Set in unraised $100 NL pot - call $200?

[AllIn3High]

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $ BB (9 handed) pokerhand.org hand converter (http://www.pokerhand.org)

UTG+1 ($84.9)
Hero ($218.87)
MP2 ($41.61)
MP3 ($101.65)
CO ($111.35)
Button ($27.8)
SB ($333.4)
BB ($163.48)
UTG ($22.62)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif. SB posts a blind of $0.5.
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG+1 calls $1, Hero calls $1, <font color="#666666">4 folds</font>, SB (poster) completes, BB checks.

Flop: ($4) 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 3/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
SB checks, BB bets $4, Hero raises $12, SB goes all-in, BB folds.

Hero has to call $205.

SB is 30/10/2.15-ish after 100hands.

I'm thinking a big draw or maybe a donk play w/ top-two?

This is the biggest moneywise decision I've had to make playing hold'em until now.. my question:

[krazyace5]

Any notes on the player?

[AllIn3High]

[ QUOTE ]
Any notes on the player?

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunatly not. I was 3 tabling so no special reads, but I usually notice it when people do exceptional stuff.

[AllIn3High]

Ofcourse all input / arguments for both call/fold is appreciated.

[xorbie]

I think he is far more likely to do this with 68/images/graemlins/heart.gif, T8/images/graemlins/heart.gif, AJ/images/graemlins/heart.gif etc than 77 or 99. The problem is that againgst the first two you aren't a huge favorite, and even against the third you are going to lose over 1/5 of the time (I think). Whereas set over set you lose just about always, so he has to have a big draw or a bad draw a large majority of the time. I would be tempted to call here though.

[boondockst]

Maybe it's an "oh S**T" by the SB after not raising KK/AA and seeing action on the flop

[theblitz]

Look at it fom his point of view.

He is coming in after a pot sized bet and a pot sized raise. Hard to think he would be betting a draw or a lowish hand here.

[AllIn3High]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe it's an "oh S**T" by the SB after not raising KK/AA and seeing action on the flop

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but maybe it's a set.. would you bet $200 on it? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[mason55]

Assuming he's reasonable, he's not doing this with any one pair hand. Since we dont' know what level he's at we don't know if he could make this play with a big draw or a huge draw. There's really no 2pair possibilities on the board (97 maybe since it's SB). Against the OESFDs you're a 58/42 favorite. Against overcard heart draws you're a 75/25 favorite. Against another set you're a 91/9 dog.

This is one of those hands you really need a read on to know how possible it is for villain to do this without a set. Even PT numbers would help. There needs to be a very strong possibility he could do this with a draw or some weak 2pr/top pair hand (&gt;50% of the time) for calling to be correct since you're getting paid 1:1 basically.

Having never played 100NL I don't know if a typical player makes this play with less than a set more than 50% of the time, I'll leave that up to you.

[AllIn3High]

[ QUOTE ]

This is one of those hands you really need a read on to know how possible it is for villain to do this without a set. Even PT numbers would help. There needs to be a very strong possibility he could do this with a draw or some weak 2pr/top pair hand (&gt;50% of the time) for calling to be correct since you're getting paid 1:1 basically.


[/ QUOTE ]

"SB is 30/10/2.15-ish after 100hands."

But in these situations reads usually says more than stats... unfortunatly I didn't have any.

Sounds like you're leaning towards a fold?

(nice analysis btw)

[Malachii]

Fold. Definitely fold. Villain has 77. 99 he would've raised preflop. I can see myself calling this in the heat of the moment though.

[captZEEbo1]

Perhaps he thinks his overpair TT is good here, and doesn't want to get drawn out? I call, it's a set baby.

Assuming he has an OESFD, you are still 57.9 to win the pot.

[Chris Piekarski]

It seems a bit suspect. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him turn over a big pair here, or some sort of good draw. While it's true you're not _that_ far ahead of good draws, and you're way behind a set, I almost never see low-stakes NL players go all in on the flop with a set. Let alone top set. I read this as something else, and even if I felt like he had the set, I just think there are too many combinations of hands you're destroying to lay this down.

[wtfsvi]

I think it's a real tough decition. But with them stats on SB being your only read, they tip me into folding. They don't look donkish. (And if he isn't (very) bad, it should mean he either has a set or a very big draw. Far behind/slightly ahead-situation.)

[fimbulwinter]

call very quickly

[theben]

i voted for call. your hand is very strong and you are playing on partypoker. because of his play, its very possible he is drawing. if he has a hand, you may still be ahead. its highly possible your opponent completed with a 97, suited or off. you can beat that, along with a variety of big flush draws, flush draw+ gut, and OESD+FD. and since it partypoker, dont forget the possibility of random crap or a donkey move with an overpair. i honestly think calling here will win more in the long run that it loses

[DoomSlice]

This guy's been reading Super System. Call instantly.

[slimbob]

The only hands you have to fear are 77 and 99. Even with OESFD you have redraws to the boat to make a call profitable. If he have the 77 or 99 he want to keep you in the hand so its unlikely that he go all-in with the set. I think the typical 100$ NL-player slowplay this or reraise you but not wanna scare you of this hand with an all-in. So 77 or 99 is a possibility but I call that instantly.

[crazygeorge]

I can understand your concern for calling that much in an unraised pot, but i think in your position with the set of 3's he is probably on the nut flush draw and I think it is an instacall for you.

[Jester999]

[ QUOTE ]
call very quickly

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you guys might be out thinking yourselves a bit here. I've seen this move several times at this limit and all the ones I remember have been two pair. I'm not saying it can't be set over set here, but I call and if I'm on a 'one outer' oh well...it sucks. Reload and keep playing.

[spoohunter]

Dude, you have three of a kind. Call.

[PokerFink]

Just want to point out that it isn't a one-outer. You just know that board is coming heart-heart if villian has a bigger set. I mean, party is rigged, right?

Seriously though, this has to be a profitable call. For every one time that villian has a bigger set, there are going to be two times he has something really stupid like AA or 97... or worse. And you're ahead of every draw.

Make the call.

[Zag]

Since your starting stack was over 200 BBs, you should fold. If you (or villain) had only 100 BBs, I might consider a call, and at, say, 75 BBs it would be an easy call. However, a losing set should only lose around 100-120 BBs.

These numbers, however, are against an unknown player. If you have ever seen the "Move of Honor" from this player before with less than the nuts, it changes things. But let's assume equal chances of (1) Big set (2) top two (3) a huge draw. I think this is a reasonable assumption and is probably close to the one that the majority of the people who said "call" are making.

You are risking $205 in order to win $235, for a total pot to be split up of $435

A. He has a better set: You are a huge dog with only 8.9% pot equity. http://twodimes.net/h/?z=1015401 The value of the call was therefore 0.089 * $435 = $38.72 (ouch)

B. He has top two: You are a big favorite with 83.2% pot equity. http://twodimes.net/h/?z=1015403
The value of the call was therefore 0.832 * $435 = $361.92

C. He has a huge draw: You are only a small favorite with 57.9% pot equity. http://twodimes.net/h/?z=1015405 The value of the call was therefore 0.579 * $435 = $251.87.

Since we said that these three cases are roughly equal in likelihood, EV calculation is:

(A + B + C)/3 - $205 = $217.5 - $205 = $12.5 EV

Hmmm, I am a little surprised, I thought it would come out negative. Note, however, if we increase the chances of A even a tiny bit, it quickly becomes very negative.

A/2 + B/4 + C/4 - $205 = $-32.19

[meow_meow]

[ QUOTE ]
Hmmm, I am a little surprised, I thought it would come out negative. Note, however, if we increase the chances of A even a tiny bit, it quickly becomes very negative.

A/2 + B/4 + C/4 - $205 = $-32.19

[/ QUOTE ]

On the other hand, if you add some possibility that he has a naked flush draw or an overpair, it becomes more positive.

To your point though, assuming the +12 EV, do you advocate folding because you have 200bb in a 100bb capped game?

[PinkSteel]

Zag, your pricing of various hands is extremely interesting to me. Here you price a set at about 100BB. I remember in another post somewhere you priced TPGK at about 40BB; do I remember correctly? Where do your benchmarks come from? Can you put some color behind them?

The one thought I keep coming back to in this specific case is that villain doesn't have the set. Sure, he may be a maniac, but would a thinking player play middle or top set this way? I absolutely would not. I still might chicken and fold but I think P( VillainSet ) &lt; 1/3.

[unlucky513]

i get my chips in the pot ASAP, for sure!

[Jester999]

[ QUOTE ]
But let's assume equal chances of (1) Big set (2) top two (3) a huge draw. I think this is a reasonable assumption and is probably close to the one that the majority of the people who said "call" are making.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the weighting here is flawed and you're discounting other hands such as top and bottom pair and bottom two. I think the assumptions make the math very flawed.

[ QUOTE ]
Hmmm, I am a little surprised, I thought it would come out negative. Note, however, if we increase the chances of A even a tiny bit, it quickly becomes very negative.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you've already WAY overestimated the likelyhood of a bigger set, so I really think you're reaching.

Like I've said, at these levels I've seen this move 3 or 4 times that I can think of and the hand either got shown down or the player who moved all in flahsed their cards after the opponent folded. It's been two pair every single time, so maybe my process is somewhat skewed.

And before I get someone telling me that 'set over set' isn't THAT rare. I agree. I had it 3 times yesterday and was on top everytime en route to my biggest single winning day in my poker history online.


And...just for fun...

[ QUOTE ]
Just want to point out that it isn't a one-outer. You just know that board is coming heart-heart if villian has a bigger set. I mean, party is rigged, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Zag]

[ QUOTE ]
Zag, your pricing of various hands is extremely interesting to me. Here you price a set at about 100BB. I remember in another post somewhere you priced TPGK at about 40BB; do I remember correctly? Where do your benchmarks come from? Can you put some color behind them?

[/ QUOTE ]
They come from a combination of personal experience and extrapolation from what I have learned from better players (mostly here).

Somewhat, they are calculated this way: If I have AK in early position, I will raise preflop. Then, if I hit my TPTK, I will check-raise. If you calculate it out, you will find that this check-raise will put my total investment so far in the 40 BB range. Of course, this depends on the number of callers, whether the bets were pot-size or half-pot, etc. but it gets you into a neighborhood. Note that if you do check-raise the flop and are re-raised, the opponent probably has TPTK beaten, which is why this is the number I choose for that hand.

Of course, these numbers vary greatly according to the opponents, my image, etc. but they represent a good starting point. The big value that they offer to me is that I can put in that raise with confidance, because I know that I will feel OK about losing 100 BBs (or whatever). If I have to think about it, then I am more likely to inspire the opponent to make a play at me.

[ QUOTE ]
The one thought I keep coming back to in this specific case is that villain doesn't have the set. Sure, he may be a maniac, but would a thinking player play middle or top set this way? I absolutely would not. I still might chicken and fold but I think P( VillainSet ) &lt; 1/3.

[/ QUOTE ]
If that is your belief on the assumptions, then you should always call here or quit playing no limit poker. It helps to try to think of any money that you have bought in with as already gone, already invested. If you can't put it all at risk when you are pretty sure you have much the best of it, then you should stick to limit games.

To everyone who disagreed with my assumptions: I agree with you that they are probably flawed, and I think we can all agree that the amount to put on the ratios is a matter of opinion. My point was primarily to figure out the EV, given some assumptions that I thought would make it close but slightly negative -- I was right about close, at least. Also, I wanted to set it up so that people could easily plug in their own assumptions and see the EV. If you assume that the chance of a set is substantially less than 1/3 I don't argue with you, as long as you can make that call when you are at the table.

[PinkSteel]

[ QUOTE ]
If I have AK in early position, I will raise preflop. Then, if I hit my TPTK, I will check-raise. If you calculate it out, you will find that this check-raise will put my total investment so far in the 40 BB range. Of course, this depends on the number of callers, whether the bets were pot-size or half-pot, etc. but it gets you into a neighborhood. Note that if you do check-raise the flop and are re-raised, the opponent probably has TPTK beaten, which is why this is the number I choose for that hand.

Of course, these numbers vary greatly according to the opponents, my image, etc. but they represent a good starting point. The big value that they offer to me is that I can put in that raise with confidance, because I know that I will feel OK about losing 100 BBs (or whatever). If I have to think about it, then I am more likely to inspire the opponent to make a play at me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks. This is the kind of framework that, it seems to me, one would have to have before one could feel ready to play deep stack poker -- of which OP put up a good example and with which I have no real experience. I guess one could also have a benchmark as a percentage of stack sizes, rather than multiple of blinds. But either way, like you said, a starting point.

Very helpful way of looking at deep, deep bets. Thanks again.

[ryanghall]

I'd have to call this.

It reeks of a draw and we all know how rare set over set is.
Once in a while it will happen. I had a hand similar to this the other day and the guy had top set. Whatever. Normally, you're good here. Looks like AJh or perhaps a straight flush draw.

Remember, if it is a draw, which really seems likely to me, you also have one of the hearts, lowering their chances slightly. I call.

Ryan

[Chris Piekarski]

[ QUOTE ]
Since your starting stack was over 200 BBs, you should fold. If you (or villain) had only 100 BBs, I might consider a call, and at, say, 75 BBs it would be an easy call. However, a losing set should only lose around 100-120 BBs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Although I understand what you're trying to say here, I have to argue that it makes no difference how many bets he hypothetically wins or loses on the hand. Assuming there's $0 in the pot (it's pretty close), he's getting 1 to 1 on his call regardless, so as long as he wins more than half the time the call is profitable. Doesn't matter whether he's risking 50BB or 1,000BB in my opinion, except where bankroll is concerned.

[AllIn3High]

Thanks for the thoughts guys, as is almost always the case the discussion was more interessting than the results.

I couldn't imagine him doing this with the nuts so after thinking a while i tought his most likely hand was a big draw and called. He showed 77 and party wasn't rigged enough to let me suck out. IMHO villian played this hand terribly - only one hand worse than his could possibly call this - 33 (which I unfortunatly had).

I'm still not sure what the correct play in this situation is against an unknown, but I'm inclined to think it's close between a call and a fold - as someone pointed out in this thread it's usually a way behind/slightly ahead situation most of the time.

This decision would have been so much easier had I had 77 or the board would have been w/o the flush draw possible.

[wallofchips]

I say call. I admit it's a lot to call off in an unraised pot, but does he really have a bigger set? If he had a set of 7s or 9s would he make a huge overbet on this board? I don't think there's any way. This isn't a bet that wants to be called. I don't even think the straight/flush draw is possible. I think it's a draw or a stone bluff. I would be shocked if he had a made hand at this point.

[wallofchips]

A lot of people seem to think it's very likely that the villian has a set. I believe most thinking playeres would try to sell a set. If this guy is a donkey, then he will have a wider range of hands. It seems like either way it's not very likely he has a set.

How would you guys play the villian's hand? Assuming you checked, would this be the way to play it?

[RiverTheNuts]

He is thinking at a higher level than you, he knows that pushing looks like a draw, so he does it to get 33 to call

just playin /images/graemlins/smile.gif

I lead flop for 2/3 pot, either smoothcall or do the delayed fake-think push if he raises, check/raise turn

[Malachii]

[ QUOTE ]
He showed 77 and party wasn't rigged enough to let me suck out. IMHO villian played this hand terribly - only one hand worse than his could possibly call this - 33 (which I unfortunatly had).

[/ QUOTE ]

Am I not a badass hand reader?

Seriously though, my condolences on losing your stack. Set over set sucks.

[Malachii]

I like the push. Huge over bets like this only have to work occasionally to be profitable.

[TheWorstPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
I like the push. Huge over bets like this only have to work occasionally to be profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is very not true. You have to compare the profitability of the line versus the profitability of all other lines, not versus nothing.

[dtbog]

[ QUOTE ]
This is very not true. You have to compare the profitability of the line versus the profitability of all other lines, not versus nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well said. That is all.

-dB

[Malachii]

True. Nevertheless, the pot is like 16$. If by pushing he can pick up a call for 200$ from top pair/good kicker, and overpair, or a lower set, then I like the push. Virtually everyone here put Villain on a draw when they saw this line. Is it really so unreasonable to think that less sophisticated players would go so far as to call off their whole stack with mediocre hands because they put Villain on a draw? Plus, there are a number of cards that could potentially kill Villain's action on fourth street (any heart, 6, 8, 10, etc). Overbetting takes care of this problem.