Simple handreading

[sfer]

For the newer posters, an online 10-handed game on Party.

Three EP limpers to me and I raise KK on the button. Terrible SB calls, the rest call. 5 players, 10 SBs.

Flop is K74 rainbow. Checks to the player on my right who bets, I raise, folds back to him and he calls. His stats are roughly 25/9/1.5 and he seems unremarkable from 2 orbits of observation.

HU for 7 BBs. Turn is a 5. He checks, I bet, he checkraises. Give me a plan and a range of hands he could have.

[2moreTerps]

KT, KJ, 77, 44, perhaps KQo?

i would 3-bet. No realistic hand has you beat.

[JoshuaD]

Not to derail this, but why did you raise the flop? This seems like a nice place to slowplay a little. Unless the players after you are liable to cold-call 2 with junk anyway.

I'll leave the hand-reading up to the new guys. Don't wanna spoil it for them.

[Mike Gallo]

Give me a plan and a range of hands he could have.

He obviously has a very well played 3 6 soooted.

Only kidding /images/graemlins/laugh.gif, good post.

[blackize]

I take it he limped from UTG+2?

KQ-KT, 77, 44, and theres an offchance he has a slowplayed AA.

[clownshoes]

Id say the most likely out of all his hands would be A7s or 44 given his PF limp
Of course theres also a chance he has 77 but thats pretty small
He could have the case king with something like KQo or KJo but I dont think hed be that aggressive with those against a PFR given his stats [Edit] Also with your unremarkable read he doesnt sound very tricky so that adds to the unlikelyhood of these K holdings with this play
People love to bet out sets against PFRs and hope they raise then go for the turn c/r

I would 3bet the turn and hope he caps it then I would raise his river bet and call a 3bet

[ggano]

[ QUOTE ]
KT, KJ, 77, 44, perhaps KQo?

[/ QUOTE ]

K4/5/6/7s and AA are also possible though less likely.

[clownshoes]

I really dont think hes limping a suited king in EP

[Harv72b]

I'm not a new poster.

[chief444]

[ QUOTE ]
I would 3bet the turn and hope he caps it then I would raise his river bet and call a 3bet

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty certain sfer is not slowing down at any point in this hand.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
Not to derail this, but why did you raise the flop? This seems like a nice place to slowplay a little. Unless the players after you are liable to cold-call 2 with junk anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

I assumed that he was confident the SB, at least, would call 2 as readily as 1.

[clownshoes]

Yeah, youre right
I run bad /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[ggano]

[ QUOTE ]
I really dont think hes limping a suited king in EP

[/ QUOTE ]

He's to sfer's right, who's on the button. So he's in the CO after 2 limpers.

[brettbrettr]

why'd you raise the flop?

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I really dont think hes limping a suited king in EP

[/ QUOTE ]

He's to sfer's right, who's on the button. So he's in the CO after 2 limpers.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Three EP limpers to me

[/ QUOTE ]

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]
For the newer posters, an online 10-handed game on Party.

Three EP limpers to me and I raise KK on the button. Terrible SB calls, the rest call. 5 players, 10 SBs.

Flop is K74 rainbow. Checks to the player on my right who bets, I raise, folds back to him and he calls. His stats are roughly 25/9/1.5 and he seems unremarkable from 2 orbits of observation.

HU for 7 BBs. Turn is a 5. He checks, I bet, he checkraises. Give me a plan and a range of hands he could have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Range of hands:

AA - 10%

77 - 20%

44 - 20%

55 - 20%

A6 - 20%

68 - 1%

AK, KQ, - 5%

KJ, KT, K7, K4, K5 - 4%

(I don't think we can give him K4 or K5... K7 is even questionable. I'll just throw them out there though since they are all possible holdings w/ a turn check/raise on this board. I don't think the 5 helped him at all though as he was most likely looking to get the bets in on the big-money streets. That's why I give more towards another set. one of the K's seems more likely than what I gave it credit for, but there's only ONE K left so I don't see how we can give it more than what I did here. If the Turn-5 makes a 2 flush THEN maybe we can count KXs).

Did the Turn make a 2 flush? If so we need to account for some specific suited hands.

I raise/call the turn and plan on capping a non flush/non straight card on the River if possible. We need to be best at showdown with a line like this (from the turn c/r) 27% of the time. I think we own this more than 75% of the time and probably more like 80%. I see no other choice really with the information we have.

This looks like a slow play and I really think we see a set here more than we do anything else. If the dude has 86 then we are unlucky, but given he's not a totally loose player, I doubt he has it. It's the only hand we're behind against and since I say he has a set or 2P raising the T will still give us max value on our holding since he's calling down ~100% of the time with either of those holdings.

I don't know if ANY of this is right, but how else will I learn? Thanks for posting this, Sfer.

EDIT: forgot to include AA (after reading everyone else's posts... doh) -- borrowed 10% from A6 (which should probably only be suited) and I think I gave too much to it anyway.

[dantheman_05]

dont raise flop

[baronzeus]

He has 55, 77, 75, 68s. Im guessing you raise, as you are good 95% of the time here.

[sthief09]

he limped in EP. he's pretty tight. he doesn'thave kings up. he's pretty passive so I doubt he has75 here and I think he's too tight to have 74s. he didn't bet a gutter into you. if the turn put a flush draw out that's not the suit of the king, KTs, K9s, or KJs are possible.

if not, I can't think of what he has other than a set or maybe KQo. I highly doubt this is a bluff, so I don't see what it really matters exactly what he has, since he's probably paying off a 3-bet. I don't see any reason to take measures to keep him on the pot.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
why'd you raise the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd rather slowplay a set of jacks on this board, as it has more upside of keeping overcards in. also there are lots of straight draws on a 2 gapped board, and with all thsoe limpers, low cards make sense. a gut shot has 5-7 bets of implied odds on him even though he'll have a 10 out redraw. raising the flop also ahs the benefit if keeping whoever calls on the flop in the pot rather than blowing them off on the turn. middle pair might call 2 on the flop, then call again on the turn because the pot's so big, and maybe again on the river, whereas he'd end up folding the turn for 2 bets

but I think it mostly boils down to the fact that there aren't many hands that he wants to stay in that'll call for one bet but not two on a K high board.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: forgot to include AA (after reading everyone else's posts... doh) -- borrowed 10% from A6 (which should probably only be suited) and I think I gave too much to it anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

The guy is 25/9/1.5. I think we can safely rule out him limping behind 2 others with AA in EP. EDIT: and then flat calling Hero's PFR.

[Klepton]

i'm glad you have time to post hands like these

too bad it wont make a f[/i]uck of difference

[Entity]

Hey Dave,

His flop bet is odd but players like this don't always make sense. I'm thinking that hands like K7s, K5s, 44, and 77, in descending order, seem likely. And we 3-bet. For value. Because he isn't folding.

Rob

[clownshoes]

Er for some reason I thought the turn was a 7. So theres a good chance he has 77 and not A7s.
I suck at reading

[elindauer]

Why the hell would you raise the flop?! TERRIBLE play. You could hardly diagram a better opportunity to slowplay. I hope you didn't really play this hand, and you just posted it as an exercise.

Good luck.
Eric

PS. as to your question, he probably has the case K (KQ, KJ, KTs) or a set. Raise as many times as you can.

[elindauer]

sthief, I recommend you give some more thought to how these hands play out if you are concerned about hand protection with top set on a K74 rainbow board. You should be looking to get as much action as possible, and then means flat calling the flop. Think about how much more common it is that your call keeps a hand like Ax, a small pocket pair, etc around to catch while drawing dead and payoff many big bets on later streets. Even against a gutshot, letting him in is hardly a problem, since he is barely getting the right odds given your huge redraw to his straight. Then there's the much more common situation when he turns a pair and pays off, or picks up runner-runner two pair and loses 4 BB, or runner-runner trips... You WANT these guys in there drawing!

Being overly sensitive to hand protection isn't a big leak, since in SOOOO many pots, this is the overriding strategy. It is a leak though.

-Eric

[TiltsMcFabulous]

In order of likelihood:

55
77
44
67 (if he is aggro/tricky)
68 ("")
65 ("")
K7/5/4
36
KQ/KJ/K10
AA
AK

You're miles ahead of almost everything he could be holding with outs in case he played 86 like a donkey. Obviously you raise. If he caps you, you put in one more raise on the river and call unimproved. If he calls and donk bets you with another straight maker falls on the river, you call. If he calls and a blank hits the river, you raise and cap it. It's obvious what to do when you fill.

Btw, this is not a "simple" handreading exercise, as you have not provided reads, and villian's hand range is quite extensive.

~ Tilts

[cmwck]

[ QUOTE ]
Not to derail this, but why did you raise the flop? This seems like a nice place to slowplay a little. Unless the players after you are liable to cold-call 2 with junk anyway.

I'll leave the hand-reading up to the new guys. Don't wanna spoil it for them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I tend to agree with this also. This looks like a great board to try to induce calls from players who are drawing dead. Of course, there's still the problem of whether to raise the turn once everyone calls the flop.

[Chris Daddy Cool]

i'm pretty sure you could have picked a better example to where hand reading actually even matters.

[Just_Like_on_TV]

I'm new and I think I only saw this in 1 other post: 65s. 25/9/1.5 that's probably a playable hand for that vpip range, a better hand like KQ or 77 he may have raised it up (probably not 44 though). 1.5 AF so he'll possibly bet his good draws for value (although a check-raise being the best way to do this might make the 65 a tad less likely...maybe he's dumb). On the turn he picked up a pair to go w/ his OESD, so he may even count himself as having up to possibly 13 outs to improve, so after he checked hoping to get a free card, he got mad so he tried to push you off your AQ w/ a check-raise (failed!). So, if none of the obvious set or K-face hands are there, I'd go w/ 65s.

[flawless_victory]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm pretty sure you could have picked a better example to where hand reading actually even matters.

[/ QUOTE ]haha no kidding.
he likely has a set, but TP is also plenty possible... if you told us what limit this was it would help.
BTW/what is the point of this post?

[flawless_victory]

[ QUOTE ]

Range of hands:

AA - 10%


[/ QUOTE ]you are on crack.

[billyjex]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm pretty sure you could have picked a better example to where hand reading actually even matters.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, i was gonna post that i don't really give a [censored] what he has because i have top set on a very bland board (except for a donkey straight.) 3-bet.

[bugstud]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i'm pretty sure you could have picked a better example to where hand reading actually even matters.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, i was gonna post that i don't really give a [censored] what he has because i have top set on a very bland board (except for a donkey straight.) 3-bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you think he has a weak TP here you need to call and let him bet the river, too.

[billyjex]

well, the way i'm thinking is if he has a set/two pair/AA he's calling us down or reraising us, getting us some more bets. if he has a weak top pair, he still might call us down, because nobody likes to fold top pair HU.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
sthief, I recommend you give some more thought to how these hands play out if you are concerned about hand protection with top set on a K74 rainbow board. You should be looking to get as much action as possible, and then means flat calling the flop. Think about how much more common it is that your call keeps a hand like Ax, a small pocket pair, etc around to catch while drawing dead and payoff many big bets on later streets. Even against a gutshot, letting him in is hardly a problem, since he is barely getting the right odds given your huge redraw to his straight. Then there's the much more common situation when he turns a pair and pays off, or picks up runner-runner two pair and loses 4 BB, or runner-runner trips... You WANT these guys in there drawing!

Being overly sensitive to hand protection isn't a big leak, since in SOOOO many pots, this is the overriding strategy. It is a leak though.

-Eric

[/ QUOTE ]


did you even read what I wrote?

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i'm pretty sure you could have picked a better example to where hand reading actually even matters.

[/ QUOTE ]haha no kidding.
he likely has a set, but TP is also plenty possible... if you told us what limit this was it would help.
BTW/what is the point of this post?

[/ QUOTE ]

For a start, the point wasn't so you and Chris could demonstrate how smart you are.

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]

Why the hell would you raise the flop?! TERRIBLE play. You could hardly diagram a better opportunity to slowplay.

[/ QUOTE ]

<sigh> The three players behind me were terrible. They were calling 2 cold with an Ace or two broadway cards or any runner-runner draw for that matter. They were calling 2 cold on the flop a lot, on the turn less so, on the river rarely. I've got a player who seems reasonable and who should be unconcerned by overcards in a way-ahead/way-behind situation on the flop if he has TP, and he's betting either to protect his hand or because he wants excess action. Now, I can slowplay and try to extract an extra BB or two, or I can jam (which, anyone who is halfway observant, understands that I do a lot with hands much less robust than top set) and hope for excess action and a couple of donkeys strapping in and coming along for the ride.

Really, it's less clear cut than you think, and further, not the point I'm trying to get across.

[ QUOTE ]
I hope you didn't really play this hand, and you just posted it as an exercise.

[/ QUOTE ]

What motherfucking difference does it make?

[brettbrettr]

[ QUOTE ]

What motherfucking difference does it make?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice.

(I also questioned the raise. Thanks for the explanation....)

[TripleH68]

Villain thinks hero has AK, KQ, AA, (KK), QQ, JJ, TT, 99.

His check-raise on the turn indicates that he has the first three holdings beat.
It could also mean that he holds a weak king and is ready to fold to a 3-bet.

I would usually just 3-bet the turn, but smooth calling and popping the river would be fun also.

As for slowplaying the flop - why bother on such a disjointed board?

[PokerBob]

86s, a set, KJ-KT. I'd just call the flop, and pop the turn by the way.

[droolie]

77, 44, K7s, K4s are the only logical choices given his VP$IP and position. With his pfr% he raises any bigger K that would give him the confidence to C/R the turn. I three bet this turn hoping he has a set and wants to go to war.

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
if you told us what limit this was it would help.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just noticed this. Please explain your different lines for Party 3/6, 20/40 and 15/30. It was one of the three.

[molawn2mo]

I choose to comment on post flop action, action that, is highly dependent on the opps hand reading skills. Our "handreading" of this is rather simple and straightforward and has been covered throughout this thread. My own interpretation is villain has a set 80% of the time, 15% KQ-KT, 5% 88-99.

I, like others, think that the flop raise is bad and effectively shuts out the limpers that don't have a set or the case K. I really hate the flop raise.

The sequence on the turn leaves open the following options, each accounting for 3 bets:

1. 3bet the turn and bet the river when it is checked to you. I can't see this opp being 3 bet and then leading the river w/o the nuts.
2. smooth call the turn and raise the river

That said, IMO, the determining factor in how to proceed is how likely it is the villain can make the big laydown when faced with the turn 3bet because in the sequence of raising the river... no one is folding that for 1 bet.

You play of the hand screams KK to me especially if you 3 bet the turn. If there is any chance that villain could fold to the 3 bet, I would opt for the turn smoothcall and pop the river.

This line effectively snuffs out allowing villain to go maniac but from the read this seems unlikely. I choose to accept the guarantee of getting in 4 total bets on the turn and river.

[B Dids]

He's got reasonable if slightly laggy stats, he limped after two bad limpers and knows that the sb is probably coming along. It sounds like this table is pretty loose, so I think you can open up his hand range here to include some non-set hands.

I think 77 and 44 are the most likely, but I wouldn't rule out 86s or some suited kings. Either way I think the correct line is a 3-bet.

[Exsubmariner]

Sorry,
I would still just call this on the flop and hope the weak callers behind would come in. I really would be hoping one of them would try to bluff raise the turn or make an inferior set. I possibly don't raise until the river here. If things were less clear cut like two suits on the board, I might be inclined to raise the flop then, and call the turn if the scary card hit, knowing I had outs to the river. May still call the river if weakies behind me raise things like trash 2 pair or bluff on scare cards.
Just my 2 Party Points.
X

[W. Deranged]

I would expect to see 77 or 44 over three-quarters of the time here, with 44 more likely because 77 would be a bit more likely to encourage a pre-flop raise.

[B Dids]

I think people making suggestions on his flop play are ignoring the fact that because he wasn't asking for questions about his play, he didn't share elements (that he has now stated) which make a flop raise correct.

Addressing the question at hand would be more awesome.

[avisco01]

[ QUOTE ]
For the newer posters, an online 10-handed game on Party.

Three EP limpers to me and I raise KK on the button. Terrible SB calls, the rest call. 5 players, 10 SBs.

Flop is K74 rainbow. Checks to the player on my right who bets, I raise, folds back to him and he calls. His stats are roughly 25/9/1.5 and he seems unremarkable from 2 orbits of observation.

HU for 7 BBs. Turn is a 5. He checks, I bet, he checkraises. Give me a plan and a range of hands he could have.

[/ QUOTE ]

The main question I'd ask is this, what does smooth calling the flop and checkraising the turn mean? Why would someone do this? Villain must think he has the best hand, the question is did the 5 help him, or was the checkraise planned on the flop when Villain smooth called Hero's flop raise? I am leaning towards the latter. This action screams 77 to me. Of course, some people play any pair from any position, so 44 is I suppose equally likely. I don't like the notion of putting Villain on a weak K like KT or KJ because he must know that Hero has at least AK or AA given Hero's action thus far. Unless of course Villain is thinking Hero has AQs and missed and is now drawing to 3 outs against his Kx, or that Villain has JJ or QQ and is in even worse shape, but I don't think these scenarios are as likely. If Villain had AK or KQ himself, well, I think a flop raise from Villain would have been present, so I'm basically eliminating any hand containing a K for Villain. I don't think a turn checkraise indicates that Villain has one of those Kx holdings, unless Villain is really in there with something crazy like K7s or K5s. If the 5 did help him, 86s is I suppose possible, but you're drawing to full house / quad outs obviously if you're that unfortunate to be up against a somewhat strange holding. Just as likely is 75s I suppose, it would certainly be in the same range of 86s anyway and the action would sort of make sense for a 75s holding. Though is Villain really leading the flop with 75s against a preflop raiser and a K high flop? I doubt it. Villain's VP$IP percentage is on the borderline high side indicating perhaps playing too many hands, probably more small pairs and or suited hands from EP, obviously pretty pertinent to this example.

As to how to proceed, well, I guess smooth calling the turn with the intention of raising the river is not a bad idea. Hero can collect two river BB's or more if Villain 3-bets Hero's river raise. 3-betting the turn may alert Villain to the likelihood of Hero actually having KK and cause Villain to simply call down in which case Hero collects only 2 more bets. Although, Hero has played full steam ahead thus far and its reasonable to assume that Villain caps the turn and leads the river with a lot of second best hands and really only one better hand (discounting 36 of course), alluding to 86. If Villain caps the turn we know Hero will have a lot of fun on the river. I'm not commenting on Hero's flop raise because the question pertained to handreading and how to proceed AFTER the flop. Personally, I would smooth call the turn, giving the impression that I'm in call down mode with AK, acquiescing to pay off Villain's set, and then blind-side Villain with a river raise, UI or improving to a full house or better, and see what happens. I'm in aggreement with a few other posters who have commented that hand reading is not really that important in this hand, given Hero has top set in this example and is practically in the driver's seat like 95% of the time.

[theghost]

[ QUOTE ]
For the newer posters, an online 10-handed game on Party.

Three EP limpers to me and I raise KK on the button. Terrible SB calls, the rest call. 5 players, 10 SBs.

Flop is K74 rainbow. Checks to the player on my right who bets, I raise, folds back to him and he calls. His stats are roughly 25/9/1.5 and he seems unremarkable from 2 orbits of observation.

HU for 7 BBs. Turn is a 5. He checks, I bet, he checkraises. Give me a plan and a range of hands he could have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably:
45s
K4s
K5s
K7s
44
77

Possibly:
67s
68s

Doubtful:
23s
68s

Plan:
3-bet, full speed ahead on the riv.

(edited to mask my lack of reading comprehension)

[SomethingClever]

77 and 44 are the only ones that make sense.

Mayyyybe K7s or K5s.

3-bet.

River?

[DrBob]

Your possible hands make sense, although I think you meant "K7, K4, 77, 44", not "K7, K5, 77, 55". I wouldn't rule out the suited K7 or K4 from a 25%VPIP player after 2 limpers. But his flop bet is significant. It's asking to be raised, which implies a hand that needs protection, like K7 or K4. With 77 or 44 he might well have checked the flop, looking to checkraise after several call the (hoped-for) bet by the preflop raiser. So to my mind, these hands are much more likely than 77 or 44, even not counting the sets' lesser a priori likelihoods. On the turn, he's just betting K7 or K4 for value.

[spamuell]

Eric, I think a flop raise is much better than a call, mainly for the reasons sthief mentioned. Also, I don't think he included that a non-insignificant amount of the time here, you're in a set-over-set situation and you make several more bets when you raise the flop than when you raise the turn. When you have the nuts, it's generally best not to slowplay because you make so much more when someone else has the a very strong hand and thinks they're milking you hard.

Remember the lowball example in TOP where Sklansky recommends you just call with a 7-low but raise a wheel?

[madscout]

[ QUOTE ]
His flop bet is significant. It's asking to be raised, which implies a hand that needs protection, like K7 or K4. With 77 or 44 he might well have checked the flop, looking to checkraise after several call the (hoped-for) bet by the preflop raiser. So to my mind, these hands are much more likely than 77 or 44, even not counting the sets' lesser a priori likelihoods. On the turn, he's just betting K7 or K4 for value.

[/ QUOTE ]

If villain is a thinking player, this analysis gets an A+. I like.

[molawn2mo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
His flop bet is significant. It's asking to be raised, which implies a hand that needs protection, like K7 or K4. With 77 or 44 he might well have checked the flop, looking to checkraise after several call the (hoped-for) bet by the preflop raiser. So to my mind, these hands are much more likely than 77 or 44, even not counting the sets' lesser a priori likelihoods. On the turn, he's just betting K7 or K4 for value.

[/ QUOTE ]

If villain is a thinking player, this analysis gets an A+. I like.

[/ QUOTE ]

don't think so.

re-read... villain checked/raised the turn. K4/K7 either donk the turn, cc or cf but certainly not, cr, imho.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I don't think he included that a non-insignificant amount of the time here, you're in a set-over-set situation and you make several more bets when you raise the flop than when you raise the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]
If 5 people see every flop, you'll flop set over set about 1.5% of the times you flop a set, or about once in every 5000 hands you play. Choosing your strategy based on the chance that you might be set over set doesn't seem like the best idea.

I think even sfer would agree that in a vacuum this is a good spot to slowplay his set. But as he pointed out, there were substantial mitigating factors in this particular case that made him feel that fast playing was best.

[spamuell]

If 5 people see every flop, you'll flop set over set about 1.5% of the times you flop a set, or about once in every 5000 hands you play.

Where did you get this figure, is it a simulation based on random cards or does it take into account hand ranges that are limped with? Anyway, it's irrelevant, you want the probability that someone has a set given that you already have a set. If you put EP players on hand ranges and consider the flop action, the probability that you have set over set is A LOT higher than 1.5%

Anyway, this was just one of the reasons for raising the flop here.

[TiltsMcFabulous]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you told us what limit this was it would help.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just noticed this. Please explain your different lines for Party 3/6, 20/40 and 15/30. It was one of the three.

[/ QUOTE ]

Waste of time. It's a crummy example to illustrate hand reading, as people have pointed out, and wasting more time explaining what to do in differentially-aggressive games is useless.

I find it funny how you act like a teacher on this board and don't really know/have a lesson plan.

~ Tilts

[johnd192]

55, 77, 75s or 86s. I probably 3 bet and call a cap.
If capped by him I may just c/call the river if a blank comes off, unless he is the type who reads you for AK and he would cap with two pair.

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you told us what limit this was it would help.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just noticed this. Please explain your different lines for Party 3/6, 20/40 and 15/30. It was one of the three.

[/ QUOTE ]

Waste of time. It's a crummy example to illustrate hand reading, as people have pointed out, and wasting more time explaining what to do in differentially-aggressive games is useless.

I find it funny how you act like a teacher on this board and don't really know/have a lesson plan.

~ Tilts

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay. I'll stop.

[B Dids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you told us what limit this was it would help.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just noticed this. Please explain your different lines for Party 3/6, 20/40 and 15/30. It was one of the three.

[/ QUOTE ]

Waste of time. It's a crummy example to illustrate hand reading, as people have pointed out, and wasting more time explaining what to do in differentially-aggressive games is useless.

I find it funny how you act like a teacher on this board and don't really know/have a lesson plan.

~ Tilts

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay. I'll stop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please don't.

While there's two obvious answers, the other hands he might have are important to think about, if you're considering the table image and the player. In general I think people are putting this player on way to narrow a range.

[colgin]

[ QUOTE ]
I find it funny how you act like a teacher on this board and don't really know/have a lesson plan.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think sfer ever claimed to be a teacher. I would point out however that he was on a short list of about half a dozen posters whose recent absence from the SS boards were lamented by a huge number of regualr SS posters. You don't have to like this particular post. However, statments like the above will have the effect of chasing away from this board one of the top posters (and a fine individual I might add) to the detriment of the rest of us.

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you told us what limit this was it would help.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just noticed this. Please explain your different lines for Party 3/6, 20/40 and 15/30. It was one of the three.

[/ QUOTE ]

Waste of time. It's a crummy example to illustrate hand reading, as people have pointed out, and wasting more time explaining what to do in differentially-aggressive games is useless.

I find it funny how you act like a teacher on this board and don't really know/have a lesson plan.

~ Tilts

[/ QUOTE ]

No one is making you 1.) read this post 2.) participate in this forum 3.) continue to be a member of 2+2.

SO I reccomend that in a post where the MAJORITY of responses are to Sfer's questions that you refrain from remarks such as yours as they TOTALLY DO NOT contribute to any degree of learning that could be achieved irregardless of what YOU think about Sfer and/or his contributions to the forum.

I'm just saying...

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: forgot to include AA (after reading everyone else's posts... doh) -- borrowed 10% from A6 (which should probably only be suited) and I think I gave too much to it anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

The guy is 25/9/1.5. I think we can safely rule out him limping behind 2 others with AA in EP. EDIT: and then flat calling Hero's PFR.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. My bad. 9% pfr begs for different action PF from villain.

[ QUOTE ]
You're on crack

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for showing me why. This forum used to be VERY good when I first arrived. I thoroughly enjoyed lurking and learning. Now that I finally post, NOBODY feeds any type of discussion and thus learning does not occur.

If the good posters who give a %*#@ about poker any more suddenly decide to start up a secretive forum somewhere else, please PM me.

[B Dids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: forgot to include AA (after reading everyone else's posts... doh) -- borrowed 10% from A6 (which should probably only be suited) and I think I gave too much to it anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

The guy is 25/9/1.5. I think we can safely rule out him limping behind 2 others with AA in EP. EDIT: and then flat calling Hero's PFR.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. My bad. 9% pfr begs for different action PF from villain.



[/ QUOTE ]

I would hestitate to buy this.

People don't limp AA because they're not aggressive, they do it because they're "tricky". This is why I dislike straight numbers based reads.

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: forgot to include AA (after reading everyone else's posts... doh) -- borrowed 10% from A6 (which should probably only be suited) and I think I gave too much to it anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

The guy is 25/9/1.5. I think we can safely rule out him limping behind 2 others with AA in EP. EDIT: and then flat calling Hero's PFR.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. My bad. 9% pfr begs for different action PF from villain.



[/ QUOTE ]

I would hestitate to buy this.

People don't limp AA because they're not aggressive, they do it because they're "tricky". This is why I dislike straight numbers based reads.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I have seen MANY MANY bad players play AA this SAME way 2/4 and lower which is why I included it. I think that some people were a little more in the know than I when it came to limits Sfer was most likely playing at the time or what he intended the post for. I haven't played higher than 2/4 so I don't really know how 3/6 and up pan out for "tricky players."

As far as "numbers reads" goes, it really can be nailed down (for the most part). For instance:

Someone who raises PF with AA-TT; AK-AJ will have a PFR of 5.8% My 9.xx PFR includes AA so I don't see why it wouldn't here. What is he raising w/ in place of AA to keep it at 9% Maybe med pairs?

[chief444]

Sfer,

Please don't let one idiot on the board keep you from posting. Most of us myself included really appreciate your posts.

Matt

[B Dids]

I'm not saying AA is impossible. I'm just saying that you can't see that based off PT numbers. You know if he limps AA because you've watched him play and understand him.

[ellipse_87]

The only made hands that beat you are 68s/64s. Does 25VPIP translate into these hands being played EP after 2 limpers? I don't know, maybe. This is the dispositive decision; if these cannot be excluded from his range, you have to call down his turn cap after your 3-bet. The rest of this post assumes these hands have been excluded.

Does the fourth suit drop on the turn?

Made hands: K7s,K4s,K5s,77,44; if board is three-suited on the turn, Kxs. K w/4-flush, 2-pair, and set are more-or-less equally likely.

A3s & A2s are strong semi-bluff hands (again, if the board is 3-suited); they have 16 apparent outs each, though only you know that 3 of them are dead. A7s/A5s/A4s are also a possibility, with 14 apparent outs (5 of them dead).

Since you have the best of it in all of the above scenarios, you should jam the pot. If he caps the turn, he has a set or less and has you on a lesser hand, so push the river as well. If he calls your turn 3-bet and then bets the river, raise unless a 2, a 3, or the third of a suit falls.

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying AA is impossible. I'm just saying that you can't see that based off PT numbers. You know if he limps AA because you've watched him play and understand him.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see what you are saying and agree. This is why I included it in my original assessment (I didn't have any information not to include it PLUS Sfer has only seen him for 2 orbits so like 4 or 5 hands max w/ his VPIP. Friggin' A, I really missed this boat last night when I OP'd. These numbers mean VERY little given the information Sfer provided.

Sfer, you never said whether or not the T made a 2 flush or not. Oh yeah, and please don't stop posting.

[madscout]

[ QUOTE ]
The only made hands that beat you are 68s/64s.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would Villain ever bet this flop, to have the hero raise and knock people out? If he is going to draw to a gutshot he will want everybody coming with to the turn and so will check / call the flop.

[TiltsMcFabulous]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I find it funny how you act like a teacher on this board and don't really know/have a lesson plan.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think sfer ever claimed to be a teacher. I would point out however that he was on a short list of about half a dozen posters whose recent absence from the SS boards were lamented by a huge number of regualr SS posters. You don't have to like this particular post. However, statments like the above will have the effect of chasing away from this board one of the top posters (and a fine individual I might add) to the detriment of the rest of us.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he's going to leave in a hissy fit because one poster thought his hand exercise was crummy ... maybe he should spend some time in the psychology forum.

~ Tilts

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you told us what limit this was it would help.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just noticed this. Please explain your different lines for Party 3/6, 20/40 and 15/30. It was one of the three.

[/ QUOTE ]

Waste of time. It's a crummy example to illustrate hand reading, as people have pointed out, and wasting more time explaining what to do in differentially-aggressive games is useless.

I find it funny how you act like a teacher on this board and don't really know/have a lesson plan.

~ Tilts

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay. I'll stop.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, please don't. To quote a conversation I once had with bakku:

bakku: I love Dave.
me: Yeah. Me too.
bakku: He's awesome.
me: Yeah. I think so too.
bakku: Vegas is going to rock.
me: Yeah. I think so too. Too bad Josh won't be there.
bakku: Yeah, but Dave is.
me: Yeah, I love Dave. That was awesome when he owned you by 5-bet bluffing with 3 high.
bakku: Shut up nit.
me: Okay.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
People don't limp AA because they're not aggressive, they do it because they're "tricky". This is why I dislike straight numbers based reads.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tricky players will sometimes limp AA first in, or even second in, in order to generate more action preflop. They will very rarely limp AA behind 2 limpers, as they already have more than enough action for their hand. Further, a halfway decent player (and villian's statistics were indeed halfway decent) will limp behind 2 players with AA and then not 3-bet when it gets raised behind approximately 0% of the time. I would much sooner give him credit for 68s (which wouldn't be out of character behind 2 limpers) than for AA; the reason I doubt 68s is because it makes less than zero sense to lead into the PFR on a K high flop with nothing more than a gutshot and high card 8.

Anyway, it's been long enough so I'll repost what I had said earlier: villian has a smaller set something approaching 100% of the time in this hand. Based on the PT numbers provided, villian is aggressive enough to continue betting/raising with his set at least until it is 2 bets on the river. So Hero doing anything other than 3-betting the turn (and then continuing to raise wherever possible) would be leaving bets on the table.

I do not discount the possibility of 55 in this hand, particularly if it was played on 20/40 or 30/60 as sfer intimated it might have been. This is a fairly typical line for a good player to take with 55 in this situation.

[B Dids]

You're arguing a point I'm not making. My only point is that pure numbers driven reads suck.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
My only point is that pure numbers driven reads suck.

[/ QUOTE ]

Based purely on numbers, since I have no way of knowing who the villian was let alone any specific reads sfer or I have on him, I have arrived at the conclusion that villian does not have AA. I trust that read completely.

[Kirg]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you told us what limit this was it would help.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just noticed this. Please explain your different lines for Party 3/6, 20/40 and 15/30. It was one of the three.

[/ QUOTE ]

Waste of time. It's a crummy example to illustrate hand reading, as people have pointed out, and wasting more time explaining what to do in differentially-aggressive games is useless.

I find it funny how you act like a teacher on this board and don't really know/have a lesson plan.

~ Tilts

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay. I'll stop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't stop posting, as others have already said you are one of the best posters on this board.

Don't let the majority of the board get punished because of a borderline troll like Tilts who has wonderful gems like this. (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2806501&page=&view=&s b=5&o=&vc=1)

[JTrout]

[ QUOTE ]
If he's going to leave in a hissy fit...

[/ QUOTE ]

Where's this hissy fit you speak of.. I'd like to read it.

ps. I'm mesmorized by your avatar. I gotta get out more.

[spamuell]

[ QUOTE ]
villian has a smaller set something approaching 100% of the time in this hand

[/ QUOTE ]

I just don't think this is true. People will play top pair like this a lot, as the pfr is willing to raise with many worse hands than a pair of Kings on the flop, like QQ-88 or sometimes even AQ-A8, depending on the table history. Not that it's necessarily the best line to take given that the pfr doesn't necessarily have a set of kings, but it's a line that is often used.

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My only point is that pure numbers driven reads suck.

[/ QUOTE ]

Based purely on numbers, since I have no way of knowing who the villian was let alone any specific reads sfer or I have on him, I have arrived at the conclusion that villian does not have AA. I trust that read completely.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
PLUS Sfer has only seen him for 2 orbits so like 4 or 5 hands max w/ his VPIP.

[/ QUOTE ]
(unless Sfer states otherwise, I don't know how reliable #'s are in this hand)

I think you are right that we aren't seeing AA here very often if at all, but w/ the info we had provided I don't think it was horrible to include it in range of hands. I think you're right though, that it can be tossed out now. I participated in this post in hopes of getting a better grip on how everyone else puts people on hands (how and why). Thanks for the input so far!

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
I just don't think this is true. People will play top pair like this a lot, as the pfr is willing to raise with many worse hands than a pair of Kings on the flop, like QQ-88 or sometimes even AQ-A8, depending on the table history. Not that it's necessarily the best line to take given that the pfr doesn't necessarily have a set of kings, but it's a line that is often used.

[/ QUOTE ]

Any King is less likely simply because we have already accounted for 3 of them, leaving only 1 remaining in the deck. Likewise, given that villian's PFR is 9%, it is likely that he would have raised preflop with either AK or KQ. Given his somewhat passive aggression level, it is unlikely that he would overplay a hand like KJ or KTs in this fashion. This leaves only K7, K5, or K4 which would play the hand in this fashion; it is more likely, mathematically, that villian has either 77, 55, or 44 than any of these hands (especially given that villian is not overly loose, meaning that the KX pairing would have to be suited--sfer does not give the suits in this hand, but a 2 pair hand matching the unknown king's suit would have to be possible to make this a realistic holding).

A set, particularly one held by a fairly good player, might indeed play this hand exactly as villian did (particularly if villian was savvy to the same read sfer had on the other 3 opponents, that they were just as likely to call 2 flop bets as 1). A good player with 55 would often play this hand exactly as villian did, using the expected flop autoraise from the PFR to clear out the field of other overcards.

I don't say 100% because nothing is that certain in this game, but I stand by my statement that this is set over set something very close to 100% of the time.

[Harv72b]

Sfer can clear this up himself if he chooses to, but just because he only had about two orbits of observation on the villian does not mean that he only had 20 or so hands of him logged in PT. Before my computer crashed & killed my original database, I had thousands of hands on some opponents that I'd never even sat down at a table with.

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
did you even read what I wrote?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I did. You wrote this:

[ QUOTE ]
I'd rather slowplay a set of jacks on this board

[/ QUOTE ]

which I have trouble understanding on a K74 board. and you wrote this:

[ QUOTE ]
... there are lots of straight draws on a 2 gapped board, and with all thsoe limpers, low cards make sense...

[/ QUOTE ]

which is why I said that you should not be concerned with protecting your hand against these straight draws, since they will so often hit other hands that pay you off incorrectly on future streets, while their gutshots draws do not give them much equity vs your top set.

and you wrote this:

[ QUOTE ]
a gut shot has 5-7 bets of implied odds on him even though he'll have a 10 out redraw.

[/ QUOTE ]

which is a good point, but when you factor in the times he calls catches a pair and loses 2 BB, and the times you both improve and you crush him for many big bets, I think you do not mind him calling.

and you said:

[ QUOTE ]
raising the flop also ahs the benefit if keeping whoever calls on the flop in the pot

[/ QUOTE ]

which I believe I was addressing when I said that raising is bad because it causes so many hands NOT to call the flop.

[ QUOTE ]
... rather than blowing them off on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no reason you have to raise the turn, and 1SB from someone drawing dead is better than 0.

and finally, you said:

[ QUOTE ]
but I think it mostly boils down to the fact that there aren't many hands that he wants to stay in that'll call for one bet but not two on a K high board.

[/ QUOTE ]

and I think I addressed this specifically when I said that Ax and pocket pairs are just some of the hands that may call 1 but not 2.


So, I guess the question is, did YOU read MY post?

-Eric

[spamuell]

I don't think you're right that it's unlikely that an opponent would overplay a mid-king like this. Also, although there is only one K left, there are still quite a lot of combinations of hands with a K that he could have, even discounting for AK/KQ, given there are lots of lower offsuit and suited cards for him to have as a kicker.

Anyway I agree that the opponent has a set frequently but nowhere near 100%. I don't know what percentage, but there are lots of worse hands, mainly the case K or 65, but occasionally random weird stuff that will be played like this.

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
... a non-insignificant amount of the time here, you're in a set-over-set situation and you make several more bets when you raise the flop...

[/ QUOTE ]

First, I seriously doubt that set bets into the preflop raiser and risks shutting out the field. I claim that a set will check there very close to 100% of the time.

Second, I doubt the claim that you will make much more from him if you raise the flop. I think that most players slowly begin to fear KK with every raise you put in, and raising the flop just means he will stop a little earlier on the later streets.

On the other hand, raising may make a weak hand like 88 fold here or on the turn, while you have little risk of losing action from stronger made hands like top pair and a set.

my 2 cents.
Eric

[spamuell]

I think you win quite a lot more when you raise the flop here if the opponent has a set because you're probably going at least 2 more bets on the flop and the same amount as you would on the turn and river, and especially if there are cold-callers of the flop raise this will add up.

I also think it's funny how you're saying "set will check there very close to 100% of the time" and Harv27b is saying "this is set over set something very close to 100% of the time."

[elindauer]

edit: I see that you have conceeded that your estimate was too high, and withdraw my poking fun at you.

Good luck.
Eric

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
I also think it's funny how you're saying "set will check there very close to 100% of the time" and Harv27b is saying "this is set over set something very close to 100% of the time."

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. One of us is clearly quite wrong. Have the results been posted yet? This will give a significant boost to one of us.

If I'm wrong on this, and perhaps I am, it doesn't really change the argument, if he does have a set, you don't win much more by raising. You think he'll give just as much action if you raise the flop, I disagree. I'm not sure how either of us can really prove the other wrong, it seems to be based on experience. I will concede that certainly SOMETIMES he will give just as much action though, so deciding whether or not you think a set will be here is relevant to your decision, since the plan of raise, catch a coldcaller, and then trap him on the turn when the set check-raises you is pretty appealling.

Good luck.
-Eric

[MaxPower]

I doubt he flopped a set, because he would probably check the flop and let you bet. He could have top pair or middle pair or two pair. I think a hand like 76s is very likely .

In either case you should re-raise the turn and call a cap.

[scrub]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you told us what limit this was it would help.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just noticed this. Please explain your different lines for Party 3/6, 20/40 and 15/30. It was one of the three.

[/ QUOTE ]

I /images/graemlins/heart.gif bitchy Dave.

scrub

[deetle]

I like the slowplay also, on this board let them come along.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
I also think it's funny how you're saying "set will check there very close to 100% of the time" and Harv27b is saying "this is set over set something very close to 100% of the time."

[/ QUOTE ]

I noticed this & found it amusing, too. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

I might be presuming too intently that this was played on one of the higher limits that sfer mentioned, and thus giving the villian too much credit for solid and sophisticated play. But the reason that you lead this flop with a set against a thinking opponent is that he wouldn't normally expect it. The fact that the other 3 players in the hand are terrible and will readily call 2 bets with any hand they'd call 1 with (and I'm assuming the villian would've picked up this read within the two orbits we know he's been at the table) is just icing on the cake.

This is the same basic principle that leads me to believe that villian might have 55. You lead the flop into the raiser because, on the higher limits, flop play is often just an extension of preflop. He expects to get raised because his play is representing an underpair, and any hand that sfer would raise with preflop behind 3 limpers is justified in staying in the pot against 55 or another small/medium PP. If it does get heads up (as it did), the standard play is to check the turn, where sfer probably checks through with AQ or a higher PP less than kings, and then bet a non-A river when sfer checks through.

So leading the set is actually representing a weaker hand than villian has, setting him up to 3-bet the flop after sfer raises and the donks coldcall. But then the donks don't coldcall, and villian changes gears because he fears sfer will call a 3-bet and fold the turn UI with a hand like AQ or maybe even a medium PP. He instead opts to continue playing this like an underpair: checking the turn, but then raising when sfer bets it, hoping that sfer has AK or AA but knowing that he at least got an extra SB out of the hand if sfer folds to the c/r.

Irregardless of whether it's a set or 2 pair or an overplayed top pair, I think we're all in agreement that the proper play for sfer is to 3-bet the turn and continue raising as much as possible in the hand.

[tansoku]

[ QUOTE ]


Flop is K74 rainbow. Checks to the player on my right who bets, I raise, folds back to him and he calls. His stats are roughly 25/9/1.5 and he seems unremarkable from 2 orbits of observation.

HU for 7 BBs. Turn is a 5. He checks, I bet, he checkraises. Give me a plan and a range of hands he could have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Flopped set slowplays this here most often I think as a bet by the pflop raiser is highly likely. Any high pair 3 bets pflop, as does AK/AQs types and maybe KQs.
Given your flop raise, I doubt any KJ or weaker king check-raises that turn as he now thinks you have AK/AA.
So, it's either 2 pair (unlikely as anyone who limps early with K7/K4 you would have noticed by now) or a set on the turn.

Leaves a 55/66 that took a stab at the flop hoping it missed you, then called so it didn't look like he was stealing. Or a similarly played A6s that turned an OESD.

Pot is pretty big, he aint going anywhere, 3 bet and cap the turn. chk-call a 3, 5, 8 river card, bet/raise anything else.

[elindauer]

Sorry if they're here and I just can't find them. Were the results of this posted? There was a debate in this thread about the probability of the donker having a set which would be changed significantly by hearing his actual hand.

Thanks,
Eric

[Nick C]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry if they're here and I just can't find them. Were the results of this posted? There was a debate in this thread about the probability of the donker having a set which would be changed significantly by hearing his actual hand.

Thanks,
Eric

[/ QUOTE ]

The handreading didn't seem simple to me, so I didn't respond to this thread, because I wasn't sure what to write. (Also, I suppose I was worried about making myself look stupid.)

Anyway, though, like Eric, I hope SFer hasn't simply abandoned this thread.

[oreogod]

first look at the hand I think he has either 88,66,55. But after the turn action I think he has 66 or 55 and the turn either improved him to a set or open ended. He could have KQ, but I think he'd raise pre.

I go insane on the turn.