57s. Why am I a LAG? - Page 2

chesspain · #11 12-22-2004, 08:50 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't realize it at the time, but MP3 is a TAG.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't post information that you didn't have at the time.

Grease · #12 12-22-2004, 02:03 PM

MP3 did indeed have the AK [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] and I'll work on getting my titles correct. Thanks for the responses.

Kaz The Original · #13 12-22-2004, 02:08 PM

Preflop call is fine in my books. Would anyone object if it was QJ suited? But here you're much less likely to be dominated.

Whether to try for the bet-cap or the check-raise on the flop depends on one thing, the number of people on each side of you and MP3.

You hit the turn like it's your job.

On the river I have to decide if my opponent has an overpair (with a spade), or the flush. I'm not letting this puppy go for 1, but I would let it go for 2 or 3.

private joker · #14 12-23-2004, 05:10 AM

[ QUOTE ]
So your standard PF play with 74s from the BB is to call a raise with it? I must be playing too tight from the blinds, but this is an insta-fold for me unless I was closing the action (UTG made the raise) and 8 other people cold-called it. (Also, this post was mis-titled).

Let me show you something.

7s 4s 79116 12.02 561200 85.29 17692 2.69 0.133
As Ad 321880 48.92 330131 50.17 5997 0.91 0.493
Qd Kh 76481 11.62 580925 88.29 602 0.09 0.116
Ac 7c 57833 8.79 583276 88.64 16899 2.57 0.100
4c 9h 15060 2.29 627487 95.36 15461 2.35 0.034
Ts 9d 75880 11.53 572855 87.06 9273 1.41 0.122

This horribly contrived example is a fairly hostile situation for 74s. Yet it still manages to win 13.3% of the time. .133 * 11 = 1.463. If you fail to call in the big blind, you are throwing away 92 cents every time you do it. However, most of the time you will not be in such a hostile situation. On average, 74s is good 15.3% of the time. Reduce this a bit to account for the raise and cold calls, and call it 14.5%. This means that your equity is 1.59, and therefore you're throwing more than $1 away every time you make this laydown.

Keep in mind that I'm only talking about those cases where you face 5 or more other players. With fewer players, fewer hands are attractive. Offsuit hands remain thoroughly unattractive against a raise, and I agree they usually must be either raised or folded (usually folded).

When the pot gets this big, you have to play some pretty egregious stuff or you're giving up value. I would agree with you if the equity were something like 1.1, but giving up an entire half small bet is horrid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because of this thread, I decided to loosen up in the blinds and play crap suited cards when the pot is monstrous PF. Here's how it went down. I don't think I played it optimally, however.

Party Poker 2/4 Hold'em (10 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is BB with 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].
UTG raises, UTG+1 calls, UTG+2 folds, MP1 calls, MP2 calls, MP3 folds, CO folds, Button 3-bets, SB folds, Hero calls, UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, MP1 calls, MP2 calls.

Flop: (18.50 SB) 3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (6 players)
Hero checks, UTG checks, UTG+1 bets, MP1 calls, MP2 calls, Button raises, Hero 3-bets, UTG folds, UTG+1 folds, MP1 calls, MP2 folds, Button calls.

Turn: (14.75 BB) 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (3 players)
Hero bets, MP1 calls, Button calls.

River: (17.75 BB) Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (3 players)
Hero bets, MP1 raises, Button calls, Hero calls.

Final Pot: 23.75 BB

Results in white below: 
Hero has 3h 6h (three of a kind, threes).
MP1 has Qs Kh (two pair, queens and threes).
Button has As Ad (two pair, aces and threes).
Outcome: Hero wins 23.75 BB.

joker122 · #15 12-23-2004, 06:42 AM

and this doesn't even take into account implied odds...

private joker · #16 12-23-2004, 06:50 AM

[ QUOTE ]
and this doesn't even take into account implied odds...

[/ QUOTE ]

Which in my case turned out to be quite nice. I was getting 9:1 immediate odds to call the PF 3-bet (which I would never have made before this thread) and after I hit trips I still ended up getting raised on the river by an inferior hand. If I hadn't frozen up I could have 3-bet the river. (The reason I didn't is because I would only get capped by a hand that beats me and due to prior action I was worried QQ was out there).

Nick C · #17 12-23-2004, 07:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I was getting 9:1 immediate odds to call the PF 3-bet . . .

[/ QUOTE ]

You did end up getting 9:1 on your preflop call, it's true. But, instead, it could've gotten capped behind you. Then some of the preflop cold-callers could've decided to fold -- which would increase your winning chances somewhat, but you've got to figure your hand is probably a huge underdog to at least one of the preflop raisers' hands and that you'll need to hit the board hard to win.

I don't know. I don't think calling a preflop 3-bet with suited and vaguely connected cards from the big blind is quite the same thing as calling a single raise with them.

cpk · #18 12-23-2004, 07:18 AM

Ack, dude, call one bet with that garbage, but not two. NH, tho. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

cpk · #19 12-23-2004, 07:23 AM

Yep. Implied odds are difficult to calculate because you don't know what you'll have to go through to get there, and you might get there and lose as Grease did.

Thus you could make the case for cold-calling 2 on this basis (as Joker illustrates in this thread), but the problem with doing that is that it could get capped and you're really cold-calling 3. This is ruinous to implied odds.

The moral of the story is that in very loose and somewhat aggressive games, you're going to have to hold your nose and drop a bet in from the BB very frequently.

private joker · #20 12-23-2004, 07:24 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Ack, dude, call one bet with that garbage, but not two. NH, tho. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

It wasn't the number of bets -- in the 74s example, Hero was getting 8:1 to call one raise, and I was getting 9:1 to call 2 raises. To me it was a matter of math, not bets. And, as the other Joker said, implied odds... anyway, I just wanted to test this theory. I'm only half-serious. I sort of still want to play tighter from the blinds than most of 2+2.