Current Cardplayer, Jim Brier Shorthanded article . . or: Lenny Sucks.

[Grisgra]

I just don't know that I agree with the advice given. I've played it the same way, but I'm not convinced that against the player in question that it's the right move, at least not at 10/20.

Situation:

5-handed game, you're Barry, a "Good player" on the button with A8o. Lenny is in the big blind; he's "a tough player who is highly aggressive and loves to play shorthanded. Lenny likes to bluff and semibluff. His only fault is that he is too loose." The game was actually a live $40/$80 Mirage game, but naturally I'm thinking of this in Party 10/20 terms.

It's folded to you, you raise, duh. Lenny calls.

Flop: A /images/graemlins/spade.gif 7 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif.

You bet, Lenny raises. Brier advocates just calling, and I think I'm okay with that, though I'd be okay with 3-betting as well. Though a 3-bet only punishes a flush draw or the unlikely weaker ace that isn't 2-pair, and will make a crap hand like 66 or such just fold and you won't get any more bluff bets out of him.

Turn: A /images/graemlins/spade.gif7 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif(4 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif)

Lenny bets. What do you do?

Brier advocates raising. I just don't see this as being the proper move. I'd rather call down with outs. If you're ahead, a raise is probably going to get him to just fold, or stop a river bluff, so I don't see you making any more $$ except against a weaker ace (or, if you get lucky and suck out, but there's only a 20% chance of that happening). And if you're behind, and Lenny doesn't suck, he's going to 3-bet his flush or two pair, and now you're putting in more money with the worst hand praying you hit your X-outer (X>=9, but still.)

Anyway, you raise, and Lenny calls.

River: Turn: A /images/graemlins/spade.gif7 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 4 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif (Q /images/graemlins/club.gif).

Lenny checks. Brier advocates checking behind, and that's fine by me.

Here's the kicker -- Lenny shows A /images/graemlins/club.gif7 /images/graemlins/club.gif for two pair and takes the pot.

Lenny is "tough"? Lenny is a pussy for not 3-betting the turn with top two pair just because there's three diamonds out there. I can't imagine a single 10/20 player I consider "tough" not 3-betting the turn, or betting the river there. Christ. Either this means I'm ready for the $40/$80 at the Mirage, or Brier has his reads wrong.

Anyway, what do y'all think? I used to raise the turn here all the time in this situation, but I really don't see how we get more money in with the best hand very often, while we definitely will, against an opponent who actually knows how to play top two pair, put in more money when we're behind. I don't care that we're not "much" behind, that we still have a 20% or 30% chance of taking the pot. We're behind *enough*.

Okay, tell me I'm an idiot . . .


EDIT: Admittedly, we will also get more money in there with the turn raise against somebody with something like T /images/graemlins/diamond.gifT /images/graemlins/heart.gif, and a diamond falls on the river. Long shot, though, all that happening.

EDIT: Obviously, against many opponents it's an obvious value-bet on the river, but not against tough-old (read: weak-tight) Lenny.

[Alobar]

I agree with everything you said. Especially the part about lenny sucking

[sthief09]

in the past I play it how Brier does. now I call the turn and river. I don't think Lenny is folding outs on the turn, he might 3-bet a hand like A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 2x that you have outs against, or even semi-bluff 3-bet the turn if he's got a little wrecklessness in him. I think raising this turn in this situation for a free showdown is best saved for weak opponents who might give up too easily with a middling diamond


Lenny should have 3-bet the turn, and Brier probably would've had to fold. that would've sucked

[donger]

You've omitted the crucial detail that the hero had the A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, giving him top pair + the nut flush draw. This is a pretty standard position play. You get more money in if you hit and can take the free showdown if you miss.

Jennifer Harman talks about this play in the limit holdem section of SS2, except I think her example is something like TPGK with a gutshot.

[Grisgra]

Hero has A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif8 /images/graemlins/spade.gif (hence the part where I mention the 9-outer). My opinion stands.

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
You've omitted the crucial detail that the hero had the A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, giving him top pair + the nut flush draw. This is a pretty standard position play. You get more money in if you hit and can take the free showdown if you miss.

Jennifer Harman talks about this play in the limit holdem section of SS2, except I think her example is something like TPGK with a gutshot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, really bad omission on my part, forgot to add that in, though it was in my mind (hence my reference to the >=9 outer and making more money against T /images/graemlins/diamond.gifT /images/graemlins/heart.gif on the river if a diamond falls).

Nonetheless, I think that my view stands as-is. Against a "tough" shorthanded player, the guy with two pair or better (and maybe even AK/AQ, though those might have been 3-bet pf) is going to 3-bet the turn in a heartbeat. No end to the turn betting, no free showdown -- not on this board, IMO. On a scarier board, perhaps.

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
You've omitted the crucial detail that the hero had the A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, giving him top pair + the nut flush draw. This is a pretty standard position play. You get more money in if you hit and can take the free showdown if you miss.

Jennifer Harman talks about this play in the limit holdem section of SS2, except I think her example is something like TPGK with a gutshot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see an example (p.263) where we have a semi-bluff turn raise where we have as many as 21 outs, and the turn card is an overcard to the flop. And an isolation play against someone we read as being on a draw, in a multiway pot (p.264). And on a very dry board where it's an obvious fold-to-a-3-bet (p.265).

Here:

1) The turn card was not an overcard to the board,
2) The board, except for a possible flush, is very dry, and everyone knows that everyone likes semibluffing on flush draw boards,
3) It's Heads-Up, and
4) We absolutely cannot fold to a 3-bet because we may win on the river.

In other words, the circumstances are quite different in this hand than in any of the hands she's discussing.

[wheelz]

I also thought that calling down on the turn would be much better when I first read this article. Maybe Jim is just sick of people talking about how weak-tight his book with Ciaffone was so he's showing us his new aggressive side.

[ALL1N]

I had a brief go at his article here (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2287546&page=&view=&s b=5&o=&vc=1) , a week or so ago; I was pretty disgusted, but the bit I couldn't help but laugh at was: "against a tighter, more controllable opponent, you should three bet, since this may slow him down, enabling you to get a free card on the turn if you wish."

I would raise the turn and check behind if I thought two pair wouldn't 3-bet the turn, but this is grossly unrealistic, so I call and call with the rest of you.

[sthief09]

what's wrong with his play? I think it's pretty standard against a guy like this who misses a painfully easy 3-bet with aces up

[donger]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You've omitted the crucial detail that the hero had the A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, giving him top pair + the nut flush draw. This is a pretty standard position play. You get more money in if you hit and can take the free showdown if you miss.

Jennifer Harman talks about this play in the limit holdem section of SS2, except I think her example is something like TPGK with a gutshot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see an example (p.263) where we have a semi-bluff turn raise where we have as many as 21 outs, and the turn card is an overcard to the flop. And an isolation play against someone we read as being on a draw, in a multiway pot (p.264). And on a very dry board where it's an obvious fold-to-a-3-bet (p.265).

Here:

1) The turn card was not an overcard to the board,
2) The board, except for a possible flush, is very dry, and everyone knows that everyone likes semibluffing on flush draw boards,
3) It's Heads-Up, and
4) We absolutely cannot fold to a 3-bet because we may win on the river.

In other words, the circumstances are quite different in this hand than in any of the hands she's discussing.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right.. I was mistakenly thinking of an article by the very same Jim Brier /images/graemlins/smile.gif

http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_magazine/archives/?a_id=12950&m_id=47

Taken from the article:
[ QUOTE ]
Fourth-street raising: In low- and middle-limit games, a raise on fourth street, where the prices double, almost always means a big, made hand (frequently two pair or better). So, a typical betting pattern is something like this: Player A raises from early position and gets called by Player B. The flop arrives, Player A bets, and Player B calls. The turn arrives, Player A bets, Player B raises, and Player A reluctantly calls. The river arrives, Player A checks, Player B bets, and Player A makes a crying call. Player B turned a second pair running down Player A’s top pair, top kicker, or Player A’s overpair. In a high limit-game, you frequently see the same pattern, except that Player B now checks it down at the river. Player A wins because Player B had something like top pair with a worse kicker, and picked up a draw on the turn only to bust out at the river. Player B checked the river because he had something to show down and knew that Player A, having called his turn raise, would call at the river with a better hand.

Here is an example provided by a friend of mine who is one of the top pros in the Bellagio $30-$60 game. You open with a raise from late position with the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif 10/images/graemlins/heart.gif. Only the big blind calls. The flop is A/images/graemlins/heart.gif 7/images/graemlins/club.gif 6/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, giving you top pair. The big blind checks, you bet, and he now raises. Based on what you know about the big blind, you figure to be in trouble, but plan on calling all the way. So, you call. The turn is the 8/images/graemlins/spade.gif, giving you a gutshot-straight draw along with your top pair. Your opponent bets. In a typical high-limit game, you should raise and plan on checking it down if he calls and a blank comes on the river.

So, why the raise on fourth street in this high-limit game? Because your opponent may fold and you have outs if he doesn’t. The turn raise allows you to win the pot outright a certain percentage of the time; it allows you to win more money if you hit your hand; and it gets you a cheap showdown, thereby preventing your opponent from bluffing you out at the river. This is a common tactic in the bigger games that is rarely seen in the smaller ones.

[/ QUOTE ]

[jdock99]

Mid limit live game play is totally different than the online play you are used to. It is much more passive/straightforward with less bluffing/value raising, especially out of position. If you play your normal online super-aggressive, happy-go-raising style you will find that you are the live one in the game. The reason that Barry was able to get away with this play is that this type of play (the semi-bluff re-raise with a pretty weak holding looking for the free river checkdown if missed) is used very sparingly, and so it is more effective when it is used. In Party online shorthanded games EVERYONE over-uses these semi-bluff plays to the point where they never work anymore (if they ever did), everyone knows what you are doing and plays back accordingly, and it is just chip spewing. In live games, advanced plays like this are used much more discriminatedly and so have the desired effect more often.

Let me give you an example of a play I made in a short handed 40-80 game with solid players what would never work online. I had KQ in small blind. A tight, solid (not great) player limped in mid position, everyone else folded, I completed and we were off to the flop. Flop comes K, rag, rag. I checked, big blind checked, mid position limper bet. I called planning to cr ANY card on the turn since I figured he had King w/ weaker kicker or pocket pair, and bb folded. Turn came ace, which wasn't great for me but I figured I was still ok. I checked, MP bet, i checkraised. He thought about it and folded A9s face-up. I am not saying I am a great player or this was a great play, but this is the type of play which could work in a live game against observant, thinking players if you are an otherwise solid player who uses it sparingly, but has 0% chance of working in an online 6 max game at any limit under any conditions.

Unlike in online games, in live games the "fish" do not checkraise you on the turn w/ J5 on a 246Q board and when 40-80 live "fish" donkbet a flop like 399 it is probably not correct to always raise them w/ ace high and bet the turn because they will not have nothing most of the time like the players who frequently do this in online shorthanded.

So, to reply to your comment, Lenny was not necessarily a tight, wimpy player because he played less aggressively. He is just playing a different style suited for a different game, and Barry's play was something which is done a lot less in live games, and so is more effective when it is done.

[NLSoldier]

I really dont feel like reading through it again but I definately remember laughing when I read this article the first time.

[ALL1N]

[ QUOTE ]
what's wrong with his play? I think it's pretty standard against a guy like this who misses a painfully easy 3-bet with aces up

[/ QUOTE ]

It is the best play against such a player, and I said I'd play it the same if I thought two pair wouldn't 3-bet. The problem is of course that a painfully easy 3-bet doesn't get missed very often /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[helpmeout]

A tough player isnt going to call in the BB against a button open raise with A7s he is going to 3 bet.

I'd call the raise on the flop because I have position if I was out of position I'd 3bet.

On the turn I see no reason to raise as I wouldnt expect him to have an Ace (weak preflop). The turn raise does nothing, if he is semibluffing with a high diamond then I'd want him to bet the river if he has a flush then he'd 3bet and I dont want that when I have a showdownable hand.

If he has a bigger Ace it costs me the same to checkcall with the option of raising the river if I improve.

I'd also bet the river, I see no reason why a better hand would check.

[kiddo]

I think you are missing the points people are trying to make. Noone is talking about the "normal mid limit live games." We are talking about a player that Brier presents as:

[ QUOTE ]
Lenny is a tough player who is highly aggressive and loves to play shorthanded. Lenny likes to bluff and semi-bluff. His only fault is that he is too loose.


[/ QUOTE ]

And we see how tough he is when Brier gives us a reason to not 3bet flop:

[ QUOTE ]
Lenny could be check-raising on the flop with a wide range of holdings, and it is probably better to simply see the turn cheaply. If you three-bet, Lenny may four-bet and then lead into you on the turn if a blank comes, making your life difficult. Against a tighter, more controllable opponent, you should three bet, since this may slow him down, enabling you to get a free card on the turn if you wish.

[/ QUOTE ]

(By the way a very silly reason. Why do we want to see turn cheaply if he is often bluffing in this spot?)

This guy is capable of 4betting us on flop with less then toppair and then bet turn again. This means his flopraise means nearly nothing at all. But when he bets turn we are doing the "raise to get a free showdown". Why? As Brier says, he cant have A with better kicker because that would mean 3bet preflop so either he is behind and drawing pretty dead or he is ahead and will 3bet when we raise with his 2 pair, set or flush.

Why isnt calling the best move here?

And: If this guy is so aggressive, how on earth can he only call 2pair when he is raised on turn? Or at least bet his 2pair when river isnt the flushcard? And why isnt this aggressive player 3betting A7s preflop against a stealraise from button? It makes no sense.

*

In your exampel of your own you are talking about a shorthanded game. A "tight, solid (not great)" player in MP is limping with A9s, everone else is folding and you are calling in small blind with KQ.

Flop is Kxx. You checkcall flop putting him on pocketpair or K with a weak kicker.

Turn is A (board is AKxx) and u checkraise and he folds his A9s.

And your conclusion:

[ QUOTE ]
this is the type of play which could work in a live game against observant, thinking players if you are an otherwise solid player who uses it sparingly, but has 0% chance of working in an online 6 max game at any limit under any conditions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now I like to make some comments on this:

1) A player in MP in a shorthanded game not raising A9s first in is not doing a solid play.

2) A player in SB with KQ completing after 1 limper is not doing a solid play.

3) Why are you putting him on a weak K or a pocketpair just because he bets after both you guys checks on a Kxx flop? This is the perfect blufflop and u have shown nothing but weakness.

4) You are puttinhg him on a weak K or a pocketpair and after checkraising turn you say: "this is the type of play which could work in a live game against observant, thinking players if you are an otherwise solid player".

In what way is your play "working". You just stated he had 3 or 2 outs, so he is drawing pretty dead. Making him fold turn is worst you can do.

*

I think you are grossly overestimating the aggressivness of online shorthanded games. There are all sorts and a good shorthanded player is adapting to every player, not always raising the fish with A high.

[Grisgra]

Great feedback -- thanks. I've played very little live (and certainly nothing as high as $40/$80), but it sounds like at that limit, you could mow the table over by simply putting in a bluff-raise every eight or nine hands or so against the Lennies and Barries of the world. If nobody is going to play one or two more big bets to see the river with top pair . . . shees. It's certainly true that everybody semibluffs way too much at 10/20, but it sounds like it hardly happens at all in these live games.

[Grisgra]

Lenny sucks, Barry sucks, and that Brier fellow got some 'splainin' to do. I can appreciate that there's a difference between online and live play, but I just can't believe that a "tough" player at any limit wusses out with top two this often, especially given the description Brier himself gives about how this guy could be checkraising the flop with anything (great catch, kiddo!).

[King Yao]

[ QUOTE ]
Nonetheless, I think that my view stands as-is. Against a "tough" shorthanded player, the guy with two pair or better (and maybe even AK/AQ, though those might have been 3-bet pf) is going to 3-bet the turn in a heartbeat. No end to the turn betting, no free showdown -- not on this board, IMO. On a scarier board, perhaps.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you have to think about the context of the hand here. The facts are:

1. Jim Brier is known to be a tight player (read Middle Limit Hold'em). So when he raises, he gets more attention.
2. This is not a online game. Online and B&M shorthanded games play differently.

[King Yao]

With that said, if Jim's opinion of Lenny is "tough", I agree he's gotta take it down a couple of notches (if not more) based on this hand.

[cartman]

What if you DID NOT have a diamond? Then you would need to raise to try to drive out a baby diamond, right?

Thanks,
Cartman

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
What if you DID NOT have a diamond? Then you would need to raise to try to drive out a baby diamond, right?

Thanks,
Cartman

[/ QUOTE ]

With no diamond I think that raising the turn makes a lot more sense. Maybe we chase out a baby diamond (though not online!), and we can almost certainly fold to a turn 3-bet.

[kiddo]

[ QUOTE ]
With no diamond I think that raising the turn makes a lot more sense. Maybe we chase out a baby diamond (though not online!)

[/ QUOTE ]

You mean u are not capable of folding a weak flushdraw if a predictable player raise u on turn?

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With no diamond I think that raising the turn makes a lot more sense. Maybe we chase out a baby diamond (though not online!)

[/ QUOTE ]

You mean u are not capable of folding a weak flushdraw if a predictable player raise u on turn?

[/ QUOTE ]

I am, of course, that doesn't mean my opponent is /images/graemlins/smile.gif. I'd put the chance of winning the pot with, say, the 8 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif in my hand at around 10%. After the turn raise, I need to see a diamond fall (20%) and then I need my opponent to not have a better diamond (~50% he doesn't, probably a tad higher, esp. if the top card on board is a diamond). I probably have at least two other outs as well. So it's a pot-odds question at that point. If it's a ~9BB pot, I'd call the turn raise and see what happens. Lord knows I've sucked out against aces or TPTK or whatnot with my tiny pocket in similar situations in the past. And had it done against me, too.

[StellarWind]

Didn't have time to read the whole thread, but here's my take.

I didn't hear a 3-bet preflop against my steal raise. I think Lenny has an ace and I think my ace is the best ace. If I'm wrong and I'm outkicked then I have 12-18 outs. Overall I have a tremendous amount of pot equity against an ace.

Another likely hand is a pocket pair and you certainly want to raise that, especially since he may be trapped in by a diamond.

It's also possible he has a seven with or without a diamond. Once again you need to raise.

The flush risk is certainly real but the A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif in hand cuts the odds quite a bit.

[ QUOTE ]
Lenny is "tough"? Lenny is a pussy for not 3-betting the turn with top two pair just because there's three diamonds out there. I can't imagine a single 10/20 player I consider "tough" not 3-betting the turn, or betting the river there.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Lenny checks. Brier advocates checking behind, and that's fine by me

[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly how can you reconcile these statements? Of course you should bet the river.

[ QUOTE ]
I'd rather call down with outs.

[/ QUOTE ]
This aphorism has no application to this hand because I would never fold under any circumstances. This is a mandatory showdown whether you have outs or not.

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd rather call down with outs.

[/ QUOTE ]
This aphorism has no application to this hand because I would never fold under any circumstances. This is a mandatory showdown whether you have outs or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

It absolutely applies, because one reason to raise the turn in situation similar to this is that you can fold to a 3-bet. If Lenny 3-bet us like a good boy, we need to at least call his turn raise, and maybe even his river bet, only to find we're screwed. If we're actually ahead, though, I don't see how the turn raise gets us more money.

So it costs us when we're behind (because we are going to showdown), and gets us little to no money when we're ahead.
In the situation where we can fold to a turn 3-bet, and don't insist on showing down, raising the turn costs us no more than calling the turn and river, and is thus, more appropriate.

I am hesitant in betting the river here because if Lenny is a tough player, he probably doesn't checkraise the flop, then call our turn raise, then call our river bet, with something we're beating half the time -- but it's close. Half the aces weaker than us have two-pair, all the aces stronger than us, we're losing to, and a good pocket with a diamond in it probably raised us preflop.

[TStoneMBD]

the article at hand is clearly a joke. not raising A7 on the turn is clearly a gigantic mistake.

however, i do like raising the turn with A8 here. the only time i wouldnt raise the turn here is if i had the 8 of diamonds. with the ace of diamonds, my equity is so large even if im behind that raising the turn isnt that big of a mistake. the amount of times that you are ahead, your equity is huge and youre passing up on free money. if the opponent is semibluffing a smaller diamond, he may just check-fold the river after you just call the turn. if you raise the turn, he will most likely call, and when that diamond hits on the river you may extract anywhere from 1-3 bets.

i have certainly adapted a calldown type strategy lately, and i think its very useful in alot of situations. i dont like it here though.

[TStoneMBD]

you mean to tell me that you never raise the turn and check the river with Kdx, or a midpair with no diamond? if you dont, then raising the turn may force villain to fold his hand correctly with no troubles. if you do, then hes put to a tough decision.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]

2. This is not a online game. Online and B&M shorthanded games play differently.

[/ QUOTE ]


I didn't know hand reading didn't apply in casinos...


... waiting for stupid Amazon to ship me your book

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]

2. This is not a online game. Online and B&M shorthanded games play differently.

[/ QUOTE ]


I didn't know hand reading didn't apply in casinos...


... waiting for stupid Amazon to ship me your book because it looks pretty damn good

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
A tough player isnt going to call in the BB against a button open raise with A7s he is going to 3 bet.


[/ QUOTE ]


it's hard to take you serious you make such broad sweeping judgments like this. man, you write some really good stuff but you're so arrogant. there's no reason A7s HAS to be 3-bet preflop as long as you're getting to showdown most of the time. if it induces more mistakes, then it's the way to go. it it makes you feel like he can't have an A, then it'll certainly induce you into making more mistakes.

[jdock99]

First of all, when you are playing live, especially a high limit like 40-80 (high for me anyways), it is much harder psychologically to look that other player in the eye, grab $160 worth of chips, and put in that semi-bluff/bluff raise on the turn. Remember, you are really there, those are real chips in your hands, and you are giving off real physical tells that other players are tuned into because they are not playing 7 other games, watching TV, and folding their underwear at the same time. I think to a certain extant the protective veil of internet anonymity can make a lion out of the mousiest off men.

That being said, this is probably a very important skill in live play that separates the good and great players, that is the ability to selectively make plays at decent (but not great) observant opponents to manipulate pot size and occasionally take down a pot with the worst hand when their opponent has a decent hand like top pair/two pair/etc. Remember, a key component of semi-bluffing is there must be a reasonable chance that you can win the pot unimproved. In the internet short-handed games (at least 10-20 and below that I play in) it is possible to semi-bluff and get (some) players to lay down their K high on the flop when you bet w/ your J high flush draw, but for the most part it would be -EV to be turn semi-bluffing and trying to push players off of top pair, whereas with the right image and good timing I believe this is an important part of the arsenal of a good 40-80 player. For another example read Thomas Keller's article in the last cardplayer of a play he made against a good player who he was able to push off a straight with only 2 pair (and he said that this player who I am sure you would all characterize as a weak tight wimp was a top player who was killing that 40-80 game).

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
you mean to tell me that you never raise the turn and check the river with Kdx, or a midpair with no diamond? if you dont, then raising the turn may force villain to fold his hand correctly with no troubles. if you do, then hes put to a tough decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, I might raise here in that kind of situation where I think I might bet a better hand to fold (pocket tens, or a super-weak ace, though the latter is unlikely online). Harman's section in SS2 speaks to this point, and I couldn't agree with that analysis more.

My point is that making the turn raise here is NOT going to get a better hand to fold! It's just going to put more money in when we're behind, or get a worse hand to fold/stop bluffing. I very much doubt that our equity is "monstrous". It's less than 50% against the range of hands calling us or 3-betting us, period.

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nonetheless, I think that my view stands as-is. Against a "tough" shorthanded player, the guy with two pair or better (and maybe even AK/AQ, though those might have been 3-bet pf) is going to 3-bet the turn in a heartbeat. No end to the turn betting, no free showdown -- not on this board, IMO. On a scarier board, perhaps.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you have to think about the context of the hand here. The facts are:

1. Jim Brier is known to be a tight player (read Middle Limit Hold'em). So when he raises, he gets more attention.
2. This is not a online game. Online and B&M shorthanded games play differently.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know that it's a given that the button here is Jim, or that the tough player knows to give the button a ton of respect (though obviously he does, the wuss! /images/graemlins/smile.gif). Seriously, the button's raise here just SCREAMS a better ace + a diamond, and I just can't see not 3-betting unless Lenny figured that he could checkraise an inevitable button bet if the river was a blank.

But I'm glad that you posted and that sthief responded, because now I'm going to buy your book too . . . /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
I think to a certain extant the protective veil of internet anonymity can make a lion out of the mousiest off men.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is true -- I've hardly ever played live, but the couple times I did I was definitely less rais-y. Partically because I sensed that others were less bluffy, though, and also it was full-ring. On a shorthanded table against a button stealer . . . I just can't imagine playing top two the same way, even if it was live.

[ QUOTE ]

. . . For another example read Thomas Keller's article in the last cardplayer of a play he made against a good player who he was able to push off a straight with only 2 pair (and he said that this player who I am sure you would all characterize as a weak tight wimp was a top player who was killing that 40-80 game).

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll have to check it out, thanks. But if it was an example from a full-ring game, that's something to keep in mind. Frankly, I'm not entirely sure how Brier's hand advice would differ at ALL if the game were full-ring. It's folded to you on the button, you have A8, you're up against a loose and aggressive big blind . . . I doubt that much changes here. Maybe his advice makes more sense in a full-ring game, but to expect a tough opponent with top two pair to slow down on the turn just because he's been raised -- in a 5-handed game -- ugh.

[King Yao]

I didn't read the article, so I don't know if Jim mentioned it or not - but I wonder what the atmosphere was like. Was this a shorthanded game through and through? Or was it shorthanded for a short period of time (many walkers, or game starting)? I think both of those factors make a difference on how much respect you are going to give Jim on the button....if its been playing like a typical shorthanded online game, then Lenny's gotta 3-bet...but if its been playing more like a typical live full game, then I still think he should three-bet, but I don't think its nearly as clear anymore.

I think Jim played it right by raising on Turn, with plans to check on River if called. About Lenny though - the only thing is I wonder what Lenny thinks of Jim's creativity - maybe he thought that Jim is a stale, non-creative player who is unlikely to even raise with the A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif. Maybe Jim plays exactly that way in full games, but understands how to adjust to shorthanded games; while Lenny doesn't think Jim can adjust correctly, so he's shaking in his boots when tight Jim raises. Its really tough to know unless you've really played against these guys alot. I hope that makes sense.

[Grisgra]

Like I said, the only rationalization I can come up with for Lenny's play is that he put the button on something like A /images/graemlins/diamond.gifK /images/graemlins/club.gif or A /images/graemlins/club.gifK /images/graemlins/diamond.gif, and expected he'd be able to checkraise the river if a blank fell. I still don't like the turn raise, for the reasons I gave -- on the other hand, if Jim really thinks that top two pair is going to shut down, then the turn raise is certainly more reasonable.

I just have a difficult time conceiving of a "tough player" that likes shorthanded games, that could be "checkraising the flop with anything", shutting down on the turn like that with top two.

[King Yao]

I apologize if this has been mentioned before. Doing the math was a headache, I didn't feel like reading every post in this thread.

You pointed out that you did not like the Turn Raise because a worse hand is likely to fold. How often does Lenny have to call for it to be worth it for you to raise?

Here are the assumptions I've made. (God save the soul that is willing to dawdle through all this til the end of this post. I feel like I need a lobotomy after spending the last half hour going through this. I hope I didn’t make any stupid mistakes)

1. Pot size is currently 5 big bets after the BB has bet on the Turn.
2. Assume Lenny has K7o with no diamonds. Middle pair with top kicker. He’s got 4 outs (the two other 7s and the two other non-diamond K).

Here’s what happens if you just call.
a. If the River is a non-diamond K or 7 (4 cards), you lose two bets by calling (one on Turn, one on River). I’m assuming you will call the River.
b. If the River is Kd (1 card), you win a total of 6 bets. The pot was 5 bets after he bet on the Turn, but I’m assuming he’ll check-call on the River…or bet and fold to a raise.
c. If the River is a diamond, you win a total of 5 bets. He will check and fold.
d. If the River is any other card, you win a total of 6 bets.
Doing the calculations, the total EV for calling is 5.09 big bets. Not that much higher than if he folded to your raise, but higher anyway. So calling is better if you knew he has K7o and you knew he’d fold every time you raised.

Here’s what happens if you raise and he folds:
Ah, so easy on this one. You win 5 big bets. A nice little vacation for the brain.

Here’s what happens if you raise and he calls. Of course, you plan to check the River unless a diamond or 8 hits:
a. If the River is a non-diamond K or 7 (4 cards), you lose two bets by raising (two on Turn, none on River). This is the same as if you had just called.
b. If the River is Kd (1 card), you win a total of 7 bets. The pot was 5 bets after he bet on the Turn, 1 more on his call of your Turn Raise, and another one on an assumed check-call by him on the River due to his two pair. This is one more than if you had just called.
c. If the River is a diamond, you win a total of 6 bets. He will check and fold. This is one more than you had just called.
d. If the River is any other card, you win a total of 6 bets. (I’m discounting that you’d get an 8 and bet again – makes life a bit easier).

If he calls your raise, the EV is 5.30

In summary, assuming he has K7, here’s the EV table:
You raise, he folds: 5.00
You raise, he calls 5.30
You call: 5.09

With those numbers, the breakeven point for your raise is where Lenny calls 31% of the time. If he calls more often than 31% of the time, then you should raise. If he calls less, then you should call. There was a ton of assumptions in these calculations, but even after all that, I still have a tough time pegging whether he will call more or less than 31% of the time with K7. And we are not even done yet…what about what he’d do with two pair, Ace with better kicker, Ace with worse kicker, and just the K of diamonds? What if he was totally on a bluff, would he still bet the River, or would he just check-fold the River? There’s a lot more math to be done to get to the bottom of it. But I’m not going to do it.

After thinking about this, I can’t decide. My current judgement is that it is a toss-up between calling and raising. From the looks of it, the answer will be very close. I have no problems with either calling or raising.

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
After thinking about this, I can’t decide. My current judgement is that it is a toss-up between calling and raising. From the looks of it, the answer will be very close. I have no problems with either calling or raising.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was actually going to do some math on this myself when I got home, but I think you've proven my point! If he has a garbage hand like 2nd pair-no-diamond, and will fold to your turn raise about 2/3rds of the time (sounds about right, but I think he'll probably fold more often), raising is break-even with calling.

If he's got a flush, or two pair, or a set, or anything beating you, you'll be losing more money by raising. This was precisely my point all along: when we're ahead, we don't make more $$ by raising, while when we're behind, we most certainly lose $$ by raising. You've proven, to my satisfaction (and it seems to yours as well), the first part of that argument. At least, for a good representative garbage hand like K7o. Do a little math for the hands that we're losing to, and it's going to get much grimmer for us.

If we don't make money against a losing hand by raising . . . how can raising be good?

[helpmeout]

I assume the tough player knows "Barry" is good so he'd expect him to steal fairly frequently. I'd also expect a "tough" player to 3bet with a lot of decent hands to stop "Barry" from getting out of line.

A7s is definately a hand you should be 3betting against a tough player. Not against a tight or super aggressive guy (obviously you can make more money post flop against these 2).

I'd assume a tough player will raise my blinds fairly frequently I'd also assume that he will slow down a bit if I start 3betting with decent hands.

I also expect the tough player to respect Barry's postflop skills so he would rather get his money in preflop with likely the best hand.