Another hand from the archives

[jason_t]

I enjoyed reading through this one.

8-handed Party 3/6.

Hero open raises UTG+1 with red AA. The Button cold calls, the SB folds and the BB calls. The villains are unknown but haven't gotten out of line yet.

Flop: K/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 3/images/graemlins/club.gif, A/images/graemlins/spade.gif
BB checks, Hero bets, Button calls, BB calls.

Turn: Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif
BB checks, Hero bets, Button raises, BB 3-bets, Hero

What's Hero's plan? Why?

i cap. theres a good chance you are still ahead and you have outs to improve. i dont give the button credit for JT due to preflop, i put him on something like AQ, KQ or semibluffing a flush draw. BB is concerning me more. if he leads the river i call.

[jgorham]

Putting either of these guys on a range of hands is very difficult. At least for me. I would really really like to know how these players would play an A on the flop, as that would really impact the decision.

The problem I am having is that there just aren't a lot of hands for the BB to have here (the buttons range being a bit wider). So when I can't make a specific range, I compare my equity against the tightest and loosest (within reason) ranges. The tight range I would give him is probably A3, KQ, JT or 33.

Even against that range, hero has huge equity. Seems like a pretty clear cap to me.

[Erik W]

I call and raise river.
If I cap turn Button will probably fold since he is likely to have AQ or AJs(less likely) and he'll fold turn with that heavy action. Other coldcalling hands is 88,99 but he wont raise them of course.

With Jgorhams range of hands u r 50-50 with BB right now and have outs to improve to best hand. If u don't improve call river to and go for a overcall of Button since if u r behind u will be raise and otherwise not. U wan't him in to pad the pot because u r 50-50 against the other guy. The only hand u r behind is JT and Button won't have it so all he puts in is dead money.

[jgorham]

IMO, from buttons perspective there is very little difference in calling a 3bet (after you have called) or a cap.

Also: how are you so sure button isn't holding JT? He sees that AK on the board, and raises an UTG preflop raiser on the turn. That says strong hand. Top of strong hand list is JT - its just that there are other strong hands he could have here.

Edit: Of course it is possible he has a weaker A here as well. But I don't think he is going to be putting any more money in the pot with it (regardless of 3bet v cap) unless he has AT or AJ, in which case he is sticking around for his gutshot anyway.

[toss]

I'm capping because it doesn't look like Button has a straight as does BB. I also don't see how we can extract more bets on the river if we call.

Edit: But as the post below mine its true that JT is a more probable holding since we have 3 aces. If one of 'em holds KQ and the other a straight, we can extract like crazy on the river if KQ hits one of his 4 "outs".

The action on the river would go BB bets, Hero calls, Button raises, BB calls (or 3-bet), Hero 3-bets (or caps).

So maybe calling is better.

I would actually call here. Based simply on possible ranges and hand distribution, JT is the most probable hand for any of the two to have and it's quite likely that someone has it. If button has it, he will cap it anyway. If BB has it, it's not impossible for the button to fold if we raise, which we do not want in that case. In this last scenario, if we just call and button calls, we have saved one bet when we don't hit the full house or quads, and got as many bets in on the turn when we do hit our outs. And lastly, if none of them has JT, there's still the possibility of the button folding to a raise, and in that case a call will collect as many bets when we are ahead, and possibly more bets on the river than we would have got with the button out of the pot.

[ QUOTE ]
IFlop: K/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 3/images/graemlins/club.gif, A/images/graemlins/spade.gif
BB checks, Hero bets, Button calls, Hero calls

[/ QUOTE ]

Am I missing something here? This has to be a typo, right? Is it supposed to be BB calls at the end?

As far as an answer to the original question, though, I'm not quite sure. You still could have the best hand or at least have a number of outs to have the best hand, but... what's the point of raising? It seems like you could be very easily building the pot for someone else.

[Dopey]

Toss,

Im intrigued by your proposed river line. When we just call the turn 3-bet we do not who has 2 pair or who has a straight (obviously if Button doesn't cap behind he most likely doesn't have JT) so assuming button has 2 pair and will re-raise when he fills is optomistic (we also don't know which card will fill him as he could have KQ or AQ so the K pairing on the river wouldn't always produce the desired action).

Is calling the BB's river bet the best line if we fill? I think regardless we have to raise BB bet.

If button has filled up with 2 pair he is going to atleast call and probably raise even after we raised.
Now if the button has a hand he would just call the river behind us if we called then we at worst break even if we raise (as BB should always at least call) and have a much greater gain if he will still call.

Thoughts,

Dopey /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[Dopey]

Im still capping the turn, but I'm not sure it is correct. If you are behind you have atleast 8 outs and there is a decent chances you are ahead, but based on the action it makes alot of sense for atleast one of them having JT (Anyone willing to calculate how sure you need to be that atleast on of them has JT to make calling correct?)

I have multiple river questions based on different turn actions

River questions:
1. If you cap the turn and both call, what is your river line if you dont improve assuming ...

BB bets? (Call, Is there any action that gets you to fold?)
BB checks? (Bet/Call = standard?)

2. If you call the turn, button caps and you both call, what is your river line if you dont improve assuming ...

BB bets? (You'd be trapped in the middle, but You'd have to call all river bets right?)
BB checks? (Is there value in the bet after button capped, or is checking with the intention of trying to keep BB in to call a possible bet better?)

Dopey /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[toss]

I think its more likely for BB to have JT since he's in the blinds. (Button is more likely to coldcall PF with KQ, AQ instead of JT)

[jskills]

[ QUOTE ]
I enjoyed reading through this one.

8-handed Party 3/6.

Hero open raises UTG+1 with red AA. The Button cold calls, the SB folds and the BB calls. The villains are unknown but haven't gotten out of line yet.

Flop: K/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 3/images/graemlins/club.gif, A/images/graemlins/spade.gif
BB checks, Hero bets, Button calls, Hero calls.

Turn: Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif
BB checks, Hero bets, Button raises, BB 3-bets, Hero

What's Hero's plan? Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

The "Hero calls" in the flop line was a typo yes?

Shouldn't the plan be to call the turn and check / fold the river since it looks very much like one or both villans has JT?

I probably couldn't make this fold myself since I suck and would end up trapped like a ping pong ball on the river /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[mack848]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I enjoyed reading through this one.

8-handed Party 3/6.

Hero open raises UTG+1 with red AA. The Button cold calls, the SB folds and the BB calls. The villains are unknown but haven't gotten out of line yet.

Flop: K/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 3/images/graemlins/club.gif, A/images/graemlins/spade.gif
BB checks, Hero bets, Button calls, Hero calls.

Turn: Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif
BB checks, Hero bets, Button raises, BB 3-bets, Hero

What's Hero's plan? Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

The "Hero calls" in the flop line was a typo yes?

Shouldn't the plan be to call the turn and check / fold the river since it looks very much like one or both villans has JT?


[/ QUOTE ]

If Button caps after your turn call, then I think it could be a river check/fold. The pot will be ~17BB (?), but you could get trapped for 3 or 4 bets.

If Button calls the 3-bet, then I think calling BB river bet is OK, as Button probably won't raise and you might be good 5% of the time.

[Dopey]

The real problem is your trapped in the middle. The button's action on the turn after you call might make the river decision a little easier, so that might be a reason to call and not cap the turn. Im too tired to do the math but what % do you have to know your beat to make just calling correct, cause I still think based on the range of hands they could have combined with your chances to improve its a very close decision. Then again, Im wrong alot /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Can it really be right to fold this for one bet on the river unimproved? I can't do it. The only way I could get away on the river is if it is 2 more bets back to me (BB bets, Hero calls, Button raises, BB raises), but even that wouldn't fell right.

Dopey /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[wrto4556]

I started to think about this hand a bunch. It's likely we're beat by BB but we are getting 2-1 on a cap if we know button is coming for two more. We only have to have the best hand 33% of the time to cap, right?

On the river if BB leads again we can call and hope for over call from button.

[lufbradolly]

Hero caps. Because he's losing to one hand JT. If BB leads the river just call UI.

[Dopey]

I don't think 33% is valid on the turn because we also have to face the river action. The number also needs to factor in our chance to improve.

I really am too tired (and lazy) to do the math now but it is something I will look into after I get some sleep (unless someone beats me to it).

Dopey /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[Entity]

I call. I think it's fairly important to see if Button caps here.

Rob

[jskills]

It sure looks like BB has JT and the button on a flush draw (or possibly AQ, AJ or 33). Seeing button's action on the turn will be telling, i.e. if he calls 2-bets and doesn't cap, I'd think flush draw. Capping says it's either 2 pair or an underset to me anyway.

If the river brings another /images/graemlins/spade.gif and given our read on the turn action, we're really not happy here. We could be looking at the 3rd best hand at that point.

Sure I'd call the river for one bet in any case, but I think the point of this excercise is that you have no guarantee that it will be just one bet, since you're in the middle of two people who may hold better hands than you and you risk having to spend 4 bets.

[Dopey]

Im more interested in the hand reading reasons to call in this reply.

I semi-agree, but what does the button capping tell us when we don't have any reads.

His hand range at this point would most likely fall into 2 pair hands, sets and JT (with possible flush draws which the cap would tend to rule out). Does the fact he caps change his range that much if at all?

There is potential value in noting how he played this turn for future hands but how much does it affect the actual play of this hand?

Thoughts?

Dopey /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
Im more interested in the hand reading reasons to call in this reply.

I semi-agree, but what does the button capping tell us when we don't have any reads.

His hand range at this point would most likely fall into 2 pair hands, sets and JT (with possible flush draws which the cap would tend to rule out). Does the fact he caps change his range that much if at all?

There is potential value in noting how he played this turn for future hands but how much does it affect the actual play of this hand?

Thoughts?

Dopey /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I think if Button caps and BB still leads, you can fold the river UI for one bet. How's that?

[Dopey]

Makes sense, as I see where your coming from. I just couldn't fold this for one bet UI.

I can potentially see the turn action playing out with hands other than JT and top set is too hard for me to get away from without a really good read. Possible a leak in my game but not one that occurs often so it's something I'll keep in mind for after I solve my bigger problems.

Dopey /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[Mister Z]

I don't think BB would have made a turn 3-bet without at least a set or better. For BB - JT, 33, KQ, and AQ seem like the most likely holdings - maybe AK, but I think most other hands would have been 3-bet PF. Button's range is a little wider at this point, though 2-pair seems pretty likely as he would have 3-bet most set holdings PF. I think we have to cap here for value, but I wouldn't be too shocked to see JT at SD. River action is pretty varied depending on the river card, whether button calls the turn, and if BB bets out.

I cap this turn. It is unlikely that button cold called pre-flop raise with J10 so I do not worry about waiting to see if he caps.

BB is trouble since he is more likely to have J10. There are too many other good and semi-bluffing hands that BB could have to not cap for value here, though. We also have plenty of outs to J10.

On the river, unimproved:

If BB leads, I call and fold to three bets if the river is a spade, 10, or J. Otherwise, I call three bets.

If BB checks, I bet and then play it the same way as above.

On the river, improved, oh boy...!

-Andrew

[jskills]

[ QUOTE ]
Makes sense, as I see where your coming from. I just couldn't fold this for one bet UI.

I can potentially see the turn action playing out with hands other than JT and top set is too hard for me to get away from without a really good read. Possible a leak in my game but not one that occurs often so it's something I'll keep in mind for after I solve my bigger problems.

Dopey /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not just one bet - remember you're stuck in between two people who have appeared to made their hands. You could end up having to call in between as they raise each other. So the UI fold is not for "one bet" - the potential is there for a few more ...

[jskills]

[ QUOTE ]
I cap this turn. It is unlikely that button cold called pre-flop raise with J10 so I do not worry about waiting to see if he caps.


[/ QUOTE ]

He might cold call on the button w/ JTs no?

Yes, button could have J10S, but there are only 4 combinations of that hand, which is why I stated that holding as "unlikely". Think of all the other hand combinations button will raise with in this spot, and divide 4 by that number. Very small percentage I think.

-Andrew

[ErrantNight]

well i keep thinking the answer might be call but then i think: no, that's wrong. i can't see why calling is better than raising here.

cap it up. (i'm assuming since the BB is there on the turn he called the flop?). i think there's a very, very minute chance BB has JT and we're behind, but it's a possibility. but then, so is 33. i think the button almost certainly has AQ here.

BB is saying he can beat two-pair here, but I find it unlikely he has KK or QQ for obvious reasons, and there are a helluvalot more combinations of JT than 33. so perhaps that's the reason for a call. but our equity is pretty ginormous. against a river blank if we capped and assuming the button called if we're bet into perhaps we just call and go for the overcall. this seems a little weak, particularly with the button padding the pot...

so perhaps that's the argument for just calling the turn. because button might fold his AQ to a cap here (although that seems unlikely) and bb's range of hands, however unlikely, include a fair portion that beat us.

however, i'm relatively certain that with our outs to improve if behind, plus the possibility that bb is finally getting out of hand make this a cap and proceed actively on the river.

now, to read the responses.

[ErrantNight]

i don't think there's a chance in hell button caps this. and even if he does i'd be more inclined to believe he's getting donkish or hoping for a cheaper river than he's got us beat. BB is far more likely to hold JT than the button.

[ErrantNight]

any line that involves folding this river is a bad one.

now, if you don't improve, and the river drops the T /images/graemlins/spade.gif or something, it goes bet, you call, raise, 3-bet... then you can start that discussion. but for now, don't outthink yourself.

i think someone needs to stop and do some math. hopefully not me. given that there's a small chance the BB is getting donky with something pisspoor for such a strong play, or is overplaying 33 (or oddly playing QQ/KK), combined with the larger chance that he has JT, along with our likely outs if behind + the dead money from the button (factoring in the remote possibility he also has us beat and/or has like, 1 live out against us here)... is our equity high enough to raise? i think it's prolly pretty close. but i'm getting to showdown unless [censored] explodes.

[wrto4556]

[ QUOTE ]
I call. I think it's fairly important to see if Button caps here.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Not only that, the range of hands we have Button on are drawing dead. We dont want him to fold when it gets 2 back to him. We also get lots of action when we fill up most times.

I thought too hard about the hand.

[ErrantNight]

isn't it pretty clear he has AQ here a vast majority of the time?

[ErrantNight]

that would be pretty freakin' out of line.

I agree with you that we should not be worried about the button beating us.

I do not think AQ is most likely, though, since there are only three of those combinations left. I am guessing KQ or some sort of semi-bluff flush/straight draw.

[ErrantNight]

at some point bayesian analysis of his possible hands is overridden by the play. AQ is a far more likely cold-calling hand in general, regardless of how many aces are left.

[Jake (The Snake)]

I haven't given the hand enough thought yet, it is very interesting.

But my first instinct is to call, as it will make the river less expensive when behind and more profitable when ahead or improved, imo.

The turn looks like a cap to me. If there is an 'x' probability one of them has JT and we know for a fact the other has 2-pair/set hero's equity is: [.167x + (1-x)]*100%

In order for a cap to be profitable this must be greater than 34%. Solving for 'x' tells us that one of the two must have JT 79% or more for capping to not be profitable.

Capping also makes the river easier to play.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
at some point bayesian analysis of his possible hands is overridden by the play. AQ is a far more likely cold-calling hand in general, regardless of how many aces are left.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not "far more" likely when you have to discount AQ to 3 possible combinations, and discount them some because AQs is more likely for coldcalling than AQo.

You can't do this one purely by combinatorial math, but you can't do it just by saying that it's "far more likely." The reason we call rather than capping ourselves is we get much more pure information about the river and our best action on it, and we don't hurt ourselves equity-wise by raising with the worst hand while we're drawing to 8-10 outs.

Rob

[ErrantNight]

I've yet to hear compelling evidence in support of the assertion that we reaceive much more information about the river if we call.

I think mathematical analysis is definitely needed, and my point about believing the button is more likely on AQ than KQ, wrong or right (and I'm certainly open to being wrong) has nothing to do with it. I don't think you should play this turn looking for information from the button. I'm simply not concerned. I think cold-calling JTs is far enough out of line that we'd know it about this guy by now. Maybe that's being too close-minded of the situation.

I think for other reasons the call may be correct. Because there's a slim (if unlikely) chance we fold the button. Because I haven't done the math and our equity might not be as large as I think it is.

However, if we check and improve and the board pairs we're either going to war with the button (or less likely, both) regardless of the turn action. I think this is a simple "is our equity great enough to raise" issue. I'm inclined to believe that it is, and not inclined to believe we gain any extra information by calling. Other than, perhaps "gee, I was right! button doesn't have the most unlikely hand he could have played this way that beats me!"

[flair1239]

Getting in late on this one...

But with unknowns at 3/6, with a big redraw if I am behind... I just am not ready to give credit for JT.

There are too many 2-pair type hands out there, that moderately bad players would CC with.

I am likely to cap now, because on the river if the board pairs, we probably won't get much action. Also if one of them picked up a BD flush draw, we are less likely to get an additional bet out of them on the river if the draw busts.

I am taking my 2 BB now, and handle the river when it comes. The likelyhood of having the best hand, with a solid redraw to the probable best hand, I am more inclined to think of value against unknowns. Rather than sweating the JT.

Errant,

I have to agree with you that there is very little useful information to gain from calling due to the unlikelihood that Button has J10.

I also agree that we most likely have an equity advantage and should push.

Still not sold that Button has AQ most of the time, though, but that is not the point of this hand anyway. We need to make it expensive for Button to draw if he has a hand with a J or 10 by capping, right?

-Andrew

[ErrantNight]

i think we need to cap because we have proper equity to raise with the button likely dead money, and because it will more readily define the river, depending on what comes and what the bb does after we cap.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
i think we need to cap because we have proper equity to raise with the button likely dead money, and because it will more readily define the river, depending on what comes and what the bb does after we cap.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're folding if BB leads a blank after you cap? Or are you defining your hand and then ignoring the information you get from it?

Rob

[ErrantNight]

no, i'm calling. i'm wagering that our equity is high enough on the turn to make capping the correct and calling a single river bet (or betting if checked to, and calling a raise).

i'm waiting for someone to attempt a breakdown of our turn equity. i'm not ignoring hand reading. really.

i think you're overestimating the importance about gaining information about the button's holding. i don't think he's folding, and i think he's drawing dead. bb's turn move is strong, and is frequently the current nuts. but it isn't always, and sometimes we'll improve.

[mtdoak]

Caps it and prays for the board to pair. Preferably a spade pair. You are beat by 1 hand only, JT. There are several ways for them to have it. I would rule out KK and QQ here, as he would have gotten more action preflop. AK, AQ, KQ are all possibilities. You cap because you have a signifigant redraw and there is a strong possibility you are still waay ahead.

[callmedonnie]

Originally I was thinking call. The reasoning was that we are probably ahead, there is only one hand that has us beat, two pair hands we have crushed, and if there is a flush or whatever we can't force anyone out.

But now I thinking otherwise. The likelihood of a flush draw looks small due to all the raises no the turn. These tell me made hands. Plus, no two pair flush draws are possible except K3.

So even if a spade falls I am not worried about it. I think capping is best. The only positive I can see to calling is that we get to see if button caps, but I don't know how valuable that is anyway. And, versus a straight we save a bet if we don't fill/quad up. As has already been noted, we have equity against a straight.

To be perfectly honest, I am not sure how much difference a call or raise here even makes in this spot. When you add in the infrequency of this, the difference is even less. It is good brain food though.

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
To be perfectly honest, I am not sure how much difference a call or raise here even makes in this spot. When you add in the infrequency of this, the difference is even less.

[/ QUOTE ]

This type of reasoning drives me insane. I've already elaborated on this previously here (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=headsup&Number=3157212&For um=f8&Words=%2Bprevious%20%2Bthoughts&Searchpage=0 &Limit=25&Main=3156063&Search=true&where=bodysub&N ame=21723&daterange=1&newerval=16&newertype=w&olde rval=&oldertype=&bodyprev=#Post3157212) and in the threads linked there.

[callmedonnie]

Yea, I hear you. I checked out those other posts and I know that in poker certain exact things don't occur too often but that similar situations do occur where knowing the correct play for one hand will allow you to know the optimum line for another. Also for one, I really liked this post and on a first read thought the turn action was surprising and perplexing.

After some thinking, I prefer a cap and if we don't fill on river, I'd prob just call BB's bet rather than raising and having to call a three bet. I think this simply because our hand is so strong and J10 is the only thing that scares us.

My comment came as I had some of Ed Miller's advice about leaks in mind, and not to be overly concerned with rare instances. That was probably the thinking that compelled me to make that statement you abhor. I know this hand wasn't a "am I spewing/what is my leak" post, I was just thinking that the choice between a call or raise won't make or break you.

I also realize that just because I try to spend more time worrying about mistakes that I have a chance to make more often, that doesn't mean others aren't far past that.

[thejameser]

given the way the hands have been played, the board and your holding it seems like a pretty obvious calling situation to me. capping can kill the action from hands drawing dead/slim to the river and is spewing when behind to the straight(which is not "one hand", it is one set of combos for a hand).

EDIT: not "obvious" or easy, but i think calling is correct.

[jason_t]

My point is merely that by understand what the correct action is in this hand and why will help us understand lots of other situations. What to do in the CO after I've posted with AA and it's been folded to me is an example of a situation to not worry about.

I think I'm capping it here. First of all, I definitely want to get another bet in here, especially three handed, and we will not be open to a reraise.

Second, I think it makes the river easier to play. If we cap the turn, I think that clearly tells the button that if he doesn't have J10 that he is behind. If the river doesn't improve us and the BB leads out, I probably call b/c I'm not folding this to an unknown, but if Button raises and BB 3bets the river I think I can find a fold.

[brettbrettr]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I'm capping it here. First of all, I definitely want to get another bet in here, especially three handed, and we will not be open to a reraise.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not the time to espuse this sort of thinking.



[ QUOTE ]
If we cap the turn, I think that clearly tells the button that if he doesn't have J10 that he is behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you trying to give him information? Is it better than he plays perfectly or that you do?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think I'm capping it here. First of all, I definitely want to get another bet in here, especially three handed, and we will not be open to a reraise.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not the time to espuse this sort of thinking.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure what you mean. I think we likely still have the best hand, and with outs to improve if we're behind, and button padding the pot, that I think a raise is +EV. I am even more inclined to raise if I will not face a reraise if I'm behind, as that might switch my raise to -EV. Probably I'm wrong but please tell me why I'm wrong.



[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If we cap the turn, I think that clearly tells the button that if he doesn't have J10 that he is behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you trying to give him information? Is it better than he plays perfectly or that you do?

[/ QUOTE ]

If the button has KK or QQ KQ or AK or whatever, he is still going to call my raise and any number of bets on the river. So he will still be playing imperfectly. BB is an unknown and might lead the river with the nuts or one of the hands mentioned above. I personally want to put as few bets in as possible on the river as I think I'm behind a lot of the time here. Letting the button know that he is likely behind will prevent him from raising the river, so giving the button this information helps me a lot more than it helps him.

[jskills]

[ QUOTE ]
no, i'm calling. i'm wagering that our equity is high enough on the turn to make capping the correct and calling a single river bet (or betting if checked to, and calling a raise).



[/ QUOTE ]

On the river a spade falls and what if BB bets, do you call then? If so, what do you do if the button raises? Button's raising the turn could be consistent with a possible 4 flush, no? Sure it could be 2 pair, but I'm thinking he'd cap the turn with that hand (which we'd find out by just calling the turn and not capping ourselves).

A more broad question is on the river, if you are in the middle of these opponents will you call each time it is one bet back to you - all the way to cap if they get into a raising war? The question in the OP was "what's the plan and why". We need to account for this situation, since I believe it may be part of the excercise.

[Jake (The Snake)]

My argument for calling... 3 situations:


If we are behind and hit:

Often, the turn is going to be capped anyway so while we do lose some bets by not capping ourselves, it is reduced some. Furthermore, we are much more likely to get paid off big on the river imo. Since we were behind on the turn, that means somebody with JT is going to go crazy on the river, especially considering we only called the turn. While it's unlikely someone with JT will slow down, it is at least possible if we cap the turn and keep raising the river that villain will realize we have a boat. Our hand is also hidden from the 3rd player if we only call the turn.

If we are behind and miss:

Calling the turn clearly saves us bets here. We could potentially save turn bets if button doesn't cap obviously. Then, there is the possibility that Entity suggested that we can fold the river, saving more bets. What I really don't want it to cap the turn, call BB's river bet and then get stuck in some raising war. If we don't cap the turn, I think it becomes more clear if this is going to happen or not.

If we are ahead on the turn:

Well here we are losing some bets. But not as much as you probably think. At most capping the turn will net 2 more bets, but villains will fold the river more often when this happens as well, so the number is reduced some. Furthermore, sometimes flush or straight draws will come in on the river and now calling saves more bets.


I'm defenetely missing some things here as my thoughts on this hand are very cluttered. Overall though, I want to be the one getting information and making my river play easier. I don't want to be the one giving away the fact I have a great hand when I am uncertain I am ahead. To those saying capping the turn makes the river play easier, I think you are sorely mistaken, though I can always be convinced.

[jgorham]

No one seems to be posting hand ranges here.

The tightest range I think is half reasonable for both players:

Button - 33, A3s, JT, KQ, AT, AJ
BB - 33, A3, KQ, JT, K3s

That is a pretty tight range for villains here. Even against that range, heroes equity is 39%. If button folds, heroes equity heads up against bb's range is 60%. And that doesn't even take into consideration the times these guys don't raise AK, AQ, KK, QQ. Or it doesn't take into consideration the times they have KsJs or KsTs. Or the times when they are just on crazy bluffs.

With those possibilities factored in, I would guess that hero has roughly 43%-45% equity on the turn, and not capping is just giving up money.

As for people who are worried about the hand playing itself easily on the river, you have top set. The hand isn't going to be that hard to play in any case. No matter what happens on the turn, you should be able to reduce the hand ranges significantly based on the river action. The info you gain from knowing whether or not the button is capping that turn (in which case you are going to call anyway) is going to at most save you one bet on the river. And that is only in the circumstance when he has exactly JT.

Besides all of that, letting the button call one bet on the turn rather than two with a pair and gutshot draw is the difference between him calling correctly or incorrectly. If he is going to beat you on the river by hitting a straight, it should be a mistake.

For me to be convinced that capping the turn isn't right, someone is going to need to tell me where my hand ranges are flawed, based on the action of the hand.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't want to be the one giving away the fact I have a great hand when I am uncertain I am ahead. To those saying capping the turn makes the river play easier, I think you are sorely mistaken, though I can always be convinced.

[/ QUOTE ]

Give me a scenario where in this hand, if we're behind, it hurts us to show strength on turn.

EDIT: What I mean is how does calling make the river easier to play, or how does capping make the river harder to play.

[ QUOTE ]
If we are behind and miss:

Calling the turn clearly saves us bets here. We could potentially save turn bets if button doesn't cap obviously. Then, there is the possibility that Entity suggested that we can fold the river, saving more bets. What I really don't want it to cap the turn, call BB's river bet and then get stuck in some raising war. If we don't cap the turn, I think it becomes more clear if this is going to happen or not.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is a good point.

[ QUOTE ]
If we are ahead on the turn:

Well here we are losing some bets. But not as much as you probably think. At most capping the turn will net 2 more bets, but villains will fold the river more often when this happens as well, so the number is reduced some. Furthermore, sometimes flush or straight draws will come in on the river and now calling saves more bets.


[/ QUOTE ]

IMO if villians are raising on the turns with made hands, they are folding like 0% of the time on the river.

[Jake (The Snake)]

I think your range is fine, and I am assuming you got the 39% from PS. I think the 39% needs to get chopped down a bit as the most likely hand to be played this way by far is JT.

After chopping and accounting for crazy bluffs, I think Hero has 37-40% equity, which would be enough to cap for value. But for the reasons I specified above, combined with the fact that some of this equity comes from hitting on the river (so we lose some implied odds by raising now) I'd rather call.

[ QUOTE ]
Besides all of that, letting the button call one bet on the turn rather than two with a pair and gutshot draw is the difference between him calling correctly or incorrectly. If he is going to beat you on the river by hitting a straight, it should be a mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true and a good point. It wouldn't be a big mistake though, and I don't think it overcomes the other factors.

[Jake (The Snake)]

[ QUOTE ]

Give me a scenario where in this hand, if we're behind, it hurts us to show strength on turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well it hurts us since we lose bets we didn't have to put in on the turn first of all.

If we DO cap, then we really set ourselves up on the river imo. What do we do if BB bets out? Call I guess. Now we risk Button raising and getting caught between. What if BB checks? We have to bet, but again we are risking c/r and other nasty scenarios.

If we had just called the turn though, we can see what button does. If he caps and BB still leads, we can probably fold, saving a bet or two. If he doesn't cap, now we can call BB's bet on the river without worrying much that button will raise.

[jgorham]

[ QUOTE ]
the most likely hand to be played this way by far is JT.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is true, then there is something wrong with my hand range, yeah?

[jason_t]

StellarWind made two posts in the archived thread which are absolute gold. Here's his idea.

If the Button has JT, it doesn't matter what we do because he is going to cap the turn. So let's instead assume that the Button does not hold JT but still consider the possibility that the BB might have JT.

Hero has a full house draw that will come in 10/46 = 21.7% of the time. Sometimes one of the villains will have two pair and Hero will only have 8 outs against JT. In that case Hero's full house draw is 8/44 = 18.2% to come in. So, either way, the full house draw is roughly 20% to come in.

Capping against JT will cost (4/5) * 1 BB - (1/5) * 2 BB = 2/5 BB. The actual cost is a little less because JT is sure to pay off if the board does pair.

Not capping the turn when Hero is ahead will cost him 2 BB.

At any rate, it's roughly 2:(2/5) = 5:1 that Hero is getting that the BB doesn't have JT. These odds are great for Hero and makes this an easy cap.

[jskills]

Great analysis. Really well done.

But I have a question regarding the plan for the river.

What do we do when we miss the boat and BB bets? My obvious concern is becoming the ping pong ball between raisers if the choice is to call.

[ErrantNight]

I think your logic is inconsistent.... and it still ignores my point about equity. When I get home from work I'll sit down and offer some sort of mathematical basis for my decision to raise v. call.

Why do I think your logic is inconsistent? Because IF the button is on a flush draw, we should be charging him the max on the turn. If we cap, are lead into on the river, we call, the button raises, and the bb calls or raises.... do you think we're good here very often? What happens if you call and the button caps... does that mean he's not got a flush draw and a pair? Does it mean he has two pair? Does he have a gutshot and a pair? We don't have a strong enough read to get any particular information from his raise if he caps. I think it's far more important to charge dead money or a draw, which are far more likely.

I'm basing my entire position on the proposition that there's a strong enough chance that we are ahead, in combination with our potential outs if behind+bets we'll gain on the river when we improve being a strong enough wager to outweigh trying to save a bet when we're behind, because against two relative unknowns a single turn 3-bet does not, IMO, always mean that we're behind.

[ErrantNight]

really. why would you keep calling raises between the two villains if after your turn cap you call the bb bet and the button raises. the situation you're talking about is about a billion times more likely to occur of you just call the turn, leading the button to think his hand might still be good, and then we you flat call the river, thinking that even more.

[ErrantNight]

wow I wish I had time to shoot all of this down...

first offf: "we are behind and hit"

the turn is NOT going to be capped anyway often. in fact, I'd be SHOCKED if this turn is capped by the button 1:10 times. if we go to sleep on the turn, the board pairs, and we suddenly wake up and go nuts, why is someone with a straight NOT going to think... "oh, he just sucked out on me? maybe i ought not to cap the river with him." right, he's not. and you're more likely to fold the button if you wake up on the river in this situation, unless the button makes his full house. but if he makes his full house, you should have capped the turn, and you can go to war with him on the river, and make more money

behind and miss:
in this situation you maybe save one bet, if you flat call, the river goes bet/call/call. i don't see why everyone is worried about a raising war. there's no evidence to suggest it. it would be a bizarre enough situation that you could make that fold. and it would be a lot EASIER fold if you capped the turn (essentially you saying, i have the best hand) and them simply not caring on the river. your call on the turn could induce a raising war between, say AQ and KQ.

if we are ahead on the turn:
i have nothing to say other than villains will not be folding this river more often when this happens. look at the size of this pot. the only time they're folding is if they were pumping draws on the turn, and if they were pumping draws on the turn, it becomes ESSENTIAL that you charge them the max, make the button call two bets incorrectly with his pair+gutshot or whatever...

really, i don't see why so many posters are so afraid of the turn action, and/or are trying to get so tricky in their thinking.

[ErrantNight]

you keep saying we lose bets. no. in a worse case scenario, we're behind, and we don't improve, we lost ONE more bet. ONE. why the [censored] is everyone so concerned about losing that one bet that percentage of the time we're behind and don't improve. that's simply not how to play in pots like this.


GAH this makes me so angry!

[ErrantNight]

particularly when you're frequently ahead and have outs to improve.

capping doesn't kill your action.

you should charge draws that won't put money in on the river when ahead.

make the button make a poor turn call, because he's calling this cap nearly ALL the time.

where is all this weak/tight decision-making coming from?!!?

[ErrantNight]

but where is stellarwind? i misses.

[toss]

I don't quite understand this part:

At any rate, it's roughly 2:(2/5) = 5:1 that Hero is getting that the BB doesn't have JT.

[Entity]

Stellar’s analysis seems very good. However, there are a few key points that I would like to discuss:

1) The possibility that Button can fold a horribly dominated two pair hand. I don’t think this happens often but it doesn’t have to happen often to make it have an impact. I’m thinking a folding rate against your cap of AQ, KQ has to be somewhere in the range of 10-15% of the time. I don’t think he folds 33 ever, and never folds AK. This is important, as it reduces the overlay on your cap the times that BB has JT and Button has AQ/KQ. So if Button is capable of folding a two pair hand even in the smaller range, then he’s folding to the cap 10% of the time, which means that rather than losing 1/5 of 2BB, you’re actually losing more like 1/5 of 1.9BB. Not a huge difference, but important to note. Looking at that mathematically, that means that we need to be ahead about 68% of the time for it to have a breakeven return on the turn (losing .8 bets 32% of the time is about the equivalent of losing 1.9 bets 68% of the time).

2) The most important part of analysis in this hand, though, is the effect of the turn action on the river action. 20% of the time we will improve, and capping the turn – against all but complete donks – will often lower our profit by ~1.5BB, given the fact that any river that improves our hand will be checked to us with a displeasing frequency. So let’s look at the harm of capping here:

By capping, we “lose” an additional 1BB from each our customers as we’re relatively unlikely to be led into again by a worse hand – I’d say the effect is probably that about 80% of the time, you get checked to with a hand that would have paid off 2BB. This includes the very real possibility that BB leads, you raise, and Button pays off. It’s hard to estimate the exact cost of this as Button may have a hand like KQ that is an easy fold on a rivered Ace or 3, but I think that saying that a fair estimate is that we earn 3.4BB the times we improve as opposed to 1.9BB (again, given the frequency of Button folding to a turn raise, we have to diminish the amount of times he will still be there to pay off on the river if we raise the turn). Looking at the math, that would indicate that we’re losing in the neighborhood of 1.2 bets when we improve by capping the turn (.8 x 3.4-1.5).

This is meant to be a direct correlation to SpicyF’s theorem on calling the turn in order to induce a worse hand to bet the river (his case is different and has to do with checkraising the river to save bets, but I’m trying to apply the same ideas here).

Additionally – and I know this goes against the 2+2 dogma of never folding sets – I still believe that calling to see if Button caps the turn has quite a bit of validity, as while I am never folding the river for one bet UI, it makes the decision significantly easier when Button caps the turn, BB leads the river, I overcall, and Button raises again. This is probably of little value as a fold in this situation should be fairly easy whether Button capped the turn or you did.

The fact that all of this has to be considered rather than just how often we’re ahead is very important. I think doing a weighted analysis of all of this will yield that capping the turn is very likely the incorrect action in this hand.

Rob

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
particularly when you're frequently ahead and have outs to improve.

capping doesn't kill your action.

you should charge draws that won't put money in on the river when ahead.

make the button make a poor turn call, because he's calling this cap nearly ALL the time.

where is all this weak/tight decision-making coming from?!!?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are genuinely overestimating the time we're up against draws and underestimating the times that we're up against made hands of varying degrees (AQ, JT, 33 most frequently, KQ occasionally). I also think you're vastly overestimating the amount of times JT looks at a turn cap and says "well, I guess I'll lead out on a paired river."

This has nothing to do with being weak-tight, and everything to do with trying to make the most bets out of this situation. That means saving bets when behind and earning extra bets when ahead (or when you improve). You've got to do some math on this rather than just shouting "raise" and "weaktight" and crap like that.

Rob

[Guruman]

this has been a very interesting discussion to read - particularly because it seems to have caused a fundamental disagreement about the value of info in this spot.

Here's a followup that I would love to see comments on from the impassioned mob:

Scenario 1)you cap the turn for value. What specific river action would cause you to fold UI? does any specific river card influence this decision?


.
.
.
.


scenario 2)you call the turn and the button caps. What specific river action would cause you to fold UI? Does any specific river card influence your decision?



thx!

[jskills]

All I was wondering was what is the plan for the river.

So you're saying you call the BB and fold to a button raise?

[Jake (The Snake)]

I'll just say that I disagree with most of your responses, as I do not think most of them are logical.

I've already stated my reasons for calling and every word that Entity has said in regards to this hand I agree 100% with.

Of those who have recommended a cap, I think jgorham and stellarwind make very good points, though I don't yet agree capping is better because of those points.

Jason, can you please provide the link to the original thread?

[ QUOTE ]
2) The most important part of analysis in this hand, though, is the effect of the turn action on the river action. 20% of the time we will improve, and capping the turn – against all but complete donks – will often lower our profit by ~1.5BB, given the fact that any river that improves our hand will be checked to us with a displeasing frequency.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that if the BB has J10, regardless of the turn action after his 3 bet, he is going to be checking the turn a lot of the time if the board pairs. The board is really scary, and WTF does he think people are paying of 3-4 bets on the turn with?

[ QUOTE ]
That means saving bets when behind and earning extra bets when ahead (or when you improve).

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't this all really come down to then the % of the time we think that BB has J10?

I agree with your reasoning in the post above that we will likely get more bets in on the river if we improve if we don't cap the turn. So if we improve 20% of the time and get on average one more bet in on the river b/c we didn't cap the turn let's say thats like .2BB (maybe we get more bets maybe less), just throwing a number out there

But that's offset by the value we might lose by not capping the turn, which depends on how often we're ahead/behind on the turn? Thanks.

[thejameser]

[ QUOTE ]
What Entity has said in regards to this hand I agree 100% with. Of those who have recommended a cap, I think jgorham and stellarwind make very good points, though I don't yet agree capping is better because of those points.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ErrantNight]

Way to totally dismiss me when you're wrong, Rob.

I have argued consistently and conclusively in favor of a turn cap here, which, when the one and only person to do the math in this situation (StellarWind, when the hand was originally discussed) came to the same conclusion I did: the turn is an easy cap.

If you'd bothered to read my responses, as opposed to dismiss them because I had spent more time thinking and arguing this problem than I did, you would have noticed that I did not just rant and rave and scream raise and yell weak/tight at those who disagreed with me. In fact, you'd find that in my arguments I said, on numerous occasions that we were up against made hands, I never once argued that either the button or the BB was on a draw.

In concert with another posters arguments that these draws were possibilities I argued that they could be included in the analysis, but I believe I stated explicitly and numerously that we were up against made hands here.

Nor do you need JT to lead the river if the board pairs to make a turn cap correct, nor did I ever presume that such a circumstance was a integral part of any plan on the turn.

You're wrong, and you're playing the turn too weakly, and the math and the disciplined plan/arguments are out there.

You can stop conjecturing about what you think I estimate now, thank you.

You could also stop and do the math yourself... as ultimately before Jason returned with Stellar's math, I closed my arguments by noting that I believed a mathematical analysis of our turn equity would support my play. It did. But I also said that if someone did the math and showed me wrong, I would certainly admit to being wrong. I would happily adjust my play accordingly. However, for you to come back and tell me what I'm estimating and saying "You've got do so some math on this..." is downright insulting right after the math has proven me right.

I hope our future discussions will be more convivial.

Peace.

[ErrantNight]

You're willing to give the button a 10-15% turn fold rate but not even that for a river donkbet?

You're worried about the river action but give no weight to the times you improve and the button (or even the BB the times he has a made hand but not JT) does to and you get to go multiple bets?

What about the times you're ahead?

What makes you think if you and the botton both call and the board pairs the straight doesn't bet anyway?

You're checking for information, so that you can fold for exactly the same number of bets as when YOU cap. Only now you're not charging the button when you're ahead.

I did not see this post when I made my other, angrier retort... but I still think you're overestimating the number of times the button either folds or caps here... by a lot.

[ErrantNight]

scenario 1) the river goes bet, you call, raise

scenario 2) i wouldn't call the turn, and the button wouldn't cap. but if i were rob (and he wrote something to this effect), he would call the turn, call the button cap, call the bb donk bet on the river, and then fold after the button raised.

costing you exactly the same amount...

now, he claims that since we called the turn, we now have more information about where our hand stands, and that since we will sometimes be able to showdown for just two more bb's (call the turn, it's called behind, we call the river unimproved), that these two factors in concert make calling the turn a better play.

he can probably elaborate, or you can reread his posts.

i would counter that it's a helluva lot easier for me to fold this river if i cap the turn and the button is still coming over the top on the river. further, i would argue that the times we get to showdown and lose for one bb less are far outweighed by the number of times we showdown for one bb more and win, or improve and win.

further, i suggest that the river action will be largely unaltered by the presence of a turn cap. either the button will improve and raise behind, or will improve and call behind, or will not improve and will call behind.

[ErrantNight]

one of three things must be true

(a) i'm being so rude in my responses that even though i'm making valid points no one can bring themselves to read/acknowledge them (because no one is)

(b) people have already decided that one particular course of action or another is correct and is reading the situation improbably in favor of this opinion

(c) some combination of the two.

since everyone seems to think i'm just a raving monster with no poker insight aside from "must... raise... always..." and "calling... is... always... weak... tight.... ggrrrraaaarrrrrrr!!!!" i'll just shut up now and wait for someone else to maybe start presenting some compelling math/argument. because even with rob's excellent analysis... there's nothing.

[Jake (The Snake)]

Your posts come off very negatively. Yes, you make some points which are valid... then you typically use language which I do not think is of best interest to the discussion.

As for the math, Stellar's math does not take into account every variable in the hand. There are a ridiculous number of possibilities going on in this hand, and many assumptions have to be made in order to decide the best course of action. If I have any time tonight/tomorrow, I'll try to start doing some of the math to see if it can go anywhere.

This is the type of problem, though, where math is extremely difficult to do (because there is going to be a big difference in the assumptions you and I would make for example), and so we end up arguing over concepts.

[ErrantNight]

Which is why I haven't done any math... but I think that regardless of my tone I have rather successfully countered most if not all of the arguments in favor of a call... and have yet to hear anybody specifically refute the points that I'm making.

If I'm wrong, and I've been known to be wrong, I'd love to know it. I'm not arguing so vehemently so that I can be right. I'm arguing so vehemently because I believe I'm right, and I keep reading the same (in my estimation, incorrect) arguments that I've already responded to.

Anyway, obviously I lied about shutting up. But I'll at least alter my tone going forward.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
because even with rob's excellent analysis... there's nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get what you're saying.

I'm accustomed to your tone enough that it doesn't bug me. But I'm unhappy by your reluctance to do math when I at least attempted it, because it's a [censored] close decision here, but you're going to have to stab at the math involved to actually present an argument here. I tried, even if I'm wrong. Stellar's argument in the original thread was good but incomplete, and I think mine is missing some important variables as well, but I'm trying to get a complete picture.

[ QUOTE ]

further, i suggest that the river action will be largely unaltered by the presence of a turn cap. either the button will improve and raise behind, or will improve and call behind, or will not improve and will call behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

This really is the crux of the argument, and empirical evidence from my play suggests that you're 100% wrong. But who knows; maybe you play in games where unknowns don't get scared or slow down, or maybe you play in games where they play more aggressively on the turn but slow down on the river.

Readless, my contention is simple: I don't think we're ahead often enough to cap and I think we lose bets when improving by capping when behind. You can disagree if you want, but I read every single one of your posts before commenting about what the key differences between our standpoints were. I'd appreciate the same courtesy from you. I don't take offense at your tone, as I have said, but I'm chagrined by the fact that you didn't care to read what I wrote before dismissing my argument.

Rob