HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

Villain is a tight aggressive table coach who uses PT and will get cute. i think this is standard, he berated me.

Party Poker 2/4 Hold'em (9 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">CO 3-bets</font>, <font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, Hero calls.

Flop: (7.50 SB) T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">CO bets</font>, Hero calls.

Turn: (4.75 BB) J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">CO bets</font>, Hero calls.

River: (6.75 BB) 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">CO bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, CO calls.

Final Pot: 10.75 BB

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

Standard.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

nh

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

It's possible I could find a fold on the flop as my overcard outs are likely very dirty, but I don't mind the call. Once that turn card hits, the hand plays itself.

He's just bitter because you hit a runner runner to beat him. Nice hand.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

Obviously the only suspect street is the flop.

In general you probably have like 3-ish outs here. A three-betting hand (with the exception of JJ, maybe 99; TT has you drawing basically dead) is dominating you here (AA, KK, QQ, AK, AQ). Occasionally you have three over card outs but your giving reverse implied odds with them and out of position will possibly miss bets when you hit anyway. Your bad door flush is suspect and maybe worth 1 out. The backdoor straight is even more unlikely. I think it's hard to say you have more than 3-4 effective outs here. We can't can't implied odds because in fact we're giving them, really. Heads-up a decent taggish type is not often checking behind on the turn here, as AK and AQ still rate to be the best hands on a turn blank and every other hand is going full-steam ahead.


So, I hate to agree with the table-coachy dude, but the flop call is incorrect in my opinion.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's possible I could find a fold on the flop as my overcard outs are likely very dirty, but I don't mind the call. Once that turn card hits, the hand plays itself.

He's just bitter because you hit a runner runner to beat him. Nice hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I initially thought the same thing, but he's got a couple things going for him other than overcards.

Let's say his overcards are worth an out each for two outs total. He has a flush (not the nut flush, though) and straight draw. So, maybe 2 outs for those. With this size pot, he needs less than 3 outs to call the flop.

Of course, had I been playing this, I would have never been able to do figure this out in time to make the call.

EDIT: Or am I being too generous with outs?

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
So, I hate to agree with the table-coachy dude, but the flop call is incorrect in my opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

What kind of flop would you want here to continue in the hand? Top pair? Two pair? A str8 draw?

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's possible I could find a fold on the flop as my overcard outs are likely very dirty, but I don't mind the call. Once that turn card hits, the hand plays itself.

He's just bitter because you hit a runner runner to beat him. Nice hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
im getting 8.5-1 and i have a 2 backdoors and 2 overs. all of these may or may not be good. his range is a little wider than some are thinking because we were chatting and i had a read he was isolating. so ATs-AKs, 88-AA, KQs, KJs, AJ-AKo. with that range do u still fold?

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

Where do you get the impression he needs less than 3 outs to call the flop? He's getting a little under 9-1, meaning his equity needs to be in the 9-10% range here. (He'll never have the odds to call the turn unimproved unless he picks up a big draw). That means he needs something like 4.5-5 outs consistently to make this call close to correct. I actually think he needs a bit more because so often he'll hit and lose but often when he hits and wins he won't extract max value: hence he's giving reverse implied odds. Needing safely 5 clean outs to proceed, as he never has more than 3 overcard outs really, and the flush and straight draw are longshots, I see effectively 4-4.5 outs here and a clear fold.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
With this size pot, he needs less than 3 outs to call the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? 3 outs is 14:1...he's getting 8.5:1. He CAN'T hit a definite winning hand on the turn, so he has to go to the river, regardless, but he's either putting in another bet or folding on the turn, so I don't think you can count flop-to-river odds, and Hero's implieds suck since the river is the only street he'll have to make up bets.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

Okay, maybe I'm looking at the wrong chart, or I'm just altogether reading it incorrectly.

But, for 4 outs, you need 10.5 to 1 to call the river, and only 5 to 1 to call the turn.

If I'm wrong, please correct me.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
so I don't think you can count flop-to-river

[/ QUOTE ]

This might explain why the chart I'm looking at is wrong.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
so ATs-AKs, 88-AA, KQs, KJs, AJ-AKo. with that range do u still fold?

[/ QUOTE ]

The only parts that help you are JJ/99/88/AJo...the least likely parts. The rest you're still in trouble to. Give me "any pocket pair and middle suited connectors" and then we can talk.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously the only suspect street is the flop.

In general you probably have like 3-ish outs here. A three-betting hand (with the exception of JJ, maybe 99; TT has you drawing basically dead) is dominating you here (AA, KK, QQ, AK, AQ). Occasionally you have three over card outs but your giving reverse implied odds with them and out of position will possibly miss bets when you hit anyway. Your bad door flush is suspect and maybe worth 1 out. The backdoor straight is even more unlikely. I think it's hard to say you have more than 3-4 effective outs here. We can't can't implied odds because in fact we're giving them, really. Heads-up a decent taggish type is not often checking behind on the turn here, as AK and AQ still rate to be the best hands on a turn blank and every other hand is going full-steam ahead.


So, I hate to agree with the table-coachy dude, but the flop call is incorrect in my opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]
since he was so talkative and critiquing everyones play, i didnt want him to start isolating me all the time for easy $ from my flop folds. I was going to fold the turn UI. Can I invest 1 SB that is slightly -EV for image against someone who is paying attention?

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
so I don't think you can count flop-to-river

[/ QUOTE ]

This might explain why the chart I'm looking at is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

The chart is right, you're applying it wrong.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
so I don't think you can count flop-to-river

[/ QUOTE ]

This might explain why the chart I'm looking at is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

The chart is right, you're applying it wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what I meant.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
Can I invest 1 SB that is slightly -EV for image against someone who is paying attention?

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course you can. What are you going to do when one of your overcards comes on the turn, you c/r him and he 3-bets?

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

On the turn if you have exactly 4 outs you need 10.5:1 to call (to see the river). 42 cards you lose, 4 cards you win so the ratio is 42/4 = 10.5:1

On the flop (assuming you have 4 pure outs twice - like a gutshot) then you would need less odds to call the flop (to see the turn) and turn (to see the river). You have your four outs twice so you have more chances to hit (two streets). I usually just count my outs a time and a half (so 6 in the flop gutshot example) as a quick calculation for needed odds on the flop.

The problem Here is that you do not have pure outs. When you give one out to a BD draw you are already accounting for two streets . . . if you then account for it as a whole out twice (on 2 streets) you are doublecounting. Here the estimate of "outs" are not true outs and should not be "counted up". Also, this does not inclue implied odds or reverse implied odds given by the board and the action. Does this make sense?

EDIT: If you PM the chart you have I can tell you where the numbers are coming from. I'm good at math but I suck at the strategy aspect of Poker =)

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can I invest 1 SB that is slightly -EV for image against someone who is paying attention?

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course you can. What are you going to do when one of your overcards comes on the turn, you c/r him and he 3-bets?

[/ QUOTE ]
id call down

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

I fold the flop.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

Guys - you should normally not be using "odds to the see the river" when deciding whether or not to see the turn.

If you're going to use the odds you need to see the river (instead of just seeing the next card) then you need to account for the bets that will go in on the turn. There are 7.5 small bets in the pot on the flop; Hero will be forced to call 1 SB on the flop and almost certainly 2 SBs on the turn (and Villain will contribute 3 SBs on these streets), meaning he's effectively getting 10.5:1.5 or ~7:1. However, since a good portion of his outs consist of backdoor draws, and he will not likely continue on the turn unless one of his "continuation outs" falls, this offers and even stronger argument to disregard the "see the river odds."

You'll be much better off in the vast majority of circumstances if you just look at the odds immediately offered when deciding whether or not to peel off a card (and considering implied odds as you grow more experienced). As you grow even more comfortable and experienced, you can start projecting beyond one street; until then, do yourselves a favor and stick to a street-by-street analysis.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So, I hate to agree with the table-coachy dude, but the flop call is incorrect in my opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

What kind of flop would you want here to continue in the hand? Top pair? Two pair? A str8 draw?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't mind the flop to continue, but I don't think the pot is large enough to risk it. If there were about 3 people calling the flop, instead of just heads up, I think you have the odds to peel one off. I give him 4 outs total on the flop (0.5 outs for each K, Q - discounting because they may not be good enough on their own), 0.5 out for the 1 gap backdoor str8, and 0.5 out for the backdoor flush (you could lose to a higher flush). 4 outs is 10.8 to 1 against improving on the turn, but you still might need to improve again on the river. I figure he's getting 7.5 to 1 on the flop call ($15 preflop + $2 from the villian on the flop). The turn call is a no brainer once you get there, and nice check-raise on the river to get max value.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

so basically i understand that the flop call is bad and most every other opponent i would fold.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
Guys - you should normally not be using "odds to the see the river" when deciding whether or not to see the turn.

If you're going to use the odds you need to see the river (instead of just seeing the next card) then you need to account for the bets that will go in on the turn. There are 7.5 small bets in the pot on the flop; Hero will be forced to call 1 SB on the flop and almost certainly 2 SBs on the turn (and Villain will contribute 3 SBs on these streets), meaning he's effectively getting 10.5:1.5 or ~7:1. However, since a good portion of his outs consist of backdoor draws, and he will not likely continue on the turn unless one of his "continuation outs" falls, this offers and even stronger argument to disregard the "see the river odds."

You'll be much better off in the vast majority of circumstances if you just look at the odds immediately offered when deciding whether or not to peel off a card (and considering implied odds as you grow more experienced). As you grow even more comfortable and experienced, you can start projecting beyond one street; until then, do yourselves a favor and stick to a street-by-street analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this explanation helps me the best. I was evaluating pot odds incorrectly by looking at the "turn" portion of a pot odds chart to justify the call with this small number of outs in this hand. So, basically, I'm better off just looing at the "river" portion of a pot odds chart to make a correct judgement. Luckily, I had only made this mistake a few times during actual play.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
so basically i understand that the flop call is bad and most every other opponent i would fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this guy is tight you should fold against him too. Best case scenario you're facing RIE with him holding JJ. Worst case scenario you're drawing nearly dead.

Implied tilt odds aren't worth the call.

Rob

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
so basically i understand that the flop call is bad and most every other opponent i would fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this guy is tight you should fold against him too. Best case scenario you're facing RIE with him holding JJ. Worst case scenario you're drawing nearly dead.

Implied tilt odds aren't worth the call.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]
he had AJo and my play was correct on every street! ok yeah i know big time fold on the flop im a lucksack.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
Guys - you should normally not be using "odds to the see the river" when deciding whether or not to see the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

haha YES! This is essentially what I was saying. Execpt, it is phrased in a much shorter and clearer way. I [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Catt =)

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

A bit worrying that a TAG thinks he has such good control over you that he wants to isolate you with AJ off! I think I might have been inclined to put a few moves on him myself to keep him in check.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
A bit worrying that a TAG thinks he has such good control over you that he wants to isolate you with AJ off! I think I might have been inclined to put a few moves on him myself to keep him in check.

[/ QUOTE ]
well he said he "thought i was a PT'er" and "i knew his vitals"

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

I've read through this one and I have to say I believe it's one of those nearly flip a coin situations. BUT -- Given your "he's trying to isolate me" read -- the flop would be a peel for me. The reason I'm peeling one here is not that I have the odds (is everyone going to do the "hm, half and out for this, let's discount that, oh, reverse implied there...." in the time it takes to make a decision?). It's close. Smallish, HU pot makes for a fold with overs in most cases. Somewhere in TOP or HPFAP the point is made, however, that you can't always fold overs to aggression. You gotta peel even without the odds (I think it's in the loose calls part, where you might call with a beat mid-pair getting 10/12-1 or so in the right pot as well). There's just too much chance of being run over by your opposition on other hands if you do. Metagame, I guess, though I normally ovoid any metagame stuff for online SS games for the usual reasons. But when I've got overs without the A (again, HPFAP, too much reverse dominated probability), a back door flush, back door straight... I'm going to see another card.

This is small stakes. One advantage we have here is that it’s easier for us to see more streets than higher play (Not because it’s cheaper). When the balance is teetering on fold, go ahead and call on occasion.

I might get slammed for this, but I think we’re over-analyzing the “outs” on this one.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've read through this one and I have to say I believe it's one of those nearly flip a coin situations. BUT -- Given your "he's trying to isolate me" read -- the flop would be a peel for me. The reason I'm peeling one here is not that I have the odds (is everyone going to do the "hm, half and out for this, let's discount that, oh, reverse implied there...." in the time it takes to make a decision?). It's close. Smallish, HU pot makes for a fold with overs in most cases. Somewhere in TOP or HPFAP the point is made, however, that you can't always fold overs to aggression. You gotta peel even without the odds (I think it's in the loose calls part, where you might call with a beat mid-pair getting 10/12-1 or so in the right pot as well). There's just too much chance of being run over by your opposition on other hands if you do. Metagame, I guess, though I normally ovoid any metagame stuff for online SS games for the usual reasons. But when I've got overs without the A (again, HPFAP, too much reverse dominated probability), a back door flush, back door straight... I'm going to see another card.

This is small stakes. One advantage we have here is that it’s easier for us to see more streets than higher play (Not because it’s cheaper). When the balance is teetering on fold, go ahead and call on occasion.

I might get slammed for this, but I think we’re over-analyzing the “outs” on this one.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think so. In position, we can make a loose peel here (i.e. we raised and he 3-bet from a blind, etc.). It's close then. In this case, since we still have to check the turn, and we have no clue what our opponent holds, we're facing an icky spot which is best solved by folding, getting 8.5:1 OOP, almost surely facing a turn bet, with around 4 tarnished outs.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

He 3-bet in position. I'd give a lot more respect to a 3-bet from the blinds.

A third of the deck or so will get you to call the turn. Everything else is a clear fold.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

Oops, I misread Entity's point. In fact, I thought he thought the 3-bet came from the blind. Yeeech, reading too fast.

Yes, OOP and all. I get it. It's close. And against a lot of opponents I'd fold this, too. This just sounds like one of those cases where you'd want to peel.

I see a lot of iso-raises from table coach types with small to mid-pairs. I think the overcard outs are closer to half-dirty, rather than 60% or more. They love the iso stuff. Shows their balls off. They've read Helmuth and think he's the blankity-blank.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
so basically i understand that the flop call is bad and most every other opponent i would fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

It sound like you are trying to reason why calling was good for image.

How about this line. We know he is observant and likes to be tricky. Let's let him have this one thinking he can push us around so we can suck him in when we have the hand or get him to fold later when we don't. Minimum loss this hand better gain next time. If he thinks we are weak and he can out play us he is very vunerable. Against a guy like this it is better to appear weak and attack than appear strong.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

Rob and I are clearly in agreement here.

I think this has been a pretty fruitful discussion, and I think it's brought up a couple of very important issues that I think are very crucial for small stakes players to think very hard about:

1. Be very careful when counting overcard outs. Clearly consider your opponents likely ranges before assuming that pair outs are good.

2. It is very important to consider issues like position, implied and reverse implied odds, and your ability to extract value when improving in making our decisions. Just because Pokerstove says we have enough equity to continue doesn't mean we'll realize all that equity or that future effects don't decrease/increase the value of our hand.

3. Consideration of opponents and image is important, but it's very important to carefully analyze the value of "image moves."

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

I'm arguing this one half because I believe in the call, and half because I wanna be talked out of it.

It's just that for me, BD + BD + thin overcards+iso-aggression is going to equal a call a lot of the time. It is damned thin, no arguing with that. And the argument that we're going to feel happier next time we have a hand kinda sucks cause this guys a couple hands to our left. Iso-aggression is going to cause us more problems from that table-coach than finding the hand to play into after playing "weak". If I can't raise my semi-nice hands from MP into most of the limp-passive, good tables... well, I might just have to find another table.

If any of you guys advocating fold here opened up villains range from 99-TT+ to mid-pairs (66+, weighted), is this a call?

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think this explanation helps me the best. I was evaluating pot odds incorrectly by looking at the "turn" portion of a pot odds chart to justify the call with this small number of outs in this hand. So, basically, I'm better off just looing at the "river" portion of a pot odds chart to make a correct judgement.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right. On the flop you can use the rule of thumb that a backdoor straight and/or flush are worth about 1.5 outs each, then just use the odds to see one card on your chart.

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

Surely by calling the flop, and then showing down your made straight you are ENCOURAGING him to take pops at you in future, as you have shown you will call with bad odds?

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

[ QUOTE ]
Surely by calling the flop, and then showing down your made straight you are ENCOURAGING him to take pops at you in future, as you have shown you will call with bad odds?

[/ QUOTE ]
wow this is an old post. i am flattered. anyway, no I don't think this will encourage him because the point of taking pops is to get me to fold. so if i am calling his shots wont work. Do you bluff against calling stations?

Re: HU against a \"PT\'er\"
 

Flop...eh whatever. Seems a bit loose to me but not horrid.

I think you should bet the river. He could have AK or even AQ and will check through but may call a bet. He may see your bet line as AJ/KJ/AT or whatever doing the standard c/c c/c bet line and raise if he has a hand worth a bet if you check. He obviously doesn't think KQ should be in your range for a flop call. It probably shouldn't. So he'd likely raise the river bet with an overpair. He'll almost certainly raise a river bet with a set. A c/r kills the action most of the time though.