Hand against a weirdo 1/2 skins 6-max

[Ghazban]

Villain is very odd. He minraises often preflop, then minbets the pot on the flop into however many people are around then bombs the turn for 3xPot or so. He's never gotten called and he's done this about 3 times in the past hour. If somebody plays back to the flop minbet, he'll often fold, sometimes call and then fold to a follow up on the turn.

1/2 6-max on Eurobet

UTG limps, MP folds, Villain ($115) minraises in CO, button folds, SB calls, I call in the BB with 7 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 3 /images/graemlins/heart.gif, UTG calls and 4 of use see the flop for $4 each.

Flop: 9 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 6 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 5 /images/graemlins/club.gif ($16)

SB checks, I bet $12, UTG folds, villain pushes for $111, SB folds, I call with 7-high.

Standard? Maybe. What range of hands do you put the weirdo on?

[TheWorstPlayer]

That's quite a good "7 high". In any case, he obviously has a wide range of hands. Could be anything from a set to a higher flush draw to complete air. Maybe the nuts? Maybe an overpair? Really it's just too hard to say. I guess you are ahead of his hand range, though. Probably air or one pair. Hope it's not a straight or higher flush draw.

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]
He minraises often preflop, then minbets the pot on the flop into however many people are around then bombs the turn for 3xPot or so

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, check/call the flop? Hit the turn and take his stack?

[Ghazban]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He minraises often preflop, then minbets the pot on the flop into however many people are around then bombs the turn for 3xPot or so

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, check/call the flop? Hit the turn and take his stack?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to see the river in case I don't hit on the turn.

[gunslingner]

I dont play 1/2 but I really dont like it.

Your gambooooooling with a donk. No matter if he has a set, pair of 2s or two overs you will HAVE to hit your draw.

What's the point in playing for half your stack here?

You're either 50/50 with set, something like 55/45 versus a pair lower than 7(my math could be a bit way off) OR you're a big dog vs 78 or higher flush draw.

And the latter seems more likely.

EDIT: My math was a bit off. You are way ahead of two overs, but it doesnt look like he has two overs(unless they're sooted) IMO.

[Hattifnatt]

I fold this preflop even with these attractive odds.

Rest looks good imo.

[Hattifnatt]

Is it wrong to semi-bluff bet on the flop with a probable 15-outer?

How can callin the push be EV- even against a donk?

[Ghazban]

[ QUOTE ]
I fold this preflop even with these attractive odds.

Rest looks good imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't fold anything to a minraise from the BB but that doesn't mean I shouldn't.

[gunslingner]

[ QUOTE ]
Is it wrong to semi-bluff bet on the flop with a probable 15-outer?

How can callin the push be EV- even against a donk?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because you can find MUCH better spots against these guys.
You're going in as a small favorite or a big dog. I know, some people dont like all this "wait for better spot" thing, but if a guy is a moron I'm just waiting for a situation where i know I'm AT LEAST 2-1 favorite... and usually I dont have to wait too long...

[Ghazban]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is it wrong to semi-bluff bet on the flop with a probable 15-outer?

How can callin the push be EV- even against a donk?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because you can find MUCH better spots against these guys.
You're going in as a small favorite or a big dog. I know, some people dont like all this "wait for better spot" thing, but if a guy is a moron I'm just waiting for a situation where i know I'm AT LEAST 2-1 favorite... and usually I dont have to wait too long...

[/ QUOTE ]

Turning down a +EV scenario in a cash game is almost always wrong.

[Hattifnatt]

Word,

What say the guy is staying for long. If he losses he might refill, if he wins you can double through him later.

[ericlambi]

I'd say 75% of the time he has a set, 20% it is any overpair, and 5% it is two pair or a flopped straight.

[ericlambi]

[ QUOTE ]
Turning down a +EV scenario in a cash game is almost always wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is completely false. Think of poker playing as an investment. The relevant statistics are both the expected return (EV) and the standard deviation of the play. Investors don't only think about the expected return of a stock, but also it's risk, and the total is what's called a Sharpe Ratio (Expected Return / Risk). Playing smart poker is searching for high Sharpe Ratio (EV/StdDev) spots, not just +EV spots. If you call and lose, that money which could be invested in a better EV/StdDev spot is now gone.

There is no point in making this call.

[Hattifnatt]

Stick to the stockmarket... /images/graemlins/wink.gif

If you can't make this call, you're playing to high for your bankroll.

[Ghazban]

I understand your point but disagree. I play enough hands and have a large enough bankroll that I do not need to avoid high variance +EV situations. If villain and I were both at triple the buyin cap, it would be a different matter.

[nietzreznor]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd say 75% of the time he has a set, 20% it is any overpair, and 5% it is two pair or a flopped straight.

[/ QUOTE ]

Given OP's description of villain, I think his range probably includes one pair hands or air a decent percentage of the time. 75% set seems pretty high imo.

[ericlambi]

No, if I can't make this call it's because I'm smart enough not to. Villain doesn't have air, and the only hand he has odds to call against is an overpair or TPTK. When donks overbet the pot, they have something very good 9 times out of 10 (if not more).

I just went to cardplayer and screwed around with this hand, it is an EASY fold. Hero vs. Villain's:

AA - 51.2% Equity
A9 - 56.3% Equity
99 - 39.9% Equity
96 - 49.1% Equity

And here's where it gets good:

A/images/graemlins/heart.gifK/images/graemlins/heart.gif - 34.4% Equity
78 - 39.9% Equity
78/images/graemlins/heart.gif - 35.3% Equity

In summary, villain is ahead or coinflip pretty much all the time. Hero is being offered a bad price . . . barely better than 1-1 after rake. If calling is +EV, which I doubt it is, it is maybe $1-$2 worth of it, which points back to the risk/reward concept. Do you want to risk over $100 to win $1 just because it's +EV and you take all your +EV spots? I don't.

If you can find a call after looking at these numbers, then god bless you. Let me know where you play.

[Ghazban]

Party skins 1/2 6-max most afternoons and/or evenings, Foxwoods on the weekends.

[ericlambi]

You disagree with my analysis then? Where do you believe it fails.

[PinkSteel]

[ QUOTE ]
Hero is being offered a bad price . . . barely better than 1-1 after rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hero must call $99 to win $139; he's getting 1.4:1.

[Ghazban]

I believe his hand range is quite a bit wider than you seem to. Your analysis also doesn't include anything about weighting the probabilities of different holdings, it just lists the equity vs. a few specific ones.

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He minraises often preflop, then minbets the pot on the flop into however many people are around then bombs the turn for 3xPot or so

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, check/call the flop? Hit the turn and take his stack?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to see the river in case I don't hit on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, you can buy one card for $4 or two cards for $100. I dunno. Seems like a bad deal.

[ericlambi]

You're right, bad math in my head. Hero still has to win 42.1% of the time to break even after rake. To me, this is probably right about the odds that he'll win the hand, which means he's adding variance with little/no EV.

[Ghazban]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He minraises often preflop, then minbets the pot on the flop into however many people are around then bombs the turn for 3xPot or so

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, check/call the flop? Hit the turn and take his stack?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to see the river in case I don't hit on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, you can buy one card for $4 or two cards for $100. I dunno. Seems like a bad deal.

[/ QUOTE ]

I also might not get paid if I hit on the turn as my flush is obvious and one of my straights is a one-liner. Obviously, if I knew he was going to push over a bet but would minbet if I checked to him, I would not have bet but I didn't know he was going to do this at the time.

[ericlambi]

Errr . . . what do you think his hand range is?

I listed the odds of what I think he had in a different post (I think the combo set + two pair + straight are > 50%, which is all you need to find a fold). Seeing as how you weren't a strong favorite in any of the cases I didn't feel it was necessary to go into odds of each of the possibilities I listed. I believe he has one of the hands I didn't list a small percentage of time unless he is a lunatic, in which case you can get your money in about any time. As of right now, your hand has no showdown value, so you still lose to a random Ace high 30% of the time. Of course if you knew he had Ace high, it would be a good call.

You were the one sitting at the table, so it is your read, not mine. You called him a donk, which to me means different than maniac. Donk's overbet when they have the nuts. Maniacs bet when they have anything.

[Ghazban]

Hold on a second, let me make sure I understand your posts. Are you saying his entire hand range is: {AA, A9, 99, 96, A/images/graemlins/heart.gifK/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 87}?

Edit: I also never called him a donk

[ericlambi]

No, but I am saying an overpair, TPTK, set, two pair, higher flush draw, and made straight comprise the vast majority of what he holds. Your chances of beating KK are about the same as beating AA. You chances of beating K/images/graemlins/heart.gifQ/images/graemlins/heart.gif are about the same as A/images/graemlins/heart.gifK/images/graemlins/heart.gif, etc.

You are right, you never called him a donk, you called him a "weirdo" who makes a lot of min-raises, min-bets, and some other strange bets. What do we call a "weirdo" who has strange/stupid betting habits on this forum?

[Ghazban]

Somebody said "donks overbet with the nuts". This is true. Despite this guy's weird (and, quite honestly, bad in my opinion) play, I don't think he should be classed in with the group of donks whose overbet is the nuts most of the time. Whether this is a subcategory of "donk" or not is academic; the point is that I don't believe his prior actions imply that this overbet is certainly the nuts.

Could somebody pokerstove this? I can't do it from work. Give my opponent a hand range of {AA-88, A9, AK-ATs (hearts, obviously), KhQh, KhJh} and tell me what it comes out to. I think this is a fairly reasonable hand range for legitimate hands he could make this bet with. I also believe there is a reasonable chance he has nothing at all (or some even worse draw like Ts8s). If you say he has the pokerstove result 90% of the time and some random crap 10% of the time, I wonder if calling is mathematically +EV. If it is, I wonder what the lower bound of the random crap percentage is for EV neutrality.

[vulturesrow]

---
68,310 games 0.031 secs 2,203,548 games/sec

Board: 9h 6h 5c
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 53.2880 % 52.92% 00.37% { 7h3h }
Hand 2: 46.7120 % 46.35% 00.37% { 88+, A9s+, KhQh, KhJh, A9o }

[vulturesrow]

I realize that wasnt quite what you wanted. This one is better.

---
52,470 games 0.015 secs 3,498,000 games/sec

Board: 9h 6h 5c
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 50.1439 % 49.78% 00.37% { 7h3h }
Hand 2: 49.8561 % 49.49% 00.37% { 88+, AhKh, AhQh, AhTh, KhQh, KhJh, A9o }


---

[TheWorstPlayer]

You aren't giving him all possible sets or the nut straight. You should do one with those added. And then also add like 22 and 23 or whatever (just some random crap).

[vulturesrow]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En respuesta a:</font><hr />
You aren't giving him all possible sets or the nut straight. You should do one with those added. And then also add like 22 and 23 or whatever (just some random crap).

[/ QUOTE ]

I gave him what he asked for, why are you guys so demanding&gt;?! /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[Phoenix1010]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Turning down a +EV scenario in a cash game is almost always wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is completely false. Think of poker playing as an investment. The relevant statistics are both the expected return (EV) and the standard deviation of the play. Investors don't only think about the expected return of a stock, but also it's risk, and the total is what's called a Sharpe Ratio (Expected Return / Risk). Playing smart poker is searching for high Sharpe Ratio (EV/StdDev) spots, not just +EV spots. If you call and lose, that money which could be invested in a better EV/StdDev spot is now gone.

There is no point in making this call.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is... interesting. Are you saying that if one has a full bankroll and isn't in fear of going broke, thay they should still pass up +EV spots that have high standard deviation? Honest question.

[vulturesrow]

---
70,290 games 0.016 secs 4,393,125 games/sec

Board: 9h 6h 5c
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 47.3360 % 46.36% 00.98% { 7h3h }
Hand 2: 52.6640 % 51.68% 00.98% { 88+, 66-55, AhKh, AhQh, AhTh, KhQh, KhJh, 87s, A9o, 87o }


---

[TheWorstPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
This is... interesting. Are you saying that if one has a full bankroll and isn't in fear of going broke, thay they should still pass up +EV spots that have high standard deviation? Honest question.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is very far from obvious but correct for several reasons.

[Phoenix1010]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is... interesting. Are you saying that if one has a full bankroll and isn't in fear of going broke, thay they should still pass up +EV spots that have high standard deviation? Honest question.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is very far from obvious but correct for several reasons.

[/ QUOTE ]

Care to expand?

[TheWorstPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is... interesting. Are you saying that if one has a full bankroll and isn't in fear of going broke, thay they should still pass up +EV spots that have high standard deviation? Honest question.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is very far from obvious but correct for several reasons.

[/ QUOTE ]

Care to expand?

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, there are several ways that plays which SEEM to be +EV on paper in the light of day are actually NOT +EV in the heat of battle. These plays are often the high variance plays. There are other ways that short term variance can hurt your long term EV. I could say more, but there is too much to say, I wouldn't know where to start.

[ericlambi]

Everyone has their own personal risk aversion characteristics, so there is not a blanket answer. In theory, there could be people who are truly risk neutral and willing to push any edge regardless of the variance. There could even be people who are "risk-loving"; these people would purposely seek to increase their variance at the expense of their expected return.

This is all theoretical, in reality, no one on this list should be EV-neutral. If the best you can do with your money is find +1-2% EV spots to put it in, you ought not be playing poker for profit. Seriously . . . if you were risk-neutral then you would not mind making bets for an entire buy-in that only had the expectation of say 1BB. Who wants to do this? I know that I can find much better places for my money.

This doesn't even consider the idea that high variance leads to tilt, which is the case for nearly everyone.

[fathertime]

Maniacs like him tend to pay very well no matter what hand you represent and no matter what the board reads.

For this reason I agree with Xorbie, Gunslinger, et al. that against this player I ain't looking to get my stack in on the flop--even with this monster draw.

In fact I try to make it a rule not to invest a lot of money on draws against this type of player. Made one pair hands pay too well.

And so even though you are often in a +ev situation on the flop, I'd check flop and go from there.

FWIW: I also play less junk hands againt these players unless I'm the preflop raiser in position.

[ericlambi]

Are we going to get results for this hand or what.

[TheWorstPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
Are we going to get results for this hand or what.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why should we? They hardly matter. This guy's hand range is huge. It doesn't really matter what he happened to have in this one instance. And the turn and river cards are obviously completely unimportant.

[fathertime]

Had a neat 7-high hand win the other night. We got all in on the flop--I was oes&amp;fd; he was gs&amp;fd. Nothing hit. My ak7 outkicked his ak5!

[ericlambi]

Why? Did you really ask this question? Because I spent a whole bunch of my morning thinking about this hand, putting the guy on a range, and I want to know what happened. You are right though . . . I care much more about what the villain had than what the turn and river were.

[Ghazban]

I was not at the computer for a while. Thanks to vulturesrow for doing the Pokerstove stuff. I'm honestly surprised that its almost dead even with that range. Including all pairs (especially those that made sets on the flop) would probably be appropriate, too.

People seem to think I was looking to get my stack in on the flop; I wasn't. Nobody had led into him and I had a hand that could stand some action (bet/3bet probably has decent folding equity depending on the size of the raise, obviously as he went all-in it was a non-issue). If he had said he was going to push if I bet but minbet if I didn't, I absolutely would have check/called his (expected) minbet. At the time, I had no reason to believe he was going to push; he had been quite weak on the flop and always waited for the turn to pound it.

Anyway, he had 96o for the flopped two pair and an almost deadeven coinflip against my hand. I was quite surprised to see that when all the cards were out so I don't think omitting it from the hand ranges for the calculations is wrong as those are based on my read (which, clearly was off if I didn't even have his hand in my range). The turn and river were both hearts and I took it down.

[TheWorstPlayer]

Just trying to stress that what matters is his hand range and not his hand which is the only thing we can learn from the results. But hey at least it's one data point which better than nothing.

[fathertime]

I see what you are saying but I'd like to know what he had just so I know what type of hand this type of player tends to push with. I think that a made monster is much less likely than air or a draw. I think a draw more likely here than air. ?Equally? likely is a one pair hand.

1 one pair or draw
2 air
3 monster