The Lost Art of Folding

[Dark Force Rising]

Recently a friend of mine told me about a hand in which he raised red Kings UTG.He narrowed the field down to eight players and bet out on the As 2s 3c board.After two people called and the button raised he JUST CALLED.See where I'm going with this?I know it is an extreme example but it seems that there are a lot of competent players in the HUSH forum(the best players at Two Plus Two IMO) who are taking JUST CALLING and calling down,when facing heat from multiple opponents with scary boards,too far.

We rail against resisting the weak-tight inclination of fearing monsters under the bed.What about the tendency of labeling every 5 or 6 max villian a bluffy or semi-bluffy LAG?

Afraid someone will take shots at you when they see you fold on the flop after a raise?How many of them are really paying attention-even at the higher limits?But the flop is just a small(?)leak.Calling the turn-and then the river...being willfully ignorant of the fact that LAGS can make hands,too.

My biggest swings are a direct result of JUST CALLING when I know Goddamn well that I am beat- with little hope of improvement.How 'bout ya'll?

[Scotch78]

Naphand, did you just hear something? I think the crickets are out tonight.

Scott

[Dark Force Rising]

I knew you would be the first responder.In case you didn't know,Nap and I made nice via PM.Wanna try me one on one? /images/graemlins/mad.gif /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[bugstud]

In the 10/20 6max games we're gernally talking about you will get raise on the flop often by smaller pairs, any A,2,3,4,5 or flush draw. Your full table example is completely different than our (general) conditions.

[Scotch78]

Nah, it'd be fairer if the two of you teamed up.

Scott

[Zele]

You have a point. It's possible to go too far with "monsters under the bed", just as many of us previously went too far with "bet and fold to a turn raise."

In today's games, the latter mistake is much more expensive. But not everyone is on a steal, particularly at 5/10 and below.

[naphand]

This is indeed true. Dark Force took the more dignified route of PMing his thoughts to me rather than letting the flames rage uncontrollably. While I can't stand intolerance it is also important not to read too much into others' words, given the misunderstanding that can clearly arise even between two English-speaking nations, and always give someone the chance to explain themselves before reaching for the napalm... /images/graemlins/mad.gif

I blame too much poker, which seems to reward being able to quickly classify others, and then aggressively attacking them. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[naphand]

The reason you will see a lot of these type of posts is that many people are asking about default plays against "unknowns". Folds are much easier with a read, but you are sacrificing too much EV folding easily against unknowns, particularly if they are aggressive. You should certainly be calling down more short-handed as:

(1) players are more aggressive
(2) there are less people to get reads on

Calling down 9 players "to get reads" is much more expensive on a full table for obvious reasons. Less so SH. But even there, some hands are just more easily called with (not just pockets, but the board).

Of course you might ask yourself, given that your opponents have a "read" that you are folding too much, why you don't have a read on them yet?

[Dark Force Rising]

Oh,so people don't raise the flop with TPTK shorthanded?The full table example probably wasn't the best but I think it illustrates an all too common flaw.A flaw that has cost me heaps of dough.Yet, I realize that it is a balancing act between calling down bluffy aggros and knowing when one is beat especially when moving up in class.

My biggest downswings,SH or full,have never been a result of too many bad folds.

[TJD]

[ QUOTE ]
My biggest downswings,SH or full,have never been a result of too many bad folds.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is certainly true that people make more bad calls than bad folds.

I think it is also true that at the lower limits and particularly at full tables, if you just played a normal tight/aggressive game preflop and played all multiway flops on a fit or fold philosophy BUT played aggressively when you hit, then you would win at a pretty good rate. There is no need to be deceptive in those games since very few players are taking any notice. Any EV to be gained from the more marginal situations is rather small compared to the huge amount available from abc play so it is whether you can be bothered. If you are raised/reraised then you will need to make a judgement call based on what you know of the opponent if you wish to get maximum profit. However, even if you just called down with your hand that has "hit" then I suspect in the long run whether to call it down or fold would be close to neutral against unknowns. There is always the chance they are bluffing; they may be overestimating their own hand; you DO have a good hand and if you are behind you may improve to be best in any case.

Knowing when to fold SH is very difficult. Flops are much more often taken HU or 3-way and the vast majority of pots are won by a pair only. Since there are fewer opponents, players enter preflop with weaker hands and with so few opponents to scare off to "take home the bacon", there is a greater frequency of bets/raises with marginal holdings and even outright bluffs.

Once again, I suspect that if you have no read then as long as you actually HAVE a decent hand then calling it down will be close to neutral EV.

However, when it is HU or 3 way, it is necessary to believe that sometimes a weak hand is actually the best.

Let's say we get a free play HU or 3 way with 82 and the flop is K84r. Well, we might be behind but the odds favour us to be ahead. If we bet and are raised by an unknown, we have no idea whether /reraise/fold/call it down/call and fold to a turn bet/ is right. You are just going to have to guess. Is a call here a bad call?

Not easy!

I wonder what people's views would be on taking an abc approach to SH? If we just refused to get involved in small pots without a hand of some worth, would the pots we fail to win with AKo unimproved compensate for the losses in those pots we lost when we were raised on the flop and decide to call 'im down only to be shown that his J7 hit the 7 on the flop?

T

[naphand]

[ QUOTE ]
the vast majority of pots are won by a pair only.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not sure this is accurate. Obviously it is hard to determine what hands people had when there was no SD, but from hands won at SD about 45% are single pairs and perhaps up to 10% with high cards. While single pairs form the largest single group of winning hands, they are not even the majority. Together with high cards, they form a small majority. However, it would be interesting to see how these figures change when the SD involves 3 or 4 players, rather than just HU.

[joker122]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it is certainly true that people make more bad calls than bad folds.

[/ QUOTE ]

This a mark of correct play, since a bad fold is a much bigger mistake than a bad call.

[TJD]

[ QUOTE ]
This a mark of correct play, since a bad fold is a much bigger mistake than a bad call.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I agree that a bad fold can cost more.

However, many players rarely make that mistake since they do not fold enough! /images/graemlins/smile.gif and that of course is the point of the statement.

Many players call when the should fold but they rarely fold when they should call. Just because a fold is a bigger error does not mean that we should always call /images/graemlins/smile.gif


[ QUOTE ]
This a mark of correct play,

[/ QUOTE ]

is to do the right thing at the right time.

T

[TJD]

Hi Nap,

"My 98% of all statistics are made up on the spur of the moment" post was unclear, I apologise.

I was talking about hands that went to showdown and it was a "pair or less". The view that the (vast -exaggeration?) majority were "pair or less" was from a fairly small sample of just a few hundred hands when I was looking at my showdowns for $10/$20. There are not many multiway showdowns but I am sure that if I filtered those out then it would take a bigger hand on average to win.

My figure was that 57% of hands were <= 1 pair but I only counted those hands where the pockets were important. So if the board had a pair of 2's on it then the guy who hit the flop with his Q would be viewed as having one pair only since all other players had the pair of 2's in any case. However if he had a 2 in his hand then it would still be called trips. Any clearer or have I made it worse? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

T

[Tosh]

I don't especially like betting that flop, but calling one bet is probably ok.