Hand against crappy player...

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
krishan, what are the odds of flopping (2pr/trip/FD)?

[/ QUOTE ]

** pretends he's Krishan **

2 pair = 49:1 using both your pocket cards)
trips = 73:1
FD = 8.1:1

Edit: Damn! Not fast enough [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]


so theoretically i should call with any 2 suited given 6:1 preflop right?

[/ QUOTE ]

You get to choose your number. You should facter in the chance that your flush under flush and the chance that someone will raise behind.

I'll call any 2 suited in SB at 10/20 after 2 limpers.

I call K high, Q high, suited semi-connecter in the BB 3-way after a raise.

Krishan

[Catt]

[ QUOTE ]
so theoretically i should call with any 2 suited given 6:1 preflop right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Pick your poison. Note that you need to account for the fact that all these hands we're talking about aren't guaranteed winners (i.e., while it is 7.5:1 to flop a set with a PP, some people think 8 or 9 to 1 is a good metric of profitable calling and others take a more conservative approach of 10:1 - just on pure math; obviously, at SH and sometimes at full ring, we are also acounting for how often our PP holds up UI).

And see my post above regarding implied odds and the size of the call pre-flop. 6:1 when you're completing in the SB against limpers is much different than 6:1 when it's 3-bet in front of you in the BB, and not just because of what the limps / 3bets means about the relative strength of your hand.

[tizim]

Can someone explain how leading this flop can be better than checking??

[Catt]

[ QUOTE ]
Can someone explain how leading this flop can be better than checking??

[/ QUOTE ]

Because there's a player trapped between you and PFR and the flop didn't likely hit the PFR -- you've got the flush to fall back on and you've got some serious bluff equity, even if they think you only have a 5. The 6 is gravy on the turn; depending on what happens on the flop and the turn card, you'll probably also lead the turn. The river has a passive guy calling down - he would have raised with a K, meaning he peeled the flop with a 5, a FD, a PP, or any 2. So you bet the river for value, expecting to be shown A5 or an A-high FD or a PP that beats you. But you can't check the river.

[imitation]

Sorry I see absolutely no benefit in leading into the field on the flop, I would definitely check/call the flop and check/raise the turn. It's "the power play" and is the best way to take down the pot, if however I feel that MPs peel on the flop puts him on a hand that will call 2 on the turn I just check/call again. Leading, leading, leading will not get button to fold A high on this board I think.

[Catt]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry I see absolutely no benefit in leading into the field on the flop, I would definitely check/call the flop and check/raise the turn. It's "the power play" and is the best way to take down the pot, if however I feel that MPs peel on the flop puts him on a hand that will call 2 on the turn I just check/call again. Leading, leading, leading will not get button to fold A high on this board I think.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're counting on the turn being bet, which it often will not be when PFR gets a call, let alone two, on his flop bet. If he does check the turn, we need to hit a flush are we are not likely winning this pot, because he will almost certainly call a river lead with A-high and we don't win a check-through (nor can we call a bet) with 6-high on the river.

[imitation]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sorry I see absolutely no benefit in leading into the field on the flop, I would definitely check/call the flop and check/raise the turn. It's "the power play" and is the best way to take down the pot, if however I feel that MPs peel on the flop puts him on a hand that will call 2 on the turn I just check/call again. Leading, leading, leading will not get button to fold A high on this board I think.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're counting on the turn being bet, which it often will not be when PFR gets a call, let alone two, on his flop bet. If he does check the turn, we need to hit a flush are we are not likely winning this pot, because he will almost certainly call a river lead with A-high and we don't win a check-through (nor can we call a bet) with 6-high on the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a free card in a 5BB pot is a-ok, when you pair you can easily lead and fold to a raise (and as you said you expect to get called by A-h), and when you hit a flush and lead you have the opportunity of 3-betting weirdly played trips or some other fruity hand.

[Catt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sorry I see absolutely no benefit in leading into the field on the flop, I would definitely check/call the flop and check/raise the turn. It's "the power play" and is the best way to take down the pot, if however I feel that MPs peel on the flop puts him on a hand that will call 2 on the turn I just check/call again. Leading, leading, leading will not get button to fold A high on this board I think.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're counting on the turn being bet, which it often will not be when PFR gets a call, let alone two, on his flop bet. If he does check the turn, we need to hit a flush are we are not likely winning this pot, because he will almost certainly call a river lead with A-high and we don't win a check-through (nor can we call a bet) with 6-high on the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a free card in a 5BB pot is a-ok, when you pair you can easily lead and fold to a raise (and as you said you expect to get called by A-h), and when you hit a flush and lead you have the opportunity of 3-betting weirdly played trips or some other fruity hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, a free card is fine. But your post on why you ck-cl (to set-up a possible ck-raise on turn) seemed to account for winning this pot when we don't hit. If we assume that we're hitting a pair or a flush, then it probably doesn't matter that much. When Hero leads the flop, he is not committed to leading the turn. He led the turn because a 6 fell and because of the reaction on the flop. Leading the flop doesn't prevent us from checking the turn and either enjoying the same free card as in your line, or ck-raising PFR's turn bet just as in your line (except our C/R is backed by a flop lead). I'd say the flop lead followed by the turn screwplay has more FE than ck-cl ck-rs.

[tizim]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can someone explain how leading this flop can be better than checking??

[/ QUOTE ]

Because there's a player trapped between you and PFR and the flop didn't likely hit the PFR -- you've got the flush to fall back on and you've got some serious bluff equity, even if they think you only have a 5. The 6 is gravy on the turn; depending on what happens on the flop and the turn card, you'll probably also lead the turn. The river has a passive guy calling down - he would have raised with a K, meaning he peeled the flop with a 5, a FD, a PP, or any 2. So you bet the river for value, expecting to be shown A5 or an A-high FD or a PP that beats you. But you can't check the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

But with Button as a 70 vpip calling station type player, I think it's extremely rare that you'll pick up the pot on this flop, and you'll also frequently get raised. If you're unlikely to be stealing this pot, then leading is especially bad because it pressures MP to fold when he may peel if Button bets and you call.

The flop decision hinges on how likely you think you'll pick up the pot, and I don't think you'll be successful often enough for flop bet to be profitable.

[Catt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can someone explain how leading this flop can be better than checking??

[/ QUOTE ]

Because there's a player trapped between you and PFR and the flop didn't likely hit the PFR -- you've got the flush to fall back on and you've got some serious bluff equity, even if they think you only have a 5. The 6 is gravy on the turn; depending on what happens on the flop and the turn card, you'll probably also lead the turn. The river has a passive guy calling down - he would have raised with a K, meaning he peeled the flop with a 5, a FD, a PP, or any 2. So you bet the river for value, expecting to be shown A5 or an A-high FD or a PP that beats you. But you can't check the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

But with Button as a 70 vpip calling station type player, I think it's extremely rare that you'll pick up the pot on this flop, and you'll also frequently get raised. If you're unlikely to be stealing this pot, then leading is especially bad because it pressures MP to fold when he may peel if Button bets and you call.

The flop decision hinges on how likely you think you'll pick up the pot, and I don't think you'll be successful often enough for flop bet to be profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

I interpreted "Villain" to be the guy hanging around on the river, i.e., MP who will likely peel the flop regardless if we bet into him. And I don't think the flop bet hinges at all on how likely we are to pick the pot. When I reference FE I am not referring to the flop, but rather the FE it buys us on the turn -- I'm not suggesting that a flop lead takes down the pot with hardly any frequency at all. Our equity situation with the flush draw is good enough for a bet if we think we get two calls, and we aren't really too disappointed to have Button raise both of us on the flop. If we think it reasonably likely that MP folds and Button raises, then the lead is a lot less attractive; but in making my read assumption about who the Villain is, I'm guessing that he peels here like always.