Im a baaad bad man

[Alobar]

For some reason I cant find a converter that works, sorry.

Anyway UTG in this hand is loose preflop, but mostly passive, he will 3bet or cap weird hands tho. Post flop he is an aggresive idiot. But not all the time. Its kinda weird actually. Many hands he will just call down, or fold, but prolly half the hands he has when hes actually raising or 3 betting are bluffs.

SB is alot like UTG, except much more aggresive pre flop. Post flop hes also weird, I watched him checkraise cap a coordinated flop, with nothing more than overs. He plays aggresively, but again, not like your typical maniac who does it every hand, he plays lots of hands half way decently.

I get dealt 54s in the BB, UTG limps, SB completes, I check

3sb Flop: 772r

check, check, check

turn 1.5BB: 3(completes rainbow)

Sb checks, I bet, UTG folds, SB raises, I call

river 5.5BB: 7

SB bets, I raise...


This hand might not be that interesting (it might just be bad play), but since I hardly ever stone cold bluff, I wanted to hear what others thought.

[krishanleong]

well I'm calling with any pair. Maybe he lays down ace high but probably not 100%. Also it's cost you a huge amount to try to win a small amount. I don't think not bluffing is much of a leak. If you are going to add it in, don't start with multi-street bluffs on expensive streets.

Krishan

[kapw7]

That wouldwork if you played it against me who would possibly bluff with nothing. (I have to be awareof this)

So its totally read dependent. If you trust your reads you have to try it.

[asofel]

OT, but where are you trying to convert from? pokerhand.org doesn't do it? (avatar is awesome btw)

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
OT, but where are you trying to convert from? pokerhand.org doesn't do it? (avatar is awesome btw)

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks /images/graemlins/smile.gif Nope, pokerhand just gave me an empty window when I clicked the thing to show it in forum mode (or whatever it says). And then I tired the bison converter and it was a no good. Its been a while, so I forgot what I used to do to make the bison one work

[ISF]

If your plan is to raise most rivers here I think your way better off just threebeting the turn and betting the river.

[Grisgra]

I don't know that this is the best place for it, in that I think that A-high calls you more often on this board than others you might try this trick on, but in general I like it. Appeals to the LAG in me. And I bet that people are a helluva lot more straightforward in playing against you in the near future after you show this one down (i.e., effect on Shania = nontrivial). Probably going to be fewer steal attempts against you, for instance.

Though I wonder whether 3-betting the turn would be superior.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OT, but where are you trying to convert from? pokerhand.org doesn't do it? (avatar is awesome btw)

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks /images/graemlins/smile.gif Nope, pokerhand just gave me an empty window when I clicked the thing to show it in forum mode (or whatever it says). And then I tired the bison converter and it was a no good. Its been a while, so I forgot what I used to do to make the bison one work

[/ QUOTE ]

Take the word texas out of the one of the first lines.

Krishan

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
If your plan is to raise most rivers here I think your way better off just threebeting the turn and betting the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

naw, I definatly handt planned on that. I just didnt really buy his turn raise. When the river came the third seven I figured I had a decent hance to fold him off his Q8 or whatever, or maybe even an Ace. I figured he didnt have a pair because he would have bet out the flop or led the turn. I didnt think 3 betting the turn would do me much good, because I knew he wouldnt give me credit for a seven, and it would just look like I was bluffing. On the river I know hes still not giving me credit for a seven, but all I have to do is have him think I have a 2 or a 3.

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
well I'm calling with any pair. Maybe he lays down ace high but probably not 100%. Also it's cost you a huge amount to try to win a small amount. I don't think not bluffing is much of a leak. If you are going to add it in, don't start with multi-street bluffs on expensive streets.


[/ QUOTE ]

i like this

[spamuell]

I do this, but not on that river, you really do get called by like J-high here and it's just the type of situation where people will bluff 3-bet as well.

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
On the river I know hes still not giving me credit for a seven

[/ QUOTE ]

That's my main problem with the river raise, is that he can no longer give you credit for a 7. If it were some other blank, he could.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OT, but where are you trying to convert from? pokerhand.org doesn't do it? (avatar is awesome btw)

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks /images/graemlins/smile.gif Nope, pokerhand just gave me an empty window when I clicked the thing to show it in forum mode (or whatever it says). And then I tired the bison converter and it was a no good. Its been a while, so I forgot what I used to do to make the bison one work

[/ QUOTE ]

Take the word texas out of the one of the first lines.

Krishan

[/ QUOTE ]

n/m, I figured out why It didnt work. I was using an emailed HH instead of the ones it saves on my hard drive.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
On the river I know hes still not giving me credit for a seven

[/ QUOTE ]

That's my main problem with the river raise, is that he can no longer give you credit for a 7. If it were some other blank, he could.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats why I decided to try it. When I dont 3 bet the turn, he knows I don't have a seven. And when the 3rd seven comes on the river, he knows I know HE doesnt have a 7. So my raise says "fullhouse" even if its just with a crappy 3. And since I was pretty sure he didnt have any pair and he was just as likely to be bluffing with a hand that didnt have an ace as one that did (I agree that A high is more likely to call), I thought it might be worth it. I also hadnt been playing stupid, so I thought I maybe had a little respect. I might doing to much thinking here tho.

[New001]

I really don't like it. He calls with a lot here.

[cartman]

[ QUOTE ]
n/m, I figured out why It didnt work. I was using an emailed HH instead of the ones it saves on my hard drive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is there any way to make an emailed HH work? It seems like a laborious task to go look through the hand history files on the hard drive to find a specific hand. Is there a shortcut that I am missing or does it not take long to find the hand in the hand history file?

Thanks,
Cartman

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
n/m, I figured out why It didnt work. I was using an emailed HH instead of the ones it saves on my hard drive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is there any way to make an emailed HH work? It seems like a laborious task to go look through the hand history files on the hard drive to find a specific hand. Is there a shortcut that I am missing or does it not take long to find the hand in the hand history file?

Thanks,
Cartman

[/ QUOTE ]

I used to be able to, but I forgot what it was that i did since I havent posted one in so long. I had to remove the line that says "texas hold em blah blah blah" and would take the similiar line from a really old party HH email (bofore they made changes to how HH worked) and paste that in, then it worked fine. But I lost all my data in a comp crash a little while ago, so now I dont have an old party emailed HH to look at /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[jba]

[ QUOTE ]

Is there any way to make an emailed HH work? It seems like a laborious task to go look through the hand history files on the hard drive to find a specific hand. Is there a shortcut that I am missing or does it not take long to find the hand in the hand history file?


[/ QUOTE ]

why are you having them emailed? what I usually do is either click on the Last Hand link in PP if it's right after the hand occurs then copy and paste, or I look for the hand in PT if it's much later and find it. I don't get the email hand history workflow?

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Is there any way to make an emailed HH work? It seems like a laborious task to go look through the hand history files on the hard drive to find a specific hand. Is there a shortcut that I am missing or does it not take long to find the hand in the hand history file?


[/ QUOTE ]

why are you having them emailed? what I usually do is either click on the Last Hand link in PP if it's right after the hand occurs then copy and paste, or I look for the hand in PT if it's much later and find it. I don't get the email hand history workflow?

[/ QUOTE ]

When im 4 tabling and I play a hand that im not sure about, i just click the HH window and have it emailed to me, so that later I can look over it. To much work to copy and paste it right then and convert it, since im usually involved in other hands. And since I maybe only post like 10% of the hands I do this for, there really isnt any reason to have them converted.

[jba]

[ QUOTE ]

When im 4 tabling and I play a hand that im not sure about, i just click the HH window and have it emailed to me, so that later I can look over it. To much work to copy and paste it right then and convert it, since im usually involved in other hands. And since I maybe only post like 10% of the hands I do this for, there really isnt any reason to have them converted.

[/ QUOTE ]

yep same here but I don't try to convert it on the spot. I have an instance of notepad running on my computer at all times, I copy and paste directly into notepad and forget about it until the session is over. Then I review all those hands and never end up posting any of them because they all seem pretty basic upon further review.

anyways that's how I do it.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

When im 4 tabling and I play a hand that im not sure about, i just click the HH window and have it emailed to me, so that later I can look over it. To much work to copy and paste it right then and convert it, since im usually involved in other hands. And since I maybe only post like 10% of the hands I do this for, there really isnt any reason to have them converted.

[/ QUOTE ]

yep same here but I don't try to convert it on the spot. I have an instance of notepad running on my computer at all times, I copy and paste directly into notepad and forget about it until the session is over. Then I review all those hands and never end up posting any of them because they all seem pretty basic upon further review.

anyways that's how I do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

interesting, I never thought of that. I think I shall incorporate that.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

When im 4 tabling and I play a hand that im not sure about, i just click the HH window and have it emailed to me, so that later I can look over it. To much work to copy and paste it right then and convert it, since im usually involved in other hands. And since I maybe only post like 10% of the hands I do this for, there really isnt any reason to have them converted.

[/ QUOTE ]

yep same here but I don't try to convert it on the spot. I have an instance of notepad running on my computer at all times, I copy and paste directly into notepad and forget about it until the session is over. Then I review all those hands and never end up posting any of them because they all seem pretty basic upon further review.

anyways that's how I do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

interesting, I never thought of that. I think I shall incorporate that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do it that way to. That way you can write reads down.

Krishan

[Subfallen]

[WARNING: EXPLORATORY GAME THEORY BABBLE BELOW.]

Bluffing is always theoretically correct if done with the proper frequency.

SB has a range of possible hands given this betting pattern, and the average weighted strength of that range is X. You also have a range of possible hands given this betting pattern, and the strength of that range coicidentally goes from the nut low (54) to the nuts (quad 7's).

Now y% of your range beats his average hand X, and (100 - y)% of your range loses to his average hand X.

So if you never bluffed at all, you would raise y% of the time here---for value. But you're a baaad bad man, and you're going to bluff. But how often?

Well, the odds against you bluffing (betting a hand that doesn't beat X) should be equal to the odds Villain is getting to call your bet. That's 8.5:1.

It'll be tough to decide what X should be, so let's look at your range first. I'm going to begin by assuming that you never slowplay preflop, and that you would absolutely never, ever, check a 2 or any pocket pair on this flop.

So after your turn bet I make your range as: {3x, 7x, 45, any two cards}.

After the turn c/r, you were getting 4.5/1 immediate odds and 5.5/2 effective odds to call down. You called. Because you didn't have the odds to draw to a 6-outer, I eliminate all air that didn't think had a reasonable chance to be good already. So now I simplistically make your range: {3x, 7x, 45, Ax<T}.

Ok, river was a 7. Let's look at your weighted hand range:
3x: 112 combos
7x: 46 combos
45: 16 combos
Ax<T: 80 combos
Total: 254 combos

I'm thinking SB would not fold an A to a river raise here, but that X is also good enough that it is not profitable to raise A-high for value. So the hands you raise for value here are 3x and 7x (158 combos), and your raising percentage is y=62%.

Remember that your raise gives 8.5:1 pot odds. If you raise 62% of the time, you should bluff 7.3% of the time in order for Villain's river decision with X to be 0 EV.

So if your decision to bluff was based on a quick glance at your watch to confirm the second hand between 11 and 12...then I think your play was expert here. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]

So if your decision to bluff was based on a quick glance at your watch to confirm the second hand between 11 and 12...then I think your play was expert here. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

well my watch is in roman numerals, so sometimes I get confused and put it on upside down, so it was actually between 41 and 42, but I thought it was between 11 and 12 /images/graemlins/smile.gif

(nice post BTW)