I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

I didn't fold. To the best of my knowledge a call is not EV+ here. But calling on the river for one bet comes so natural to me. I feel I need to be giving up and folding more in hands where my opponents can't have anything that I beat, duh.

What do you think?

Opponent is 20/13 regular. I don't know anything about him other than that he is a regular.

The other guy is 80/15.

Party Poker 10.00/20.00 Hold'em <font color="#0000FF">(4 handed)</font> link

Preflop: Hero is BB with A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
UTG calls, <font color="#CC3333">Button raises</font>, <font color="#666666">1 folds</font>, Hero calls, UTG calls.

Flop: (6.50 SB) 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
Hero checks, UTG checks, <font color="#CC3333">Button bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, UTG calls, <font color="#CC3333">Button 3-bets</font>, Hero calls, UTG calls.

When he 3-bets I figure I must be beat by a bigger Ace (or better).

Turn: (7.75 BB) 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
Hero checks, UTG checks, <font color="#CC3333">Button bets</font>, Hero calls, UTG calls.

I need to see the river for my outs 2*A, 2*9, 2*7 and probably some high cards.

River: (10.75 BB) 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
Hero checks, UTG checks, <font color="#CC3333">Button bets</font>, Hero calls, UTG folds.

Hero should fold? He missed his draw?

Final Pot: 12.75 BB.

Re: I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

I don't feel very good about it, but I think I'm calling him down.

Re: I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't feel very good about it, but I think I'm calling him down.


[/ QUOTE ]

Re: I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

i think everybody hates these hands as much as you do. you need to be good 1 in 6 or 6.5 or so on the river, and I don't think you are given the opponent you described. that said, i always call down in these situations. maybe we're just bad at poker?

Re: I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

Sure you are probably beaten but are you beaten more than 90% of the time? I dont think so. Villain could possibly have A2-A6(s) or 99-KK or even a busted draw like T9s. Maybe he is hoping one more bet will make you lay your ace down. I call and I think it is even +EV. Also I would hate to lay it down and see the loose UTG call w/ 89 vs villains QQ.

Re: I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

If your read is correct then the place to fold is the turn. About 25% of the time you have 2 outs to a win and none to a split. The rest of the time with a couple exceptions you have 3 outs to a win that are tainted a bit by UTG's calling along (let's say by .5), 1 sure out to a split, and an average of 1.5 outs to a split from high cards.

This works out to an average of about 3.3 outs. Both the positive and negative implied odds scenarios are rare enough that they effectively cancel each other out. You need 12.6 to 1 to call profitably and even if UTG always calls behind you you're only getting 9.75 to 1.

Re: I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

yeah i must have been drunk when i came up w/the 1 in 6 number. i still can't find a fold here, but i agree that the turn would probably be the best place to give up.

Re: I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

I think this is a definite fold on the TURN. You read him for a bigger ace. Also, utg called two bets cold on the flop. Not only is he going to come in with a winner a good percentage of the time, but his call makes the button's 3-bet even stronger. If the button was drawing, he probably would have taken the free card on the turn with two opponents.
You said that you needed to see the river for your six outs. This is exactly where you made the mistake in this hand. An ace is obviously not an out if you're already outkicked. The 9 wins the pot and the 7 gets you half of it only when neither opponent has a boat, and either one of them could have it already.
The other replies were correct that you have to call the river once you're there. That's why the mistake on the turn will cost you $40 most of the time.
I would fold this hand on the turn and not second guess it. There's too much strength out there to invest another $40.

Re: I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

Wow Danenania! I hadn't even considered that. I just assumed I had the odds to call (it sounds better with estimated unconsiusly [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]).





[ QUOTE ]
If your read is correct then the place to fold is the turn. About 25% of the time you have 2 outs to a win and none to a split.

[/ QUOTE ]

If we count splits as half outs then I think these are my number of outs...

I have 0 outs against AA(1), 77(1) = 2 combinations.

I have 2 outs against A7(4), 88(3) = 7 combinations.

I have 5 (9*3 + 7*2/2 + A*2/2) outs against A8(6) = 6 combinations

I have 5 (9,7,A) outs against AK(8)= 8 combinations.

I have 8 (9,7,A,K) outs against AQ(8)= 8 combinations.

I think a regular won't 3-bet AJ, AT, A9 often on the flop?

If he will always play these ahnds like he played and we rebate none of them (resonable?) then I have (0*2 + 2*7 + 5*6 + 5*8 + 8*8)/(2+7+6+8+8) = 4.8 outs in mean.





[ QUOTE ]
...that are tainted a bit by UTG's calling along (let's say by .5)

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think he is tainting anything though. I would more count him towards implied odds? Is it possible to do that if he is bad?

I didn't give a good description of him in the OP because I didn't think anything else than the river would be discussed. But I'm glad the turn came up as well.

I generally think it is bad sport to bring up more detailed reads in replys... But anyway, since I didn't think it was important when posting: He was really bad and could be holding any two cards. Really. He had called my down with T-high and similar _several_ times.

He was probable to call both the turn and the river. So I don't think we can count him as negative. Let's call him EV = 0.





[ QUOTE ]
Both the positive and negative implied odds scenarios are rare enough that they effectively cancel each other out.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is very interesting. Because I feel I have to learn about implied odds. I agree that it may be + or -. Either way it is only a fraction of a bet.





[ QUOTE ]
You need 12.6 to 1 to call profitably and even if UTG always calls behind you you're only getting 9.75 to 1.

[/ QUOTE ]

I came to different but similar figures.
4.8 outs : 41.2 cards left = 1 : 8.6, which is better than the 1 : 9.75 I am getting from the pot. According to my figures I am good to call.

I arrived at more positive figures than you did. Really interestinging stuff.

I think I often underestimate the probability of worst case scenarios. Probably because I still enjoy calling. This was definatly a good reminder. Thanks for giving it!




Do you think I have calculated or estimated something incorrectly?

Re: I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

You made a few mistakes in counting combinations and your outs that account for the difference in our results.

1.) If he has an Ace in his hand that means there is only one left in the deck.

2.) Your outs to a split only count for half because you only win half the pot with them.

Also I didn't include AA (1 out) or A7s (1 out) for the sake of simplicity. The possibility of those hurts your odds a bit more.

[ QUOTE ]



I don't think he is tainting anything though. I would more count him towards implied odds? Is it possible to do that if he is bad?

I didn't consider him much when playing the hand. I didn't give a good description of him in the OP. And I don't think it is good sport to bring out reads in replys. But anyway he is really bad and could really be holding any two cards. He was probable to call both the turn and the river. So I don't think we can count him as negative. Let's call him EV = 0.

[/ QUOTE ]

Two very probable hands for him are 65 and JT. Both nullify your 9 as an out. Even if he could have a bunch of other hands too he still hurts your chances. Note I discounted your 9's by .5 due to his presence which assumes he would only have one of these hands 1/6 of the time.

[ QUOTE ]
I think a regular won't 3-bet AJ, AT, A9 often on the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

In my analysis I rightly or wrongly assumed that he would 3-bet AJ and AT every time. If this isn't the case then it makes a turn call significantly worse since it means that you are now much more likely to be drawing to only 2 outs. It also means most of the high card splitting outs I gave you credit for are toast.

Re: I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

REPOST. I don't know if stuff are correct now, but I hope so.


[ QUOTE ]
If your read is correct then the place to fold is the turn. About 25% of the time you have 2 outs to a win and none to a split.

[/ QUOTE ]

If we count splits as half outs then I think these are my number of outs...

I have 0 outs against AA(1), 77(1), A7(4) = 6 combinations.

I have 2 outs against 88(3) = 3 combinations.

I have 4 (9*3 + 7*2/2 + A*1/2) outs against A8(6) = 6 combinations

I have 4 (9,7,A) outs against AK(8)= 8 combinations.

I have 6 (9,7,A,K) outs against AQ(8)= 8 combinations.

I think a regular won't 3-bet AJ, AT, A9 often on the flop?

In the cases where I have half outs I have counted them as zero outs.

If he will always play these ahnds like he played and we rebate none of them (resonable?) then I have (0*6 + 2*3 + 4*6 + 4*8 + 6*8)/(6+3+6+8+8) = 3.5 outs in mean.





[ QUOTE ]
...that are tainted a bit by UTG's calling along (let's say by .5)

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think he is tainting anything though. I would more count him towards implied odds? Is it possible to do that if he is bad?

I didn't give a good description of him in the OP because I didn't think anything else than the river would be discussed. But I'm glad the turn came up as well.

I generally think it is bad sport to bring up more detailed reads in replys... But anyway, since I didn't think it was important when posting: He was really bad and could be holding any two cards. Really. He had called my down with T-high and similar _several_ times.

He was probable to call both the turn and the river. So I don't think we can count him as negative. Let's call him EV = 0.





[ QUOTE ]
Both the positive and negative implied odds scenarios are rare enough that they effectively cancel each other out.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is very interesting. Because I feel I have to learn about implied odds. I agree that it may be + or -. Either way it is only a fraction of a bet.





[ QUOTE ]
You need 12.6 to 1 to call profitably and even if UTG always calls behind you you're only getting 9.75 to 1.

[/ QUOTE ]

I came to different but similar figures.
3.5 outs : 42.5 cards left = 1 : 12.1, which is _worse_ than the 1 : 9.75 I am getting from the pot. According to my figures I am _not_ good to call.

Really interestinging stuff.

I think I often underestimate the probability of worst case scenarios. Probably because I still enjoy calling. This was definatly a good reminder. Thanks for giving it!




EDIT: This is killing me.

Re: I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

[ QUOTE ]
1.) If he has an Ace in his hand that means there is only one left in the deck.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was a biggie. I missed that.



[ QUOTE ]
2.) Your outs to a split only count for half because you only win half the pot with them.

[/ QUOTE ]

That I counted. But most of my half outs were the 2 aces so...



[ QUOTE ]
In my analysis I rightly or wrongly assumed that he would 3-bet AJ and AT every time.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK. Yeah, I did when playing as well. But not in hindsight. Maybe "TAGs" would 3-bet AJ-AT there. I'm a TAG myself but I still don't know :-).

If he does then that improves my odds a bit ;-)



[ QUOTE ]
Two very probable hands for him are 65 and JT. Both nullify your 9 as an out. Even if he could have a bunch of other hands too he still hurts your chances. Note I discounted your 9's by .5 due to his presence which assumes he would only have one of these hands 1/6 of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. That is very resonable. I guess I didn't catch that part correcly. You counted him as donating to the pot, so even if his hands are random he will hinder my nines sometimes. Very good!




After I did call the turn and didn't improve. Do you think I should have folded the river?

Re: I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

Small points:

-You have 2 outs against 77.

-Someone with those numbers is very unlikely to raise A7 PF unless it's suited, and there is only 1 combo of A7s. Same deal with A8s except there are 2 combos of that.

-I actually forgot to include 7's in your split outs against AK/AQ so you one upped me there [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img].

Re: I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

[ QUOTE ]
After I did call the turn and didn't improve. Do you think I should have folded the river?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably. How many hands is your read over? There is no logical hand he plays this way that you beat. The question is if he has done something irrational often enough to make calling profitable. My guess is no.

Re: I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

[ QUOTE ]
-You have 2 outs against 77.

[/ QUOTE ]

77 has quads so I have 0 outs against it.;)

Re: I need to be making more folds like this one?
 

Lol. I suppose I'll give you that one.