is somewhat close whether the preflop equity, pot building to tie in worse hands and deception arguments for raising 99 here outweigh the downsides of raising, such as the potential for getting induced to make postflop mistakes because of the reverse implied odds nature of 99 and the pot size, and the lesser ability to protect your hand when the 99 makes a best, but vulnerable postflop hand, such as when 99 is an overpair to the flop.

All-in all I like raising 99 preflop from the BB in spots like this (its closer from the sb IMO), because while you may not have the best hand you will frequently have a much bigger edge over your preflop fair share against the typical hands limped in a loose 3-6 Party game than those found in the twodimes calculation above.

But I think merits of the preflop edge, decption and pot building arguments are overtaken by the greater reverse implied odds, greater liklihood of making a mistake becuase of pot size and increasing inability to portect your hand that arise when the hand is 3-bet multiway, i.e. I don't like a cap becuase the pot is so big you can't really protect your hand postflop (especailly if you cap) which is partly why there is more value to the preflop raise the better you play postflop, are more likely to be outdrawn when you get a good flop because the pot size will mean your opponents will be more likely (and correct) to try to chase you down and you are more likly to make a mistake becuase of the pot size (i.e. calling when you should fold- although in a pot this size the impact of the mistake is not likely to be huge).

Furthermore, two reason for the prelfop riase, pot building and deception, are devauled when the pot gets huge becuase there is no further reason to build a pot, as there is already one, and deception is less valuable since people play straightforward and the pot size will limit your ability to check-raise or otherwise manipulate the pot or the apparent strength of your hand so as to induce folds by your opponents.

[Chris Daddy Cool]

I didn't really expect so many responses to this thread. I understand that my edge isn't that great pf, but I do know that I have one thus I raise. Yes, I know big suited hands like KQs are making money off the raise, but I know I will too, thus I raise. Typically the way I play, and I know it adds huge variance to my game is, if I see an edge, regardless of how small it may be, I will raise. That's just how I play.

Really, I thought the only debate in this hand should have been the cap, not the initial raise.

Nobody, and I mean, noboby, limp re-raises on the button with a good hand, so do I continue to push my edge here with a cap? I generally think my preflop edge is a lot greater than what J.R.'s twodimes sim showed because he gave my opponents too much credit in their hands. This reminds me a lot of a Mirage 10/20 game I played where I 5-bet capped pf with TT against a total maniac with a field of like 8 terrible limpers.

J.R. made a point that this hand becomes difficult to play postflop. I thought it'd be pretty easy: flop a set or an overpair and play accordingly, though I do see J.R.'s points. He also made a point that there's no point in building a bigger pot as there already is a huge pot. I disagree here however. No pot is big enough for me. /images/graemlins/shocked.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif

Thanks for the replies guys.

[MoreWineII]

Good stuff.

[cnfuzzd]

The soul of limit poker seems to be finding these small edges and having the bankroll to push them as far as possible. Well done sir.

peace

john nickle