Did I misplay these sets? [Archive] - Two Plus Two Older Archives

View Full Version : Did I misplay these sets?

cmwck

05-15-2005, 03:25 AM

Hand #1:
No reads on anyone yet

Party Poker 2/4 Hold'em (10 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with T/images/graemlins/heart.gif, T/images/graemlins/club.gif.
1 fold, Hero raises, 4 folds, CO calls, Button calls, SB calls, 1 fold.

Flop: (9 SB) Q/images/graemlins/club.gif, T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 8/images/graemlins/club.gif (4 players)
SB checks, Hero bets, CO calls, Button calls, SB calls.

Turn: (6.50 BB) J/images/graemlins/heart.gif (4 players)
SB checks, Hero bets, CO calls, Button calls, SB calls.

River: (10.50 BB) K/images/graemlins/club.gif (4 players)
SB bets, Hero folds, CO raises, Button calls, SB calls.

I pretty much have to fold the river, right?

Final Pot: 16.50 BB

Hand #2:
BB is 37/0/.3 after 45 hands

Party Poker 2/4 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 9/images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
2 folds, Hero raises, 5 folds, BB calls.

Flop: (4.50 SB) 9/images/graemlins/club.gif, 7/images/graemlins/club.gif, T/images/graemlins/spade.gif (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets, BB calls.

Turn: (3.25 BB) 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets, BB raises, Hero 3-bets, BB calls.

This 3-bet good?

River: (9.25 BB) 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets, BB raises, Hero 3-bets, BB calls.

Is this river 3-bet a little too much?

Final Pot: 15.25 BB

KDawgCometh

05-15-2005, 03:53 AM

hand 1: man, I'd be screaming and cursing as many things as I could curse. goo fold. that's the type of hand where you start wondering why god hates you /images/graemlins/smile.gif

hand 2: yeah, I think threebetting the river might be a little much. Villian's stats are telling you that you might be beat. I think he would play two pair that way too as well as a J8 straight. I think you have to just call the river raise and start hoping

Klepton

05-15-2005, 05:25 AM

both hands are played perfect

hand one i'm more scared of a flush, and as youatre not closing the action, i'm folding

hand 2 is beautiful, expect ot see a weird two pair or lower set more often...i think i straight would cap

oreogod

05-15-2005, 05:34 AM

Very nice, both hands.

Hand 2 I think J8 would cap it. Im thinking two pair or lower set...I think TT caps it to.

Nick Royale

05-15-2005, 05:36 AM

Hand 1: Cut the action at the river bet. Hand 2: Nice.

EDIT: like this
River: (10.50 BB) K/images/graemlins/club.gif (4 players)
SB bets...

Nick Royale

05-15-2005, 05:46 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Hand 2 I think J8 would cap it. Im thinking two pair or lower set...I think TT caps it to.

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you talking about the turn or the river?

If you're talking about the river we can't know his action after our 3-bet before we make it. Actually this hand should have been cut like this:
River: (9.25 BB) 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets, BB raises, Hero 3-bets...

If you were talking about the turn, then his turn smooth call followed by the river raise is a stronger move than capping the turn.(you could argu it looks like he's afraid of being outdrawn by a straight and so he wants to wait for a safe river, but I wouldn't count on it)

imported_PP123

05-15-2005, 05:47 AM

Hand 1
It sucks to be you, but yes you have to fold. Nor can you raise since a raise won't make a better hand to fold.

Hand 2
Too much on the river? No, easy 3-bet. You're only behind of 86 and J8 but CO would play this with a wide range of hand and you're ahead of a wast majority of them.

Nick Royale

05-15-2005, 06:10 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Hand 2
Too much on the river? No, easy 3-bet. You're only behind of 86 and J8 but CO would play this with a wide range of hand and you're ahead of a wast majority of them.

[/ QUOTE ]
Your reasoning is flawed. Lets make the calcs for this:

Combos

Ahead: (discounted since this passive player won't raise the river with these hand every time)
T9: 3 -> 2
T7: 9 -> 5
97: 3 -> 1
77: 3 -> 3
33: 3 -> 3
Total: 14 combos

Behind:
J8: 16
86: 16
TT: 3
Total: 35 combos

You're ahead 29% of the time and you need to be ahead 65%. Raising this would be insanity.

Even if we don't discount any combos (and that would be insane too) we're only ahead 38% of the time and that very far from the required 65%.

And yes, I do belive a 37% vpip will play all these hands from BB.

oreogod

05-15-2005, 06:24 AM

I need to play stupid and ask where u got the percentages, like the 65 percent...and with the combos and being ahead 29 percent. My numbers are way off.

Nick Royale

05-15-2005, 06:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I need to play stupid and ask where u got the percentages, like the 65 percent...and with the combos and being ahead 29 percent. My numbers are way off.

[/ QUOTE ]
65% should be 67% to be exact. Since he'll cap us with the nuts and most of the other hands that beats us, but just call when we have him beat we need to be ahead 2/3 of the times to make a raise profitable. BUT since this passive player not always will cap us when he's ahead (and he might actually cap us sometimes when we're ahead) you don't really need to be ahead 67% of the time. I aproximated 65% but that's not really important. Anyway 67% is the very worst case when he ALWAYS caps a better hand and ALWAYS just calls when we have him beat. Did this make any sense to you? Sometimes I feel my english skills limits me more than my knowledge /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

14/(14+35) = 29%

oreogod

05-15-2005, 06:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I need to play stupid and ask where u got the percentages, like the 65 percent...and with the combos and being ahead 29 percent. My numbers are way off.

[/ QUOTE ]
65% should be 67% to be exact. Since he'll cap us with the nuts and most of the other hands that beats us, but just call when we have him beat we need to be ahead 2/3 of the times to make a raise profitable. BUT since this passive player not always will cap us when he's ahead (and he might actually cap us sometimes when we're ahead) you don't really need to be ahead 67% of the time. I aproximated 65% but that's not really important. Anyway 67% is the very worst case when he ALWAYS caps a better hand and ALWAYS just calls when we have him beat. Did this make any sense to you? Sometimes I feel my english skills limits me more than my knowledge /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

14/(14+35) = 29%

[/ QUOTE ]

Your english skills are way better than my swedish skills. /images/graemlins/blush.gif

It makes sense though...Im starting to get a grasp of doing this, but its always hard to do at the table, at least until I get better, but at the table I dont have the exact numbers to back me up, just rough estimates.

Thanks for point it out to me though.

cmwck

05-15-2005, 06:59 AM

[ QUOTE ]

You're ahead 29% of the time and you need to be ahead 65%. Raising this would be insanity.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, I just thought about the hand some more, and if you just do the math and count the number of combinations like you did, you're ahead nowhere near 66% of the time, so you just call the river check-raise.

How you would figure this out in your head at the table in 20 seconds I have no idea. Maybe you just sense that a lot of hands beat you and being check-raised twice in a row is powerful.

p.s. to whomever asked about where we get 66% from:
When you 3-bet the river, you are essentially risking 2 (when he caps) to win one (when he just calls). Your pot odds are 2:1. Therefore, in order for you to 3-bet profitably, your equity (immediately after he check-raises) has to be greater than 2/(2+1)=66%.

imported_PP123

05-15-2005, 07:02 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Your reasoning is flawed.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right. I guess I should think before I write. /images/graemlins/blush.gif In my defence I've been at a crazy maniac table at Casino Cosmopol all night. There a river 3-bet would have been easy. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Nick Royale

05-15-2005, 07:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
How you would figure this out in your head at the table in 20 seconds I have no idea. Maybe you just sense that a lot of hands beat you and being check-raised twice in a row is powerful.

[/ QUOTE ]
it's almost impossible to do, but you can estimate. In this case it's pretty clear 3-betting is not good. Really strong play by a passive player is enough for me to just call. And since three 9's is out is easy to realise the combos for 2 pairs and sets won't cover for the straights.

oreogod

05-15-2005, 07:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]

p.s. to whomever asked about where we get 66% from:
When you 3-bet the river, you are essentially risking 2 (when he caps) to win one (when he just calls). Your pot odds are 2:1. Therefore, in order for you to 3-bet profitably, your equity (immediately after he check-raises) has to be greater than 2/(2+1)=66%.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now you are saying on the river, just for that action, taking out the pot...your immediate odds are 2/3? You bet, he raises (2:1) u three bet so your odds are 2/3? .....ah christ I give up, its late, Im half awake and I cant even wrap my head around this.

Either way I need to apply this more at the table.

cmwck

05-15-2005, 07:47 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

p.s. to whomever asked about where we get 66% from:
When you 3-bet the river, you are essentially risking 2 (when he caps) to win one (when he just calls). Your pot odds are 2:1. Therefore, in order for you to 3-bet profitably, your equity (immediately after he check-raises) has to be greater than 2/(2+1)=66%.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now you are saying on the river, just for that action, taking out the pot...your immediate odds are 2/3? You bet, he raises (2:1) u three bet so your odds are 2/3? .....ah christ I give up, its late, Im half awake and I cant even wrap my head around this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe I explained it wrong, or i dont understand it myself, but it's in Theory of Poker, page 204.
You have to be a 55% favorite when he calls your raise (that's the same as saying you need to be a 2:1 favorite when he bets).

oreogod

05-15-2005, 07:54 AM

Just read it, confusion cloud evaporated.

Havent hit that part of the book yet.

Nick Royale

05-15-2005, 07:58 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

p.s. to whomever asked about where we get 66% from:
When you 3-bet the river, you are essentially risking 2 (when he caps) to win one (when he just calls). Your pot odds are 2:1. Therefore, in order for you to 3-bet profitably, your equity (immediately after he check-raises) has to be greater than 2/(2+1)=66%.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now you are saying on the river, just for that action, taking out the pot...your immediate odds are 2/3? You bet, he raises (2:1) u three bet so your odds are 2/3? .....ah christ I give up, its late, Im half awake and I cant even wrap my head around this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe I explained it wrong, or i dont understand it myself, but it's in Theory of Poker, page 204.
You have to be a 55% favorite when he calls your raise (that's the same as saying you need to be a 2:1 favorite when he bets).

[/ QUOTE ]
When reading that page it seems to me he means you need to be a 55% favorite to raise. He's not using the 66% because it seems like he don't think he'll get 3-bet by a better hand very often. But in the next sentence he mention that another way to look at it is that you need to be a 66% favorite.