What I hate the most - 2pr on 4th

[grb137]

7 Card Stud High ($20/$40), Ante $2, Bring-In $5 (hand converter (http://www.geocities.com/greenage22/7StudConverter.hta.txt))

3rd Street - (0.80 SB)

Seat 1: xx xx 3/images/graemlins/club.gif___brings-in___calls
Seat 2: xx xx 9/images/graemlins/diamond.gif___folds
Seat 3: xx xx K/images/graemlins/heart.gif___calls___calls
Seat 4: xx xx 4/images/graemlins/club.gif___folds
Hero: 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif T/images/graemlins/spade.gif T/images/graemlins/heart.gif___completes
Seat 6: xx xx 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif___folds
Seat 7: xx xx 8/images/graemlins/club.gif___folds
Seat 8: xx xx K/images/graemlins/club.gif___calls

4th Street - (4.80 SB)

Seat 1: xx xx 3/images/graemlins/club.gif 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif___double bets
Seat 3: xx xx K/images/graemlins/heart.gif K/images/graemlins/spade.gif___checks___calls
Hero: 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif T/images/graemlins/spade.gif T/images/graemlins/heart.gif 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif___checks___[?????]
Seat 8: xx xx K/images/graemlins/club.gif 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif___checks


Now I admit, this is usually an easy fold, except in this case:
1) Seat 1 was very LAG - specifically, he bet every paired door card regardless. I saw him bluff with low paired door cards at least 4 times in this one session.
2) As for Seat 3, he didn't raise on 3rd, and 1 King was already dead, and he didn't raise Seat 1 on 4th.

So this was a tough one for me....

[blumpkin22]

Fold, and it's not close.

[BeerMoney]

How was seat 3's play overall? His calling the paired 3's is rather scary, no? What about the K that called behind you?

The problem here is that you have to stretch to put them each on a hand you can beat here. I would make a ridiculously huge laydown and move on to the next hand.

[grb137]

[ QUOTE ]
Fold, and it's not close.

[/ QUOTE ]

because???????

Sorry, but only Ray Zee and Greenstein can get away with posting answers without thoughtful explanations.

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fold, and it's not close.

[/ QUOTE ]

because???????

Sorry, but only Ray Zee and Greenstein can get away with posting answers without thoughtful explanations.

[/ QUOTE ]


Because the pot is small and you’re either a little ahead or way behind.

[grb137]

[ QUOTE ]
How was seat 3's play overall? His calling the paired 3's is rather scary, no? What about the K that called behind you?

The problem here is that you have to stretch to put them each on a hand you can beat here. I would make a ridiculously huge laydown and move on to the next hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seat 3 overall was very LAG. Consequently, he could have almost anything, which means I could easily have him beat. The K that is behind didn't have Ks, I was very confident of that, because he didn't raise 3rd (I know the player well enough to be sure).

What about guts?

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]


Because the pot is small and you’re either a little ahead or way behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

NICE!

[grb137]

[ QUOTE ]


Because the pot is small and you’re either a little ahead or way behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Heh - so by that logic I fold every under pair, even Ks, when a higher door card raises. I just don't play cards that way. Call me a fish.

And the pot is not small at all. There's almost 5.5 BBs in there.

[BeerMoney]

The pot is small relative to your effective odds given you have to call a double bet for 4 more potential rounds.

If the king has a pair you're way behind.

If the 3's are trips you're way behind.

If neither have the aforementioned hands, you're a little ahead of the kings, But will never know where you stand in this hand.

[blumpkin22]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Because the pot is small and you’re either a little ahead or way behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Heh - so by that logic I fold every under pair, even Ks, when a higher door card raises. I just don't play cards that way. Call me a fish.

And the pot is not small at all. There's almost 5.5 BBs in there.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.northwestoutdoors.org/Fish_-_Cartoon_26.jpg

[Andy B]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, but only Ray Zee and Greenstein can get away with posting answers without thoughtful explanations.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll keep this in mind.

I think that this is a fold. You might very well have the best hand. If the guy with the Treys really will bet here every time, then you probably do have the best hand. That said, I would guess that while the bring-in might have bet every other time he had a paired door card, there wasn't anything like a pair of Kings out on previous occasions.

There has to be at least some chance that the guy with the Kings has you beaten now. There is a very good chance that he will outrun you before the river. You have only four outs to improve yourself.

Then there's the bettor. Really, I think his most likely hand is trips. You were in the game, and we weren't. If the guy really is crazy, he might have nothing. I think that most people in this spot would need Aces-up or better to bet.

The pot is still pretty small, and I just don't see any reason to get involved. You hate playing two pair on fourth street? Don't play 'em.

[grb137]

[ QUOTE ]


http://www.northwestoutdoors.org/Fish_-_Cartoon_26.jpg

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[grb137]

Well, running the twodimes on this, and assuming the Kings have a pair in the hole, my EV is either .24 or .28 (the former if Seat 1 has trips, the latter if he does not).

How much would have to be in the pot for this to actually be a correct call? Any math experts? (And please show your work).

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fold, and it's not close.

[/ QUOTE ]

because???????

Sorry, but only Ray Zee and Greenstein can get away with posting answers without thoughtful explanations.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here are some numbers

Ac Jc 3c 3d 163662 32.73 336337 67.27 1 0.00 0.327
Ks Kh Qh 5h 140834 28.17 359165 71.83 1 0.00 0.282
Ts 7d Th 7h 195503 39.10 304497 60.90 0 0.00 0.391

This is a very optamistic "best case" scenario. In this scenario folding will cost you 6% of future action + 40% of the current pot. This comes out to be .36BB + 1.75BB or about 2.1 BB. If you KNOW you are ahead.


3s Jc 3c 3d 307712 61.54 192288 38.46 0 0.00 0.615
Ks Kh Qh 5h 51407 10.28 448593 89.72 0 0.00 0.103
Ts 7d Th 7h 140881 28.18 359119 71.82 0 0.00 0.282

In this situation fold also seems to cost you money because of the guy with Ks is padding your odds. Folding cost you 28% of the current pot and saves you 5% of your future action. This comes out to 1.26 - .20....or about 1.05 BB. So even when the guy is tripped up we can correctly chase as long as the KK guy stays around.


3s Jc 3c 3d 272341 54.47 227658 45.53 1 0.00 0.545
Ks 5s Kh 5h 93406 18.68 406594 81.32 0 0.00 0.187
Ts 7d Th 7h 134252 26.85 365747 73.15 1 0.00 0.269

In this simulation folding costs us 27% of the pot on 4th and saves us 6% of our future action. Or :: 1.215 - .24 (.27*4.5 - .06*4). This comes out to about 1BB


I am very very surprised to see that calling down is correct in every case as long as we disallow trip Ks (which is reasonable)

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, running the twodimes on this, and assuming the Kings have a pair in the hole, my EV is either .24 or .28 (the former if Seat 1 has trips, the latter if he does not).

How much would have to be in the pot for this to actually be a correct call? Any math experts? (And please show your work).

[/ QUOTE ]


Wont he have a flush draw most of the time here. Don't most people raise/fold with 22K on 3rd.


Yes, showing your work is good.

[grb137]

[ QUOTE ]

Here are some numbers

Ac Jc 3c 3d 163662 32.73 336337 67.27 1 0.00 0.327
Ks Kh Qh 5h 140834 28.17 359165 71.83 1 0.00 0.282
Ts 7d Th 7h 195503 39.10 304497 60.90 0 0.00 0.391

This is a very optamistic "best case" scenario. In this scenario folding will cost you 6% of future action + 40% of the current pot. This comes out to be .36BB + 1.75BB or about 2.1 BB. If you KNOW you are ahead.


[/ QUOTE ]

Jon - can you dumb this down even further more morons like me? I understand the 40% of the current pot comes from the EV that twodimes calculates, but how is the "6% of future action" figure derived? What about the .36BB and 1.75BB figures, how did you calculate these?

Very interesting.

[grb137]

[ QUOTE ]
I am very very surprised to see that calling down is correct in every case as long as we disallow trip Ks (which is reasonable)

[/ QUOTE ]

And by the way, everything that jon wrote is *exactly* what I was thinking: /images/graemlins/grin.gif

7 Card Stud High ($20/$40), Ante $2, Bring-In $5 (hand converter (http://www.geocities.com/greenage22/7StudConverter.hta.txt))

3rd Street - (0.80 SB)

Seat 1: xx xx 3/images/graemlins/club.gif___brings-in___calls
Seat 2: xx xx 9/images/graemlins/diamond.gif___folds
Seat 3: xx xx K/images/graemlins/heart.gif___calls___calls
Seat 4: xx xx 4/images/graemlins/club.gif___folds
Hero: 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif T/images/graemlins/spade.gif T/images/graemlins/heart.gif___completes
Seat 6: xx xx 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif___folds
Seat 7: xx xx 8/images/graemlins/club.gif___folds
Seat 8: xx xx K/images/graemlins/club.gif___calls

4th Street - (4.80 SB)

Seat 1: xx xx 3/images/graemlins/club.gif 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif___double bets
Seat 3: xx xx K/images/graemlins/heart.gif K/images/graemlins/spade.gif___checks___calls
Hero: 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif T/images/graemlins/spade.gif T/images/graemlins/heart.gif 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif___checks___calls
Seat 8: xx xx K/images/graemlins/club.gif 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif___checks___folds

5th Street - (5.40 BB)

Seat 1: xx xx 3/images/graemlins/club.gif 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 2/images/graemlins/diamond.gif___calls
Seat 3: xx xx K/images/graemlins/heart.gif K/images/graemlins/spade.gif 3/images/graemlins/spade.gif___bets
Hero: 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif T/images/graemlins/spade.gif T/images/graemlins/heart.gif 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif___calls

6th Street - (8.40 BB)

Seat 1: xx xx 3/images/graemlins/club.gif 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 2/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 9/images/graemlins/club.gif___calls
Seat 3: xx xx K/images/graemlins/heart.gif K/images/graemlins/spade.gif 3/images/graemlins/spade.gif 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif___checks___calls
Hero: 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif T/images/graemlins/spade.gif T/images/graemlins/heart.gif 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif T/images/graemlins/club.gif___bets

River - (11.40 BB)

Seat 1: xx xx 3/images/graemlins/club.gif 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 2/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 9/images/graemlins/club.gif xx___folds
Seat 3: xx xx K/images/graemlins/heart.gif K/images/graemlins/spade.gif 3/images/graemlins/spade.gif 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif xx___checks___calls
Hero: 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif T/images/graemlins/spade.gif T/images/graemlins/heart.gif 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif T/images/graemlins/club.gif 8/images/graemlins/heart.gif___bets

Total pot: 13.40 BB

Results:
Main Pot: $533 | Rake: $3

Seat 3: [ 2h 2s Kh Ks 3s 5s 6c ] [ two pairs, kings and twos -- Kh,Ks,6c,2h,2s ]

Hero: [ 7d Ts Th 7h Qd Tc 8h ] [ a full house, Tens full of sevens -- Ts,Th,Tc,7d,7h ]

[Andy B]

Let's try this again....

I'm a little surprised that your equity is as high as 24%. In the wise words of SittingBull, "hmmmmm."

Assuming that both of the other guys stay the rest of the way, it's going to cost you three BB to see the river, where presumably you will fold unimproved. There are 4.8 BB in the pot right now, so you have a potential win of 10.8 BB (I'm ignoring river betting). The .24 equity is a little over 3:1 against, and you're getting a little more than that from the pot, so obviously I've missed something. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Here are some numbers

Ac Jc 3c 3d 163662 32.73 336337 67.27 1 0.00 0.327
Ks Kh Qh 5h 140834 28.17 359165 71.83 1 0.00 0.282
Ts 7d Th 7h 195503 39.10 304497 60.90 0 0.00 0.391

This is a very optamistic "best case" scenario. In this scenario folding will cost you 6% of future action + 40% of the current pot. This comes out to be .36BB + 1.75BB or about 2.1 BB. If you KNOW you are ahead.


[/ QUOTE ]

Jon - can you dumb this down even further more morons like me? I understand the 40% of the current pot comes from the EV that twodimes calculates, but how is the "6% of future action" figure derived? What about the .36BB and 1.75BB figures, how did you calculate these?

Very interesting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, in order to be even money you need to win the pot 33% of the time. But you are gonna win 39% of the time. So you have an edge of 6% on the action that you get from your opponents. 6% * 6BB (2 BB each on 5th,6th, and 7th). With luck 1.75BB = 4.5BB (the current pot) * .40

I think this is right, but please let me know if you don't think this calculation is valid. (the calc is a simplification because we will assume you fold if the boards get really scary later)

[Roland]

Jon, that’s very interesting.
Your calculations look good to me. You assumed that hero always folds if he doesn’t hit his boat, right? (So the “future action” is usually 2BB).

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
Jon, that’s very interesting.
Your calculations look good to me. You assumed that hero always folds if he doesn’t hit his boat, right? (So the “future action” is usually 2BB).

[/ QUOTE ]

Right you are.

[RayGarlington]

I like the way you have encorporated the 2 dimes sims into your logic and analysis. In regards to your "future action" idea, it think you need to add something...

[ QUOTE ]
Well, in order to be even money you need to win the pot 33% of the time. But you are gonna win 39% of the time. So you have an edge of 6% on the action that you get from your opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is correct so far as your opponents future action; however, your future action must also be considered. In the best case scenario in the example hand, every time you put in 1BB, your pot equity for that bet is .4BB; so, every time you do that you lose .6BB

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
I like the way you have encorporated the 2 dimes sims into your logic and analysis. In regards to your "future action" idea, it think you need to add something...

[ QUOTE ]
Well, in order to be even money you need to win the pot 33% of the time. But you are gonna win 39% of the time. So you have an edge of 6% on the action that you get from your opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is correct so far as your opponents future action; however, your future action must also be considered. In the best case scenario in the example hand, every time you put in 1BB, your pot equity for that bet is .4BB; so, every time you do that you lose .6BB

[/ QUOTE ]


If you're pot equity is 39% and you have 3 opponents you get 39% of 3 bets. Or 1.17BB, but it cost you 1BB to gain that. So you have an overlay of .17 BB....which is roughly 6% of the future action on that street.

I really think I'm right here. But because I don't understand your criticism I might be missing what you are pointing out.

[Andy B]

[ QUOTE ]
In the best case scenario in the example hand, every time you put in 1BB, your pot equity for that bet is .4BB; so, every time you do that you lose .6BB

[/ QUOTE ]

It's three ways, right? So if he has 40% equity and is putting in 33.3333333333333333% of the money, he is gaining, not losing.

[RayGarlington]

Well, things seem clearer this morning!

I was only giving us credit for 6% of the opponents bets then looking at our bet in isolation. i.e. I should have been thinking "for every bet that goes in I get 40%, the opponents split 60%" or the way Andy put it "we're putting in 33% and our equity is 40% so we're gaining not losing"

rats. someday I'll be right.

[BeerMoney]

Grb,

What do you think of the hand?

One point that hasn't been made is that if you fill, you're likely to be good. (I say this because of the dead king.)

You also have to note that you could get trapped in the middle for a raise at some point, which would kill your odds.

Would you guys say that this is a situation where having this pot multiway is advantageous?

To Ray Garlington: Believing we have an edge only when we have more than a 50% chance of winning is a big mistake.

Think about it this way.. Why do we raise with aces, even in a multiway pot on 3rd? Not because we expect to win more than 50%, but because we expect to win more than 1/N where n is the number of opponents.

This is why drawing hands are so powerful in stud, and often shouldn't be looked at as a draw. There are draws where we are simply calling because of the size of the pot, and there are draws that make us a favorite against the field. (An open ended straight flush draw on fourth... Or trips on 5th against a made straight with 2 or more opponents if our cards are live.)

[jon_1van]

1. I think your ability to call down drastically changes if you've seen one of your 7s or Ts
2. I think your ability to call down would be very low if you had 22TT instead of 77TT. (drastically weakens 1/2 of your outs)

3. I still don't know what to do if you get heads up on 5th. Because now your odds aren't as good but your chances of winning probably haven't changed much. So any idea what you do if KK folds on 5th and 33 keeps firing? (I'm guessing call down...I'm also guessing that this is very close to neutral EV) Also what happens if on 5th you see 1 of you cards drop? Does this make you fold? Does 2 make you fold? (it probably should)

thoughts?

[RayGarlington]

Chip Reese in his section of SS cites an example where he pushed a hand with only a slight advantage over his opponent. The take-home message was that pushing slight advantages makes sense when your opponent is of equal or greater skill, but not when playing with those with less skill.

In this case, when the 3 double bets, and it is called by the K, the pot is ~4.4 big bets at decision time for the hero. If you use some of the more likely possibilities (rather than the best case scenario), you have his equity at ~2.8 * 4.4 = 1.2BB. At this point, hero is deciding to invest another big bet, to win 1.2. Looking forward, he will contribute 33% of the pot, losing about 5% of each bet. The more I think about this hand, the more I agree with the position of folding and waiting for a bigger edge.

[grb137]

The more I think about this hand, the more I think I misplayed it and simply got lucky.

Since we have the benefit of seeing the results, I think we can dissect out everyone's thinking and decide what the "right" decision was.

First of all, as I had suspected, Seat 1 did not have trip treys. He probably had a small pair in the hole or maybe even A-Q or some nonsense like that. Seat 3 probably wasn't as sure as I was, and so he called with his two pair.

I think this is where I should have strongly suspected Kings up in seat 3, because if he held trips, he woulda raised, and if he had a drawing hand, he would have folded, figuring it wasn't worth the risk against possible trip 3s with a K already dead.

However, since he DID call, I think a call was the right decision because of the effective odds that jon described in his post, at least in so far as 4th street is concerned, since I was guaranteed a 3-way pot.

Now, when 5th comes around, and the Kings catch a three, he realizes that Seat 1 aint got crap and figures his Ks up is good, and so he bets. At this point, I should have been 100% certain that he was Kings up. So, I can call correctly only if I'm sure that seat 1 will also call. I think most decent players holding seat 1's cards would fold at this point if he's in a 3-way pot with junk, and so I should have folded here assuming seat 1 wouldn't be calling. However, I was married to my 2pr at this point, and called. Luckily for me, seat 1 called too. At this point, I should have been confident of my opponent's hands: seat 1 A-?-3-3 or baby pair-3-3 and seat 3: Kings up.

So when I hit my ten on 6th, seat 1 realizes he's drawing dead with his 2 pair (or, alternatively, his lone 3s are toast) and drops. Seat 6, of course, is married to his two pair and calls it down.

So in summary, 4th was a good call, and 5th is a good call only if seat 1 is dumb and calls behind me. Usually, most 20/40 players are NOT that dumb, and so I probably should have folded 5th under the assumption seat 1 would be folded as well.

I think the lesson here is this: poker is a human game. We can look at simulation results, but the correct play ultimately turns on human decisions that math can't predict (i.e. in this case, whether seat 1 will call with his junk hand).

Major geek moment: Anybody ever see the episode of Star Trek The Next Generation where Data is invited to the officer's poker game? He was convinced he'd win because of his computing abilities, and 'ole Commander Riker just smiled smugly.

[jon_1van]

I mention what a crappy spot getting heads up on 5th is in a recent post....but then the pot is soo much bigger /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[grb137]

[ QUOTE ]
I mention what a crappy spot getting heads up on 5th is in a recent post....but then the pot is soo much bigger /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

big enough to call it down?

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I mention what a crappy spot getting heads up on 5th is in a recent post....but then the pot is soo much bigger /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

big enough to call it down?

[/ QUOTE ]

Who knows, simulations don't mean anything. /images/graemlins/cool.gif

(Kidding Greg.)

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I mention what a crappy spot getting heads up on 5th is in a recent post....but then the pot is soo much bigger /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

big enough to call it down?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know...but you're right about being it not being all about sims.

[Andy B]

If you're in a cash game, and you're adequately bankrolled for that game, there is no reason to pass up small edges. Pushing those small edges will not preclude you from taking advantage of the big edges. It's different if you're on a short bankroll or you're in a tournament.

[Andy B]

I liked the game with Data, Newton, Einstein, and Hawking myself.

Those games were always ridiculous. Your typical lineup:

Geordi, who can see through the cards fer cryin' out loud.
Deanna, who can read people better than any human.
Data, with ridiculous computational powers.
Worf, who I know I would let win.

And of course the big winner is always Riker, a bumpkin from Alaska.

And five-card draw is going to make a comeback in the 23rd century.

[grb137]

[ QUOTE ]
I liked the game with Data, Newton, Einstein, and Hawking myself.

Those games were always ridiculous. Your typical lineup:

Geordi, who can see through the cards fer cryin' out loud.
Deanna, who can read people better than any human.
Data, with ridiculous computational powers.
Worf, who I know I would let win.

And of course the big winner is always Riker, a bumpkin from Alaska.

And five-card draw is going to make a comeback in the 23rd century.

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

so true!