Amusing question for you all?

[aflaba]

I may have a strange sense of humor, but I think question B) is rather amusing, or at least the answer to it that I arrived to.


BB is something like 35/25 and thinking. Post flop he is moderatly/way too laggy.

Button is loose passive.


Party Poker 10/20 Hold'em (6 max, 4 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx (http://www.zerodivide.cx/converter)

Preflop: Hero is SB with A/images/graemlins/heart.gif, A/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Button raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, BB calls, Button calls.

Flop: (9 SB) 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 8/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">BB raises</font>, Button calls, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">BB caps</font>, Button calls, Hero calls.

Turn: (10.50 BB) J/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">BB bets</font>, Button calls, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, BB calls, Button calls.


A) Do you bet out or check-raise the turn?

B) Would you rather have the button see the river for 2 BB on the turn, or would you rather want him to fold?


I've thought quite a bit about this hand. And I think the answer to both qeations starts with "It's close...".


I look forward to seeing how you will answer the questions. To see how you think about this situation.

[mscags]

I think this is interesting. I really like the check raise. I think it traps the other idiot in for two more. I don't think there is any way he will fold unless you think if you bet out the other guy will raise. I like the line you took. NH

[einbert]

Edit the turn action so we don't see what happens after hero raises. There's a good chance that will influence the responses.

I'll post my thoughts later. Gonna sleep on it for the time being.

[aflaba]

[ QUOTE ]
Edit the turn action so we don't see what happens after hero raises. There's a good chance that will influence the responses.

I'll post my thoughts later. Gonna sleep on it for the time being.

[/ QUOTE ]

I look forward to it einbert!

I hope you don't sleep for long, like you did here (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Number=3245474&amp;page=&amp;view=&amp;s b=5&amp;o=&amp;vc=1) /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[mr pink]

good post /images/graemlins/smile.gif.

this is an interesting question and i'm curious as to what others think about this.

generally, i bet the turn in these situations but given that:

1. bb is laggy so you're pretty sure he's going to bet the turn for you.

2. there is no guarantee that he'll raise the turn after you cap the flop and still lead at him.

3. the button is likely drawing dead or close to it.


one argument for betting the turn is that the button might be loose enough to call 2 cold allowing you to 3-bet. but even then, i don't think i'd wanna 3-bet there after all the flop action because you're likely behind and staring at a cap.

all in all, i really, really, really like your line here.

[aflaba]

[ QUOTE ]

B) Would you rather have the button see the river for 2 BB on the turn, or would you rather want him to fold?


[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to rephrase question B).

B) When the button has 5 outs, would you rather have the him see the river for 2 BB on the turn, or would you rather want him to fold?

[7ontheline]

Well, purely odds wise, you want him in because even if he knows both you and BB are putting in 2 BB he's getting 14.5:2 and those aren't enough odds. Still, if he hits on the river his implied odds are pretty good. I think I shortsightedly want him to fold. Sure, over 10,000 similar situations you do better if he calls and puts his mostly dead money in drawing thin, but it's close and it's more fun to win a pot. Financially and psychologically, really.

[aflaba]

[ QUOTE ]
... but it's close and it's more fun to win a pot. Financially and psychologically, really.

[/ QUOTE ]

I though about this earlier today. How my feelings lead me astray.

In this hand for exaple I would feel really bad if it was checked around. But if I got 3-bet I would feel _terribly_ bad.

This is even though getting 3-bet costs me a lot _less_.

But still it would be emotionally tougher on me. The reason for that is that now I realize that I'm probably behind. And I feel kind of like I have suddenly lost the entire pot, not just a fraction of a bet.

That is why I should not let emotions govern my play. They lead me into making incorrect decitions because they weigh the EV outcome of situations in a very inaccurate way. I need to try to rely on knowledge and math.

EDIT: But if one choses to value psychological gratification over financial gratification that is an entirely other thing then.

[TStoneMBD]

i think checkraising is much stronger than betting if you know the BB will bet for you.

i have argued this many times and it seems so common to me but alot of people dont take it into consideration when situations like this arise. if you have the opportunity to force a player to make a mistake, its almost always correct do so unless his mistake gives equity to another player and not yourself.

in this situation, if you bet and the BB raises you may lose the calling station. if you checkraise you force the calling station into following along far more often then not. you are taking a decision away from him and that adds to your equity. you definitely want the calling station in to see the river for 2 more bets. if his hand was strong enough that it would be correct for him to call 2 bets cold, he would do it anyway.

[aflaba]

[ QUOTE ]
you definitely want the calling station in to see the river for 2 more bets. if his hand was strong enough that it would be correct for him to call 2 bets cold, he would do it anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

The thing is his hand is bairly strong enough if he doesn't know what he's up against. He is up against a range of pairs and sets. If he _knew_ I only had a pair he would definetly call.

For us to want him to call with 5 outs he needs
(P(HisHIS) * Pot) &lt; 2 : We want him to call

and well, that comes to about (I may be calculating incorrectly. Please correct me if that is the case)...

5/44* (14.5 + 3[river: I lose 2 bets to him and I don't win one bet from the other opponent I would have collected had I won the hand]) = 2.1
2.1 &gt; 2 : We want him to fold
So if we only look this far we actually want him to _fold_. I think it is strange how you say we very much want him in the pot without doing the math. Or am I missing something obvious?

But the thing that turns it around, so that we actually want him to _call_ is what I somehow though was amusing. Since he is LP he will (most often) not fold the river even unimproved. He will hope that his pair is still good.

So that changes the math from
2.1 &gt; 2 : we want him to fold
to
2.1 &lt; 3 : we want him to call. A call from him is EV = +0.9BB to us.

This is the answer I arrived to on B)

[aflaba]

On A), just like mr pink, I came to the conclution that check-raising is better.


I believe it will hardly ever get checked around.
The risk with check-raising is that we may get 3-bet. But this doesn't cost us much.


If we were to bet I think many hands that would have bet themselves will now not raise. That on the other hand will cost us a lot of money. Not getting 3 bets in when we are heavy favorites is a big bad loss.

[7ontheline]

You're right of course - and personally I would still c/r and trap the BB even with his outs vs. trying to get him raised out. It's more money in the (infinitely unapproachable) long run after all. Just mentioning that losing a pot can be more frustrating than missing a bet or two. You're much more likely to start tilting and giving up serious EV if you start getting sucked out on. Of course, we great, disciplined players would never allow that to happen. Never. Ever. Right? Sigh. . .

[aflaba]

[ QUOTE ]
You're right of course - and personally I would still c/r and trap the BB even with his outs vs. trying to get him raised out. It's more money in the (infinitely unapproachable) long run after all. Just mentioning that losing a pot can be more frustrating than missing a bet or two. You're much more likely to start tilting and giving up serious EV if you start getting sucked out on. Of course, we great, disciplined players would never allow that to happen. Never. Ever. Right? Sigh. . .

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/smile.gif Yeah, maybe one should give that EV as well

[einbert]

[ QUOTE ]
i think checkraising is much stronger than betting if you know the BB will bet for you.

i have argued this many times and it seems so common to me but alot of people dont take it into consideration when situations like this arise. if you have the opportunity to force a player to make a mistake, its almost always correct do so unless his mistake gives equity to another player and not yourself.

in this situation, if you bet and the BB raises you may lose the calling station. if you checkraise you force the calling station into following along far more often then not. you are taking a decision away from him and that adds to your equity. you definitely want the calling station in to see the river for 2 more bets. if his hand was strong enough that it would be correct for him to call 2 bets cold, he would do it anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey you're smart a smart guy!

Post here more please ^_^

I agree with what he says btw.