67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

<font color="blue"> I hate the flop bet in retrospect. Anyone see a turn fold or a river bet? </font>


Party Poker 2/4 Hold'em (9 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

Preflop: Hero is Button with 6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]. CO posts a blind of $2.
UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, MP2 calls, MP3 calls, CO (poster) checks, Hero calls, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (8 SB) 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(8 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, UTG checks, UTG+1 checks, MP2 checks, MP3 checks, CO checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, SB folds, BB calls, <font color="#CC3333">UTG raises</font>, UTG+1 folds, MP2 folds, MP3 calls, CO folds, Hero calls, BB calls.

Turn: (8 BB) 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, MP3 calls, Hero calls, BB calls.

River: (12 BB) 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
BB checks, UTG checks, MP3 checks, Hero checks.

Final Pot: 12 BB

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

The flop bet is correct and necessary, so is the flop call.

The turn call is also a no-brainer (you've got a gutshot and your 7 outs are good).

The river is iffy, if it is a VB then it is very thin.

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

Perfect.
No need to hate the flop bet, it's easy.
Absolutely no way to fold anywhere.
And I don't think you can bet the river for value.

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

You're supposed to raise preflop. Then the rest of the hand is much easier. Also, 3-betting the flop the way you played it is a strong option.

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
The flop bet is correct and necessary, so is the flop call.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand that the call is automatic when it's check/raised, but I take exception to the bet being obviously correct.

This bet does nothing to defend our hand. Anyone with any hint of a draw, even two overcards, is correct to call.

The bet does nothing to protect our hand, our equity will change dramatically on the turn, either up or down. I see this is a pretty clear check actually.

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
This bet does nothing to defend our hand. Anyone with any hint of a draw, even two overcards, is correct to call.

[/ QUOTE ]
When overcard hands fold to our flop bet - we gain A LOT! (Not to mention that we easily have enough equity on the flop to put a bet in and grow the pot a little)

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This bet does nothing to defend our hand. Anyone with any hint of a draw, even two overcards, is correct to call.

[/ QUOTE ]
When overcard hands fold to our flop bet - we gain A LOT! (Not to mention that we easily have enough equity on the flop to put a bet in and grow the pot a little)

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, hoping that big fields of small stakes fish all will make incorrect lay downs is stretching it a bit.

This hand is similar to the TT example in 'Two Overpair Hands' in SSH. I'll happily claim that Ed would agree to wait for the turn. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

I am thinking about raising the turn here.
1. He might get scared of the paired board and fold a better 7.
2. You'll probably get a free showdown.
3. You bet the river if you improve and make more money.

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This bet does nothing to defend our hand. Anyone with any hint of a draw, even two overcards, is correct to call.

[/ QUOTE ]
When overcard hands fold to our flop bet - we gain A LOT! (Not to mention that we easily have enough equity on the flop to put a bet in and grow the pot a little)

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, hoping that big fields of small stakes fish all will make incorrect lay downs is stretching it a bit.

This hand is similar to the TT example in 'Two Overpair Hands' in SSH. I'll happily claim that Ed would agree to wait for the turn. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

The hands aren't similar at all and you'd be pretty wrong to hope that Ed would agree that checking the flop in an 8SB pot when no one has shown any interest and you have a fair amount of equity.

The conversation of offering infinite odds vs. offering limited odds has been covered before. In addition, your gutshot adds to your potential equity in this hand.

This is an easy flop bet.

Rob

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

Our equity against 7 completely random hands is ~18.2%. The random hands equity is ~11.7%. A 'fair share' would be 12.5%. Notice that we are actually likely to improve and still lose, our showdown equity is significantly lower than our chance to improve.

If we are sure that 6 people will call our bet we can treat a bet like pumping a draw, actually we want to be fairly certain all 7 will call as atleast 4 of them hold a non-random hand.

If for some bizarre reason we were sure our opponents were so tight that a bet would cut it down to 1-2 villains we could bet for that reason. The problem is that we are going to end up somewhere between those extremities.

Betting to avoid giving infinite odds is a good point though. (And I retract the likeness to 2OP hands) It's pretty much the only point really.

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
Our equity against 7 completely random hands is ~18.2%. The random hands equity is ~11.7%. A 'fair share' would be 12.5%. Notice that we are actually likely to improve and still lose, our showdown equity is significantly lower than our chance to improve.

If we are sure that 6 people will call our bet we can treat a bet like pumping a draw, actually we want to be fairly certain all 7 will call as atleast 4 of them hold a non-random hand.

If for some bizarre reason we were sure our opponents were so tight that a bet would cut it down to 1-2 villains we could bet for that reason. The problem is that we are going to end up somewhere between those extremities.

Betting to avoid giving infinite odds is a good point though. (And I retract the likeness to 2OP hands) It's pretty much the only point really.

[/ QUOTE ]

Our opponents won't have random hands when they call our bets. Randomness is weighting the odds of AA and 82o equally likely as calling bets on this board and that's bad from what I can see.

As I said to a friend, you're not going to win this pot as often as you'd like, but you'll win it more than often enough to justify putting bets -- be it one or multiple -- in on the flop.

Rob

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
Notice that we are actually likely to improve and still lose, our showdown equity is significantly lower than our chance to improve.


[/ QUOTE ]
Hitting a 7 or our straight won't likely lose the hand, so we have 6 pretty clean outs. Hitting a 6 would be dangerous, but not devasting. Plus we're likely to already hold the best hand.

[ QUOTE ]
If we are sure that 6 people will call our bet we can treat a bet like pumping a draw, actually we want to be fairly certain all 7 will call as atleast 4 of them hold a non-random hand.


[/ QUOTE ]
You have to realise we're not up against random hands here. Eliminate AA-77 and 55/33 would give a better estimation of our equity.

This is an easy bet.

Where in Sweden do you live?

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

Good thing I took my own advice and started participating here again, I obviously picked up some bad thinking during my absence.

Nick, I live in Uppsala, a real university town. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The flop bet is correct and necessary, so is the flop call.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand that the call is automatic when it's check/raised, but I take exception to the bet being obviously correct.

This bet does nothing to defend our hand. Anyone with any hint of a draw, even two overcards, is correct to call.

The bet does nothing to protect our hand, our equity will change dramatically on the turn, either up or down. I see this is a pretty clear check actually.

[/ QUOTE ]


I think alot of hands will fold to a flop bet. If someone limped in with K9o, they might fold, if someone has 22, they might fold.

As the hand went, I'm checking the river, seeing as you are losing to everything he would c/r the flop with except hands like A3. If he has a 5 or a 7, or 88, you lose

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
Nick, I live in Uppsala, a real university town. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, I was thinking about studying there, but the only living I seemed to be able to get was in a bunker half way to stockholm. I have a couple of friends studying there though.

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

I'm having a hard time following discussions like this in the Small Stakes HE forum. General statements like:

[ QUOTE ]
..you have a fair amount of equity.

[/ QUOTE ]

or

[ QUOTE ]
Not to mention that we easily have enough equity on the flop to put a bet in and grow the pot a little.

[/ QUOTE ]

are totally unsupported. If another poster says, "..you don't have much equity" then who wins the argument?

At least this poster tried to quantify it:

[ QUOTE ]
Our equity against 7 completely random hands is ~18.2%. The random hands equity is ~11.7%.

[/ QUOTE ]
but what does that mean? Is the equity against 7 random hands 18.2% or 11.7%?

As for this statement:

[ QUOTE ]
Our opponents won't have random hands when they call our bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

it seems to me if the opponents don't have random hands, then the hero's equity is even less. So, how does making that statement support the argument that the hero has plenty of equity to bet/raise?

Confuzzled.

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
it seems to me if the opponents don't have random hands, then the hero's equity is even less. So, how does making that statement support the argument that the hero has plenty of equity to bet/raise?

[/ QUOTE ]
If our 7 opponents have random hands that will include AA-77 and 55/33. In this case it's not likely that anyone of the 7 opponents holds these hands which means we're in better shape than being up against 7 random hands. When they call they won't have hold a hand like T2o or AA, but we still have top pair and a gut-shot meaning we'll be ahead most of the time and have a nice re-draw when we don't.

Those facts make this an easy bet imo.

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This bet does nothing to defend our hand. Anyone with any hint of a draw, even two overcards, is correct to call.

[/ QUOTE ]
When overcard hands fold to our flop bet - we gain A LOT! (Not to mention that we easily have enough equity on the flop to put a bet in and grow the pot a little)

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, hoping that big fields of small stakes fish all will make incorrect lay downs is stretching it a bit.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is potentially a coup if 2 or 3 opponents fold overcards. If the turn is a J, you'll be happy that JT folded.

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This bet does nothing to defend our hand. Anyone with any hint of a draw, even two overcards, is correct to call.

[/ QUOTE ]
When overcard hands fold to our flop bet - we gain A LOT! (Not to mention that we easily have enough equity on the flop to put a bet in and grow the pot a little)

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, hoping that big fields of small stakes fish all will make incorrect lay downs is stretching it a bit.

This hand is similar to the TT example in 'Two Overpair Hands' in SSH. I'll happily claim that Ed would agree to wait for the turn. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the difference between this hand and Ed's TT example is that we have more redraws to improve here. I don't see the flop bet as a protection bet, I see it as a value bet - we have 7-9 outs to get better here.

I think we should pop the turn but I am in the "over aggro" stage of my transformation from weak-tightie to 2+2er LOL. I agree with the consensus check down on the river.

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
it seems to me if the opponents don't have random hands, then the hero's equity is even less. So, how does making that statement support the argument that the hero has plenty of equity to bet/raise?

[/ QUOTE ]
If our 7 opponents have random hands that will include AA-77 and 55/33. In this case it's not likely that anyone of the 7 opponents holds these hands which means we're in better shape than being up against 7 random hands. When they call they won't have hold a hand like T2o or AA...

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not following that argument. If you throw out a bad hand like T2o and a good hand like AA as potential hands for your opponents, why does that necessarily change the hero's random hand equity? In other words, won't those two hands offset each other?

In addition, it seems to me that people entering the pot are, on average, going to have better than random hands, which would serve to reduce the hero's equity versus the random hand equity.

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you throw out a bad hand like T2o and a good hand like AA as potential hands for your opponents, why does that necessarily change the hero's random hand equity? In other words, won't those two hands offset each other?


[/ QUOTE ]
Do you really think that AA and T2o would hold equal amounts of equity in this pot?

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
it seems to me if the opponents don't have random hands, then the hero's equity is even less. So, how does making that statement support the argument that the hero has plenty of equity to bet/raise?

[/ QUOTE ]
If our 7 opponents have random hands that will include AA-77 and 55/33. In this case it's not likely that anyone of the 7 opponents holds these hands which means we're in better shape than being up against 7 random hands. When they call they won't have hold a hand like T2o or AA...

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not following that argument. If you throw out a bad hand like T2o and a good hand like AA as potential hands for your opponents, why does that necessarily change the hero's random hand equity? In other words, won't those two hands offset each other?

In addition, it seems to me that people entering the pot are, on average, going to have better than random hands, which would serve to reduce the hero's equity versus the random hand equity.

[/ QUOTE ]
Since there are 8 players to the flop these hands are pretty close to random. I guess they will still fold hands such as 52o but they will play T9o and like, but in this spot the hand that would have gotten folded preflop will have higher equity than the hand the would have gotten played (partly because the flop contains low rags). In a random range we will also include weird 2-pair such as 73/53, these hands will probably not have gotten played preflop either. They're more like to hold Q9/K8 and such. What I'm trying to say is that the hands that usually will get folded preflop is the ones that have hit the flop, so their equity isn't that much lower on average than Q9/K8/JT hands.

Ans it's not until they call the flop bet we assume their hands have considerably better equity than a random hand. However, since there are no preflop raise or flop bet we can pretty much out rule AA-77 and 55/33, and probably also 75/73/53 and A7/K7.

I don't know if I explained myself very well, please ask again if my explanation sucks...

Re: 67s on the button, 8 to the flop, i flop top pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
You're supposed to raise preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, he is not. This is Party 2/4 - not live 200/400!