99

[mute]

No solid read, but villain seems no the loose/passive side (only 20 hands, though).

I was gonna check/fold the turn (?). Can I call the river?

Party Poker 10/20 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is UTG with 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 9/images/graemlins/club.gif.
<font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, Button calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, BB calls.

Flop: (6.50 SB) A/images/graemlins/spade.gif, T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, Button calls, BB folds.

Turn: (4.25 BB) 6/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, Button checks.

River: (4.25 BB) 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">Button bets</font>, Hero calls.

Final Pot: 6.25 BB

[Spicymoose]

I don't know about that river call. Especially if he is loose/passive.

I always call that. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[Spicymoose]

[ QUOTE ]
I always call that. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Gimme a hand range please.

Either bet the turn again or check-fold the river. Unpaired diamonds will be obliged to check it through, gutshots will fold on the turn, some Ts and Qs may fold. I'd just check-fold.

JJ-22,KQ-K9,QJ,J10,109s,98s,J9s,108s
Something like that.
We are 42% vs that range which is enough for a call. I discounted the aces,Q10 since I believe he would bet it on the turn. I thought he would 3-bet AQ,QQ preflop.

[Spicymoose]

[ QUOTE ]
JJ-22,KQ-K9,QJ,J10,109s,98s,J9s,108s
Something like that.
We are 42% vs that range which is enough for a call. I discounted the aces,Q10 since I believe he would bet it on the turn. I thought he would 3-bet AQ,QQ preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you put in 89s, did you put in all 89s, or just the ones with the flush draw? Low pairs need to be seriously discounted as well. I would probably only include one combo of each, such as the /images/graemlins/diamond.gif /images/graemlins/heart.gif combo. That would give them a 25% weighting, which I think is generous.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
JJ-22,KQ-K9,QJ,J10,109s,98s,J9s,108s
Something like that.
We are 42% vs that range which is enough for a call. I discounted the aces,Q10 since I believe he would bet it on the turn. I thought he would 3-bet AQ,QQ preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you put in 89s, did you put in all 89s, or just the ones with the flush draw? Low pairs need to be seriously discounted as well. I would probably only include one combo of each, such as the /images/graemlins/diamond.gif /images/graemlins/heart.gif combo. That would give them a 25% weighting, which I think is generous.

[/ QUOTE ]
no I took every 89s. I picked a range which I thought he would cold call with and worked from there.

[Spicymoose]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
JJ-22,KQ-K9,QJ,J10,109s,98s,J9s,108s
Something like that.
We are 42% vs that range which is enough for a call. I discounted the aces,Q10 since I believe he would bet it on the turn. I thought he would 3-bet AQ,QQ preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you put in 89s, did you put in all 89s, or just the ones with the flush draw? Low pairs need to be seriously discounted as well. I would probably only include one combo of each, such as the /images/graemlins/diamond.gif /images/graemlins/heart.gif combo. That would give them a 25% weighting, which I think is generous.

[/ QUOTE ]
no I took every 89s. I picked a range which I thought he would cold call with and worked from there.

[/ QUOTE ]

You need to change your range once he calls the flop bet. Then you need to change your range once he checks the turn. Then you need to change your range once he bets the river.

Not all of these things have drastic effects, but you do have to think about them, and not only go by preflop. Counting combos is great, but people really need to start weighing these combos more.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
JJ-22,KQ-K9,QJ,J10,109s,98s,J9s,108s
Something like that.
We are 42% vs that range which is enough for a call. I discounted the aces,Q10 since I believe he would bet it on the turn. I thought he would 3-bet AQ,QQ preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you put in 89s, did you put in all 89s, or just the ones with the flush draw? Low pairs need to be seriously discounted as well. I would probably only include one combo of each, such as the /images/graemlins/diamond.gif /images/graemlins/heart.gif combo. That would give them a 25% weighting, which I think is generous.

[/ QUOTE ]
no I took every 89s. I picked a range which I thought he would cold call with and worked from there.

[/ QUOTE ]

You need to change your range once he calls the flop bet. Then you need to change your range once he checks the turn. Then you need to change your range once he bets the river.

Not all of these things have drastic effects, but you do have to think about them, and not only go by preflop. Counting combos is great, but people really need to start weighing these combos more.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why do you think Q10 is more probable than 22? Imo a loose passive plays them exaclty the same. Why should I discount any 89s? He has a gutshot. Thats enough for a loose passive. I think you are unfair right now. I did change my range on every street except the river. But the river bet can imo mean anything. Even loose passives realise they might have to bluff their J9s or 98s here. :/

[Spicymoose]

[ QUOTE ]

Why do you think Q10 is more probable than 22? Imo a loose passive plays them exaclty the same. Why should I discount any 89s? He has a gutshot. Thats enough for a loose passive. I think you are unfair right now. I did change my range on every street except the river. But the river bet can imo mean anything. Even loose passives realise they might have to bluff their J9s or 98s here. :/

[/ QUOTE ]

I may be being harsh, but I think that this is one of the most common mistakes people are doing right now when analyzing, and I really want people to fix it at least a bit.

QT is more probably than 22 because he plays them differently on average.

I am going to use some random estimations here, so don't jump down my throat about the numbers. There are 12 combos of QTo, and 6 combos of 22. Lets say he cold calls QTo 75% of the time, and 22 50% of the time. Lets say he calls the flop with QTo 100% of the time, and calls the flop with 22 50% of the time. Lets say he checks the turn with QTo 50% of the time, and checks the turn with 22 100% of the time. Lets say he is equally likely to bet the river.

From these numbers there are now:

QT - 12 * .75 * .5 = 4.5 combos
22 - 6 * .5 * .5 = 1.5 combos

With the kind of weighting people normally do, QT is only twice as likely as 22. But if we think about it more, we see that QT is three times as likely. This makes a huge difference.

You don't need to be so exact, as we can never estimate perfectly, but putting a little more effort into figuring out how often he might play a hand a certain way could change your equity result drastically.

Edit: You should discount 89s drastically because although he has a gutshot, he is still folding this flop a huge amount of the time.

I fire the turn again. Not sure what to do on the river if he calls though. On a pure blank I might check/call if he's aggressive to pick off a bluff from a busted draw or lower pockets. If he's not aggressive or the river puts 4 to a straight or 3 to a flush, it's a check/fold.

Well I dont do any calculations but let pstove do it. So the 12 combos vs 6 combos preflop is done automatically.

I disagree about your weighting preflop. I think he is equally likely to call with 22. I agree with the flop but think he calls a little bit more on the flop, perhaps 65%. I think however that Q10 is raising around 10% on the flop. On the turn I think Q10 is checking 20% of the time. So for me:

Q10 is 12*0.9*0.2=2.16
22 is 6*0.65=3.9

I agree with your point that we should be a little more thourough in our analysis but its quite difficult with so little information. Our answers differ greatly because of the preflop assumption. :/

[Spicymoose]

[ QUOTE ]
Well I dont do any calculations but let pstove do it. So the 12 combos vs 6 combos preflop is done automatically.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is exactly the problem. If 22 is less likely than normal, you need to remove 2 /images/graemlins/heart.gif2 /images/graemlins/club.gif or something like that to drop its likelyhood by 25%.

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree about your weighting preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]
I do too, I was throwing these out to show how to do the analysis.


[ QUOTE ]
I think he is equally likely to call with 22. I agree with the flop but think he calls a little bit more on the flop, perhaps 65%. I think however that Q10 is raising around 10% on the flop. On the turn I think Q10 is checking 20% of the time. So for me:

Q10 is 12*0.9*0.2=2.16
22 is 6*0.65=3.9


[/ QUOTE ]

Perfect, this is how you should be doing it. Note that this results ends up with 22 almost twice as likely as QTo. That means that if we were only using these two hands (every other hand was 0% likely), that in PokerStove you could do something such as allow 4 combos of 22, and only 2 combos of QT (gotta be careful that one of your combos of QT doesn't conflict with the board, or PT will automatically not count it, and you will end up with 1 combo).

The best thing about doing stuff like this, is that you can start to argue about hand ranges more indepth. For example, I highly disagree with your estimation of him checking the turn 20% of the time. He is super passive, and will check far more than this IMO. I would rather not argue about this right now though, but in future threads, this is the kind of stuff we should be debating.

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with your point that we should be a little more thourough in our analysis but its quite difficult with so little information. Our answers differ greatly because of the preflop assumption. :/

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that it can be difficult, and all I can say is that do as best you can. Our assumptions are different, but that is great. Hand reading is huge, and I currently suck at it. If I think someone plays a certain hand only 10% of the time, but then someone else comes along and says that the hand could be played like that 75% of the time, I really need to think about that. Our answers will be differing, but we can at least debate on specific points. Once we are in relative agreement about ranges, PokerStove becomes so much more valueble.