Debatable all-in call angers opponent.

[VarlosZ]

This was at a PartyPoker 6-handed $100 ($1/$2) NLHE table at 5AM. I've only been at the table a few rounds, but so far it's been consistently loose and aggressive, though not maniacle. I've got $122 at the start of this hand.

I'm dealt J /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 6 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif in the SB. UTG ($71) calls, two folds, Button ($377) calls, I complete, BB checks.

Flop (pot=$8): 4 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 5 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 7 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

I lead out for $7 with my straight and flush draws, BB folds, UTG calls, Button (big stack) quickly goes all-in. Assuming UTG folds, I'm getting about 1.19-1 on my call. Here are my win probabilities against the various hands BB might hold:

A /images/graemlins/spade.gif 9 /images/graemlins/club.gif: 68.5% (1-2.24)
A /images/graemlins/heart.gif 9 /images/graemlins/heart.gif: 65.7% (1-1.96)
9 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 9 /images/graemlins/spade.gif: 61.4% (1-1.63)
8 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 8 /images/graemlins/spade.gif: 54.8% (1-1.22)
7 /images/graemlins/spade.gif 5 /images/graemlins/spade.gif: 48.2 (1.04-1)
5 /images/graemlins/spade.gif 5 /images/graemlins/club.gif: 38.5% (1.55-1)
8 /images/graemlins/club.gif 6 /images/graemlins/heart.gif: 36.4% (1.56-1)

My feeling at the time was that BB's huge overbet was, at this table, more likely to be one of the first five hands above than one of the last two. After a long pause, I call.

BB flopped the nut straight, but I made my flush and won a huge pot. I guess the only question is: given a relatively LAG table, do you think this call is +EV?

After the hand, villain types:

. . . sick
. . . sickkkk
. . . all ur money on flush draw
. . . impressive
. . . ridiculous
Me: Guess I had fewer outs than I figured. . .
Him: ur an idiot

I just let it drop, and he didn't say anything else.


Hand 2:
16 hands later, this same player and I are in another pot. In the intervening hands he's kept up his mostly LAG play, but has not been indiscriminately crazy. I've got $209, he's got $168.

I have A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif K /images/graemlins/club.gif in the SB, again. fold, call, fold, the villain from previous hand uses the auto-bet-pot feature ($9). I call, BB folds, limper calls.

Flop (pot=$27.55): Q /images/graemlins/heart.gif K /images/graemlins/spade.gif 7 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

I check, MP checks, villain again auto-bets-pot ($27.55). I call, MP folds.

Turn (pot=$82.10): 7 /images/graemlins/heart.gif
I check, villain again auto-bets-pot. I concede that my check-call-check was probably unwise. Given that it was played this way, however, what now? What do you think villain has? There's $164 in the pot; villain has $49 left.


Thanks in advance for any comments.


Edit: Fixed stack size for Button/BB in Hand 1.

[ChipLeader]

I think AK or AQ, and i put his stack in right there. If hes betting a hand preflop, it probably doesnt have a 7, and if it has two of em, hed probably try luring you in more on his set turned 4 of a kind. In other words, he doesnt have 77 (and probably wouldnt bet it PF anyway). What he WOULD bet is a PP between T and A, AK, and AQ... MAYBE AJ. It doesnt look like aces, nor trips, so my play is to push his last chips in there and expect to split with AK or beat a poorly played AQ. The times i lose to trips or Aces here are rare enough to makes this call. Unless you have some sort of read on the villian? A BB flopped straight doesnt really tell us much. If he hasnt bet PF much then i probably would have reraised his flop bet to find out where i am, then fold to a push.

[Tilt]

Hey Varlos,

I agree with chipleader. Since you are calling, acting passive, and given your first big hand with this guy, he feels cerain you are drawing for the flush again, so he is going to make you pay or lay it down. Given that, I don't think you could say with much certainty whether he has AK, QQ, JJ, or TT. I think he has one spade, which makes him feel slightly better that you won't flush him, and he has a nut straight draw. I doubt the trip Q's, but its possible. Its also slightly possible that he has tilted with 78s or 99.

Too much in the pot to let this go. But you can't check - he'll push no matter what he has and then you wont know what to do. Hes pushing in almost any case, so I'd throw out $50 and give HIM something to think about. He might lay it down and start whining again about how you hit your third 7 on the turn. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif Or he might show a monster. Given your description that seems about 50-50 to me which makes $50 to go obvious into the pot of $164.

[ZManODS]

A /images/graemlins/club.gif9 /images/graemlins/heart.gif : 68.5% (1-2.24)
A /images/graemlins/heart.gif9 /images/graemlins/heart.gif : 65.7% (1-1.96)

Why would you pick these hands? Its like saying he could have KQ. It has no revelance.

[Sterno]

I was wondering that as well. What makes you think he's holding A9 on a board like that?

[TakeMeToTheRiver]

[ QUOTE ]
A /images/graemlins/club.gif9 /images/graemlins/heart.gif : 68.5% (1-2.24)
A /images/graemlins/heart.gif9 /images/graemlins/heart.gif : 65.7% (1-1.96)

Why would you pick these hands? Its like saying he could have KQ. It has no revelance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was wondering the same thing... I think he uses those hands to mean an Ace with another overcard 9 or over -- the odds are basically the same regardless of what overcard it is. (also the same if it was your KQ)

[DBowling]

I dont like that selection, because it doesnt take into account the times you hit a J and he hits... maybe a Q while holding AQ. Or even if he has AJ, your outs are less. I think if youre going to pick two overcards, might as well be AK.

[jon_1van]

me too....and why aren't you thinking about the Ad

[jon_1van]

I'd call...but be very unhappy about not betting or checkraising the flop.

By the way...in hand 1. You didn't consider what happens if villian has a higher flush draw...which is by far the worst hand he can have as far as you are concerned

[VarlosZ]

The A /images/graemlins/club.gif 9 /images/graemlins/spade.gif was just meant to represent an almost pure bluff. I didn't use two overcards tp my Jack because I'm confident he would've raised with such a hand. A /images/graemlins/heart.gif 9 /images/graemlins/heart.gif was a brain fart -- it was supposed to be diamonds, but I used hearts instead (I remember being surprised that I was doing so well against a better flush draw). I'd post the revised odds, but twodimes.net isn't responding right now.

In the second hand, I decided that three successive auto-bet-pots were two risky to do without AA, KK, QQ, or at least AK, since if I bet in front of him he'll automatically have to put just that much more into the pot. I folded.

Villain showed 9 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 4 /images/graemlins/club.gif, then proceeded to speed around crazily until he lost his whole stack about 5 minutes later.

[VarlosZ]

There we go. Against A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 9 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif, I'll win 33.84%, getting 1.93-1. That's pretty ugly, and might change things a bit.

[Entity]

You know about using PokerStove to run these numbers too, right?

http://www.pokerstove.com

Rob

[VarlosZ]

I hadn't seen that. Thanks.

[ddubois]

PokerStove is pretty neat, but it won't be able to handle this problem very well, since it's ability to handle ranges of suited-diamond hands is messed up.

[tpir90036]

I stopped reading after I saw that you made up a bunch of hands for your opponent with incorrect %'s to justify your call. Analysis of a thought process is good. Bogus analysis to support a conclusion that you would like to think is correct is silly and not good. Hope it all worked out for you...

-tpir

[VarlosZ]

Huh? The percentages were correct. I made one mistake (the hearts/diamonds), then corrected it. I really don't understand the latent hostility in your post.

Anyway, thanks for the helpful response.

[tpir90036]

There is no hostility. Also notice that all you did was address the percentages part of my post and not the absurdity of simply listing a bunch of hands you are in good shape against. Obviously, you see that this was worthless, yes? So let's just call it "sad disbelief in what you were tying to pass off as logical analysis." I am actually trying to help you in a way.

Good luck,
-tpir

[VarlosZ]

[ QUOTE ]
Also notice that all you did was address the percentages part of my post and not the absurdity of simply listing a bunch of hands you are in good shape against.

[/ QUOTE ]
I see you really didn't bother to read more than a few lines of the OP. I listed almost every type of hand the opponent could have -- from a bluff to the nuts -- with the accidental ommission of a better flush draw, as I mentioned. I never held up the OP as a paragon of brilliance; I merely said that, at the time, my feeling was that this player was more likely to have a hand against which I was doing well than a one against which I was doing poorly. Considering the hole I'd be in versus a better flush draw, I may have been mistaken (and have already said as much).

[ QUOTE ]
I am actually trying to help you in a way.

[/ QUOTE ]
In the laziest, rudest way possible, perhaps.

Seriously, you've posted two false accusations ("incorrect %'s" and "simply listing a bunch of hands you are in good shape against"), and wrapped them in some thinly veiled insults. This is how you help people?

[tpir90036]

Duly noted.

1) I am not the only one who was confused by your analysis. Just the only one who said it the way I said it.
2) There is still no hostility involved.
3) It seems like you have a good idea about what goes into analyzing a range of hands (which is good)... but you missed so many other possible and important hands that I think the work you did was partially wasted. That's all.

I am sorry you were as offended as you were.

Good luck,
-tpir