blind war w/ two great players
 

Player 1: he is the sb and is very good, aggressive, capable of making thin calls and riases/bets on later streets w/ about the correct frequency

Player 2: he is the bb and plays tons of hands vs. player 1, they both know each other very well and play at about the same level.

100/200.

p1 opens in sb w/ K9, p2 calls in bb w/ K8.

flop is T84. p1 bets p2 raises p1 calls.

turn is J. p1 checks p2 checks.

river is J. p1 checks p2 bets p1 calls.

thoughts? comments? bet the turn p1 or p2? river call by p1?

-Barron

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

i hate this "great players" bs. everyone is an effing GREAT PLAYER. NO. just say they both play well. i think p2 should bet the turn (DUH.), but the check is ok... p1s river call is absolutely awful... no effing way in a million years is K high is good in that spot.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

P2 should bet the turn.

P1 should fold the river. P2 isn't playing a worse hand than K9-hi in this manner. The J completed all semi-bluffing hands.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

Repeating what's been said..

The J makes this a fold IMO. Turn should have been bet.

Nigel

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
P2 should bet the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]
If P1 check raises on bluffs at about the right frequency, why? ... esp if it'll inbluce river bluffs or weak calls when P1 would otherwise fold to turn bet?

[ QUOTE ]
P1 should fold the river. P2 isn't playing a worse hand than K9-hi in this manner. The J completed all semi-bluffing hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

69, 67, 65 etc are few whiffs that P2 can have.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
Repeating what's been said..

The J makes this a fold IMO. Turn should have been bet.

Nigel

[/ QUOTE ]

you guys need to get out of your little box.

if somebody raises with the correct frequency on the turn, what is your ev by betting....ZERO!!! if he's doing it correctly then it doesn't matter wtf you do, fold, call because its worth 0 to you.

so by passing on a 0 ev spot you can maybe gain a large fraction of a bb from a call on the later street or induce a bluff.

stating blindly that betting the turn is a must is very narrowminded.

on the river why can't p2 have raised for a free card? and decided to bet the river as a bluff? the jack virtually assures he doesn't have a jack. from p1's perspective a T or 8 or even 4 would bet the turn...a 4 would be very likely to bet the turn ... so from p1's perspective its hard to see what p2 has so he calls thinking K high may be ggood w/ some of those hands that have enough to raise for a free card.

-Barron

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

I dont like P1s river call. After the second jack comes, P1 knows taht P2 knows that he isnt going to fold an ace or king on the river. And since p1 knows that p2 knows this, I think he has to fold when P2 still bets. Unless of course, they are both thinking on one level higher than me....

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
if somebody raises with the correct frequency on the turn, what is your ev by betting....ZERO!!! if he's doing it correctly then it doesn't matter wtf you do, fold, call because its worth 0 to you.

[/ QUOTE ]

He can do no better than play perfectly against your hand range, though. He can't assume you have K8s and play perfectly against that hand. Also, in practice it's much more difficult to play perfectly(create 0 EV decisions) because plays must be balanced for all streets and all future hands.

Your 0 EV argument can apply to the river as well. If p2 is a great player, then it shouldn't matter to p1's hand range whether he calls or folds. However, K9-high is probably on the lower end of the range that p1 holds in this spot, so his call is probably -EV.

Edit: To clarify my argument. What if p2 has Q9 here? P1 may be able to play perfectly against p2's hand range by check-raising with the optimal frequency, but he is not playing optimally against that specific hand.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

I don't like the river call.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
69, 67, 65 etc are few whiffs that P2 can have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mightn't he bet the turn with those hands pretty often?

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

hi barron

the call on the river with K hi is probably being made to keep from being run over in future hands. the SB will fold or raise in this same spot the next few times around. there is also a slight chance that he is leading with the K high, but i think that is a secondary reason.

at the higher levels, you will see calls like this when heads-up on a few rare occasions.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

I was on semi-tilt and quit about 5 minutes after this hand. The river call is aweful and I know it and I quit partly because of it. The hand was between schneids and I and dcifrths didn't know I was not playing my A game and this hand isn't very interesting IMO from my point of view. I just played it badly and that's all there is to it.

You know when you're getting beat up and everything is going wrong? You think everyone is putting moves on you. I had tunnel vision vs mike and I paid 200 bucks for it. I had dropped about 70bb at that table before this hand came up and sealed the deal. I quit for the day.

Mike should bet the turn, too. I don't HATE his check, but he really should be betting here IMO. I guess it did throw me for a loop though, cause he doesn't do that very often.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
Repeating what's been said..

The J makes this a fold IMO. Turn should have been bet.

Nigel

[/ QUOTE ]

This is so key it's not even funny.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

I think we need a circle jerk forum before a bad beat forum.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think we need a circle jerk forum before a bad beat forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you like in?

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think we need a circle jerk forum before a bad beat forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Man 1800, you really have the greatest ideas ever. I vote you for moderator. Top notch guy.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think we need a circle jerk forum before a bad beat forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you like in?

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think we need a circle jerk forum before a bad beat forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Man 1800, you really have the greatest ideas ever. I vote you for moderator. Top notch guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jesus, you're dense. 1800 and BK plz kiss and make up in PMs.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
He can do no better than play perfectly against your hand range, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an important point when considering bluffing frequency. He is bluffing against your mean hand. If you are holding an above average hand you gain value from this.

A simple way of looking at it. Assign your hand values on the turn as 1 to 5. 1 being the worst possible hand you will hold there and 5 being the best. If he is under the impression that you will bet hands 1 - 5 he could be justified in c/r'ing you to get you to fold hands 1 and 2 (you can't call with 1 or 2 because of his perfect frequnecy) giving him value on his bluff. How do you combat this? Be one step ahead, realise this and change your range to 5 - 3 thus giving extra value on your hand when he bluffs with no folding equity at all.

However if you do this check and he was never going to bluff the turn you just cost yourself EV from hands 1 and 2.

Jeff's comment about the river is great and a great way of looking at this. As is the sfer and rory hand posted a while ago. This topic goes way overlooked in this forum.

IMO, you should be betting the turn even if he has perfect frequency.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think we need a circle jerk forum before a bad beat forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Man 1800, you really have the greatest ideas ever. I vote you for moderator. Top notch guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jesus, you're dense. 1800 and BK plz kiss and make up in PMs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was just kissing jay's ass trying to be funny. I don't get why you're calling me dense?

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

Eff my post above, this explains it better. Dcfir, would you check behind top set because your opponent had perfect bluffing frequency? If not, at what point do you draw the line?

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

Now i just feel like typing a lot rather than writing my personal statement for university. Here's something out of my notes file that i writen to correct my own thinking when i found poker interesting. It's note form so it's difficult to follow. Hand ranges aren't realistic, they are made up to help for theory reasons.

PokerStars Game #1565620861: Hold'em Limit ($100/$200) - 2005/04/22 - 12:54:48 (ET)
Table 'Aralia' Seat #4 is the button
Seat 1: JayP ($8685 in chips)
Seat 2: bacplayer ($3461.50 in chips)
Seat 3: magicpitch ($7840.50 in chips)
Seat 4: PottedPlant ($4755 in chips)
Seat 5: Exclusive ($16571 in chips)
Seat 7: The Cooker ($4226 in chips)
Seat 9: #10 PELE ($3986 in chips)
Seat 10: dbocean ($2314.50 in chips)
Exclusive: posts small blind $50
The Cooker: posts big blind $100
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to JayP [5c 6h]
#10 PELE: folds
dbocean: raises $100 to $200 with A8s
JayP: folds
bacplayer: folds
magicpitch: folds
PottedPlant: folds
#10 PELE leaves the table
Exclusive: raises $100 to $300
The Cooker: folds
dbocean: calls $100
*** FLOP *** [Tc Jh As]
Exclusive: bets $100

Exclusive range: TT JJ AA AK AQ AJ = 9 + 24 + 9 = 42; KK QQ = 12. 42:12 7:2 loss:win rato; pot odds: 7:1.

KK QQ = 6 outs over 2 cards; 4:1 to improve to a better hand with KK QQ thus lowering our win % => 3/4 * 12 = 9. => 42:9 5:1.

So given we are getting 7:1 pot odds and we will win the hand 5:1 we should call

However 5:1 is our current pot odds, not our showdown pot odds. Yet if he has KK QQ we may be able to showdown getting 7:1 Meaning he will check both the turn and river with KK QQ, in that case we should call.

Yet, that's not very realistic, it's pretty rare to be in the hand against someone who you will know will check KK QQ on the turn; esp. in this hand.

So lets say we can assume 75% players check KK QQ on the turn here and 25% bet and we have no idea which group of players he hits into.

So this now makes it 75% of him having KK QQ (and not improving) we showdown for 7:1 yet 25% we may showdown for 9:3 or 3:1, which averages at 7 + 7 + 7 + 3 / 4 = 6, or 6:1. Meaning we get 6:1 showdown odds in a hand we'll win 5:1, thus we should call.

Ok, so just hightlighting the obvious, the higher the percentage of players who will bet KK QQ on the the higher our showdown cost and thus less profit.

i.e. if the player would always bet KK QQ on the turn our showdown cost vs KK QQ would be 3:1 and thus we would have to fold the flop.

So, anyone else noticing how crazy this is? The logic here is, because a player is now more likely to bet a hand that we are beating we now have to fold!

Well, imagine these two players were bots, we'll call the player with A8s Bot1 and the player with the range of hands Bot2. Imagine these bots are programmed to play against each other and they knew perfect each others hand range at all times, Bot2 knows Bot1 has Alittle, Bot1 in case 1. knows Bot2 will always check KK QQ on the turn and thus he can call the flop bet and get value on his Alittle yet in case 2. bot1 knows bot2 will always bet KK QQ and thus he can no longer call on the flop with Alittle because of the increased showdown cost.

So perfect strategy for bot2 would be to a high % of the time bet KK QQ on the turn so Alittle gets no value against him, the reason this works is because Bot2 has

HUGE protection on KK QQ because of the other hands in his hand group, TT JJ AA AK AQ AJ.

Perfect shania here is betting KK QQ against a players Alittle.

dbocean: calls $100
*** TURN *** [Tc Jh As] [3d]
Exclusive: bets $200


dbocean: calls $200
*** RIVER *** [Tc Jh As 3d] [2h]
Exclusive: bets $200
dbocean: calls $200
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Exclusive: shows [Ad Qd] (a pair of Aces)
dbocean: mucks hand
Exclusive collected $1697 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $1700 | Rake $3
Board [Tc Jh As 3d 2h]
Seat 1: JayP folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: bacplayer folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: magicpitch folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: PottedPlant (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: Exclusive (small blind) showed [Ad Qd] and won ($1697) with a pair of Aces
Seat 7: The Cooker (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 9: #10 PELE folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 10: dbocean mucked [5h Ac]

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

Great post Jay, but how is it impacted if exlusive will also check behind in the turn with AK-AQ (say 1 time in 8)? I realize it isn't very likely given the board, but is definitely relevant to the OP's hand.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
69, 67, 65 etc are few whiffs that P2 can have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mightn't he bet the turn with those hands pretty often?

[/ QUOTE ]

not when the c'r frequency from hands that call a flop raise are pretty high.

-Barron

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
i hate this "great players" bs. everyone is an effing GREAT PLAYER. NO. just say they both play well. i think p2 should bet the turn (DUH.), but the check is ok... p1s river call is absolutely awful... no effing way in a million years is K high is good in that spot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not a great player. Bicyclekick is a great player. A dick, but a great player.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
69, 67, 65 etc are few whiffs that P2 can have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mightn't he bet the turn with those hands pretty often?

[/ QUOTE ]

not when the c'r frequency from hands that call a flop raise are pretty high.

-Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

With a semibluffing hand that weak, I think a bet wins you the pot *far* more often then you get check-raised and also wind up folding the winner.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
I was on semi-tilt and quit about 5 minutes after this hand. The river call is aweful and I know it and I quit partly because of it. The hand was between schneids and I and dcifrths didn't know I was not playing my A game and this hand isn't very interesting IMO from my point of view. I just played it badly and that's all there is to it.

You know when you're getting beat up and everything is going wrong? You think everyone is putting moves on you. I had tunnel vision vs mike and I paid 200 bucks for it. I had dropped about 70bb at that table before this hand came up and sealed the deal. I quit for the day.

Mike should bet the turn, too. I don't HATE his check, but he really should be betting here IMO. I guess it did throw me for a loop though, cause he doesn't do that very often.

[/ QUOTE ]

mike talked to me about the hand and didn't mention you're state of mind and i found it interesting that a) he checked the turn and b) you called the river.

the turn check though is what is usually a bet for me like 100% of the time...but the arguments for checking are pretty convincing IF you are putting him to the test by c'ring him correctly on the turn making his decision virtually neutral.

-Barron

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
69, 67, 65 etc are few whiffs that P2 can have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mightn't he bet the turn with those hands pretty often?

[/ QUOTE ]

not when the c'r frequency from hands that call a flop raise are pretty high.

-Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

With a semibluffing hand that weak, I think a bet wins you the pot *far* more often then you get check-raised and also wind up folding the winner.

[/ QUOTE ]

very true betting there will fold out the winner a lot.

-Barron

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

I don't mind the turn check, as p1 is a sneaky prick who couldy easliy be winding up to c/r that turn, and such a move would make p2 puke. The river bet is standard IMO.

And I don't get this river call at all. time to give up.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

jay,

thanks for taking the time to point that out. your second post clears it up.

-Barron

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
69, 67, 65 etc are few whiffs that P2 can have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mightn't he bet the turn with those hands pretty often?

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. I'm more inclined to bet this turn with a draw than a made hadn like p2's. Is that wrong?

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]

you guys need to get out of your little box.

if somebody raises with the correct frequency on the turn, what is your ev by betting....ZERO!!! if he's doing it correctly then it doesn't matter wtf you do, fold, call because its worth 0 to you.


[/ QUOTE ]
This is completely wrong, and is based on a faulty interpretation of game theory. The fact that your opponent plays the turn perfectly doesn't mean that he can reduce your EV of betting to zero. You have two cards, and there are four more cards on the board. Given a sufficiently strong hand, it doesn't matter what your opponent does. His policy certainly affects the EV of your policy, but if your hand is sufficiently strong, whatever he does will still leave you with +EV.

1800GAMBLER provided a simple counterexample (top set) to your claim above.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

Since when is BK considered a great player [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]


[img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

you guys need to get out of your little box.

if somebody raises with the correct frequency on the turn, what is your ev by betting....ZERO!!! if he's doing it correctly then it doesn't matter wtf you do, fold, call because its worth 0 to you.


[/ QUOTE ]
This is completely wrong, and is based on a faulty interpretation of game theory. The fact that your opponent plays the turn perfectly doesn't mean that he can reduce your EV of betting to zero. You have two cards, and there are four more cards on the board. Given a sufficiently strong hand, it doesn't matter what your opponent does. His policy certainly affects the EV of your policy, but if your hand is sufficiently strong, whatever he does will still leave you with +EV.

1800GAMBLER provided a simple counterexample (top set) to your claim above.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes he did. and ironically i was in a box..the box of this hand, or rather, marginal hands that are not top set, any set, two pair, 1pair +huge draw...3rd pair makes the claim correct or thereabouts it starts to be correct.

-Barron

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

I think the reasoning here gets lost in the complications. it's apparent that it's just a rough draft (eg, immediate pot odds are 8:1, not 7:1, and price of calling bets atw is 11:5, not 9:3), so it's not meant to be a definitive statement. the flaw in the argument, it seems to me, is that the cost of calling down is only relevant when you lose, not when you win. it's not more "expensive" for you when you have the winning hand. let's drop the complication of when KK/QQ catch up (as was dropped the complication of A8 improving to win or chop)). all that matters is that we're 3.5:1 to win (or whatever it is when each side is adjusted for outdrawing). 78% we call down from the flop and lose 5 small bets. 22% of the time we call down from the flop and win something (8 + what he puts in post flop). the more the better. he can't hurt our expectation by paying us off witha worse hand. what we put in when we're winning doesn't come into the equation. this is all assuming that we decide on the flop to call or check according to his action. is that not right? did I misunderstand the point?

edit: let me try to emphasize my take this way. add one hand to his range, something random that he bluffs with, like Qs5s, or better something even farther behind. the more he will bet this all the way, the better it is for us to cover our eyes and call down, no?

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

"The logic here is, because a player is now more likely to bet a hand that we are beating we now have to fold!"

That can't be right - when doing the showdown calculation, you have to do (probability of being beat X what that costs) : (probability of being ahead X what you make). If you want to go nuts you can tree that out with times he improves and times you improve (1 more node is plenty).

You need the guy with KK to bet all streets so that you make more when ahead. If he only bets hands beating you, your implied odds are worse and a fold more justified.

This is why you don't call down passive players.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

Yes, i know that.

Looking back it's not shocking to me the more money that goes in the pot with KK QQ makes us fold. The situation is pretty simple, he is beating us with more than 50% of his hands so the closer we get to putting even money in the more reason to fold.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

I completely see how it seems reasonable, but the flaw in the argument is in trying to blend the expected investment when ahead with the expected investment when behind for a "net" expected investment. you can't do that because those two parts of the equation are of opposite sign. it makes no sense.

what we lose when we lose is a given, 5 sb's--end of story. what we put into our winning hands does not make that "worse", does not affect it at all. And, obversely, we can not decrease our losses (/can not "net" save money) with free showdowns with winning hands.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

i kept waiting for the part where they play great.

Re: blind war w/ two great players
 

"p1 opens in sb w/ K9"

I'd have folded.

"flop is T84. p1 bets p2 raises p1 calls."

I'd have folded.

"river is J. p1 checks p2 bets p1 calls."

I'd have folded.