Clarkmeister's Theorem with flopped set [Archive]

SkyRocker

03-31-2005, 01:25 PM

Clarkmeister's Theorem:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=1953957&page=&view=&s b=5&o=&vc=1

CO has
VP$IP: 80%
Postflop aggressiveness: 1.33

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, K/images/graemlins/club.gif.
2 folds, Hero raises, 2 folds, CO 3-bets, 3 folds, Hero caps, CO calls.

Flop: (9.50 SB) K/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 5/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 9/images/graemlins/diamond.gif (2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets, Hero calls.

Turn: (5.75 BB) J/images/graemlins/heart.gif (2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets, Hero raises, CO calls.

River: (9.75 BB) 4/images/graemlins/diamond.gif (2 players)
Hero bets, CO raises, Hero folds.

Final Pot: 12.75 BB

Results in white below: 
CO doesn't show.
Outcome: CO wins 12.75 BB. 

It really hurt folding on the river. Is this maybe the exception to the rule and a check/call on the river is better?

SkyRocker

iluzion

03-31-2005, 01:29 PM

you flopped a set.. and you wait til that scary of a river to bet? 3 to a suite and im leading the flop, no use giving the four-flush a free draw. i bet flop, maybe 3bet to see where i am.. for the river, using the theorem was pointless in my opinion because an 80% VPIP player is not going to fold a better hand enough to make it profitable.

bigmac366

03-31-2005, 01:29 PM

river looks good. i dont like the flop one bit though. he 3-bet preflop so give him a chance to raise your flop bet, that way you can 3-bet. if he caps the flop bet, then check raise the turn. he probably has AA with the A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif or QQ with the Q /images/graemlins/diamond.gif. either way you get more money in while he's stil drawing.

bottomset

03-31-2005, 01:34 PM

lead the flop

he plays 80% of his hands and is agressive thats prob enough for me to call the river raise

bigmac366

03-31-2005, 01:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
he plays 80% of his hands and is agressive thats prob enough for me to call the river raise

[/ QUOTE ]

good point, my line didnt take the read into account and is better against an unknown or "typical" opponent.

SkyRocker

03-31-2005, 01:40 PM

I completely agree I should have bet 3-bet the flop

But I'm still unsure about the river. Usually extremely loose does not equal extremely aggressive. Anyone with much experience with extremely loose players, what do you think the odds are he is rasing without the flush?

bozlax

03-31-2005, 01:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
...extremely loose does not equal extremely aggressive.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. But, extremely loose coupled with a postflop agg number that means he knows how to be aggressive, can sometimes equal a little nutball action on the river. How many hands of PT do you have on this guy? I'd say the more hands you've got on him, with him showing this kind of stat, the more likely it is he's trying to steal from you.

Catt

03-31-2005, 02:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
But I'm still unsure about the river. Usually extremely loose does not equal extremely aggressive. Anyone with much experience with extremely loose players, what do you think the odds are he is rasing without the flush?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are misinterpreting your PT data. This guy is not just aggressive, he is probably maniacal.

The "true aggressiveness" reflected in the PokerTracker AF is very much influenced by the player's VPIP. The AF is calculated as (bet % + raise %) / call %. A 1.3 AF is considered neutral / a bit passive around here, but that's for someone with a reasonable VPIP -- our tendency to bet and raise more than call is because we generally only see post-flop play with strong hands, and we generally fold when faced with a poor flop and action from others. To maintin a 1.3 AF (again, more betting and raising than calling) when our VPIP is 80%, we would need to either: (1) be a very disciplined folder when the flop misses us, so that even though we're seeing ~85% of the flops we are getting away from them immediately; or (2) bet and raise a whole crapload of terrible and marginal hands. Most 80% VPIP players are not disciplined folders post-flop, so I generally go with reason (2) until proven otherwise when I see a very high VPIP and an AF other than 0.X.

UncleSalty

03-31-2005, 02:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But I'm still unsure about the river. Usually extremely loose does not equal extremely aggressive. Anyone with much experience with extremely loose players, what do you think the odds are he is rasing without the flush?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are misinterpreting your PT data. This guy is not just aggressive, he is probably maniacal.

The "true aggressiveness" reflected in the PokerTracker AF is very much influenced by the player's VPIP. The AF is calculated as (bet % + raise %) / call %. A 1.3 AF is considered neutral / a bit passive around here, but that's for someone with a reasonable VPIP -- our tendency to bet and raise more than call is because we generally only see post-flop play with strong hands, and we generally fold when faced with a poor flop and action from others. To maintin a 1.3 AF (again, more betting and raising than calling) when our VPIP is 80%, we would need to either: (1) be a very disciplined folder when the flop misses us, so that even though we're seeing ~85% of the flops we are getting away from them immediately; or (2) bet and raise a whole crapload of terrible and marginal hands. Most 80% VPIP players are not disciplined folders post-flop, so I generally go with reason (2) until proven otherwise when I see a very high VPIP and an AF other than 0.X.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a very good analysis.

SkyRocker

03-31-2005, 03:06 PM

I had around 50 hands on him. Not much but enough to put him in the category "the table's sucker"

Aaron W.

03-31-2005, 03:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But I'm still unsure about the river. Usually extremely loose does not equal extremely aggressive. Anyone with much experience with extremely loose players, what do you think the odds are he is rasing without the flush?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are misinterpreting your PT data. This guy is not just aggressive, he is probably maniacal.

The "true aggressiveness" reflected in the PokerTracker AF is very much influenced by the player's VPIP. The AF is calculated as (bet % + raise %) / call %. A 1.3 AF is considered neutral / a bit passive around here, but that's for someone with a reasonable VPIP -- our tendency to bet and raise more than call is because we generally only see post-flop play with strong hands, and we generally fold when faced with a poor flop and action from others. To maintin a 1.3 AF (again, more betting and raising than calling) when our VPIP is 80%, we would need to either: (1) be a very disciplined folder when the flop misses us, so that even though we're seeing ~85% of the flops we are getting away from them immediately; or (2) bet and raise a whole crapload of terrible and marginal hands. Most 80% VPIP players are not disciplined folders post-flop, so I generally go with reason (2) until proven otherwise when I see a very high VPIP and an AF other than 0.X.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's some good work. Too many players around here don't understand the nature of the data they get from PT to use it effectively.

droolie

03-31-2005, 03:43 PM

pots too big. call the river.

detruncate

03-31-2005, 04:14 PM

Don't slowplay this hand. Get your money in early and often.

Given Villain's apparent LAGishness and the fact that you're ahead of the non-flush hands he'd be bluffing with, I'd probably call the river raise.

A read that goes beyond the numbers will help you make this sort of decision. Has he often put in multiple bets on the expensive streets? Does he back off when played back at? Has he shown a tendency toward opportunistic aggression? These are the sorts of things to keep an eye on.

RaiNz

03-31-2005, 11:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But I'm still unsure about the river. Usually extremely loose does not equal extremely aggressive. Anyone with much experience with extremely loose players, what do you think the odds are he is rasing without the flush?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are misinterpreting your PT data. This guy is not just aggressive, he is probably maniacal.

The "true aggressiveness" reflected in the PokerTracker AF is very much influenced by the player's VPIP. The AF is calculated as (bet % + raise %) / call %. A 1.3 AF is considered neutral / a bit passive around here, but that's for someone with a reasonable VPIP -- our tendency to bet and raise more than call is because we generally only see post-flop play with strong hands, and we generally fold when faced with a poor flop and action from others. To maintin a 1.3 AF (again, more betting and raising than calling) when our VPIP is 80%, we would need to either: (1) be a very disciplined folder when the flop misses us, so that even though we're seeing ~85% of the flops we are getting away from them immediately; or (2) bet and raise a whole crapload of terrible and marginal hands. Most 80% VPIP players are not disciplined folders post-flop, so I generally go with reason (2) until proven otherwise when I see a very high VPIP and an AF other than 0.X.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you very much. That is very useful information. I completely misunderstood AF.