PDA

View Full Version : How would you, with your infinate poker wisdom, play my hand?


lawpoker
02-02-2005, 01:10 AM
Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t30 (8 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Button (t1195)
SB (t780)
Hero (t830)
UTG (t1130)
UTG+1 (t1130)
MP1 (t2005)
MP2 (t785)
CO (t145)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 7/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG+1 calls t30, MP1 calls t30, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 raises to t60</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Button raises to t90</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, Hero calls t60, UTG+1 calls t60, MP1 calls t60, MP2 calls t30.

Flop: (t465) 7/images/graemlins/club.gif, 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif, J/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG+1 bets t150</font>, MP1 folds, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 raises to t300</font>, Button calls t300, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to t740 (All-In)</font>, UTG+1 folds, MP2 calls t395 (All-In), Button calls t440.

Turn: (t2790) 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players, 2 all-in)</font>

River: (t2790) A/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players, 2 all-in)</font>

Final Pot: t2790

Allinlife
02-02-2005, 01:14 AM
exact same way/

Daliman
02-02-2005, 01:15 AM
Completely different. I'd have called the 60 more preflop, checked the flop, and when it got back around to me, facing a bet, a raise, and a flat call, I'd have gone allin.....

The Yugoslavian
02-02-2005, 01:20 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Completely different. I'd have called the 60 more preflop, checked the flop, and when it got back around to me, facing a bet, a raise, and a flat call, I'd have gone allin.....

[/ QUOTE ]

Dammit. This was going to be my line. You suck!

Although, I have to admit in the $215s I'd be folding after checking, facing a bet, raise and flat call. At the levels I play I don't fold a set of sevens on the flop... I just don't.

Yugoslav

lawpoker
02-02-2005, 01:34 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Completely different. I'd have called the 60 more preflop, checked the flop, and when it got back around to me, facing a bet, a raise, and a flat call, I'd have gone allin.....

[/ QUOTE ]

Dammit. This was going to be my line. You suck!

Although, I have to admit in the $215s I'd be folding after checking, facing a bet, raise and flat call. At the levels I play I don't fold a set of sevens on the flop... I just don't.

Yugoslav

[/ QUOTE ]

and the mockery begins...ok, so seriously. should i have thought twice about pushing? any thoughts of another set? or just monsters under the bed?

Daliman
02-02-2005, 01:51 AM
This is pretty close to a no brainer. Sure, you might be beat, but it happens. If you only wait for the mortal nuts to go allin, you'll go like broomcorn's uncle.

Not to minimize your obvious yearning for expanded thought, but if you never fold and always raise allin with a set on the flop for your entire poker lifetime, your results will likely not be more than .0001% worse than if you took each as an individual case. Very similar to the "should I ever fold KK preflop?" question.

The Yugoslavian
02-02-2005, 02:05 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Completely different. I'd have called the 60 more preflop, checked the flop, and when it got back around to me, facing a bet, a raise, and a flat call, I'd have gone allin.....

[/ QUOTE ]

Dammit. This was going to be my line. You suck!

Although, I have to admit in the $215s I'd be folding after checking, facing a bet, raise and flat call. At the levels I play I don't fold a set of sevens on the flop... I just don't.

Yugoslav

[/ QUOTE ]

and the mockery begins...ok, so seriously. should i have thought twice about pushing? any thoughts of another set? or just monsters under the bed?

[/ QUOTE ]

Assessing the situation for a couple extra seconds before going allin is never a bad idea. That being said you should not second-guess the decision you outlined above. Daliman is right about many things. And this is no exception /images/graemlins/wink.gif.

No mockery intended really. Every once in a while we all need a 'yes, your hand is a monster you can't fold' check-up. Or better yet, I search for thread after thread of these situations and then I am *really* convinced allin is good.

Yugoslav

Barrett's Last Privateer
02-02-2005, 02:15 AM
Guys,

Is the call pre-flop automatic here? I reailse both raises are min-raises, but does facing 2 of them introduce any doubt? My first inclination was probably to fold pre flop.

Obviously there are raises which would be large enough to drive a fold here, so what are the considerations when choosing how big a raise you are prepared to call? Should you be thinking about pot odds, implied odds or both? (Or is that a stupid question?)

Thanks in advance,

BLP

SuitedSixes
02-02-2005, 02:20 AM
I fold pre-flop, and it's not even close.

ChrisV
02-02-2005, 02:20 AM
A good rule is to call for up to 1/15th of your stack with a pair. You're paying slightly more than that here, but there are special circumstances that make this an easy call: (1) There are two raisers, which increases the chances someone will flop an overpair, or failing that TPTK with AK, when you flop a set, which means a better chance to bust someone (2) There are quite a few people in, which both increases your immediate pot odds and increases your chances of getting someone's stack when you flop a set.

stupidsucker
02-02-2005, 02:27 AM
I fold this preflop often, but not always.

After the play is made the action is not over.

lorinda
02-02-2005, 02:32 AM
I'd river quads.

Edit: Also no mockery intended, the stacks are not deep enough to worry about the monsters, but rivering quads just in case is always good.

Lori

lawpoker
02-02-2005, 02:52 AM
Just thought I'd share...for fun.

<font color="red">
Results in white below: <font color="#FFFFFF">
Hero has 7s 7h (three of a kind, sevens).
MP2 has Kc Jc (one pair, jacks).
Button has As Ah (three of a kind, aces).
Outcome: Button wins t2790. </font> </font>

lorinda
02-02-2005, 03:06 AM
Button has obviously read my posts before /images/graemlins/frown.gif

Lori

The Yugoslavian
02-02-2005, 03:09 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I fold pre-flop, and it's not even close.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I actually will fold this sometimes too so I guess my line isn't identical to Dali's. But, it is quite close I think due to the decent pot odds and huge implied odds of the action. If I read the table as quite passive then it looks playable. If I'm closing the action then I am much more likely to call but upon further review I think there are enough people who can still act to make me fold this a significant % of the time.

BTW, the guy with AA is a moron (who happened to win all of your chips).

Yugoslav

Daliman
02-02-2005, 03:24 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I fold pre-flop, and it's not even close.

[/ QUOTE ]

It should be. Work on that.

lawpoker
02-02-2005, 03:26 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Button has obviously read my posts before /images/graemlins/frown.gif

Lori

[/ QUOTE ]

Lori is absolutly correct. i should have at least turned quads, if not rivered them. i think it's always good to have a back up plan in place. an exit-strategy, so to speak. damn it! i will consult Lori before making any bets from this point forward. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

yugo...ya, i agree that he wasn't the best player in the game. and he managed to lose his over 3-1 chip lead in about 2 orbits. good times....good times.

Daliman
02-02-2005, 03:26 AM
[ QUOTE ]
A good rule is to call for up to 1/15th of your stack with a pair. You're paying slightly more than that here, but there are special circumstances that make this an easy call: (1) There are two raisers, which increases the chances someone will flop an overpair, or failing that TPTK with AK, when you flop a set, which means a better chance to bust someone (2) There are quite a few people in, which both increases your immediate pot odds and increases your chances of getting someone's stack when you flop a set.

[/ QUOTE ]

I personally 5% as a general guideline, but otherwise, ChirisV is spot on here, as he usually is.

lawpoker
02-02-2005, 03:29 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A good rule is to call for up to 1/15th of your stack with a pair. You're paying slightly more than that here, but there are special circumstances that make this an easy call: (1) There are two raisers, which increases the chances someone will flop an overpair, or failing that TPTK with AK, when you flop a set, which means a better chance to bust someone (2) There are quite a few people in, which both increases your immediate pot odds and increases your chances of getting someone's stack when you flop a set.

[/ QUOTE ]

I personally 5% as a general guideline, but otherwise, ChirisV is spot on here, as he usually is.

[/ QUOTE ]

thank you both for these posts. the insight (and guidlines) are greatly appreciated. i'm always learning...

Irieguy
02-02-2005, 03:48 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I fold pre-flop, and it's not even close.

[/ QUOTE ]

It should be. Work on that.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, this is one of those examples of a $219 player and an $11 player trying to have the same conversation.

In a low-limit SNG if you cold-call 2 raises from the small blind with a small pair in level 2, you do not understand low limit SNG strategy. You have to fold, and it's not close. Suited Sixes and Yugo are right.

The sport changes when you go to the $109's and above because you start to lose the tremendous overlay you have on the bubble at the smaller limits. You cannot jeopardize your chances to get to the bubble in a low limit SNG by always talking yourself into playing small pairs because of implied odds. You miss the flop a lot, and you go broke with small sets sometimes. If you don't make it to the bubble in a $33 SNG or below, you better be passing up that juicy opportunity for a very good reason. Not because you went broke with pocket 7's.

Now, Daliman, in a $219 SNG I would call from the BB with pocket 7's even if the button showed me his aces (as long as he couldn't see my 7's). The implied odds for that hand are well worth the 60 chips, and missing that opportunity is less likely to be overcome by your late stage overlay. At the higher limits you need an overlay at every stage to win consistently.

The mistake that low limit players make is failing to recognize the weighted difference between decisions in level 1 and decisions in level 5. If your opponent is twice as bad as you are, his mistakes at level 5 are 25 times more significant than his mistakes at level 1. At the higher limits you are unlikely to find yourself on the bubble in a situation where you are twice a skilled as everybody else. So the marginal difference in skill multiplied by the higher blinds does not adequately compensate for a missed opportunity to double through somebody early.

Pushing marginal edges early and seeking out opportunities to acquire chips at every level is a great way to earn a 12% ROI. The problem is that at the $11's you can earn a 40% ROI if you understand what you are up against.

Irieguy

lorinda
02-02-2005, 03:51 AM
I've been wanting to word this post for about a year and never managed it.

EVERYONE should read Irie's post.

Lori

elonkra
02-02-2005, 05:02 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I fold pre-flop, and it's not even close.

[/ QUOTE ]

It should be. Work on that.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, this is one of those examples of a $219 player and an $11 player trying to have the same conversation.

In a low-limit SNG if you cold-call 2 raises from the small blind with a small pair in level 2, you do not understand low limit SNG strategy. You have to fold, and it's not close. Suited Sixes and Yugo are right.

The sport changes when you go to the $109's and above because you start to lose the tremendous overlay you have on the bubble at the smaller limits. You cannot jeopardize your chances to get to the bubble in a low limit SNG by always talking yourself into playing small pairs because of implied odds. You miss the flop a lot, and you go broke with small sets sometimes. If you don't make it to the bubble in a $33 SNG or below, you better be passing up that juicy opportunity for a very good reason. Not because you went broke with pocket 7's.

Now, Daliman, in a $219 SNG I would call from the BB with pocket 7's even if the button showed me his aces (as long as he couldn't see my 7's). The implied odds for that hand are well worth the 60 chips, and missing that opportunity is less likely to be overcome by your late stage overlay. At the higher limits you need an overlay at every stage to win consistently.

The mistake that low limit players make is failing to recognize the weighted difference between decisions in level 1 and decisions in level 5. If your opponent is twice as bad as you are, his mistakes at level 5 are 25 times more significant than his mistakes at level 1. At the higher limits you are unlikely to find yourself on the bubble in a situation where you are twice a skilled as everybody else. So the marginal difference in skill multiplied by the higher blinds does not adequately compensate for a missed opportunity to double through somebody early.

Pushing marginal edges early and seeking out opportunities to acquire chips at every level is a great way to earn a 12% ROI. The problem is that at the $11's you can earn a 40% ROI if you understand what you are up against.

Irieguy

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't even know what an overlay is, but I am beginning to really like this place and its potential for improving my game, in spite of the fact that it may be several books and months before I can actually participate in a discussion here.

SuitedSixes
02-02-2005, 08:22 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I am beginning to really like this place and its potential for improving my game, in spite of the fact that it may be several books and months before I can actually participate in a discussion here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Make posts. This is the best forum to make a mistake in. People will tell you you're wrong (nicely), why you're wrong, and what you need to do to be right. In other forums they just call you an idiot.

lawpoker
02-02-2005, 10:31 AM
let me see if i understand you.

one's goal in the low-limit SNG should be to conserve chips early, make the bubble, and then out-play the bad opponents on the bubble.

but in the higher-limit SNG, the disparity in skill level is lessend, and therefore you need to take advantage of every opportunity to get an advantage, regardless of when it presents itself.

is that correct?

thanks.

etgryphon
02-02-2005, 11:17 AM
Nah, we'll call you an idiot, but in a nice way...

It good for the character. We all need a reality check on our "great poker skills". Before getting on this forum, I though I was pretty good...Nope...Finding the forum has been the best thing to happen to me by far in my poker life.

As to the OP, and Irieguy's post:

I think Irie is spot on for his post. Great job...With that said I think I would still play this but it would be more influenced by my reads of the people involved. I would only play this hand if I was very reasonably assured that I can get ALL the chips in the middle from one of these guys. You have to make sure that you get at least 8x the PF amount to make this a +CEV move.

To the OP: If I had decided to play which is about 70-80% of the time, I would play it exactly the same way.

-Gryph

Irieguy
02-02-2005, 12:11 PM
[ QUOTE ]
let me see if i understand you.

one's goal in the low-limit SNG should be to conserve chips early, make the bubble, and then out-play the bad opponents on the bubble.

but in the higher-limit SNG, the disparity in skill level is lessend, and therefore you need to take advantage of every opportunity to get an advantage, regardless of when it presents itself.

is that correct?

thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I love it when people paraphrase something and it sounds better than the original phrasing.

Yes, you are correct.

Irieguy

sofere
02-02-2005, 12:13 PM
I love posts that are just barely beyond my understanding, those are the ones I learn most from. Thanks Irie for continually posting these kinds of responses.

OK, enough sucking up...on to the questions.

(1) I just want to make sure I have this straight. In the $219s you would be more inclined to call 7s because the implied odds in the early levels are more valuable than those in the $33s, in that the opportunity to get a chip lead early is more valuable than the cost of missing?

(2) Does this outweigh the fact that in the lower limits the implied odds are likely greater than in the higher limits as many more people cannot get away from TPTK or 2 pair and will be more likely to pay you off?

[ QUOTE ]
I would call from the BB with pocket 7's even if the button showed me his aces (as long as he couldn't see my 7's).

[/ QUOTE ]

(3) Would I be correct in inferring that you would call especially if they showed you AA because it is more likely that they would not be able to get away from the hand? (i.e. Would you rather call 77 against AA rather than against KQ because even though you have a better chance of winning against it, it is unlikely that you would be paid off if you hit a monster)

Irieguy
02-02-2005, 12:46 PM
[ QUOTE ]


(1) I just want to make sure I have this straight. In the $219s you would be more inclined to call 7s because the implied odds in the early levels are more valuable than those in the $33s, in that the opportunity to get a chip lead early is more valuable than the cost of missing?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think lawpoker clears this up the best in his post above.

[ QUOTE ]
(2) Does this outweigh the fact that in the lower limits the implied odds are likely greater than in the higher limits as many more people cannot get away from TPTK or 2 pair and will be more likely to pay you off?

[/ QUOTE ]

While low limit players may be more likely to call off their stack with a marginal hand, higher limit players tend to find many more opportunities to try and take you off your hand with a big bet if the board looks right. So, your implied odds may be better against a low limit field if you make a flush (because they will call with TP and a flush on board), but if you make a set against a high limit player holding aces and the board is innocuous, he's going to give you his chips too.

[ QUOTE ]
I would call from the BB with pocket 7's even if the button showed me his aces (as long as he couldn't see my 7's).

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
(3) Would I be correct in inferring that you would call especially if they showed you AA because it is more likely that they would not be able to get away from the hand? (i.e. Would you rather call 77 against AA rather than against KQ because even though you have a better chance of winning against it, it is unlikely that you would be paid off if you hit a monster)

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, pretty much. This happens in Pot Limit Omaha quite often, actually. let's say there's a raise and then a pot-sized reraise preflop in front of you in a PLO game. Well, the pot-sized reraiser has aces 90% of the time or more. So, I will call the raise with a hand like 4s-5s-6-6 and price the original raiser in as well. If the flop has 3 cards smaller than 8, I will either have a made hand or a huge draw and I know the guy with aces will bet the pot and I will have a good chance at his whole stack. If I miss, I fold the worse hand... generally a pretty good play in poker.

Irieguy

walterberk
02-02-2005, 12:59 PM
I would start by spelling infinite like that. Goat.

etgryphon
02-02-2005, 01:03 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I would start by spelling infinite like that. Goat.

[/ QUOTE ]

I knew this was going to get posted, but I didn't want to be the first jerk and I would have phrased it better. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Brutal Forum...but, the best.

-Gryph

PE101
02-02-2005, 01:38 PM
I thought you were going to say that he had T8o. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Phoenix1010
02-02-2005, 01:50 PM
I agree with Irieguy's post, but not as much as I would have a few months ago. I'd say that this play depends upon your view of the table.

As some other posters have pointed out, the low buy-in STT's seem to have gotten a lot tighter, if not tougher, recently. It's not a fact set in stone, or supported by rigorous research, but it is an observation that I and a few others have made. This does not mean that they are no longer beatable for a decent player, but it does mean that it's a lot harder to fold your way to the bubble these days. With most of the table playing tight poker in the early stages, you're going to have a hard time even making it to the bubble unless you find at least one hand to gain some chips with. You will very often find yourself with &lt;10 BB's with 7 or 8 players left.

I think we can all agree that there is no grievous error in calling the 60 preflop. He seems to have more than enough implied odds to justify a call, and it's not a huge portion of his stack. In normal ring game strategy it's pretty standard. It all depends on whether you think the overlay of the possibility of playing against unskilled opponents on the bubble outweighs the CEV you get by playing this hand. By my estimation, this overlay has gone down recently in general, but it still depends on the table.

To the OP, I urge you to try to get a feel for the table and for the general skill levels and looseness/aggressiveness of your opponents. I don't think it's correct to assume that most or even some of the players at the low-buyin tournaments are complete LAGs who are going to let you fold to the bubble anymore. But if they are, you should be able to tell, and adjust your play accordingly. I also won't assume that you will have a large edge on the bubble against regular opponents, because I really have no idea how good of a player you are. If you are not significantly better than the average player at your table, you should not be passing up many +CEV plays. From your own self image, you can again make your own judgement, and adjust your play accordingly.

Just remember to keep all of the factors that Irieguy brought up in mind, and try to make the best play depending on the situation and the table you're playing at. Hope that helps.

Regards,
Steve

The Yugoslavian
02-02-2005, 02:13 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I've been wanting to word this post for about a year and never managed it.

EVERYONE should read Irie's post.

Lori

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps. Of course, you're probably better off if NO ONE reads his post, /images/graemlins/wink.gif.

The Yugoslavian
02-02-2005, 02:19 PM
[ QUOTE ]

I don't even know what an overlay is, but I am beginning to really like this place and its potential for improving my game, in spite of the fact that it may be several books and months before I can actually participate in a discussion here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Skip the books -- everything you need for SNGs is in this forum (probably even in the last couple hundred posts) -- books will only confuse the issues for you (seriously!).

Yugoslav

The Yugoslavian
02-02-2005, 02:32 PM
[ QUOTE ]
let me see if i understand you.

one's goal in the low-limit SNG should be to conserve chips early, make the bubble, and then out-play the bad opponents on the bubble.

but in the higher-limit SNG, the disparity in skill level is lessend, and therefore you need to take advantage of every opportunity to get an advantage, regardless of when it presents itself.

is that correct?

thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interestingly it seems to me that this can be inferred strictly from game theory (which I know *very* little about so may be way off base) -- that smaller edges will need to be pushed in high buyins and passed up in small buyins -- so you don't even need to watch $215 SNGs to figure this out (I'm talking to YOU Texas Pete, /images/graemlins/wink.gif ). There are other phases/situations where the disparity between high and low buyins drastically changes STT strategy that can be figured out strictly at a theoretical level.

Seems to me that this is also why $215 SNG players would most likely need at least 100 SNGs to adapt to lower buyins. And why there are *very* skilled STT players who do not play the majority of their games at the higher buyins.

Yugoslav

lawpoker
02-02-2005, 03:21 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I would start by spelling infinite like that. Goat.

[/ QUOTE ]

i know...i know. and sppelling errors drive me nuts! so my apologies to all who would not even open this thread due to my lack of proofreading.

also, i have to say this may have been the most beneficial hand i've ever posted. the interaction is great and exchange of ideas is amazing. btw, i've moved on to $10 SNG b/c i realized i was getting screwed on the rake.

thanks all.

The Yugoslavian
02-02-2005, 03:22 PM
[ QUOTE ]
btw, i've moved on to $10 SNG b/c i realized i was getting screwed on the rake.


[/ QUOTE ]

You sure were. 5/1 rake is awful, /images/graemlins/mad.gif.

Yugoslav

ReDeYES88
02-02-2005, 05:12 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I fold this preflop often, but not always.

After the play is made the action is not over.

[/ QUOTE ]

Acknowledging all of the previous broad scope discussion regarding the appropriate play based on buy-in level, I think that this may be the most pertinant post to this specific situation, and the reason why I would tend to muck this hand PF.

After the Hero's t60 call, there is t285 in the middle before the action gets back around to the original UTG+1 limper, who is followed by a MP limper and a MP baby raiser. My concern with making the t60 call from the BB is that one of those three folks left to act is going salivate at the amount of chips in the pot and pop a huge bet that I won't want to/can't call.

If I were capping the action with my t60 PF call, or even if there were only one person left to act after me, then I would tend to play it more as hero did (but probably still shaded a bit more towards folding). But in this particular situation I think that a muck may be in order, perhaps at any buy-in level.

lawpoker
02-03-2005, 06:17 AM
another good point raised. however unfortunate it may be, i don't believe this thought crossed my mind during the hand (or maybe it did, and i totally dismissed it). however, i'm sure that i was prepared to ditch the hand if a big raise came at me. so maybe that means i should have ditched the hand before committing any more chips. food for thought i suppose.