PDA

View Full Version : CardPlayer/Jim Brier response to SSH


Dominic
02-05-2005, 12:58 AM
was wondering if you had a reply for Jim's disagreement with you, Ed...especially on hand #3:

This is the last in a series of columns discussing the new book Small Stakes Hold’em, published by Two Plus Two Publishing and authored by Ed Miller, David Sklansky, and Mason Malmuth. The book addresses experienced players who are trying to make a substantial income by playing in low-limit games. In my columns, a number of hands have been selected from the book and the format has been to present the problem, the answer stated in the book, and then my thoughts. You may want to first try to answer the problem yourself before reading the book answer or my thoughts. Remember that all problems are based on a loose low-limit game.

Hand No. 1: You have the Qclubs Qspades in middle position. One player limps in and you raise. Two players behind you call, as do the big blind and the limper. There are 10.5 small bets in the pot. The flop is Kspades 9hearts 7spades. The big blind bets and the limper folds. What should you do?

Book Answer: Raise. It is a little unnatural to bet a king from the big blind into four players, including a preflop raiser. Most players would check: Passive players might check and call for fear that you have A-K, and aggressive players might check, planning to check-raise. While the bettor could have a king, he could also very well have a flush or straight draw, or even a weaker hand that he decided to bluff. Since the pot is large, you should not fold. Your winning chances are too strong. If you did not have the Qspades, your decision would be closer. Having the Qspades improves your hand in two ways:

1. If you spike a set, an opponent cannot have made a flush.

2. It gives you a backdoor flush draw.

Without the Qspades, you might fold against a particularly straightforward opponent who wouldn’t bet a draw or middle pair. You should almost certainly not fold with it, though. Since you are continuing, you should raise to protect your hand. Anyone with a gutshot draw or middle or bottom pair can profitably call one bet on the flop (getting 12-to-1) but not two (getting only 6.5-to-1). Even though you are not sure whether your hand is the best, you should still force people with weak draws to choose between calling unprofitably and folding.

My Thoughts: This is a raise or fold situation, depending upon what you know about the bettor. If you know with virtual certainty that this particular player in this particular situation would not bet into a preflop raiser on a king-high flop without top pair or better, you should fold. Your backdoor draw adds only about one effective out, giving you a total of three outs on the next card, which is about a 15-to-1 shot. Your pot odds are less than 12-to-1. Many low-limit players would not bet out in this situation without a top pair of kings, so folding is frequently correct. But if you don’t know anything about the bettor or are unsure, raising is right for the reasons discussed in the book. Another advantage to raising, also cited in the book, is that your opponents might fear you have A-K and not bet the turn, giving you a free river card.

More important than having the Qspades is knowing how the bettor plays. Low-limit players are not nearly as deceptive as their higher-limit counterparts. They are normally not aggressive with drawing hands, especially in a large pot with lots of players, including a preflop raiser. The passive players who populate these games prefer to check and call with their draws rather than bet out or raise with them. They like to see what will happen before committing any more money than they believe is necessary. So, when a passive player bets or raises, especially when someone else has shown strength, he is doing so because he has a good made hand, not a draw.

Hand No. 2: You have the Adiamonds 9diamonds in the big blind. The player under the gun raises, two players cold-call, the small blind calls, and you call. The flop is 10hearts 4spades 4diamonds. It is checked around. The turn is the 9clubs. The small blind bets. What should you do?

Book Answer: Raise. The small blind may be bluffing and you should take a stand in a raised pot. He could have a 10 or a 4, but he also might bet with a variety of other hands, including a 9 with a weaker kicker than yours, a small pocket pair, a straight draw, or a total bluff. The paired board makes it less likely that a better hand is out against you. There are only five cards (three tens and two fours) that can beat you. Furthermore, the board has very few draws, so your opponents will draw out on you less often when you are ahead, while you will draw out on an opponent with a 10 more often when you are behind; your partial outs are stronger on a noncoordinated board.

Raising is better than calling because it protects your hand. Someone may have picked up a straight draw. You should force these possible holdings to call two bets. Furthermore, your raise may occasionally cause someone with a 10 to fold, as your play may appear to others as a slow-played 4. Raising will occasionally cost you an extra bet when you run into a full house. Nevertheless, you should not play passively in a multiway pot with a vulnerable hand. Play aggressively and protect your hand.

My Thoughts: The pot is not large because there was no flop betting and your pot odds are now only 6-to-1. It is rare for a low-limit player to be betting with a worse hand than yours in this situation. The small blind might well have a 10 with a weak kicker and not bet into four opponents on a flop that includes a preflop raiser. There is a chance that the small blind has a 4 and was planning to check-raise the flop because he assumed the preflop raiser would bet. Like many poker problems, what you do depends on what you know about the opponent who is betting. In general, low-limit players are not tricky or deceptive (although they are frequently unaware). This is especially true when they are out of position with lots of players in a hand. A typical, passive low-limit player will simply check and call with a worse 9 than yours, not bet out into a large field. Finally, there are three players yet to act, one of whom might have a better hand and decided not to bet the flop but will certainly call your raise or even three-bet.

Hand No. 3: You have the 8clubs 6clubs on the button. Three players limp in, you limp, the small blind calls, and the big blind checks. The flop is Jclubs 9clubs 4diamonds, giving you a flush draw. The small blind checks. The big blind bets and two of the three limpers call. What should you do?

Book Answer: Raise. This is a turn problem, so the book provides no explanation.

My Thoughts: Raising is not at all clear. You are getting 9-to-1 on your flush draw and have an easy call. You have no other outs but your flush draw, and a raise might drive out opponents. By raising, you give one of your opponents the opportunity to three-bet, further increasing your cost to draw and increasing the likelihood of eliminating opponents, which is not desirable when you are drawing. spades.

http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_magazine/archives/showarticle.php?a_id=14523&m_id=65555

Harv72b
02-05-2005, 01:14 AM
I'm not Ed, but Jim Brier's argument for Hand 3 isn't very persuasive.

For one thing, he lists among his worries that you might be 3-bet if you raise your flush draw. In an unraised pot, that seems very unlikely, especially after he spent much of the previous two answers explaining just how passive low limit players supposedly are. Regardless, having to pay an extra BB to draw (two SBs really) is well worth the price of the other advantages you get by raising:

-The possibility of a free card if you miss your draw on the turn. A 7 or a 5 would also give you good outs to a straight there, by the way.
-The likelihood that you can fold a single club in someone else's hand, on the chance that you do catch your draw on the turn but the river brings another club. An 8 high flush is hardly secure.
-Pumping the pot for the times when you do hit your draw and your hand holds up. If that third club comes on the turn your action is likely going to dry up considerably (unless you've got flush over flush, in which case you're just screwed).

Raising is clearly the superior play in this hand.

Dominic
02-05-2005, 02:08 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not Ed, but Jim Brier's argument for Hand 3 isn't very persuasive.

For one thing, he lists among his worries that you might be 3-bet if you raise your flush draw. In an unraised pot, that seems very unlikely, especially after he spent much of the previous two answers explaining just how passive low limit players supposedly are. Regardless, having to pay an extra BB to draw (two SBs really) is well worth the price of the other advantages you get by raising:

-The possibility of a free card if you miss your draw on the turn. A 7 or a 5 would also give you good outs to a straight there, by the way.
-The likelihood that you can fold a single club in someone else's hand, on the chance that you do catch your draw on the turn but the river brings another club. An 8 high flush is hardly secure.
-Pumping the pot for the times when you do hit your draw and your hand holds up. If that third club comes on the turn your action is likely going to dry up considerably (unless you've got flush over flush, in which case you're just screwed).

Raising is clearly the superior play in this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well stated, Harv.

Steve-o
02-05-2005, 03:00 PM
In regards to Question 3,

Jim's correct, right now you are 9 to 1. if you raise and are reraised by the BB you not only will most likely eliminate the SB but possibly 1 or both of the callers. your odds may go from 9 to 1 down to 4 to 1 with less people in the pot to pay you off when you hit.

You also have 2 players caught perfectly in between you and the initial bettor when you make your hand, why turn it into a check to you situation on the turn? let the BB keep the aggression, these 2 called him once they will most likely call him again. you won't miss a bet either way since you have position.

Another problem is you might not have the best draw. This is why I don't like raising for the free card, you shouldn't mind if on the turn you miss and your opponent once again bets out and is called by 3 other players (another reason to keep people in the pot not drive them out). if you eliminate 1 or 2 of those and miss and your opponent(s) does not comply and give you the free card the situatuion has gone from good to bad.

A6 of clubs a whole different story, 86 of clubs you have an ordinary draw nothing more nothing less.

Ed Miller
02-05-2005, 08:17 PM
I too think this is a straightforward raise... so much so that I didn't feel it needed comment.

For one thing, he lists among his worries that you might be 3-bet if you raise your flush draw. In an unraised pot, that seems very unlikely, especially after he spent much of the previous two answers explaining just how passive low limit players supposedly are.

This is common thread throughout Jim's analyses. He takes something like a free card play, which is designed to work against passive players (that I say like 20 times in the free card section), and says, "Well, what if your opponents are really aggressive?"

Then he takes a raise that is designed to work against aggressive bettors (because they could have a wide range of hands), and says, "But what if the bettor is so passive he won't bet unless he has you crushed?"

There is almost no poker play that doesn't become wrong if you gerrymander the assumptions about your opponent's playing style enough. (Betting the nuts on the button after all the cards are out is the only one I can think of.) I don't think attacking the assumptions is particularly enlightening... unless the assumptions are so outlandish that you'd never find an actual game or player that met the description.

The Dude
02-05-2005, 09:30 PM
FYI, I have been completely unimpressed by anything I've read by Jim Brier. I certainly haven't read everything he's written, but I've read enough to know I don't like it.

Not only does he regularly come to conclusions that are in my opinion wrong, but routinely uses faulty arguments and irrelevent points to get there.

me454555
02-06-2005, 01:12 AM
I actually enjoyed reading Jim Brier's analysis of SSH a lot. Whether I agree or disagree w/his analysis, it makes me think more about the hands in question and that is definatly good for my game.

Hand 3: This is a clear raise b/c of the EV involved. Assuming you get all 3 to call your raise that +EV and if the sb calls 2 cold, that even better. On top of that, lets say you get 3 bet, is this such a bad thing? NO. If you can get the callers to call, your still making money even if you are behind. Furthurmore, if he 3bets and you cap, you can take your free card on the turn and combined w/bb's bets on the flop is probobly some +EV too. It also gives you the image of a maniac and you get more action w/your really good hands.

This is sometimes the best reason for pumping draws big time b/c when playing tight aggro poker, you don't wind up in many pots and sometimes you get the image of a rock.

Hand 2: I aggree w/Ed on this one as a clear raise. Your hand in vulnerable and the pot is a nice size. Raise the turn and check behind on the river UI. I think you will be ahead often enough to make this raise work as a PP will often bet since the flop was checked through.