Re: Did I Trap Myself? (3-3 PL at the Vic)
 

[ QUOTE ]
90% of the time I would raise the pot here on the flop but I was definately trying to trap. Risky, perhaps, but I thought the board justified it. There was no flush draw, only a straight draw, and no overs. I'm not positive he would have called a flop raise but think it is more likely than not that he would have.

On the turn, the one hand I could rule out for sure was a set of Kings, based on his pf play. Certainly there was a good chance that he had the nuts when he put me all in. However, I think he would have done this with 99 and my hand was reasonably well disguised. He could have been putting me on AA and trying to get me to lay it down.

The reason I posted the hand is because it raises the following general problem: when someone makes a big bet like this there is X% chance that he has the nuts but just how big does X have to be before you lay down the second nuts? [I considered my hand the second nuts because, as stated I was virtually certain he didn't have KK.]

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm assuming you are referring to the point where you are raised all in? Pretty simple to calculate this. Based on your post at the point of your decision you have put in 665 into the pot so your remaining stack is at 1035. You just need to figure out the point where your return will be >= 1035.

Probably not a big leap to put villian on either the straight or 44/99 so we can use those as assumptions just to get an idea. Against 44/99 you are .977 to win, Against QJ you are .227 to win.

.227 * total potsize (~3400) = ~771
.977 * 3400 = 3321

So using those assumptions, with all the dead money here you can see for this to be +EV you don't need him to have a set very often. Having it just 10% of the time vs 90% having a straight your return is ~1025 which is just slightly -EV. So the breakeven point is right around there.

Someone correct me if I have fudged any of this real bad, but I think it's pretty close to correct.

Re: Did I Trap Myself? (3-3 PL at the Vic)
 

you have to take into account the number of possible hands. QJ is more likely than 44 and 99 combined.

Re: Did I Trap Myself? (3-3 PL at the Vic)
 

You're good here a lot. You should call. But you also should raise the flop. You are aware that in pot limit if you don't build the pot on the flop you can't get your stack in by the river?

Re: Did I Trap Myself? (3-3 PL at the Vic)
 

[ QUOTE ]
you have to take into account the number of possible hands. QJ is more likely than 44 and 99 combined.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just ran the numbers showing you the equity against those hands to display how often they need to have the bottom set vs the straight in this spot. You can then use the player knowledge, number of combo's of each etc and knock yourself out estimating the percentages of what villian shows up here with.

My calcs just show that he doesn't need to have the worse made hand here very often for you to be good with your call.

Re: Did I Trap Myself? (3-3 PL at the Vic)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Raise the flop, that is a hugely drawing flop. If he wants to get all-in with you then thats great, you have top set, and he might have a weaker set.

You have to call the turn. If he has QJ, then you need to suck out. Its far too possible that he has T9 or a big [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] draw, or 99 or 44. Your hand is too big to fold now.

I raise that flop with top set, its a real big drawing flop.

[/ QUOTE ]


YUP

Re: Did I Trap Myself? (3-3 PL at the Vic)
 

TAGs don't limp call with QJ OOP

Beat him into the pot.