Heads-Up $30-60 Hand

[CJC]

Any comments on both players actions..

3RD STREET
----------
Player A (5 /images/graemlins/spade.gifq /images/graemlins/spade.gif)4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif
Player B (A /images/graemlins/diamond.gifA /images/graemlins/spade.gif)7 /images/graemlins/club.gif

PLayer A brings it in for min..... PLayer B completes...... PLayer A makes it $60....... PLayer B makes it $90........ PLAYER A calls.

4th Street
-----------
Player A (5 /images/graemlins/spade.gifq /images/graemlins/spade.gif)4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif6 /images/graemlins/spade.gif
Player B (A /images/graemlins/diamond.gifA /images/graemlins/spade.gif)7 /images/graemlins/club.gif3 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

PLayer B bets $30 and PLayer A calls

5th Street
-----------
Player A (5 /images/graemlins/spade.gifq /images/graemlins/spade.gif)4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif6 /images/graemlins/spade.gifK /images/graemlins/diamond.gif
Player B (A /images/graemlins/diamond.gifA /images/graemlins/spade.gif)7 /images/graemlins/club.gif3 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif10 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

PLayer A checks..... Player B bets $60.......... PLayer A raises to $120..........PLayer B makes it $180 and PLayer A calls the $180

6th Street
-----------

Player A (5 /images/graemlins/spade.gifq /images/graemlins/spade.gif)4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif6 /images/graemlins/spade.gifK /images/graemlins/diamond.gifK /images/graemlins/spade.gif
Player B (A /images/graemlins/diamond.gifA /images/graemlins/spade.gif)7 /images/graemlins/club.gif3 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif10 /images/graemlins/spade.gifK /images/graemlins/heart.gif

Player A bets $60 and Player B calls

River
------

Player A (5 /images/graemlins/spade.gifq /images/graemlins/spade.gif)4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif6 /images/graemlins/spade.gifK /images/graemlins/diamond.gifK /images/graemlins/spade.gif ( 2 /images/graemlins/club.gif)
Player B (A /images/graemlins/diamond.gifA /images/graemlins/spade.gif)7 /images/graemlins/club.gif3 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif10 /images/graemlins/spade.gifK /images/graemlins/heart.gif(K /images/graemlins/club.gif)

PLayer A bets $60............PLayer B makes it $120.......... PLayer A calls......

Any comments on either of the players play??? I will post my thoughts later tonight or tomorrow

CJ

[Michael Emery]

Third: I play it the same way heads-up if I was player A or B.

Fourth: If I was player A I'm just going to war here and raising rather than waiting for fifth. Since this is heads-up my hand dosent have to scream "flush draw" to my opponent. I did catch a scare card and he might simply reraise me to three bets thinking I'm just using my board to possibly buy me a free card on fifth. Even if I catch another spade on fifth I'm not expecting player B to let go. But if I catch a spade on fifth I might not be bet into now, and lose my opportunity to get any money in the pot.

fifth: As I said, I would have just played my hand fast on fourth if I was player A. The problem that I have with making it $120 here on fifth is that now you're putting in 2 bets as a 2-1 dog and possibly opening up yourself to get three-bet. The only way I like this play is against someone who you can get a lot of fold equity out of by checkraising. Basically, by check-raising you think you can get them to fold one medium to large pair (specifically 7's here) if you bet sixth and then the river. Given how this is a heads-up game I dont think thats too likely at all unless you happen to catch an open pair on sixth. Player B making it $90 on third street should have already announced to us that he has a hand. So I dont like the check-raise.

sixth: standard

seventh: I can see why player A is quite concerned here getting raised when he has open kings and a flushy board. Against a soild player, player A should be thinking its trips/pocket aces/some two pair combo trying to fill, that B went into the river with. Given the basic facts that two pair and trip combos, going in, outweigh pocket aces, I favor a call when he raises (just like he did). I dont like risking 2-1 in this situation here by making it $180. With all this being said, I do like the river raise by player B with aces up here. Theres actually a few more fine points (namely about sixth street play) that could be brought up here (like how would B play trips on sixth), but I have to be somewhere right now. These were just a few of my thoughts. Very interesting hand. These are the posts that I like to see.

Mike Emery

[Michael Emery]

*Bump*

This is the most interesting hand posted in a long time. I hope some more people take the time to respond to it.


Mike Emery

[CJC]

n/m

[Ray Zee]

player A is the much better player of the two.

[Michael Emery]

[ QUOTE ]
player A is the much better player of the two.



[/ QUOTE ]

Whys that, Ray? All I really like is his call on the river as opposed to raising to $180. You really like that semi-bluff on fifth as a 2-1 dog that much? I think player B played it just fine. The only real debatable street from him is his river raise imo. I vote player B as the better player.

Mike Emery

[CJC]

[ QUOTE ]
I vote player B as the better player

[/ QUOTE ]

BE nice. I was one of the players, but not going to say which one yet.. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

CJ

[Ray Zee]

they both dont play well enough to be at that level. the river play by both was bad. b should never have raised and a should have reraised.

[BeerMoney]

Both opponents played it well. Player b has reason to believe player A has big pair in the hole, playing aggressively. Player A played a 3 flush deceptively and got somewhat lucky.

Overall, player B may have played the hand somewhat better.

That is, on 5th street , when he was ahead, he got the most money in, and stayed aggessive.

I'm a little drunk.

[BeerMoney]

***Beermoney responded before he saw any of these responses from Ray Zee.. ***

[Michael Emery]

[ QUOTE ]

they both dont play well enough to be at that level. the river play by both was bad. b should never have raised and a should have reraised.


[/ QUOTE ]

B raising here, imo, is a much smaller mistake than if A were to reraise to $180. I dont think the reraise by A on the river is as obvious as people might think.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm a little drunk.


[/ QUOTE ]

Want to play heads-up before you go to bed? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Mike Emery

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
they both dont play well enough to be at that level.


[/ QUOTE ]

How is that possible? One of them does, and one of them doesn't. (Assuming playing ability is something of a continuous RV.)

[ QUOTE ]

the river play by both was bad. b should never have raised and a should have reraised.

[/ QUOTE ]

B has every reason to believe that A has a big pair in the hole. Once A is called on 6th, he has to know that B has aces. You don't think A bets two pair here enough in hopes to get a call from unimproved aces? But, A has an open pair showing, and is obviously looking strong. his opponents raise is scary, but I agree that a 3 bet is probably in order.

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]

Want to play heads-up before you go to bed? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Mike Emery

[/ QUOTE ]

Want me to beat the crap out of you?

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]
they both dont play well enough to be at that level. the river play by both was bad. b should never have raised and a should have reraised .

[/ QUOTE ]


I’m with Mike on this. Like he said, player B’s call on 6th means either aces, trips or two pairs.
So his hole cards can be:

AA 6 ways
TT 3 ways
77 3 ways
73 9 ways
7T 9 ways

So player A’s hand is good only 6 times out of 30, or 20% of the time.
Assuming player B will re-raise again with a boat (and A will make a crying call with his flush), A will win 1 BB 20 times and lose 2 BB 80 times. So the EV of the 3-bet is 0.2 BB - 1.6 BB = - 1.4 BB or - 86$.

Someone check my math please.

[jon_1van]

I'd love to comment on this hand.

I'd love to know something well enough to comment intelligently more.


Any time I've played heads up it was always key to know how aggressive the other guy was to be able to tell how good a hand I needed to go to war.

If the player B folds 39/40 hands to the BI isn't folding this to a completion the best play. But if player B is trying to steal every BI player A makes then this is a great hand to go to war with. Similar auguments can be made at pretty much all streets.

[Andy B]

My biggest success in heads-up stud was taking $2 off of Carlos Chadha in a $.04/.08 game, so take this for what it's worth:

Third strikes me as standard. On fourth, I probably raise with the flush draw. I'm not crazy about the check-raise on fifth. How likely is it that the guy with the Aces is going to lay down, well, anything? I agree that the guy with Aces-up should just call on the river and the flush should three-bet.

[Andy B]

When's the last time you played $30/60, Ray? There are some bad, bad players in those games. A guy can make some mistakes and still come out, thankfully.

[Michael Emery]

[ QUOTE ]
the flush should three-bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? I was going to work out the math this morning but Roland beat me to it (ty Roland /images/graemlins/smile.gif, I hate math). As I stated yesterday in my post, given the range of hands B is going into the river with (remember hes calling open kings and a flush looking board with his blank board), its a clear call when you get raised on the end. Raising here in the long run will only cost you money.

Mike Emery

[ratso]

Player B should have folded on 5th street. No question about it. This is the classic failure to fold Aces syndrom.

[CJC]

Hello All,

As I hinted in one other post, I actually was player A. I didn't want to mention it first cause I didn't want any 'skewed' analysis. ( I actually was thinking about posting this another way but...... )

I really do think this is an interesting hand, and it shows a lot of concepts that start to happen in the bigger stud games.

I really don't think my opponent played the hand all that bad. I however ( and no one mentioned this surprisingly ) HATE that he raised on 3rd with his pocket Aces. If I don't have anything, I am just going to fold. IMHO this is a time where you actually want to slowplay ACES and give your opponent a chance to catch something. We had been playing heads-up for actually quite some time and the game wasn't all that aggressive ( up to this hand /images/graemlins/grin.gif ) so he really wouldn't have been giving away too much..

His river raise was what I really thought made this hand interesting, and honestly, I keep changing my mind from thinking its a brilliant play to a foolish one.... and I probably never will.

I was chastized by the great Ray Zee for not raising the river. ( at least he said I was the better of the two players /images/graemlins/grin.gif )... but seriously.. in all honesty.. after showing that much strength all along, and given my board.. when I was raised on the river.. I thought there was a real chance I was against tens full, and if I wasn't there was a decent chance my re-raise wouldn't have gotten pad off anyway. I just don't see a re-raise being profitable in the long run there. I don't.. and if that makes me weak-tight ( which I was also recently accused of ) so be it. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

A few other thoughts...

My check-raise on 5th wasn't a big hit with most.. MY thinking is 1) If my opponent only has a small pair or overcards, he most likely folds.. and I want him too 2) Check-raise disguises my holding

When my opponent 3 bet on 5th I actually put him on pocket Aces ( which is why I was a bit thrown by his river raise.. when I thought I diagnosed wrong )

I am still debating his river raise... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Later,

CJ

[Andy B]

In a heads-up game, you're going to be raising light so often that you're apt to get action whether you want it or not. I figure that I raise with dubious holdings often enough that I might as well raise when I have a real hand.

[Ray Zee]

then of course a reraise if you didnt have a flush was in order on the river, right.

i dont know about being weak tight but if it is possible, correct it as so be it will be the poor house.

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]
His river raise was what I really thought made this hand interesting, and honestly, I keep changing my mind from thinking its a brilliant play to a foolish one.... and I probably never will.

[/ QUOTE ]


A somewhat likely range of hole cards for you is:

<ul type="square"> 88 - QQ 27 ways
/images/graemlins/spade.gif /images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="white"> </font> 28 ways [/list]

If he puts you on these hands he obviously shouldn’t raise, especially since he can and often will be 3-bet by a flush.
Of course the math changes if you add smaller pockets and split 4s, but I don’t think that’s reasonable. Besides, that would mean he could be facing trip sixes or possibly a backdoor flush from 4d 5s 4s or something.
No way that raise is +EV.

[CJC]

[ QUOTE ]
then of course a reraise if you didnt have a flush was in order on the river, right.


[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really think for that size pot that any superior hand to a pair of kings would fold for one more damn bet?

Plus, if I didn't have a flush, or a draw to it, the whole hand would have been played differently anyways..
/images/graemlins/confused.gif

The games are different now Ray.

CJ

[RayGarlington]

[ QUOTE ]
So player A’s hand is good only 6 times out of 30, or 20% of the time.


[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't it that Player A's hand is good AT LEAST 20% of the time? If player B is holding TT, 77, 73 or 7T he only has OUTs to win, not an actual win.

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
correct it as so be it will be the poor house.

[/ QUOTE ]

Translation?

[Roland]

Nope. His raise on the river means that he’s hit one of those outs.
The question was how often the raise means aces up and how often it means boat. Answer is it means aces up only 20% of the time. At least that’s how I figure it. I could be wrong.

[CJC]

I think what Ray is saying is I have to correct my weak river play, or I will be the one in the poor house. ( go broke ) I just happen to emphatically disagree with him when it comes to the river play of this hand.

CJ

[RayGarlington]

OK. I see your argument now (I was a street behind). I think your calculation is ok; however, it would take a special guy to raise aces up into a probable flush.

[Bartholow]

You're the one who said a 3-bet on the river wouldn't be paid off a decent amount of the time that your opponent didn't have a boat.

[CJC]

[ QUOTE ]
You're the one who said a 3-bet on the river wouldn't be paid off a decent amount of the time that your opponent didn't have a boat.


[/ QUOTE ]

Forgive me, but I am not quite following what you are trying to say here.

CJ

[CJC]

[ QUOTE ]
it would take a special guy to raise aces up into a probable flush

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank God, someone finally sees the issue ( and real point to the post ) Thats the problem with me thinking 3 bet on the river

CJ

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're the one who said a 3-bet on the river wouldn't be paid off a decent amount of the time that your opponent didn't have a boat.


[/ QUOTE ]

Forgive me, but I am not quite following what you are trying to say here.

CJ

[/ QUOTE ]


You said he might fold aces up on the river to a 3-bet some amount of the time.
Ray said that consequently you should 3-bet with kings up as a bluff.
Then you said something like “do you really think he’s going to fold anything that beats kings in a pot that large”.
Get it? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
it would take a special guy to raise aces up into a probable flush

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank God, someone finally sees the issue ( and real point to the post ) Thats the problem with me thinking 3 bet on the river

CJ

[/ QUOTE ]

A 3-bet on the river is - EV in any case. Even if he will always raise with aces up.

[CJC]

[ QUOTE ]
You said he might fold aces up on the river to a 3-bet some amount of the time

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't recall EVER saying he might fold Aces-Up on the riv er. What I did say ( or meant too at least.. now i have to look ) is that who in their right mind will fold anything that can beat open kings for one more bet on the river for that size pot.

/images/graemlins/blush.gif

CJ

[CJC]

[ QUOTE ]
A 3-bet on the river is - EV in any case. Even if he will always raise with aces up

[/ QUOTE ]

I must say that after thinking about it substantially I tend to agree with you.

Do you think if my board wasn't showing any flush / straight possibilities that raising with Aces / up in the same situation would still be -EV?

CJ

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You said he might fold aces up on the river to a 3-bet some amount of the time

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't recall EVER saying he might fold Aces-Up on the riv er. What I did say ( or meant too at least.. now i have to look ) is that who in their right mind will fold anything that can beat open kings for one more bet on the river for that size pot.

/images/graemlins/blush.gif

CJ

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
I thought there was a real chance I was against tens full, and if I wasn't there was a decent chance my re-raise wouldn't have gotten pad off anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]


You said both. That’s what’s causing all this confusion.
/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A 3-bet on the river is - EV in any case. Even if he will always raise with aces up

[/ QUOTE ]

I must say that after thinking about it substantially I tend to agree with you.

Do you think if my board wasn't showing any flush / straight possibilities that raising with Aces / up in the same situation would still be -EV?

CJ

[/ QUOTE ]


Definitely not.
He knows you can’t have trip kings/kings full once he catches the case king on the river, so you would have to have rolled 4s or 6s in the hole or possibly have made a boat on the river to beat his aces up.

[CJC]

OK,

now I understand.. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

I will try this again... /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

To Me, for a re-raise to be correct... I will have to 1) think he is raising with an inferior hand 2) I will have to get called by that inferior hand...

when I said....

[ QUOTE ]
I thought there was a real chance I was against tens full, and if I wasn't there was a decent chance my re-raise wouldn't have gotten paid off anyway.



[/ QUOTE ]

what I meant by not getting paid off, I meant that if he was re-raising with garbage.. he wouldn't of called the 3 bet. I really wasn't expecting him to raise with Aces-Up ( nor would most of you if I am understanding your posts correctly ). I thought his most likely raise was 1) full boat 2) complete crap 3) possibly trip aces........ #1 was my first choice.. but for that size pot I certainly wasn't going to lay down my hand. ( and I was correct in not doing so,obviously )

Hopefully I have claryfied myself this time.. /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

CJ

[Ray Zee]

there is no differenc in the games nowadays. its the same stuff with the best players winning the most money. what may happen in some locations is that the best players arent very goo, just alot better than their opponents. that makes them big winners not great players.

[LA_Price]

3 bet the river. The flush is disguised because player A raised on 3rd and bet out on 6th. From player B's point of view player A has Kings up. By player A calling on 6th he's saying i have just one pair. If he had trips or two pair he'd probably have raised.

[stud7champ]

I think both played badly B is just worse than A.
b still raises rather than crying calls after seeing 4 flush upcards.
A fails to raise b bet on the river to maximise his winnings.
B bets on the river which should only be done if he has the nuts, because you win no extra and lose if there is a better hand.

[bygmesterf]

[ QUOTE ]
As I stated yesterday in my post, given the range of hands B is going into the river with (remember hes calling open kings and a flush looking board with his blank board), its a clear call when you get raised on the end. Raising here in the long run will only cost you money.

Mike Emery

[/ QUOTE ]

Going back to something I leanred from Mike Caro, when someone raises with you with a trash board that doesn't show any obvious strength, they arent bluffing.

Raising with Aces up (Even AAKK) is rather dangerious facing a possible flush, which implies that B ought to have some sort of hidden boat. Reraising is silly even if in this case it would have been the right thing to do.

[Bill Murphy]

[ QUOTE ]
there is no differenc in the games nowadays. its the same stuff with the best players winning the most money. what may happen in some locations is that the best players arent very goo, just alot better than their opponents. that makes them big winners not great players.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd rather be a great game selector than a great player. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif