Getting Heads Up With Only Overcards -- Worth It?

[gaming_mouse]

I accidentally cross-posted this in Probability last night.

Loose passive 2/4 Pacific Poker

Hero SB with A/images/graemlins/club.gif Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif

UTG calls, UTG+1 folds, CO calls, button calls, Hero completes, BB checks

Flop: 2/images/graemlins/club.gif 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif 5/images/graemlins/diamond.gif

Hero checks (intending to c/r to narrow the field), UTG checks, UTG+1 checks, CO checks, button bets, Hero raises, CO 3-bets, button folds, Hero calls.

Turn: J/images/graemlins/spade.gif

Hero checks, CO bets, Hero calls (too loose??).

River: 10/images/graemlins/diamond.gif

Hero checks, CO bets, Hero folds.

Thanks for any comments,
gm

[MoreWineII]

Raise preflop!

I like the flop raise.

I'd check/fold the turn.

[eh923]

I'm not a fan of raising this up w/ 3 limpers, and a probable call from the BB. I'd just call here, too.

I am a fan of the flop CR, but the check 3-bet sounds like at least two pair. I'd fold immediately and not even see the turn.

[MoreWineII]

Not raising here preflop with 3 limpers is extremely weak-tight. Almost without a doubt, you've got the best hand.

Folding to the flop 3-bet is bad too. Getting, what, 8, 9-1..?

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
I am a fan of the flop CR, but the check 3-bet sounds like at least two pair. I'd fold immediately and not even see the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a good point, but the 3-bettor could just as easily been trying to do the same thing I was doing: get heads up. I felt like at this point the odds you're getting make calling that last bet worth it. I'm pretty convinced though that my turn call was too loose.

gm

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
Not raising here preflop with 3 limpers is extremely weak-tight. Almost without a doubt, you've got the best hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the other hand (and this was my thinking at the time), by raising preflop you're going to give drawing hands correct odds to call on the flop, and possibly even again on the turn. I wanted to knock people out with the c/r -- thus I didn't want to make the pot to enticing.

Further comments on the validity of the above??

gm

[MoreWineII]

So you wouldn't raise AK for that same reason either? AA?

[eh923]

You can call it weak-tight, but here's what a raise accomplishes:
- Gets money in with the best hand AT THE MOMENT...that's probably true.
- Gets nobody to fold, except possibly the BB. But the read was loose, so I doubt a fold would happen.
- Gets the pot to 10 SB, giving anyone with any piece of the flop odds to pull another card off. Remember, our hero's plan was to CR the field with a bad flop if he could. This won't work as well with a larger pot.
- Raising also doesn't change the fact that our hero is out of position with an offsuit one-gap.

He CR'd to thin the field. It didn't work. He has [censored], and a player with a very high likelihood of a strong hand (remember, his read was PASSIVE...don't expect a bluff check 3-bet) has position on him. His only real hope is probably runner runner. Calling the 3-bet isn't inexcusable, but it isn't CLEARLY better than folding and it definitely isn't a no-brainer.

Folding to the turn bet is a no-brainer.

[eh923]

That's not a fair comparison. AK (suited or not) and AA (they better not be suited) are far stronger in this situation than AQo.

[MoreWineII]

I'll ask you the same question:

[ QUOTE ]
So you wouldn't raise AK for that same reason either? AA?

[/ QUOTE ]

[eh923]

N/M

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
So you wouldn't raise AK for that same reason either? AA?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your CURRENT pot equity with these hands is considerably greater than with AQ -- so it isn't a fair comparison.

With AQ I was applying the SSHE principle (incorrectly??) of giving up a SMALL CURRENT edge in equity in the hopes of gaining a larger edge later.

gm

[MoreWineII]

I punish the limpers here with a hand that I think has far more value than apparently either of you guys do, and then worry about protecting my hand later.

Curious to see what others think now.

[ayecappy]

I pretty much disagree with most replies so far. Here's my take on it.

Raise preflop, with noone raising you probably have the best hand and you want as much money in the pot as possible, with inferior hands they are paying you off. Reasoning as "a raise will possibly only get one player out(bb) and give draws odds further in the hand", with the best hand you dont want anyone to fold and youre in great position to make that raise since it will _not_ get anyone out(except bb) and there is no better place to punish ppl with inferior hands than preflop. For example what is the dream scenario for a drawing hand like 67s? It is getting a cheap flop with alot of players, by not raising you're giving them just that.

The flop check is automatic, it missed you completely, you cant win the pot outright with that big of a field and if you are raised you're in a tough situation. If an early player bets you can easily fold because he is not likely to be bluffing into 5 players. Now the button betting could be a positional raise after everyone showing weakness so i like the raise since you confront everyone with 2 bets, the co now coming out 3-betting makes it an easy fold for various reasons, he is almost certainly slowplaying a big made hand and was going to start betting on the turn but saw this opportunity coming up, at least two pair or a set, he has position on you and will control the betting at the turn and river, you dont have odds to call even a sb with those cards since probably neither an ace or a queen is an out so you have to hit runner runner and taking off the river card even if you would hit an ace or queen is too expensive.

[MoreWineII]

I don't think SB has that big of a hand here. No raise pre-flop means a high pair is unlikely. I think he'd wait until the turn to ram & jam a set. On that raggedy flop, a check/3-bet just means he's driving out customers. One thing even Party nubs are aware of is slow-playing a set to maximize profit.

Check/3-betting a flop probably means he has a hand that's decent but vulnerable, imo.

I'm not folding for a small bet closing the action.

[Malcom Reynolds]

I raise AQo in the BB with any number of limpers, to push the equity edge, especially with the quality of hands that are coming in. If this was an extremely tight game with many chopped blinds and suddenly everyone limped for one hand, I probably wouldn't raise in this spot, but that's a really specific situation. This is often mentioned in those other threads that question raising AKo in the BB with limpers.

I thought we concluded that raising AQo in the blinds is standard. Why is this an issue again?

[ayecappy]

I'd like to address some of the replies i disagree on and id like if anyone say what they think about my reasoning.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar till:</font><hr />
but the 3-bettor could just as easily been trying to do the same thing I was doing: get heads up. I felt like at this point the odds you're getting make calling that last bet worth it.

[/ QUOTE ]
First, when 3 players have checked to him and only the button is left to act behind him, its a very bad place to try for a checkraise. The second mistake with this reasoning is you put him on one pair, it would be very unlikely for him to check one pair after everyone else has checked, then when its raised and reraised to him he all of a sudden thinks his hand is any better and 3-bets, only with this HIGHLY unlikely scenario do you have odds to carry on.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar till:</font><hr />
On the other hand (and this was my thinking at the time), by raising preflop you're going to give drawing hands correct odds to call on the flop, and possibly even again on the turn. I wanted to knock people out with the c/r -- thus I didn't want to make the pot to enticing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nothing wrong with jamming the pot before the flop with the best hand, you will win way more than your fair share in the long run. The c/r theory is correct, it is often incorrect to lead out into a big field with a middling hand like top pair top kicker(or as in your hand, two overcards with no possible draws on the board) when the pot is big since you're giving drawing hand profitable odds to continue.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar till:</font><hr />
You can call it weak-tight, but here's what a raise accomplishes:
- Gets nobody to fold, except possibly the BB. But the read was loose, so I doubt a fold would happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are no hands, absolutely no hands that play so extremely well against a large field like two big card or a big pair. With noone raising you probably have the best of it.


</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar till:</font><hr />
- Gets the pot to 10 SB, giving anyone with any piece of the flop odds to pull another card off. Remember, our hero's plan was to CR the field with a bad flop if he could. This won't work as well with a larger pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

That plan actually works, but only if the hero wants to win pots and not money. With a drawing hand himself i dont see why he wouldnt want to make it bigger for his own purposes of drawing, did i mention the hero has the best draw to the nuts.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar till:</font><hr />
He CR'd to thin the field. It didn't work. He has [censored], and a player with a very high likelihood of a strong hand (remember, his read was PASSIVE...don't expect a bluff check 3-bet) has position on him. His only real hope is probably runner runner. Calling the 3-bet isn't inexcusable, but it isn't CLEARLY better than folding and it definitely isn't a no-brainer.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you by "he has [censored]" mean he erred i disagree, the plan to fold to an early raise and reraise a late one worked out perfectly with the button positionraising and then folding when being checkraised. In my opinion the c/r was correct, the call from CO 3betting was not. With the rest i agree 100%.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar till:</font><hr />
With AQ I was applying the SSHE principle (incorrectly??) of giving up a SMALL CURRENT edge in equity in the hopes of gaining a larger edge later.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have not read sshe yet so im not sure about what exactly he says but by raising you are making the pot roughly twice as big, that isnt what i would call small edge. Also, many players happily pays a small bet with a wide range of garbage to get to see 3 out of five community cards but dumps it if they miss, there is no other place to make them pay like preflop. And im gonna pick up sshe as soon as i can /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ayecappy]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar till:</font><hr />
I think he'd wait until the turn to ram &amp; jam a set. On that raggedy flop, a check/3-bet just means he's driving out customers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Makes NO sense, who is he trying to drive out with only two players left and they have just started a raising war, it sure is a bad place to try and push a mediocre hand and he pays a big price to do so too, very bad poker by CO if it is two bet back to him and he threebets with one pair.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar till:</font><hr />
One thing even Party nubs are aware of is slow-playing a set to maximize profit.

[/ QUOTE ]
With this board slowplaying is arguable(not after the action has gone bet-c/r-fold-fold back to him though) but generally sets should be played fast when there's two flushes, 2 or 3 cards to a straight etc.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar till:</font><hr />
I'm not folding for a small bet closing the action.

[/ QUOTE ]
Too bad, the odds arent there to draw out :]

[pfkaok]

Yeah, raise PF is good here. Its true that you're out of position and will make a bigger pot to allow for draws. So in that sense you'll make the pot big enough that you can't punish the draws after the flop. But the fact is that probably a few of the players have made a mistake already by limping with bad hands. If you raise then you magnify this mistake, and make them ALL put another bet in. If they're going to limp with 69o or q7o, make them REALLY pay for it now, don't let them in cheap and fold when their bad hands miss.

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not folding for a small bet closing the action.

[/ QUOTE ]
Too bad, the odds arent there to draw out :]

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you elaborate on your thinking here? It seems to me that do you have the odds. Or are you just saying that based on his play he is so likely to have better than a single pair that I will be drawing almost dead?

[ QUOTE ]
There are no hands, absolutely no hands that play so extremely well against a large field like two big card or a big pair.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that true? I had thought something like T9s would be better in a LARGE field, which this is not. So this is a side point. But say there were 8 players in instead of instead of 3 or 4. Would you rather have T9s or AQo?

Thanks for the comments,
gm

[ayecappy]

The pot is giving you 11-1 on a call, if all aces and queens are live you have a 7-1 shot but the problem is they probably arent given the action of the CO, he was prepared to give a free card given his flop check then when it got bet and raised to him with the EP player folding he made it three bets which indicates great strength.
Against a set(22,55,99) or two-pair(not very likely) you would need to hit runner-runner, if he has one pair and shares one of your cards like A9,Q9,A5 etc, you have only a 15-1 shot.


</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar till:</font><hr />
So this is a side point. But say there were 8 players in instead of instead of 3 or 4. Would you rather have T9s or AQo?

[/ QUOTE ]

Big cards like AQ or big pairs like AA-QQ wants as many callers as possible because they are usually favorites to win and have more ways to win than eg. 9Ts. Against say 8 opponents if you flop top pair excellent kicker with AQ you have a very strong hand whereas top pair top kicker with 9Ts is rather weak with that many opponents.
I hope i made some sense

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
whereas top pair top kicker with 9Ts is rather weak with that many opponents.
I hope i made some sense

[/ QUOTE ]

You should really read SSHE. T9s is classified as a speculative hand. You want to play it against many opps hoping to see the flop for 1 bet and to win a big pot with a staight of flush. From p.53 of SSHE:

Speculative hands play better against many opponents. They make powerful hands that can beat large fields. Playing in multiway pots leverages this power; many opponents create bigger pots.

gm

[TripleH68]

I used to limp with this sometimes too. Then experience taught me to punish the limpers. Making up the bets you gain by this pre-flop raise is not as easy as it sounds.

The other thing I think beginners overlook is when you do not raise this hand and the flop comes QT8...what does an early position bet mean? When they are betting into you as the pre-flop raiser you can have a better idea where you stand. My 2 cents.

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
You should really read SSHE. T9s is classified as a speculative hand. You want to play it against many opps hoping to see the flop for 1 bet and to win a big pot with a staight of flush. From p.53 of SSHE:

Speculative hands play better against many opponents. They make powerful hands that can beat large fields. Playing in multiway pots leverages this power; many opponents create bigger pots.


[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly, so you want to punish those who are playing speculative or weaks hands by making them pay 2 bets, instead of 1(b/c as you said only paying 1 is what they want)...

SSHE pg. 51

"The best top pair hands - A10, KJ, and better - tend to benfit more from the extra money than they lose from mulitway action. They actually make MORE money against many bad hands."

[gaming_mouse]

Good point, pfkaok. Thanks for that.

gm

[pfkaok]

No prob.

This was one of the more coutnerintuitive things for me from SSHE... but for me when I looked at a pokerodds calculator it made more sense. When you see your pot equity vs the type of hands bad players are playing its hard to argue for calling instead of raising(even from out of position)

[ayecappy]

AQo is not a speculative hand though, it is a power hand and also plays better with a big field

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
AQo is not a speculative hand though, it is a power hand and also plays better with a big field

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't say it was... I was making a side point that what you were saying about T9s was incorrect.

But you are right about AQo. I've now been convinced I should have raised that preflop. On p. 237 SSH actually has an excellent discussion which addresses my reasons for checking, and explains why they don't apply in this case: Even though I will gain postflop expectation by my play, I will lose EVEN MORE preflop equity, is what it boils down to.

gm