Q9s
 

Party Poker 10/20 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

Preflop: Hero is SB with 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
UTG calls, <font color="#CC3333">MP raises</font>, CO calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, Hero calls, BB calls, UTG calls.

Flop: (10 SB) 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
Hero checks, BB checks, UTG checks, MP checks, <font color="#CC3333">CO bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, BB folds, UTG calls, MP calls, CO calls.

Turn: (9 BB) 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, UTG folds, MP calls, <font color="#CC3333">CO raises</font>, Hero calls, MP calls.

River: (15 BB) J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
Hero checks, MP checks, <font color="#CC3333">CO bets</font>, Hero calls,

CO is 70/14 but not unreasonable postflop. MP is nambipambi, 29/20 tough TAG/LAG. I put him squarely on KQ though KJ, AK, AQ is a lesser possibility.

Krishan

Re: Q9s
 

I dont get the river call at all. I think you are good here ~0% of the time. But I need to go to sleep so I my mind might be off here.

Re: Q9s
 

yeah, put me in the "why are you calling the river" camp.

Re: Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]

CO is 70/14 but not unreasonable postflop. MP is nambipambi, 29/20 tough TAG/LAG. I put him squarely on KQ though KJ, AK, AQ is a lesser possibility.

Krishan

[/ QUOTE ]

that would make this a pretty bad call then no?

Re: Q9s
 

I started writing a post thinking you hit your straight on the river and evaluating overcall versus raising.

I don't like the river call. Yeah, pot is big, yada yada yada. But you described CO as not unreasonable postflop despite his willingness to see a lot of flops. Does CO raise the field on the turn with a hand that is losing to 9s Q-kicker on the river - there's not a whole lot of hands like that? Seems to me that CO's range, based on flop and turn play, needs to be narrowed pretty significantly to a range that has you in pretty bad shape (note you hold the 9 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] so CO is not betting / raising pair + FD). Add in your reads on np's range with him to act behind, and it seems to me that calling is the least attractive of your options.

If you told me that CO is pretty nutso post-flop and could conceivably be playing 88 or a goofy FD like this, then you've got a case for raising the river to fold out an np J and then folding to np's three-bet if it comes. If CO really is reasonable post-flop, I think you're better off folding here.

Edit: Cross-posted with a bunch of others. Did a bit of math. Assuming np folds a naked J to a raise always and has KQ 40% of the time, you still need to be ahead of CO more than 20% of the time to consider a raise. I don't think you're close to 20% unless your read isn't accurate; How often do you think np folds a naked j instead of just overcalling? It would need to be pretty high given the likelihood that you're losing to CO in any event.

Re: Q9s
 

this is a flop i bet and not a river i call. i can't see us winning ever.

Re: Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
yeah, put me in the "why are you calling the river" camp.

[/ QUOTE ]

Alright I folded. How does the rest of the hand look? Felt standard.

Krishan

Re: Q9s
 

thats how i do it. i guess a case could be made for leading the flop too.

Re: Q9s
 

Every other street looks uber standard to little ole me.

Re: Q9s
 

other than the river.......well played....per the river - you still had the MP acting behind you - even if you had a really solid reader on the better you have a player behind.....have to fold this......100% of the time (take out MP and with an incredible read in a big pot I MIGHT find the call button - if you really were putting him on a busted straight the a RAISE is in order....)

Re: Q9s
 

I prefer to donk the flop hoping to 3 bet. I think KJ KQ QJ raise for you sometimes here and let you get in many bets with great equity.

-DeathDonkey

Re: Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
I prefer to donk the flop hoping to 3 et. I think KJ KQ QJ raise for you sometimes here and let you get in many bets with great equity.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

There has to be a point at which the pot is big enough that you'll go for protection over value. This isn't big enough?

Krishan

Re: Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
There has to be a point at which the pot is big enough that you'll go for protection over value. This isn't big enough?

Krishan

[/ QUOTE ]
i don't think the preflop praiser bets this flop incredibly often. in this case you were fortunate that CO bet last to act, but i'd rather not risk this getting checked through.

Re: Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I prefer to donk the flop hoping to 3 et. I think KJ KQ QJ raise for you sometimes here and let you get in many bets with great equity.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

There has to be a point at which the pot is big enough that you'll go for protection over value. This isn't big enough?

Krishan

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope this doesn't sound dickish, but aren't you just asking me if I want to reduce variance or win more money? I do struggle with your question from time to time and I tend to err on the side of making a gigantic pot and gambooling when I can. I guess I make a mental approximation of how great my equity is relative to everyone else's - if its huge I pump and if not I try and protect. Here I think its huge.

-DeathDonkey

Re: Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
i don't think the preflop praiser bets this flop incredibly often.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? I'd say it gets bet way, way more often than it gets checked (though I don't have a ton of hands or good post-flop reads on nambipambi). Overcards have a ton of outs (BD draws, gutshots in addition to the overs) and the pot is big. Without a solid read on Villain's flop play I'd think this gets bet by PFR on the flop a LOT.

As to the flop play, I will often lead here and sometimes check to see what happens before deciding to raise or call. A lot will depend on the guys in between me and PFR and the PFR himself. I think the check and the raise is fine; I also wouldn't quibble with a flop lead.

Re: Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'd say it gets bet way, way more often than it gets checked

[/ QUOTE ]
say he bets it 75% of the time and checks 25% of the time. let's say in the end the flop gets checked through 10-15% of the time (whenever CO doesn't bet after MP checks).

to me it seems that this is really bad.

edit: not to mention when he does lead, it's obviously with the better part of his range, meaning we are more likely to be protecting our made hand against a better made hand. the check raise doesn't seem too viable an option because of this and because i really hate seeing it get checked through, so i default to betting out with my mondo equity.

Re: Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I prefer to donk the flop hoping to 3 et. I think KJ KQ QJ raise for you sometimes here and let you get in many bets with great equity.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

There has to be a point at which the pot is big enough that you'll go for protection over value. This isn't big enough?

Krishan

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope this doesn't sound dickish, but aren't you just asking me if I want to reduce variance or win more money? I do struggle with your question from time to time and I tend to err on the side of making a gigantic pot and gambooling when I can. I guess I make a mental approximation of how great my equity is relative to everyone else's - if its huge I pump and if not I try and protect. Here I think its huge.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]
It's not really a matter of variance. Specifically in this hand- we have a choice between betting out hoping that lots of people call because we have good equity in the pot or check-raising to drive people out of the pot to try to clear up some outs and increase our chances of winning what is already there. As the pot grows larger, increasing your chances of winning it by driving people out becomes a stronger option than trying to get people to put money in because we have good equity.

Re: Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I prefer to donk the flop hoping to 3 et. I think KJ KQ QJ raise for you sometimes here and let you get in many bets with great equity.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

There has to be a point at which the pot is big enough that you'll go for protection over value. This isn't big enough?

Krishan

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope this doesn't sound dickish, but aren't you just asking me if I want to reduce variance or win more money? I do struggle with your question from time to time and I tend to err on the side of making a gigantic pot and gambooling when I can. I guess I make a mental approximation of how great my equity is relative to everyone else's - if its huge I pump and if not I try and protect. Here I think its huge.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

Personally I prefer abrasive analysis. Your wasn't particularly abrasive though. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Your thinking is incorrect I believe. Let me put it this way. If there was 1 million dollars in the pot. But you were the only one who could see it, would you prefer to check raise to try and clear out overcards or would you try and pump the pot. I think pumping the pot in this theoretical example wouldn't clearly be wrong. Anything you could do to increase your chance of winning the million would outweigh (by a great deal) any equity you have in future bets.

If you agree then you just have to decide at what point the pot is large enough to try and protect your hand rather than pump.

Krishan

Re: Q9s
 

Yeah it sucks to get this checked through. But honestly, this flop is getting bet like 95%+ of the time. We're first to act, and there is a reasonable chance that one of the guys before PFR donks this flop, a substantial chance that PFR bets if checked to, and a substantial chance that the guy behind him bets if checked to. I wouldn't be so worried about this checking through -- the issue for me is whether or not checking gives us a chance to protect or whether it consigns us to only getting one bet in on the flop when leading might have gotten two in.