NL big mistake: What was it?

[Al_Capone_Junior]

I made a pretty bad mistake today playing 100$ NL on absolutepoker.com.

On the button with AK. Five limpers for 50c and I raise to $3.50. Two call.

flop is king high with two diamonds, I have no diamonds. Checked to me. I prepare to make my bet, then wind up betting 50c into a $12 pot.



OK. So the point really isn't the poll. The answer is obviously C.

So what went so horribly wrong here? Those that know my posts and my play know darn well that I violated my own advice about a million times over on this hand.

Well I did screw it up, that's for sure. But there's an explanation. The slide bar at absolute sometimes keeps sliding after you slide it to where you want it, then try to go to the "bet" button. If you're not careful, it might just slide all the way back down to 50c. that's what happened here. Despite the fact that I really intended to bet $13, only 50c managed to get bet. And we all know intentions don't count. Only money. And I didn't get it in the pot. I gave a "virtually" free card, one that was so cheap anyone with any two cards had the odds to chase a runner runner.

Realizing my horrendous error, I bet $15 into the pot on the next card, which was an offsuit deuce. I got called.

On the river I bet another $15 when an apparent blank fell. I didn't get called.

The real bummer is that I'm pretty sure my $13 bet would have been called on the flop, which would have led to my betting even more on the turn, which would have probably gotten called too. I think my opponent who called the turn was drawing to a flush. I woulda liked to have charged him. This mistake probably cost me in the neighborhood of $20-$25.

Don't let it happen to you.

BTW, I like the absolute $100 NL game because it has 25c+50c blinds. Good for the sharks. Like we.

al

[crockpot]

yeah, their software is horrible. it's really too bad because the games are loose and allow double the max buyin.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

They are working on the software. I like the site because (as you said) the games are loose. They are generally softer there than most other sites, even limit games. Hopefully their software will improve and they'll do enough advertising to boost their business some more. I do play there tho (just look for the fish) /images/graemlins/grin.gif, I really love that double sized no limit buy-in.

al

[1800GAMBLER]

The worst part about this is you have to put money in when they have card a card to catch you. Heads up it wouldn't have been much of a mistake.

That blind strcuture kicks ass.

[Eihli]

You know, a situation I get into often is that by the time I charge the draws on the flop and turn, once the flush card hits on the river, there is too much in the pot for me to fold. WTF am I suppose to do?

[Al_Capone_Junior]

ideally, those times they make the flush or str8, you fold and don't pay them off. Thay way they paid the max to draw but got nothing in payoff when they got there. Often they will make a big enough bet to where it's obvious, allowing you to fold.

al

[Eihli]

What should you do when you are first to act and the flush card hit? If you check, it's begging them to make a bet big enough to push you out of the pot no matter what they have. Bet the same amount you bet on the flop/turn?

[Al_Capone_Junior]

There's no easy answer. You could bet again and fold to a BIG raise, or you could check-bite-the-bullet-call. It helps to know your man. I generally don't bet again tho, it's just more money lost when you get raised. These kinds of decisions separate the merely proficient from the good and great players.

al

[1800GAMBLER]

If you charge them pot sized on the turn:

Say the pot is 2x. Where x was the pot size coming into the turn.

So 4 times out of 5, they'll lose x.
1 time in 5 they'll gain, 2x.

So they are down 2x (pot sizes on the turn), so on the river they have to get paid of a bet twice the size of yours on the turn to even breakeven here.

That way, they lose x 4 times.
Gain, 2x (pot size) plus 2x (twice the size of your bet) to breakeven here.

Same on the flop, they have 2 streets to cover their loses there though. You may have a redraw on them though.

I've started charging the flush stupid prices when i know someone is betting their draw now, they'll call easily 6 times the amount they bet, or 3 times the pot size. You just have to know which players bet their draws.

[Zag]

[ QUOTE ]
What should you do when you are first to act and the flush card hit? If you check, it's begging them to make a bet big enough to push you out of the pot no matter what they have. Bet the same amount you bet on the flop/turn?

[/ QUOTE ]

My choice in this case is generally to curse. A lot.

As Al said, you need to know the man. If he is capable of bluffing in this case, you have to consider calling it down. But first consider what else he might have. If it is me against you, for instance, you would want to look to see if there was a possible straight draw the whole way. It is a big part of my repertoire to call the straight draw but then bluff the flush when it hits, against someone I think is good enough to lay down top two.

According to game theory, if you have no knowledge of the other player, you should be calling a pot-sized bet in this case 2/3 of the time. This is the best defense against a player who can out-play you -- this minimizes his profit. Against a player who bluffs too often, you call more often, up to all the time if he is clueless. Against one who bluffs too rarely, you call less often. This, of course, is harder to do, because you can't be sure it wasn't a bluff if you don't call. That is why you have to keep track when others call him down. Of course, it doesn't mean that he isn't playing differently against you than against the calling stations, but it is at least an indicator.

Since you don't come up against the same situation against the same person all that often, the trick to call with the right "frequency" is to use a randomizer. If you know that you want to have a 2/3 chance of calling, then glance at the second hand of your watch. If it is between 12 and 8, then call, and if it is between 8 and 12, then fold.

[Guy McSucker]

glance at the second hand of your watch. If it is between 12 and 8, then call, and if it is between 8 and 12, then fold

I fold when Mickey Mouse is looking up Minnie's skirt on my watch. Of course, this has nothing to do with game theory.

/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Guy.

[1800GAMBLER]

Where can i get one of those watches? Minnie's pretty hot.

[tewall]

I don't think the game theory part is right. I think this is how it should go.

1) What's the probability your opponent is bluffing? If it's > 1/3, call; if it's <1/3 fold; if 1/3 or don't know, continue to next step

2) With a hand that's only good enough to beat a bluff, call 1/2 of the time.

If you call 2/3 of the time, and your opponent knows you will do this, he can make a profit by never bluffing against you in this situation. If you call 1/2 the time, it doesn't matter whether he bluffs or not.

On his side, if he bluffs 1/3 of the time (that is, for every 3 bets, 2 are legitamate and 1 is a bluff), it won't matter whether you call or not.

So if both players were playing according to game theory, the first player would bluff 1/3 of the time, and the second player would call 1/2 of the time.

[Zag]

[ QUOTE ]
Zag, you're a big dummy, and you know nothing about game theory.

And besides, your mom dresses you funny.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm. I really thought I had understood this, and I was in the process of writing up a detailed explanation when I discovered you are correct (I think). I need to work on this a lot more.

Thanks for the correction.

[CrisBrown]

Hi Eihli,

<<You know, a situation I get into often is that by the time I charge the draws on the flop and turn, once the flush card hits on the river, there is too much in the pot for me to fold. WTF am I suppose to do?>>

Uggh. We've all been there, and as everyone says, it's a tough spot. If you don't make them pay at the flop and turn, you're giving them infinite odds to draw out. If you do -- and they pay -- you're going to lose a huge pot when they hit.

I think this is a situation where you really have to adopt that "life is one long poker game" approach. Yes, in this situation, they played incorrectly and got lucky. Unless you're reasonably sure it's a bluff, dump your hand, take the loss, and figure you'll get the chips back later.

It's somewhat different in tournament play, because you can't just buy more chips. If you bust, you're done. So the "over the long run, in a 12-hour session, I'll end up ahead" logic doesn't apply quite the same way. But again, that's where you have to look at life as one long poker game, or one long poker tournament. Sure, you're out of this one, but over a month or a quarter or a year of play, you should end up ahead.

One thing I've learned NOT to do is to go all-in on an overpair vs. a straight or (especially!) flush draw in a tournament, and especially not in the early levels. The rabbits will call your all-in on a four-flush, and a third of the time you'll lose to their "incorrect" play and be coming here (or calling a friend, or whatever) with another bad beat story.

Instead, especially in the early levels of a tournament, I have a constant question running through my head: "Is this the hand I want to die on?" The answer, except in EXTREMELY rare cases, is "No."

An actual example: $55 buy-in, one-table tournament. Early-middle stage of the tournament, blinds were $50/$100 with no antes, so there was only $150 in the pot. I was under the gun with AA.

I limped, hoping for a raise so I could set someone all-in and double up. The player in fourth position called, and everyone else mucked around to the big blind, who checked. So there's $350 in the pot.

The flop was Q-J-10.

The button bet $400, and I mucked my AA. The fourth-position player called the $400. They went to the river, and the button's KJs lost to AJ. My AA would have won, but in my mind I was right to fold. Why?

I was monkey-in-the-middle, in an unraised pot, with a VERY scary board. Yes, AA doesn't come along very often. Yes, I'm always looking to bust someone and/or double up when I get AA. Yes, I had an overpair to the board, and a belly Broadway straight draw. But in this position, at this stage in the tournament, with this hand, on this board, where someone may already have the straight: "Is this the hand I want to die on?" The answer was no, and my Aces went into the muck.

Phil Hellmuth says that in order to be a champion no-limit Hold'Em player, you have to be willing to lay down the best hand. I agree. It's a matter of picking your spots, and constantly asking yourself: "Is this the hand I want to die on?"

Footnote: as it turned out, I went on to win the tournament. But even if I had lost, I still made the right decision.

Cris

[Al_Capone_Junior]

weird that my "make sure the button is pressed correctly" thread turned into a "whether to call on the end when you think they made their hand" thread. Quite interesting tho. You had some interesting insights, as did some of the other posters.

al

[tewall]

You've misquoted me! I've always been fond of how your mother dresses.

The best uninformed bluffing pct. is determined by the amount the caller puts in the pot to call over what's in the pot after his call. The best uninformed calling pct. is determined by the amount that's in the pot before the bluffer's bet over what's in the pot after his bet.

I've never read this. I figured it out myself. It's so elegant and simple. I'm so proud.

Here's an example. Pot has 50. Opponent goes all in for 35. Should you call?

The best uninformed bluffing strategy calls for him bluffing 35/(50+35+35) = 35/120 = between 1/4 and 1/3 of the time. You should fold or call depending on whether you judge him to be bluffing more or less than this. If you don't know, you should call 50/85 = 10/17 which is between 1/2 and 2/3 of the time.

[tewall]

I like your posts too, so please don't mind any nick-picks.

BTW, I agree with your fold, and your cautious strategy overall. However, if you are a 2/3 favorite in a chance to go all-in, you have to take that, right? You're not going to do better than that. 2 out of 3 times you'll double up. That's worth dying on.

The problem is, with something like top pair, you might be called by someone who has you dominated. With top set, even apart from the redraws, you'd be very happy to get all-in against a flush draw, wouldn't you?

[CrisBrown]

Hi tewall,

<<I like your posts too, so please don't mind any nick-picks.>>

Thank you, and it's fine. I enjoy learning. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

<<BTW, I agree with your fold, and your cautious strategy overall. However, if you are a 2/3 favorite in a chance to go all-in, you have to take that, right? You're not going to do better than that. 2 out of 3 times you'll double up. That's worth dying on.

The problem is, with something like top pair, you might be called by someone who has you dominated. With top set, even apart from the redraws, you'd be very happy to get all-in against a flush draw, wouldn't you?>>

It depends on when it happens. If it's early in the tournament, I would probably go all-in with top set vs. a flush draw, but I probably would not with an overpair.

With the set, I'll win on a running pair (giving me a boat) even if he hits his flush, and I'll win if he misses his flush but hits for two pair. That's a lot of extra equity for the all-in.

With the overpair, I don't have that extra equity. So while I'm a 3:2 favorite, I don't get three chances to play the hand. If I move all-in and lose, I'm gone. And for what: a chance to double up when the blinds are so small that stack size is irrelevant?

Bottom line: you CAN'T win a tournament in the early rounds, but you CAN lose it. That's why I'll lay down a strong hand early on, rather than putting my entire stack out there as a marginal favorite.

Cris

[tewall]

A lot of people have the same philosophy. I don't see how 2-1 odds is a small favorite though. I was focused on the number, not the actual hands (which is why I said top set, even without redraws).

Bob Ciaffone says he thinks his willingness to participate in coin flips gives him an edge. Much of the time he won't get called when he goes all in, and when he does, he's still 50/50 to double up. So if as fine a player as he is willing to go all in on just a coin flip, why shouldn't a lesser player be willing to go in when the odds are clearly in their favor?

I certainly agree that being cautious, especially early on, is the way to go, but wonder if giving up on favorable situations is the way to go. I'm not just thinking of you here, but of other posts I've read falling this same philosophy.

[wontons]

Sharks like 50 cent big blinds..what the hell are you talking about????

[1800GAMBLER]

Sharks, like us, like stacks with 200 blinds in, because the play will take a lot of adjusting to, which we don't expect the average player to know about so they wont be adjusting. We have another edge.