Reverse-implied, I despise thee. (hand post)

[imported_anacardo]

This is the sort of hand that troubles me often on the Party small-stakes tables; I feel I'm probably ahead, but damned if I know how I'm going to stay there.

It's your usual loose-ish passive-ish gang of nighttime Party 1/2 players. UTG is a very curious bird; VP$IP under 20, but almost never raises the pot preflop; slowplays with hands as weak as TPTK, has never folded either blind to a steal or attempted a steal himself in 250 hands, and seems generally weird.

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (10 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with 9/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 9/images/graemlins/club.gif.
UTG calls, Hero calls, UTG+2 calls, <font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, CO calls, Button calls, SB completes, BB checks.
(I thought about an isolation raise to get headup w/ UTG, but decided I was out of position w/ nines + there's no guarantee of forcing anybody out who wants to play their Jxs. I decided to draw to a set or a baby board. Should I put on my skirt at this point?)
Flop: (7 SB) 8/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 8/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(7 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, UTG checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, UTG+2 calls, CO folds, Button folds, SB folds, BB folds, UTG folds.
(Raggedy, but not so raggedy as I'd like. Nonetheless I feel a bet is mandatory here; there's so many hands I want to see gone.... way to drop out, fellahs. That's what I want to see.)
Turn: (4.50 BB) 5/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, UTG+2 calls.
(Not the turn card I want here, but UTG+2, an unknown, hasn't played back at me at all; I'm putting him on the usual overcard draw, maybe a flush draw, maybe a slowplay w/ the dreaded eight. Gotta protect my hand, though. I'm not happy to see him call.)
River: (6.50 BB) 7/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG+2 bets</font>, Hero calls.
(I feel that this is a pretty weak move in retrospect. I guess I'm trying to give a busted draw a chance to bluff, b/c it doesn't seem likely that he's going to make a value bet w/ anything that I can beat. Is this an easy laydown? Or am I a raging pussy?)
Final Pot: 8.50 BB

[toss]

Preflop you should definitely raise for value and fold some cards. You don't want the blinds to play for free too.

If you're going to see the river you should bet and let him call. If he raises I'm going to muck.

[imported_Reaction]

Here is some Avg. EV data from Pokerroom.com:

AJs 0.43
KQs 0.39
99 0.38
ATs 0.33

I think this definitly supports a preflop raise and open raise from pretty much any postion.

I like leading the river. Checking lets weaker hands(hands they may call with), get a free showdown and lets stronger hands bet.

Also, I preferr to have a much stonger/concealled hand when trying to induce bluffs.

[davelin]

Raise pre-flop, bet river. Maybe it's me but I don't think you're using the term reverse-implied correctly.

[deception5]

A preflop raise will do 2 things for you:

1.) Thin the field. Someone may fold a hand like 65s on the button which could later come back to haunt you.

2.) Make the other players put in more money when you have more than your share of equity.

Pocket 9's are a premium hand. If you limp you are just playing it for set value.

[car ramrod]

I raise pf.

I think a check on the river is ok. If he has a busted draw, you may induce a bluff bet, if you lead he may not call with his over cards or busted draw.

But leading the river, if he was slow playing an 8 or 5, you get raised, so checking and calling only loses 1 bet.

I would like to hear others thoughts, but I like the river check.

[jrz1972]

Automatic PFR.

[davelin]

[ QUOTE ]
But leading the river, if he was slow playing an 8 or 5, you get raised, so checking and calling only loses 1 bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Checking gets you no bets from most hands that you beat and would've called.

Shillx could probably show this better than me. But basically only better hands are betting after you check and many worse hands will call after you bet.

[Marquis]

[ QUOTE ]
Automatic PFR.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Automatic" is a little overboard. If you aren't raising 88 then 99 must be borderline. I think limping is fine.

[car ramrod]

Not sure how many hands are going to call a river bet that are worse. maybe a 7, I don't think over cards are calling.

I make this play a fair amount of times, and I get bluff bet into a lot. This wins me a bet against worse hands, but only loses 1 against a better hand.

Aaron W. and I talked about this last week, and he convinced me that most worse hands will not call here. I like the check call, but could be persuaded to change my mind. check out this thread, I tried to post a link, first time, hope it worked.

www.twoplustwo.com (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Number=2380266&amp;page=&amp;view=&amp;s b=5&amp;o=)

[Marquis]

[ QUOTE ]
Checking gets you no bets from most hands that you beat and would've called.

[/ QUOTE ]

What hands are calling a bet here that you beat?

[btspider]

PF is fine for a new player, especially after an UTG limper. He's not isolating anyone on this table. Focus on postflop in this hand.

Bet river. I think I'd call a raise (maybe -EV, but i don't like 'weird' being my read on a guy). If he slowplayed 8x for 3 streets, so be it.

[davelin]

[ QUOTE ]
Not sure how many hands are going to call a river bet that are worse. maybe a 7, I don't think over cards are calling.

I make this play a fair amount of times, and I get bluff bet into a lot. This wins me a bet against worse hands, but only loses 1 against a better hand.

Aaron W. and I talked about this last week, and he convinced me that most worse hands will not call here. I like the check call, but could be persuaded to change my mind. check out this thread, I tried to post a link, first time, hope it worked.

www.twoplustwo.com (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Number=2380266&amp;page=&amp;view=&amp;s b=5&amp;o=)

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't absolutely hate a check/call but I usually hate myself frequently for not betting. You'll see an Ace call here a surprising number of times (in other words not never) not to mention a lower PP. The board is suitably scary for Villain too as well plus being double-paired the number of cards that beat us is smaller. Tough but I think this is slim value bet on the river, but I could be convinced otherwise.

I'll let Prof. Btspider explain to the class (including myself). I think it's a close call between bet/fold and check/call

[Marquis]

[ QUOTE ]
Not sure how many hands are going to call a river bet that are worse. maybe a 7, I don't think over cards are calling.

I make this play a fair amount of times, and I get bluff bet into a lot. This wins me a bet against worse hands, but only loses 1 against a better hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

You beat me to it and I completely agree with you. A seven probably bets when you check to him anyway.

[btspider]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't absolutely hate a check/call but I usually hate myself frequently for not betting. You'll see an Ace call here a surprising number of times (in other words not never) not to mention a lower PP. The board is suitably scary for Villain too as well plus being double-paired the number of cards that beat us is smaller. Tough but I think this is slim value bet on the river, but I could be convinced otherwise.

I'll let Prof. Btspider explain to the class (including myself). I think it's a close call between bet/fold and check/call

[/ QUOTE ]

vpip under 20.. UTG+2 over-limp.. how does this range have 8x or 5x so often that we are afraid to bet? Ax calls all day long here.

nm, maybe i'm misreading. I'm assuming the UTG read is UTG+2. UTG was a non-factor in this hand.

[car ramrod]

I doubt an A calls here, maybe.
The only small pairs he could have are 66's, the board plays, so 22's, 33's, and 44's are no good.

I agree the board is scary for villian too, thats why I don't think he will call a bet with a weaker hand, but will attempt a bluff bet with a weaker hand. I don't know, it has been working for me lately, so maybe I like it more b/c of that.

[car ramrod]

I wouldn't call a raise on the river, I guess thats why I am promoting a check call.

Unless this player was tricky, or a good thinking player, I don't see a raise as any thing but an 8 or 5.

[Aaron W.]

I favor a check-call in spots like this. Your hand has showdown value, but not a whole lot of showdown value.

You want to induce a bluff when villain will bet more hands that you beat than he will call with. In this case, I think there are enough overcard hands that will bet (bluff) but not call that I would try to induce a bluff. Also, there aren't enough pocket pairs under yours that will be calling in this spot.

I would feel differently if the board were 22336, in which case 88, 77, 55, 44 are all pocket pairs that are calling you down. At the same time, those hands probably check behind, especially if you have been betting the whole time (their hand is weak, but they want to see a showdown -- as they should). So there are more hands that will call but will not bet.

I think a bet-fold is fine, as long as you can get yourself to do the fold part. Planning to bet-call is -EV. Bet-folding and check-calling are probably +EV, with bet-folding making maybe a fraction more than check-calling. I think it's very very close. Reads would be helpful in making a determination. Without reads, I would rather show down my hand.

[wireMan]

Does the EV data change based on how the hands are played? I don't see too many people raising 99 from EP preflop, some but not many.
Or is the EV data just simply, you start with these two cards in any position and do whatever with them and this is your expectation?

[imported_Reaction]

First off - if what I write is incorrect I hope some of the more knowledgeable will interject.

[ QUOTE ]
Does the EV data change based on how the hands are played?

[/ QUOTE ]

It depends on what we are talking about. What most people are talking when it comes to EV is how many bets are to be gained or lost.

The list of EV data I posted is based on all pocket cards dealt at real money tables and is expressed in bets. They serve as a total average for all (good and bad) players. So this data is affected by the actions bet, raise, call, and fold.

Here (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&amp;Number=2408116&amp;page=1&amp;view=colla psed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=7&amp;fpart=1) is a recent post (By meep 42) that has some EV calculations for a river action of raising a bet (modified without consent for clarity):
[ QUOTE ]
My feeling is that we're good here about 90% of the time.

We lose 2 bets when we're no good (10%)

of the times we're good (90%):
Sometimes Villain will cap with trips (7.5% of 90%) +2 BB
Sometimes BB will cold-call (7.5% of 90%) +3 BB
BB folds, Villain calls (85% of 90%) +1 BB

(10%)(-2 bets)+(7.5%)(90%)(+2 bets)+(7.5%)(90%)(+3 bets)+(85%)(90%)(+1 bet)
EV = -.2 + .135 + .2025 + .765 = 1.1025 BB

[/ QUOTE ]

So by raising Hero gained 1.1 BB.


Now, talking purely in terms of the cards:

Let’s say you are playing a friend and you hold AA and he holds KK.

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=344
pokenum -h as ah - ks kh
Holdem Hi: 1712304 enumerated boards
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
As Ah 1410336 82.36 292660 17.09 9308 0.54 0.826
Ks Kh 292660 17.09 1410336 82.36 9308 0.54 0.174

You decide you need a beer and fold. Now the EV for your hand remains the same but you have just given up that 0.826 EV preflop by folding (but gained +EV on your buzz). Now let’s say you are dealt those same hands and you decide to play out the hand. Adding some cards with the dreaded river:

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=962442
pokenum -h as ah - ks kh -- 9d 2h 4h 2s kd
Holdem Hi: 1 enumerated board containing 2s Kd 9d 4h 2h
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
As Ah 0 0.00 1 100.00 0 0.00 0.000
Ks Kh 1 100.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1.000

Your EV for the hand drops to 0.0. No. You can do nothing to change this type of EV.

My OP was simply to point out that all 4 of those hands are of the same, um, caliber.

Hope this helps and that I explained it correctly.

[Buckmulligan]

When you don't narrow the field with 99, you find yourself in a lot of these reverse-implied situations, although this one isn't one of those.