10/20 Q9s
 

Loose passives everywhere.

Party Poker 10/20 Hold'em (9 max, 8 handed) pokerhand.org hand converter

Preflop: I am MP1 with Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
UTG calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, I call, MP2 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, Button calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, BB checks.

Flop: (5.50 SB) T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
BB checks, UTG checks, <font color="#CC3333">I bet</font>, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 raises</font>, Button folds, BB folds, UTG calls, I call.

Turn: (5.75 BB) J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">I raise</font>

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

Is there something about UTG that makes you think your 9's are good here?

Pre-flop is debatable, but you know when its ok to limp with this hand in this spot and I'm not going to question it.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is there something about UTG that makes you think your 9's are good here?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm fairly certain I'm behind. But I have a monster draw.

[ QUOTE ]
Pre-flop is debatable, but you know when its ok to limp with this hand in this spot and I'm not going to question it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good boy. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

Is there a point to raising? Against loose-passives I expect to be ahead almost never. I also expect them to rarely fold. You also have about 1/3rd equity (not counting the Q's as outs) so you're not really getting value out of it...

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]

I'm fairly certain I'm behind. But I have a monster draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't drawing hands like customers? I don't get why you're trying to shut people out here.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm fairly certain I'm behind. But I have a monster draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't drawing hands like customers? I don't get why you're trying to shut people out here.

[/ QUOTE ]
Me neither. When UTG wakes up on this board I doubt your fold equity is enough to compensate for the extra bet you put in. Plus you keep the third guy from calling with hands that don't compromise your outs at all which is a decent portion of a bet in your pocket.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm fairly certain I'm behind. But I have a monster draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't drawing hands like customers? I don't get why you're trying to shut people out here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have twenty outs to an almost sure win. That gives me ~40% equity in this pot.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

The [censored] Inessa! That bitch!

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

Looks ok to me as long as you don't go crazy and bet the river if you whiff.

- Jim

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

There is a benifit to having him bet into on the river. Having 2 bets go in when you have 40% eq is not nearly as good as having 2 bets go in when you have 100% eq. The way you play it is fine though.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

Jason,

Outside of the blinds in an unraised pot, this is not a playable hand. On the turn I would call rather than raise, because it is clear that I have a drawing hand and I do not want people to fold. In addition, you might want to seek out a tailor to help with getting pants sized to fit properly. It's clear that the waist on those slacks is designed for someone with larger thighs and smaller calves. Your color choice, however, is impeccable. I give it a 3.14 on the *jason_TT* scale.

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img],
jason_TT

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

Awesome.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

I [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] this raise soosososooso much.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have twenty outs to an almost sure win. That gives me ~40% equity in this pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

So wouldn't you rather put in 1/3rd of the money on the turn? I'd like it more if your fold equity was &gt; really [censored] slim, or I thought you had a chance to scoop with your pair. As is, I really just don't get it.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

PreFlop - I like calling here with Q9s. Q9s in a passive game definitely has some +EV.

Flop - Standard

Turn - Raising and calling are fine but I like raising for the sake of being aggressive. Definitely switch it up from time to time specially against someone who's tough. I like raising because you have so many outs, I think you're getting enough value to raise anyway. The raise on the turn is for value cause I don't think any Q will fold here.

River - I'm betting almost anything here unless it's totally garbage.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have twenty outs to an almost sure win. That gives me ~40% equity in this pot.

[/ QUOTE ]
Jason, I think you need to discount pretty much here, you don't discount at all.


Counting outs:

Hands those loose passives could have that makes you forced to discount:

<u>UTG:</u>
KQ: 11.5 outs
J9: 18 outs
87: 14 outs
Other reasonable hands he could have: JT
I also think it's reasonable he's called the flop with a set trying to bet the turn to get raised by the flop aggressor and trap you, bad players tend to do that a lot (against these hands we have 14 outs). But what hands will a loose/passive bet this turn with after the aggression shown on the flop? The only one that you have 20 outs against is JT unless he's a über-fish and calls preflop in UTG with J3.

If we add some hands such as J3s and the fact that he might be donking with AJo or something like it (not very likely a loose/passive will do that after the flop got betted and raised) I would still say you'll only have ~17.5 outs against UTG.

<u>Then we need to worry about MP2:</u>
KT: 17 outs
TT/99/33: 14 outs
QT: 15 outs
T8: 17 outs
Other reasonable hands: Hard to put on a range but since he's passive it's not terribly wide. Of course it's made up by more hands we're having 20 outs against than those I've already mentioned, but he'll still kill a decent ammount of outs.

Put together I think it's obvious that estimating more than 17 outs would be too optimistic.



EV-calculations:

17 outs gives us 37% equity (first [...] is EV for the flop and 2nd is for the river).

<u>EV (turn raise):</u>
[(2+2x)*0.37 - 2*0.63)] + [(1+x)*0.37*0.935 - 1*0.065]
x = the chance of MP2 calling the turn raise.

I assume if MP2 calls the turn he'll call the river too and so will UTG. If we hit and miss it will cost us 1BB on the river, if we miss the river we'll check/fold. I estimate x=80%.

[(2+2*0.8)*0.37 - 2*0.63] + [(1+0.8)*0.37*0.935 - 1*0.065] = +0.48BB (x=90% would give +0.66BB)

<u>EV (turn call):</u>
[2*0.37 - 1*0.63] + [(2+2y)*0.935 - 2*0.065]
y = the chance MP2 will call 2 cold on the river, I assume he'll always call the turn. I estimate y=65%:

[2*0.37 - 1*0.63] + [(2+2*0.65)*0.935 - 2*0.065] = +2.4BB



Of course this is a very simplistic calculation for a complex situation, but I don't think the assumtions made will swing the results much in favor for one of the 2 lines and I think it's a decent approximation.

I really can't see how we could change those approximation so a turn raise would be correct. Why would we want to push a tiny edge on the turn, risking to lose costumers and maybe get 3-bettet when we can wait for the river to raise when we hit. These are loose/passive player, we can't count on them giving any action when we hit the river if raised the turn. They might even check the turn when the flushdraw hits depending on how strong their hands are which would swing the calculation a little, a turn raise will become a little better, but not close to making it correct.

EDIT: another benefit for raising is the folding equity, but that's about zero here.I also think folding the river ui after calling the turn would be very safe.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

This analysis is very indept, you have to remember though, we don't have enough time to actually consider all of this which is why raising or calling is fairly close. I didn't realize there was someone else left to act after us. Being that there is 1 more player(who called 2bets on the flop) left I think calling would be more profitable. If you closed the action on the turn then a raise is definitely a must for value.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
This analysis is very indept, you have to remember though, we don't have enough time to actually consider all of this which is why raising or calling is fairly close.

[/ QUOTE ]
Making these calculations away from the table makes it easier to come to the right decision at the table.I felt getting the money into the pot on the river with a made hand would be more profitable than pushing a marginal edge, so I decided to investigate the matter.

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't realize there was someone else left to act after us.

[/ QUOTE ]
I would raise hu on the turn if I thought I had a decent ammount of folding equity. Against a loose/passive who bets the turn after this aggression on the flop I don't think investing 3BB to get him to fold will be worth it since he'll fold very rarely. I would just call the turn and fold the river UI, losing only 1BB. That is if I'm confident in my read.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

Raising or calling to me are both fine. One of the reasons to raise is players start paying more attention as we move up. Raising here gives action, hopefully in a way that our opponents don't understand at all and in a little less than neutral situation. Which we can parlay into more bets later on.

Even passives can be convinced to put more bets in the pot than they normally would (especially if he hits his draw and they get pissed because he jacked it without a made hand). I was this happen twice last night against a player who was putting the screws on two different loose passives. In return, they went multiple bets on the turn against him with really crappy hands.

- Jim

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
Raising or calling to me are both fine. One of the reasons to raise is players start paying more attention as we move up. Raising here gives action, hopefully in a way that our opponents don't understand at all and in a little less than neutral situation. Which we can parlay into more bets later on.

Even passives can be convinced to put more bets in the pot than they normally would (especially if he hits his draw and they get pissed because he jacked it without a made hand). I was this happen twice last night against a player who was putting the screws on two different loose passives. In return, they went multiple bets on the turn against him with really crappy hands.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't agree. I don't like raising and I don't think it's particular close. Against what hands will we induce more action when we hit the riverby raising the turn? We have to assume these opponents have made hands since they're passive and both have been playing aggressively. 2-pair are likely as well as a set and UTG might have a completed stright. I don't think UTG will have less than 2-pair even though AJo is possible, MP2 can hold just a pair though. So by raising the turn we'll only get action from sets and 2-pair making their hand on the river, which means we're getting action from full houses, a hand we will lose to. On this coordinated board I don't think we'll any more action from 2-pairs if we raise the turn from loose passives.

I like to call the turn, keeping MP2 in the pot and get bet into when I hit the river.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

I think you mis-understood my comments. I like giving action this way from time to time to induce more action from my opponents in future hands.

- Jim

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think you mis-understood my comments. I like giving action this way from time to time to induce more action from my opponents in future hands.

- Jim

[/ QUOTE ]
Ah, then I agree. Capping to mix up our game is good from time to time. I would rather chose a spot where I better folding equity, but raising here occassionally is fine I guess. But I should be standard imo.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

Very nice work. I don't get why people want to raise this turn. It's aggressive and all and thats great, but calling is much more profitable unless you kick up your assumption of fold equity a good notch.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

MP2 calls, UTG 3bets and leads into you on the river:

[(3+3x)*.37 - 3*.63] + [(2+2y)*.935 - 2*.065] =
[(3+3*.8)*.37 - 3*.63] + [(2+2*.65)*.935 - 2*.065] =
[(5.4)*.37 - 1.89] + [(3.3)*.935 - .13] =
[.108] + [2.955] =
+ 3.063BB


Definitely possible.
Should our equity drop if UTG 3bets. Maybe.
Should the % MP calls the turn raise be increased seeing as he's loose. Probably.
Is MP more likely to call two cold on the river because of the deception of our turn raise. Maybe.
Do metagame considerations have an effect. Always.

All I'm pointing out is that the scale between right and wrong is a lot closer than your original equations make it out to be.

It's probably a lot worse than I figured when I made my original post but it's definitely closer than you make it out to be.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

[ QUOTE ]
Definitely possible.


[/ QUOTE ]
This will happen very rarely against loose passives and when it does it means we'll have at most 14 outs (30% equity). A loose passive won't 3-bet on this coordinated board with less than a set and he's more likely to already hold a straight.

[ QUOTE ]
Should our equity drop if UTG 3bets. Maybe.


[/ QUOTE ]
Not maybe, definately.

[ QUOTE ]
Should the % MP calls the turn raise be increased seeing as he's loose. Probably.

[/ QUOTE ]
I first estimated 80%, I think that's too low given his flop aggression. At the same time he could have gotten aggressive on the flop with a marginal hand to thin the field. However, x=&lt;90% for sure.

[ QUOTE ]
Is MP more likely to call two cold on the river because of the deception of our turn raise. Maybe.
Do metagame considerations have an effect. Always.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not really sure what you mean. We'll get more callers by varying our play and raise big draws sometimes. This should be done occassionally. And this isn't my favorite spot to be doing it since I think the EV of a call is much higher than the EV of a raise. We should varying our play when there's only a small differance. I would like some folding equity here to lower the gap between the 2 lines to make me like raising the turn.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

About as standard as it gets (postflop anyways).

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

Seems to me if UTG is passive you're not getting 3-bet very often which is probably good since you'll be HU some of the time after the raise but your hand is almost never good as is...even to the point that you can't call a river bet without the turn raise...which makes the raise seem a bit pointless. Sure you may have a hair more than 1/3 equity and might make be making a theoretical fraction of a bet if MP2 coldcalls but you know he'll overcall almost always if you just call. Getting led into again on the river is also nice when you catch. I don't like it. I don't think it's really that bad given your equity but calling certainly seems to have a higher expectation.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

Would UTG bet out this turn if he just picked up a flush draw? If he would, I like the raise because you likely have him beat; if you don't, you have plenty of outs. Also, the turn raise may get MP2 to fold a pair of Ts.

But, if UTG would only bet a made hand here, then I think I'd prefer just calling the turn.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

Good investigation by the way. I would have done the same if I was any good at math, I'll let the math wiz take care of the numbers from here on.

If the pot was HU it really depends who we are playing against. The only reason why I'd want to raise on the turn HU is so he knows that I'm aggressive and that I'm willing to push here with a semi-marginal hand with a big draw, trying to build a aggressive image I guess. I don't think we can fold many hands on the turn though, I'm sure anyone who has a T will the raise. I better bluff would be an A/Kc, I think more players are willing to fold when those cards flops.

Re: 10/20 Q9s
 

if mp2 is loose post and has a T he wont want to fld it very much which is good. That being said, you have a pair and a strt-flsh draw, so you are huge. You are huge. I like teh aggro