PDA

View Full Version : AKo UTG 10handed


AlphaWice
09-03-2005, 12:07 PM
everyone 1500 behind, blinds 25/50

AKo UTG raise to 200, CO calls, rest fold

flop T72 rainbow, I bet 200 (pot: 475), he pushes for 1k behind

is there a better line? whats your move here? (no reads)

kyro
09-03-2005, 12:09 PM
[ QUOTE ]
everyone 1500 behind, blinds 25/50

AKo UTG raise to 200, CO calls, rest fold

flop T72 rainbow, I bet 200 (pot: 475), he pushes for 1k behind

is there a better line? whats your move here? (no reads)

[/ QUOTE ]

If you fold I think you did fine. If he bluffed you off, good for him. He plays his position well.

09-03-2005, 12:50 PM
4xBB preflop raise does it's job - isolates HU.

Perfectly reasonable probe/continuation bet - he shows strength in position. not much you can do but fold.

This is how I play this hand 90% of the time. The only way to mix it up is to check-raise the flop to mask a simple continuation bet and show some more strength. With guys who like to steal pots on the flop frequently, i use this. But if HIS bet is over 1/2 the pot, I fold my overcards. If he checks behind, you most likely have the best hand if you pair up on the turn.

pokerlaw
09-03-2005, 12:54 PM
If you fold here, you played it like I would /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Profit
09-03-2005, 01:16 PM
yup i play this same way, then i fold.

Chaostracize
09-03-2005, 01:51 PM
Always making continuation bets with AKo OOP after getting called will murder you over the long run. I check this 80% of the time, and fold. It's too easy to make money when you hit and lose money when you don't; don't help the villain.

If you were in position and it was checked to you I bet this 100% of the time, but as it stands, I check here. And of course if villain checks through I bet the turn.

Profit
09-03-2005, 01:53 PM
i've found continuation bets to work much more often then they fail. 80% of the time? Do you just get bored the other 20% or based on reads.

I think not making continuation bets will murder you over the long run.

Chaostracize
09-03-2005, 01:56 PM
Not giving villain credit anything after calling a 4x BB UTG raise will murder you over the long run. Always making continuation bets in STTs with AKo oop is very, very bad.

Profit
09-03-2005, 01:59 PM
it entirely depends on what buyin we are talking. I assumed this was a low buy in and gave my advice with that in mind.

Oluwafemi
09-03-2005, 02:04 PM
[ QUOTE ]
everyone 1500 behind, blinds 25/50

AKo UTG raise to 200, CO calls, rest fold

flop T72 rainbow, I bet 200 (pot: 475), he pushes for 1k behind

is there a better line? whats your move here? (no reads)

[/ QUOTE ]

raise to t150 pf then check the flop. when villian bets [and he probably will], then it's an easy fold and you save yourself 250 extra chips.

AlphaWice
09-03-2005, 03:14 PM
IMO (although I am a noob) this advice is awful. My reasoning is: If I called a PF raise of 4xBB, I would bet 100% of the time on a low flop if checked to me.

AlphaWice
09-03-2005, 03:15 PM
So, what line should I use? I see some people saying to raise to 3xBB and then checkfold? I think this is too passive.

Oluwafemi
09-03-2005, 04:13 PM
[ QUOTE ]
So, what line should I use? I see some people saying to raise to 3xBB and then checkfold? I think this is too passive.

[/ QUOTE ]

it's not to passive; it's smart and it's standard. you've already seen how raising too much and then betting a missed flop has already lost you more money than you needed to lose.

bones
09-03-2005, 04:22 PM
[ QUOTE ]
it's not to passive; it's smart and it's standard

[/ QUOTE ]

Check/folding after you brick a flop heads up is smart and standard? Wow.

golfcchs
09-03-2005, 04:22 PM
Do you raise A-K out of position if you will check fold the flop 80% of the time?

Oluwafemi
09-03-2005, 04:25 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
it's not to passive; it's smart and it's standard

[/ QUOTE ]

Check/folding after you brick a flop heads up is smart and standard? Wow.

[/ QUOTE ]

why don't you tell him what he/she wants to hear then.

pergesu
09-03-2005, 04:28 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
it's not to passive; it's smart and it's standard

[/ QUOTE ]

Check/folding after you brick a flop heads up is smart and standard? Wow.

[/ QUOTE ]

why don't you tell him what he/she wants to hear then.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure that's not what he was going for.

This is a pretty nice missed flop. Easy to play. You lead out with a CB, and pick it up the vast majority of the time. If he raises he has you beat, you dump it.

Yeah he lost chips on this particular hand. But this is going to be a winner in the long run.

If you were the button, what would it take to get you to bet once the flop is checked to you?

Oluwafemi
09-03-2005, 04:32 PM
[ QUOTE ]
If you were the button, what would it take to get you to bet once the flop is checked to you?

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't remember the button being discussed in this hand.

bones
09-03-2005, 04:35 PM
I think he played it fine, although I make it either 150 or 175, depending on what flavor of Gatorade I'm drinking at the moment. I lead the flop for about 1/2-3/4ths, and fold to a push.

I do occassionally check/fold this flop heads up. Not coincidentally, it's when i'm playing and running pretty bad. I turn into a giant pussy and stop trying to pick up chips when they're there to be picked up because i'm afraid i'll get raised.

pergesu
09-03-2005, 04:36 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you were the button, what would it take to get you to bet once the flop is checked to you?

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't remember the button being discussed in this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
My bad, if you were CO (or the player with position), what would it take to get you to bet?

Oluwafemi
09-03-2005, 04:55 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you were the button, what would it take to get you to bet once the flop is checked to you?

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't remember the button being discussed in this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
My bad, if you were CO (or the player with position), what would it take to get you to bet?

[/ QUOTE ]

1. 7 7, 9 9- A A
2. 8 9o-8 9s [*highly doubt CO is calling a 200 raise pf]
3. 10 x, 7 x [preferably A 10o-A 10s or *A 7o-A 7s ]

also, villian did'nt simply bet, he/she reraised all-in the rest of their chips after calling the raise preflop with position. that's one of the main reason i advocate checking this flop and folding to a bet. had Hero been in postion at the CO and reraised all-in after a 200 bet at the flop by villian, i would like the play much better. my goal is lose as many chips as possible with A K when it does'nt hit. at the level i play, i see opponents overvalue and overplay A K way too much.

*loose call*

pergesu
09-03-2005, 05:04 PM
Okay let's just have a little fun with gap theory now.

Let's say you and I are playing this hand heads up. I know, from reading that post, that you will be way too conservative in your betting when I check it to you (you should actually be betting almost all the time). It makes sense that you'd be even more conservative with calling or raising a bet. So if I know that you will call/raise with an even smaller range of hands than the range you posted above, then isn't it profitable for me to bet an even greater percentage of the time? Then it's easy to play because if I get any action, I'm beat and dump it.

Oluwafemi
09-03-2005, 05:28 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Okay let's just have a little fun with gap theory now.

Let's say you and I are playing this hand heads up. I know, from reading that post, that you will be way too conservative in your betting when I check it to you (you should actually be betting almost all the time). It makes sense that you'd be even more conservative with calling or raising a bet. So if I know that you will call/raise with an even smaller range of hands than the range you posted above, then isn't it profitable for me to bet an even greater percentage of the time? Then it's easy to play because if I get any action, I'm beat and dump it.

[/ QUOTE ]

this hand HU, IMO, is irrelevant. this is a 10 handed game in which Hero raised 200 pf and was called by the CO with position. alot of the cards that could make you A Ko improve may have already been folded [i.e. dominated A x or K x hands]. the gap, as far as i'm concerned, is going to be smaller in a 10-handed game, and i think it's a very good chance that you're bleeding off chips by betting out after you missed, especially with that flop. if i'm the CO in this hand, it's a good chance betting out by you UTG will lose you money more often than you win in this spot.

bones
09-03-2005, 05:43 PM
[ QUOTE ]
this hand HU, IMO, is irrelevant

[/ QUOTE ]
It's heads up after the flop.

[ QUOTE ]
alot of the cards that could make you A Ko improve may have already been folded [i.e. dominated A x or K x hands

[/ QUOTE ] You have no way of knowing how many aces, kings, 4s, or 6s have been folded. You can't factor that into your decision at all here, and to think so is mathematically foolish.

[ QUOTE ]
i think it's a very good chance that you're bleeding off chips by betting out after you missed, especially with that flop. if i'm the CO in this hand, it's a good chance betting out by you UTG will lose you money more often than you win in this spot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, what? You'll re-raise with a wide range of hands, but won't lead out with AK?

You sir, have an interesting philosophy.

Oluwafemi
09-03-2005, 06:04 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
this hand HU, IMO, is irrelevant

[/ QUOTE ]
It's heads up after the flop.

[ QUOTE ]
alot of the cards that could make you A Ko improve may have already been folded [i.e. dominated A x or K x hands

[/ QUOTE ] You have no way of knowing how many aces, kings, 4s, or 6s have been folded. You can't factor that into your decision at all here, and to think so is mathematically foolish.

[ QUOTE ]
i think it's a very good chance that you're bleeding off chips by betting out after you missed, especially with that flop. if i'm the CO in this hand, it's a good chance betting out by you UTG will lose you money more often than you win in this spot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, what? You'll re-raise with a wide range of hands, but won't lead out with AK?

You sir, have an interesting philosophy.

[/ QUOTE ]

when i responded to the hand being HU, i was talking about down to two players.

*[what do you mean 4s and 6s?]*

of course you don't know how many Aces and Kings have been folded but what you do know is that you have no pair and no draw on a missed flop after you already raised too much preflop with your holding. along with that, you have a villian who cold called your 200 pf raise with [?] now, what range of hands do you think CO villian is gonna cold call 200 pf with? 7 7- A A & A Ko- A Ks sounds good to me. now, what kinds of hands that CO villian cold called a raise with pf will look good on a T72 rainbow flop? if i was holding A Ko or A Ks, i would much rather reraise all-in with this hand having missed my flop than to bet out first. i don't know where you're getting the "reraise all-in with a wider range of hands, but won't lead out".

bones
09-03-2005, 06:09 PM
[censored] [censored], man.

BadMongo
09-03-2005, 06:20 PM
[ QUOTE ]
now, what range of hands do you think CO villian is gonna cold call 200 pf with? 7 7- A A & A Ko- A Ks sounds good to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, have you played any low buy-in tournies lately? You are giving your opponents FAR too much credit.

Oluwafemi
09-03-2005, 06:32 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
now, what range of hands do you think CO villian is gonna cold call 200 pf with? 7 7- A A & A Ko- A Ks sounds good to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, have you played any low buy-in tournies lately? You are giving your opponents FAR too much credit.

[/ QUOTE ]

OP never indicated the buy-in, unless you already know Alpha plays low.

even if villian has a looser/wider range, he does have the advantage of postion and all you have is Ace high on a missed flop. how good do you think your hand is? i'd rather have CO's spot in this hand, whatever the buy-in.

BadMongo
09-03-2005, 07:27 PM
[ QUOTE ]
OP never indicated the buy-in, unless you already know Alpha plays low.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he never indicated the buy-in, but due to the nature of the question I assumed it was a lower buy-in. Correct me if I'm wrong here, Alpha.

[ QUOTE ]
all you have is Ace high on a missed flop

[/ QUOTE ]

He might only have K-high, or maybe he has a small pair and will fold anyway.

Let's do some math, shall we?

The reason a continuation bet is +EV is because of the chance the villian will fold when you BOTH miss the flop. If hero bets half the pot like he did in this case, he only needs to get the villian to fold 1/3 of the time to break even. This doesn't include the times he gets called, then improves on the turn. So, the question is, how often will we be called on a flop of T72 rainbow? This of course depends on the villians PF calling range, which will be pretty wide at lower buy-ins where people don't understand the Gap concept. Let's assume for now that villian will call with the following:

55+, ATo+, A8s+, KQo+, KJs+, QJs

From my experience at the lower buy-ins, this is more than reasonable. Let's further assume that the villian will call/raise on the flop with AT, 77+ and fold the rest. Since there are 6 ways to make a PP and 16 ways to make a non-paired hand, and considering the cards in our hand and on the flop, I calculate that there are 124 possible combinations of cards the villian could hold at this point:

PPs(6x7 + 3x4) + Ax(12x2 + 9x2 + 3x2) + Kx(12x1 +3x2) + Qx(4x1) = 124

Of these combinations, only 48 of them will call/raise:

PPs(6x4 + 3x4) + Ax(12x1) = 48

So, only 48/124 = 38.7% of hands the villian could hold will call/raise hero's continuation bet. Put another way, he will fold 61.3% of the time when we only need him to fold 33% of the time. This is why NOT making a continuation bet with AK heads-up on a flop like T72 rainbow is a big mistake.

Oluwafemi
09-03-2005, 08:19 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OP never indicated the buy-in, unless you already know Alpha plays low.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he never indicated the buy-in, but due to the nature of the question I assumed it was a lower buy-in. Correct me if I'm wrong here, Alpha.

[ QUOTE ]
all you have is Ace high on a missed flop

[/ QUOTE ]

He might only have K-high, or maybe he has a small pair and will fold anyway.

Let's do some math, shall we?

The reason a continuation bet is +EV is because of the chance the villian will fold when you BOTH miss the flop. If hero bets half the pot like he did in this case, he only needs to get the villian to fold 1/3 of the time to break even. This doesn't include the times he gets called, then improves on the turn. So, the question is, how often will we be called on a flop of T72 rainbow? This of course depends on the villians PF calling range, which will be pretty wide at lower buy-ins where people don't understand the Gap concept. Let's assume for now that villian will call with the following:

55+, ATo+, A8s+, KQo+, KJs+, QJs

From my experience at the lower buy-ins, this is more than reasonable. Let's further assume that the villian will call/raise on the flop with AT, 77+ and fold the rest. Since there are 6 ways to make a PP and 16 ways to make a non-paired hand, and considering the cards in our hand and on the flop, I calculate that there are 124 possible combinations of cards the villian could hold at this point:

PPs(6x7 + 3x4) + Ax(12x2 + 9x2 + 3x2) + Kx(12x1 +3x2) + Qx(4x1) = 124

Of these combinations, only 48 of them will call/raise:

PPs(6x4 + 3x4) + Ax(12x1) = 48

So, only 48/124 = 38.7% of hands the villian could hold will call/raise hero's continuation bet. Put another way, he will fold 61.3% of the time when we only need him to fold 33% of the time. This is why NOT making a continuation bet with AK heads-up on a flop like T72 rainbow is a big mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

i hardly think NOT making a continuation bet with A Ko on this flop is a big mistake. if you wanna argue NOT making this play over time, then fine, but something tells me this is one of the 38.7% of hands that will call/raise A K's continuation bet so i prefer checking.

BadMongo
09-03-2005, 09:01 PM
[ QUOTE ]
i hardly think NOT making a continuation bet with A Ko on this flop is a big mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/confused.gif I just showed you mathematically why it is. If you disagree with any of my assumptions, please tell me which one(s).

[ QUOTE ]
something tells me this is one of the 38.7% of hands that will call/raise A K's continuation bet so i prefer checking

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't see anything in the OP that would indicate that this is the case. What would make you think that?

Oluwafemi
09-03-2005, 09:30 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i hardly think NOT making a continuation bet with A Ko on this flop is a big mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/confused.gif I just showed you mathematically why it is. If you disagree with any of my assumptions, please tell me which one(s).

[ QUOTE ]
something tells me this is one of the 38.7% of hands that will call/raise A K's continuation bet so i prefer checking

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't see anything in the OP that would indicate that this is the case. What would make you think that?

[/ QUOTE ]

for one, i think your math is based on your experiences at low buy-in levels.

secondly, OP has no reads on villian.

thirdly, if you wanna bring up the Gap Concept, doesn't it state [you need a better hand to call a raise with than you need to raise with]? if you're gonna raise more than is needed with A Ko and a player with better position cold calls a larger than normal raise pf, what range of hands then do you put a villian that you have no reads on?

lastly, you may not have seen anything from the OP to assume he is staring at one of those 38.7% of hands that may call/raise his/her's continuation bet on the flop because he has no read of villian who is involved in the hand with him/her.

pokerlaw
09-03-2005, 10:04 PM
As per the debate as to whether to continnuation bet AKo here or not, I can't really see why you wouldn't a lot of the time.

Yeah, I like a check here, against CERTAIN players, but my general rule here is to CB BY FAR.

My gripe, if there is one, w/ this play is that the CB is too small, I like to do 275 here b/c t200 seems more weakish and I am more liable to RR a t200 than a t350 with nothing - but maybe that is just me...

Oluwafemi
09-03-2005, 10:29 PM
[ QUOTE ]
As per the debate as to whether to continnuation bet AKo here or not, I can't really see why you wouldn't a lot of the time.

Yeah, I like a check here, against CERTAIN players, but my general rule here is to CB BY FAR.

My gripe, if there is one, w/ this play is that the CB is too small, I like to do 275 here b/c t200 seems more weakish and I am more liable to RR a t200 than a t350 with nothing - but maybe that is just me...

[/ QUOTE ]

but even with a CB the majority of the time, which do you prefer:

having a read or,

not having a read?

which is more valuable to you:

having a read when you make your CB or,

not having a read?

this hand happens to involve a villian which Hero doesn't have a read on. how in favor are you of CBng into the flop against a villian you have no read on who called a larger than needed pf raise and has the benefit of acting last?

FlyWf
09-03-2005, 10:37 PM
1. 200 isn't a remarkably non-standard preflop raise with deep stacks and 25/50 blinds.
2. His math is based on a 52 card deck with 4 suits, 13 cards from 2 to A per suit.
3. "lastly, you may not have seen anything from the OP to assume he is staring at one of those 38.7% of hands that may call/raise his/her's continuation bet on the flop because he has no read of villian who is involved in the hand with him/her."

This is a very difficult sentence to parse, but if I'm reading it right I think you are accidentally agreeing. Which is good, because the other guy is right.

When he called the PF raise in LP we narrowed his range from "two cards" to a "pretty good hand". When he re-raised, we can narrow his range more, to "pretty good hands that like T72 rainbow flops". But we didn't know he was holding the 40% of hands that call PF and like this flop until he reraised. The beauty of the CB is that if he called with 88 he'll fold the better hand, and if you check his KQs is going to bet into you and you'll fold the better hand. The CB allows you to narrow his range tremendously. He'll fold nearly all of the hands AKo beats and some that it doesn't. He'll call or raise pretty much entirely with hands that beat AKo. This isn't limit, you don't get paid off outkicking other people's toppair, and if you are going to checkfold when AK doesn't hit the flop you'd be bettter off just folding it PF.

I think if you call here you are getting shown AT or JJ nearly every time. The OP's question has an obvious answer.

Oluwafemi
09-03-2005, 10:51 PM
[ QUOTE ]
As per the debate as to whether to continnuation bet AKo here or not, I can't really see why you wouldn't a lot of the time.

Yeah, I like a check here, against CERTAIN players, but my general rule here is to CB BY FAR.

My gripe, if there is one, w/ this play is that the CB is too small, I like to do 275 here b/c t200 seems more weakish and I am more liable to RR a t200 than a t350 with nothing - but maybe that is just me...

[/ QUOTE ]

i do also prefer a larger CB.

BadMongo
09-03-2005, 11:39 PM
[ QUOTE ]
for one, i think your math is based on your experiences at low buy-in levels.

[/ QUOTE ]

I stated that as an assumption, so yes.

[ QUOTE ]
secondly, OP has no reads on villian.

[/ QUOTE ]

How does this hurt my analysis?

[ QUOTE ]
thirdly, if you wanna bring up the Gap Concept, doesn't it state [you need a better hand to call a raise with than you need to raise with]?

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you read what I said about the Gap concept? Of course it means you should have a better hand to call a raise than to raise yourself... I'm not disputing that. My point was that a lot (if not most) low buy-in players are unaware of this concept, so you can't immediately put the villian on a tight range just because he called a raise.

[ QUOTE ]
lastly, you may not have seen anything from the OP to assume he is staring at one of those 38.7% of hands that may call/raise his/her's continuation bet on the flop because he has no read of villian who is involved in the hand with him/her.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know that. If you know that, then why did you post this:

[ QUOTE ]
something tells me this is one of the 38.7% of hands that will call/raise A K's continuation bet so i prefer checking

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't really understand your point here. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

My point is this:

1) If this is a low buy-in tourny, the typical (i.e. no reads) villian is unaware of or does not follow the Gap concept. He will therefore have a wide range of hands.

2) Given a range of hands for any villian, we can determine the EV of a continuation bet on the flop. I assumed a reasonable (for the villian) range of hands and calculated that a continuation bet is, in fact, very +EV on this particular flop.

3) We can conclude from these results that NOT making a continuation bet (i.e. checking) under these circumstances is a mistake, because we are needlessly giving up a significant amount of EV. The OP therefore made the correct play up to this point.

Of course, after the CB and the all-in by the villian, hero should definately fold.

45suited
09-04-2005, 12:14 AM
The OP did not give enough information to reply to this thread with much confidence. Some questions that I feel are relevant:

1) What is your READ of the villain? Has he been playing a lot of pots? How aggressive has he been post flop?

2) How many players are left at the table?

3) What are the actual stack sizes? I have a hard time believing that everyone has t1500 in level 3.

Against certain players (me, for example), C-betting this flop would be chip bleeding. I'm not calling a 4XBB raise with a hand that I'm folding to a T high flop in the face of a weak C bet.

But how can anyone give a concrete answer w/o even taking into account a READ of the villain? That is the key factor in this hand. We're not playing against bots, we're playing against people who we should have some kind of read on by the time L3 rolls around.

I'm not a big C-bettor, but against certain players, I'd C-bet this flop. Against others, I wouldn't. It DEPENDS. Face it, by this time in the game, if certain players called your 4XBB raise, you'd have alarms going off in your head. If another player called your raise, you'd be salivating at the prospect of playing the pot HU against him.

It's kind of hard to give a concrete answer without taking into account the tendencies of your opponent in this situation. However, I will say that I would tend to raise less PF (t150), so that if I did C-bet, my C-bet could be a higher % of the pot without costing me so many chips.

Oluwafemi
09-04-2005, 01:01 AM
45suited:

i agree with your post.

1. this was no read
2. a full table- 10 handed
3. i have a hard time believing that everyone has t1500 at Lv3 too.

the key problem with this hand is NO READ on villian. simply pulling out some math figures to support CBng into the flop against a villian that you don't have some inclination of how he plays by this level is troublesome.

[ QUOTE ]
Against certain players (me, for example), C-betting this flop would be chip bleeding. I'm not calling a 4XBB raise with a hand that I'm folding to a T high flop in the face of a weak C bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO, villian's pf call is very key, especially when you consider you have NO READ. Hero can't even say whether the opponent is sphincter tight, average, solid, or a splashing fish.
flashing lights in your rear view mirror should not be ignored because if you speed up [CB] without fully knowing what's going on, then you could be in for more than just a high speed chase.

Taraz
09-04-2005, 01:21 AM
I think the major difference of opinion on this hand is what kind of credit is given to the average player when no reads are available.

It seems that Oluwafami is giving the villain credit for being a decent player when he calls the pf raise because we have no reads. Bad Mongo, on the other hand, is saying that the "average" player that we will be playing against is bad and will call the pf raise with a wide range of hands.

I would tend to agree that when there is no read on the villain we should tag him as a typical (read: BAD) sng player and that we shouldn't be giving him credit for having a hand that can beat AK on the flop.

Oluwafemi
09-04-2005, 01:34 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I think the major difference of opinion on this hand is what kind of credit is given to the average player when no reads are available.

It seems that Oluwafami is giving the villain credit for being a decent player when he calls the pf raise because we have no reads. Bad Mongo, on the other hand, is saying that the "average" player that we will be playing against is bad and will call the pf raise with a wide range of hands.

I would tend to agree that when there is no read on the villain we should tag him as a typical (read: BAD) sng player and that we shouldn't be giving him credit for having a hand that can beat AK on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

no, what i'm saying is you're in a bad spot when, at Lv3, when you have no read on a villain who is calling a 4XBB raise pf with the best position. to simply say that, since you don't have a read, you're automatically gonna tag villain as a bad player is ludicrous. on top of that, you're gonna continue through with a flop bet with the thinking that , "he does'nt have a hand that can beat my A K, regardless of the fact that i don't have a read on him or the fact that he called my t200 raise pf either". that ludicrous 2Xs.

bones
09-04-2005, 01:49 AM
[ QUOTE ]
since you don't have a read, you're automatically gonna tag villain as a bad player is ludicrous. on top of that, you're gonna continue through with a flop bet with the thinking that , "he does'nt have a hand that can beat my A K, regardless of the fact that i don't have a read on him or the fact that he called my t200 raise pf either". that ludicrous 2Xs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously, have you ever played an SNG? This is not the 4k/8k at Bellagio. There are many, many players who call 4xbb raises with hands that don't beat AK. I don't need any kind of exceptional read on someone to assume that. There are many many "flop addicts", who just make the calls with KJ, A8s, QJs, 44, etc because they're pretty hands and they've won with them before. Most of them will fold the flop when bet into. There are some really bad players who will take a card or 2 off, but those are the ones that you would have noticed already.

Some of the reasoning in this thread is strikingly bad.

Finally, I'm fairly confident that check-folding here is a big enough leak that if it is your standard play (OOP after raising PF and getting HU) that you will not be a long-term winner in short-stacked sngs. It's that bad.

BadMongo
09-04-2005, 02:10 AM
I agree 100% that deciding to make a CB on this flop depends greatly on your read of the villian. Against some players you should be concerned and proceed with a bit more caution. Like every situation in poker, it depends. What I disagree with is your stance that checking the flop should be the standard line.

Lets face it - we're not always going to have reads if we're playing multiple tables. You have to proceed based on the information you have. So I made some reasonable assumptions, and from them I showed why C-betting in this spot should be your standard line instead of checking. Of course these things are subject to change based on reads, BUT WE HAVE NO READ. Putting the villian on a range like 77+, AK with no read is insane. The typical player will have a much wider range than that, and we have no information to suggest that the villian is atypical. I therefore don't see how checking the flop can be correct as a standard line.

Oluwafemi
09-04-2005, 04:09 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
since you don't have a read, you're automatically gonna tag villain as a bad player is ludicrous. on top of that, you're gonna continue through with a flop bet with the thinking that , "he does'nt have a hand that can beat my A K, regardless of the fact that i don't have a read on him or the fact that he called my t200 raise pf either". that ludicrous 2Xs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously, have you ever played an SNG? This is not the 4k/8k at Bellagio. There are many, many players who call 4xbb raises with hands that don't beat AK. I don't need any kind of exceptional read on someone to assume that. There are many many "flop addicts", who just make the calls with KJ, A8s, QJs, 44, etc because they're pretty hands and they've won with them before. Most of them will fold the flop when bet into. There are some really bad players who will take a card or 2 off, but those are the ones that you would have noticed already.

Some of the reasoning in this thread is strikingly bad.

Finally, I'm fairly confident that check-folding here is a big enough leak that if it is your standard play (OOP after raising PF and getting HU) that you will not be a long-term winner in short-stacked sngs. It's that bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

read OP's hand breakdown. this is'nt a shortstacked SNG.