Patented TWP over-aggro donkitude?

[TheWorstPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
I play it the same except I think you may be able to fold on the river. All you can beat is diamonds.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]
And 98. Wow am I glad someone thinks I'm not insane. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[silkyslim]

i dont want to fold on the flop, just call the raise and see the turn.

[bozlax]

[ QUOTE ]
See, I don't really think he is LAG. I more think he is unknown/bad/loose-ish/maybe aggro. But I thought that MP was going to raise a hand that beats me so I figured him for a mid pair/bottom pair/an overcard/a draw. Then when the bad guy raises I figured I had too much hand to fold and if I called then MP would be getting a good price on a call so I raised. When bad player capped, that slowed me down so I just called down.

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of people here spend too much time figuring out how they're beat on a hand, and wind up weak-tight (I should know, I'm one of them). In this case you seem to be spending an awful lot of time trying to justify playing a hand that's at best marginal.

Can't understand why anybody would ever think you were a maniac [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img].

[TheWorstPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
See, I don't really think he is LAG. I more think he is unknown/bad/loose-ish/maybe aggro. But I thought that MP was going to raise a hand that beats me so I figured him for a mid pair/bottom pair/an overcard/a draw. Then when the bad guy raises I figured I had too much hand to fold and if I called then MP would be getting a good price on a call so I raised. When bad player capped, that slowed me down so I just called down.

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of people here spend too much time figuring out how they're beat on a hand, and wind up weak-tight (I should know, I'm one of them). In this case you seem to be spending an awful lot of time trying to justify playing a hand that's at best marginal.

Can't understand why anybody would ever think you were a maniac [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img].

[/ QUOTE ]
How can you say top pair three way is marginal? I feel like I'm in a different poker universe from the rest of this board sometimes. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[bozlax]

[ QUOTE ]
How can you say top pair three way is marginal? I feel like I'm in a different poker universe from the rest of this board sometimes. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Because the current top pair is only the 5th best pair in the deck, and you've got a nonexistent kicker, and the only evidence you have at the moment that you're best hand is a super-weak read on one of the two opponents. There are 20 cards in the deck that you have to be scared of...that's (20/47) + (20/46) = almost 1:1 that at least one card that you'll have to fold to agg on is going to fall (and you do have to fold to agg on that turn Q, since the universe you're playing in is the stay-in-with-any-chance-to-win universe, and that includes overcards). That's my definition of "marginal," and I even think using the word marginal to describe it is kind.

[TheWorstPlayer]

OK, maybe I'm way off here and I am just being extremely dense, but here is my rationale and maybe you can just be a little bit more explicit about where I am going wrong.

Preflop:
Obviously not raising.

Flop:
I have top pair three way. This is a good hand, but vulnerable. Pot is small, so anyone with 5 outs is making a mistake by calling a flop bet. Therefore, a flop bet will protect my hand. Therefore, I bet.

MP calls (most likely incorrectly calling with a weak draw since people are very loose, but it could be a flush or OESD). Anything stronger and I would expect a raise. Even from a good draw, I would expect a raise for a free card a decent amount of the time.

Button raises which could be better hand than mine, but what would it be? AA-JJ I think we can exclude by preflop. Even a lot of better Ts like AT/KT would often be raised preflop on the button against one limper. Many people would raise all the way down to JT here. Particularly if they are suited. And people aren't that likely to limp T4, right? So there aren't really THAT many better tens that make sense with preflop action. Most likely hands to have me crushed are 22 and 77 (although these might also be raised preflop). Could be T7 (suited?) that was limped on the button, too. But it is also fairly likely that he has A7 (commonly limped here, right?), A2 (also commonly limped, particularly suited?), or diamonds, or 98. So I could be ahead, but he's drawing live with at least 5 outs and quite possibly 8-12, and I don't want MP to stick around with his 5 outs so I 3bet.

MP folds, but BN caps. That tells me that he either has me completely crushed or has a draw which he is playing extremely aggressively. It is not that rare to see people ram and jam draws even HU, right? I thought about leading the turn, but figured that is just going to cost me an extra BB when I am behind so I checked. But he could still be betting his draw since I checked the turn, so I have to call. Then again on the river, I figured he had a draw or a weirdly played middle pair or something more than 1/10 of the time, so I called.

Comments?

And I know it doesn't really matter but FWIW he showed down A6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]. He played the flop exactly the way I would have played it, but I would have checked the turn and folded the river if I were he. It would have been a very nice cap for free card play. Which made me think that maybe I should bet the turn.

[bozlax]

When in doubt, throw it on the Stove, I always say. PokerStove gives you just over 50% equity on the flop against 2 random hands, here, so BOTH opponents have to stay in for a bet or raise to be considered profitable, right?

Make one of 'em a passive with a decent hand, and you're under 50%.

Heaven forbid you give one of 'em a ten, suited or unsuited, that hasn't matched their kicer to the board, yet, and your equity drops below the 3rd, random hand.

Here's the last scenario:

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

69,729,660 games 18.086 secs 3,855,449 games/sec

Board: Td 7d 2c
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) / tie (%)

Hand 1: 18.9316 % [ 00.10 00.09 ] { Tc3h }
Hand 2: 60.2834 % [ 00.51 00.09 ] { ATs, KTs, QTs, JTs, T9s-T8s, T6s-T4s, T2s, ATo, KTo, QTo, JTo, T9o-T8o, T6o-T4o, T2o }
Hand 3: 20.7851 % [ 00.20 00.00 ] { random }


---

10,727,640 games 2.634 secs 4,072,756 games/sec

[TheWorstPlayer]

I'm sorry, but do you really think that is useful analysis? What is the chance that someone has AA-JJ here? Etc.

[Sarge85]

[ QUOTE ]
Villain is 50/3/2.75 but only over 30 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a common problem I see with people using PT/GameTime/Playerview what ever.....

30 hands means squat. Unless you specifically see bad hands being shown down, or hands being overplayed on the flop - these numbers can't really tell you much.

That being said -

If the guy was a maniac, then you probably played it ok. My MO with maniacs is to get heads up with them. Bet my strong hands fast, and if I have a marginal hand that I want to see a showdown against a maniac, I play it the same as you.

Just don't get to wrapped up on those numbers. They are a tool - not a solution.

Sarge[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

[TheWorstPlayer]

Completely agree. That's why I said
[ QUOTE ]
Villain is 50/3/2.75 but only over 30 hands. He seems quite bad, but not in any way that I can pinpoint yet. Just makes bad plays in general so far.

[/ QUOTE ]
I was saying that his numbers weren't great, but it was only over 30 hands so I didn't give it that much weight. He had, however, shown down some bad hands and made some donk moves with hands that went to showdown so he seemed bad from that.