don't be dumb like me

[mr pink]

Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (10 handed) http://216.119.70.224/converter/hhconverter.pl

Preflop: Hero is CO with Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif, Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
<font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, UTG+2 calls, <font color="#CC3333">MP1 raises</font>, MP2 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, <font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, UTG+2 folds, <font color="#CC3333">MP1 caps</font>, MP2 calls, Hero calls.

Flop: (14.33 SB) 8/images/graemlins/club.gif, 2/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">MP1 bets</font>, MP2 calls, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">MP1 3-bets</font>, MP2 calls, Hero calls.

raise the flop here and hope mp1 3-bets to squeeze out mp2?

Turn: (11.66 BB) Q/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">MP1 bets</font>, MP2 calls, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">MP1 3-bets</font>, MP2 calls, <font color="#CC3333">Hero caps</font>, MP1 calls, MP2 calls.

standard i assume.

River: (23.66 BB) K/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">MP1 bets</font>, MP2 folds, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>,

how retarded is this?

[DemonDeac]

nice catch on the turn
i prolly play it the same
ur gonna just call a 3-bet on the river right? or are u capping?

[cold_cash]

[ QUOTE ]
nice catch on the turn
i prolly play it the same
ur gonna just call a 3-bet on the river right? or are u capping?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he wants to take back that first river raise.

[TripleH68]

So did he have AA or KK?

From the title I am guessing KK. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[Nick C]

These hands are tough.

Anyway, I think the flop raise is possibly for value, but I doubt MP1 will both have and 3-bet JJ/TT often enough to protect your hand in any meaningful way. If he 3-bets AK (I doubt he will), then there aren't any unique overcards that MP2 could have that you need to worry about anyway.

However, I think what MP2 is quite likely to have is set outs. And I doubt he's dropping, say, A9 or JT, no matter what you do.

Anyway, I think the flop raise is all right.

On the river, the math tells us MP1 will have AA (6 combos) twice as often as KK (3 combos). The fact that he was willing to 3-bet the turn (when we know he couldn't possibly be best) pushes up the likelihood for AA a little, I think. The fact that he's firing into a queen and king on the river after all the strength you've shown pushes up the likelihood for KK at bit.

We can't completely rule out 88/77 (in fact, based on postflop, those hands seem kind of likely).

I don't know. Raising the river seems okay to me. I would probably just call a 3-bet, though.

[DemonDeac]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
nice catch on the turn
i prolly play it the same
ur gonna just call a 3-bet on the river right? or are u capping?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he wants to take back that first river raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

so do i, but i cant see anyone can just calling the river even though villain did lead the river. especially barring reads.

[mr pink]

yeah, pretty much my thoughts too. but then again, he's gotta be thinking "well, he's got either AA, KK, or QQ" at this point too.

[Emmitt2222]

[ QUOTE ]
he's gotta be thinking "well, he's got either AA, KK, or QQ" at this point too.

[/ QUOTE ]

You didn't give a read. I'm assuming that means he is an unknown in which case you can not assume that he is thinking that logically at all. I see 88, 77 and AA here [or even some crazy other crap] here often enough. You sound results oriented here. Nick did some good math to show you should raise/call 3bet.

[mr pink]

yeah but you're risking 2 bets to win 1 here, and i'm not giving an unknown credit for being a subhuman retard either that can't think at all. even the biggest fish start thinking AA KK QQ after you cap preflop. i treat an unknown as typical until he's done something that proves otherwise and a typical opponent is at least thinking somewhat about what you have.

[DemonDeac]

so did he have KK or not?

[mr pink]

yeah he had KK.

[mr pink]

i forgot to mention that just because bayesian analysis gives us the 2 to 1 chance that he has AA and not KK, i don't think you have the 67% you need in order to raise the river here because of the fact that he bet.

[molawn2mo]

[ QUOTE ]
i forgot to mention that just because bayesian analysis gives us the 2 to 1 chance that he has AA and not KK, i don't think you have the 67% you need in order to raise the river here because of the fact that he bet.

[/ QUOTE ]


bingo! villain's river bet screams... i gotcha!

of course you should have just called and i'll bet that you "knew" it, too. a non-maniac villain, w/AA, would CC or CF vs that river K. your river raise is a form of tilt; a denial of your gut and a denial of the obvious - falling back on untempered aggression to counteract a riverfuck.

jeff... you understand where i am coming from, right?

[sthief09]

2:1 he has AA vs KK all else equal. as far as tendencies, I'd think he'll play AA like this more often than KK because he overplayed the turn so badly. at least AA can think you have KK. what can KK hope you have? even so, I'd say you're about 50/50 here and while AA might sometimes 3-bet, KK has the nuts and will always 3-bet.

and this is a weird statement: raise the flop here and hope mp1 3-bets to squeeze out mp2?

I don't usually like being told I'm beat

[Roland19]

Mr. Pink, don't you ever put him on KK here (OK, well maybe sometimes). Cap the river merrily with your 2nd nuts. I think you're being results oriented.

[clownshoes]

capping this river is excessive minus a read

[mr pink]

cliff,

i hear ya.

this however is the best part of your post

[ QUOTE ]
falling back on untempered aggression to counteract a riverfuck.



[/ QUOTE ]

so true.

[mr pink]

[ QUOTE ]
2:1 he has AA vs KK all else equal. as far as tendencies, I'd think he'll play AA like this more often than KK because he overplayed the turn so badly. at least AA can think you have KK. what can KK hope you have? even so, I'd say you're about 50/50 here and while AA might sometimes 3-bet, KK has the nuts and will always 3-bet.


[/ QUOTE ]

so if you're 50/50, what's that mean? call i guess?

[ QUOTE ]
and this is a weird statement: raise the flop here and hope mp1 3-bets to squeeze out mp2?


[/ QUOTE ]

i guess you're saying just call him down here?

[molawn2mo]

[ QUOTE ]
2:1 he has AA vs KK all else equal.

[/ QUOTE ]

on the river all else is not equal because villain bet out. the entire hand has clearly reflected hero and villain, each, holding big PP. villain, holding AA, would be puking on the river K - he is already dodging the Turned Q as a threat. So... the fact that he bet out the river essentially denies holding AA (unless villain is comfortable folding to a river raise and takes the line that since he is going to call one bet... it is better to lead. but that line requires you to fold to a raise)doubtful).

[sthief09]

I didn't say all else is equal. I said it's 2:1 if all else is equal

[sthief09]

yeah I call the river

and I raise the flop. I just didn't like your reasoning

[mr pink]

[ QUOTE ]
and I raise the flop. I just didn't like your reasoning

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm not following here. why would you raise the flop then? for value i guess?

[molawn2mo]

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't say all else is equal. I said it's 2:1 if all else is equal

[/ QUOTE ]

i understood that. i was just continuing your analysis.

[mr pink]

nevermind. took me a sec but i got ya.

[sthief09]

yes

think about it logically. if he 3-bets, it usually means you're drawing to 2 outs, so why would you hope he 3-bets. that's like betting into a passive PFR who will only raise a better hand. sure, he may raise and clear out the field, but what good is clearing out the field when you're way behind? I realize in each case there is a small benefit (in the one I just gave, he could clean up 1 of your 5 outs or something)

[molawn2mo]

[ QUOTE ]
Mr. Pink, don't you ever put him on KK here (OK, well maybe sometimes). Cap the river merrily with your 2nd nuts. I think you're being results oriented.

[/ QUOTE ]

this statement, imho, is retarded and is another form of tilt, the type of tilt that says I've got the 2nd nuts so even if the entire hand has been played as if villain had kk or aa and even when the river brought the proverbial miracle and the villain bet out... well, screw it, i got the 2nd nuts, raise blah blah.

next!

as you can see, i'm in a mood tonight. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[molawn2mo]

[ QUOTE ]
raising this river is excessive minus a read

[/ QUOTE ]

fyp

[chief444]

Somehow I doubt if the opponent is capping the turn and then checking the river with AA. I think the typical 3/6er will bet/call the river with AA. Also, there's always the chance that he's completely overplaying something unexpected and worse or 88. Unlikely but not impossible. I think he should have called the river. But I don't think raising is that bad. Just slightly unprofitable.

[clownshoes]

Raising the river really isnt that bad but capping is just awful

[Roland19]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Mr. Pink, don't you ever put him on KK here (OK, well maybe sometimes). Cap the river merrily with your 2nd nuts. I think you're being results oriented.

[/ QUOTE ]

this statement, imho, is retarded and is another form of tilt, the type of tilt that says I've got the 2nd nuts so even if the entire hand has been played as if villain had kk or aa and even when the river brought the proverbial miracle and the villain bet out... well, screw it, i got the 2nd nuts, raise blah blah.

next!

as you can see, i'm in a mood tonight. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

You are completely right. I should have given more thought before absent-mindedly posting a response. I must agree that capping the river is horrible, as any reasonable villian will never 3-bet without KK, but I can't see how raising could be so bad. I don't know if I'm running super well lately, or what, but I've seen TONS of people overplay AA like this, so I must admit I'd be inclined to raise the river. Capping is definitely spewing, you were right.

I'm not so good with the nitty gritty analyzing and number crunching, but intuitively, I would raise the river and call a 3-bet.

Also, I think a hand like this would be highly read dependent, as villian could be a complete maniac and we would then have to add a whole new range of hands to be considered, such as 22-JJ, AK, etc. Some of those are extreme, but sometimes people do crazy things.

[Nick C]

I see this thread has grown a bit in the last few hours. I have been thinking about it in the meantime, and what I decided was this: The flop raise and river raise are both close decisions.

Heads-up I would not raise the flop. Capping 3/6 unknowns just have AA/KK too often. However, with the third person in, I think you may still have a raise for value.

I'm pretty sure I would raise the river, but I'm not sure that's best. Part of my reason for wanting to raise the river is that Villain was putting in all sorts of action on the turn, despite the strength our flop call of the 3-bet followed by a turn raise represented. What's he putting us on, AQ? Based on the flop and turn action, I think AA is more likely for Villain than KK.

However, I'll admit that when he goes ahead and fearlessly bets the river even after a king falls, hoping he's doing so out of frustration or obliviousness instead of fearlessness is perhaps a bit optimistic. I guess part of my reason for wanting to raise the river is a bit paradoxical: For Villain to have KK and put that much action in on the turn, he had to have been, at least to some extent, disregarding what our most likely hands were.

So I guess the question becomes: Was he going nuts then with KK, or is he doing so now with AA (or 88/77)? We're effectively giving 2:1, the third player is no longer part of the hand and isn't padding the pot for us, and I now think calling is fine and is probably better than raising, like Josh says.

And, like Chief says, I think it's close.

[molawn2mo]

[ QUOTE ]

Also, I think a hand like this would be highly read dependent, as villian could be a complete maniac and we would then have to add a whole new range of hands to be considered, such as 22-JJ, AK, etc. Some of those are extreme, but sometimes people do crazy things.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look... the easiest type opponent to spot at a table is a maniac. Without a history, it maybe it takes 1 to 2 orbits to get an idea that you have a maniac as an opponent. That said, to continue to push on the river when heretofore the opponenet has not raised his maniacal flag, is spewing. IMHO, to raise/cap this river on, what seems to be the hope or possibility (like, hey man, I once saw a guy cap all 4 streets against 3 others and show down 72o), that the opponent is, indeed, a maniac is delusional. Since maniacs are so easy to "see," the default against an unknown, as in this case, ought not be maniac. Now, it may be argued that the default "unknown" opponent ought be classified as LPP or LAP or otherwise - my default being "reasonable LP," a default categorization that I am pretty certain gives my opponent more credit than most posters here seem to feel is warranted.

FWIW, I just think that it may be most posters best interest to give unknowns more credit than it seems is the norm here.

[jjacky]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2:1 he has AA vs KK all else equal.

[/ QUOTE ]

on the river all else is not equal because villain bet out. the entire hand has clearly reflected hero and villain, each, holding big PP. villain, holding AA, would be puking on the river K - he is already dodging the Turned Q as a threat. So... the fact that he bet out the river essentially denies holding AA (unless villain is comfortable folding to a river raise and takes the line that since he is going to call one bet... it is better to lead. but that line requires you to fold to a raise)doubtful).

[/ QUOTE ]

it looked very obvious that hero had AA, KK or QQ after the raise on the turn. if villain has KK on the turn, he is 3-betting the worst of hero's likely holdings. if he has AA he is doing it on the river.
one thing is for sure: he did it once. the only thing that is not clear is whether it was on the turn or the river. that's why i think AA is indeed about twice as likely as KK, given the action so far. add the very slim chances that he 3-bets AA if hero raises the river or that villain has something weird. that makes me believe that the raise on the river was close but correct.

[mr pink]

note that he didn't cap the turn, i did. he only 3-bet. maybe he thought i was raising the flop for a free card and just connected with AQs, or maybe i was trying to free showdown him with something like JJ. who knows, but what is important is that *I* capped the turn - he has to know something is up at this point.