This hand has people talking

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
Can you explain this to me because it seems to me to be a mistake because Button has to invest monies on multiple streets. So you're saying he's getting around 30:1 because you're using an average final pot size of 14 BB. I say that he's getting less than that, namely around 23:5.

[/ QUOTE ]
Miss turn, fold and lose 1 SB. Hit turn, raise the entire field and win a big pot.

[Monty Cantsin]

[ QUOTE ]
One of the important issues here is that a "read/impression" should not be treated as a certain fact.

[/ QUOTE ]

In mid/high they call this not assigning zero mass to the <0 part of the distribution.

/mc

Everyone seems to have such nice arguments. I'm not sure what to think at this point. However, as tired as I am, I can't digest everything, so I know the only answer that I can conclusively come up with is:

Folding is bad.

Yes, I know, I have a marvelous grasp of the obvious...

[sthief09]

you're overstating the amount of hands there are that can actually call the flop. you can say we really would hate to let a gut shot stay in there, but the board is Q42 and there is one player who can have a gut shot, which in this case is a 3-outer vs a redraw. so the chances that he peels with a hand like JT or even KT after a bet and 2 or 3 calls (and the preflop raiser doesn't raise), turns a pair, then raises with his pair of jacks or even kings, are pretty slim. and you're also not taking into account the fact that almost no matter what they hit, you have 9-15 outs to a redraw. now throw in the fact that we have a better hand than the flop better AND the preflop raiser, and you're not even the one taking the biggest hit the times someone does hit a hand.

I see one reason to raise: to fold out better hands, and at 3/6 6-max, the chances that someone bets the flop with a worse hand, AND the preflop raiser folds an underpair to queens for 2 bets, is close to 0

my biggest problem with the hand protection stuff is that people always assume the worst. you can't do that. you have to take into account the best possible and the worst possible situations.

[tansoku]

[ QUOTE ]
Not raising the flop is awful

[/ QUOTE ]

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is a very common error that I see in these forums. Failure to recognize that the implied odds on this type of flop are about triple the pot odds. If this bet reaches the button unraised he can correctly call with practically anything because he is getting about 30-1 to close.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you explain this to me because it seems to me to be a mistake because Button has to invest monies on multiple streets. So you're saying he's getting around 30:1 because you're using an average final pot size of 14 BB. I say that he's getting less than that, namely around 23:5.

[/ QUOTE ]


and completely neglecting the implied odds YOU gain the times you hit your flush and he hits his card. there are so many good things about calling that he completely ignored.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]

1. You have MPTK on a somewhat difficult board to hit. There are flush and straight draws on board. I don't buy Dids's argument that the donk bet is usually at least a queen. The chance of having the best hand is decent.

[/ QUOTE ]

the fact that you have an A makes a big difference. if the PFR would raise AK, AQ, AA-99, then he has 3 outs for 21 combos and is ahead 30 combos. so even if we beatr the donk bettor only has a Q 50% of the time, you're beahind 80% of the time.


[ QUOTE ]
2. Nothing very special happened but the final pot reached 17 BB. I have very little sympathy for helping people with a few outs stay in this pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

the flop getting capped 3 ways, then 3 bets going in on each of the turn and river wasn't anything special?



[/ QUOTE ]3. You have 14 outs to aces up or better plus a possible best hand. Your pot equity is well over 50%. Compared with a typical 9-out flush draw the immediate value equation is much more favorable for raising as opposed to playing for overcalls.

[/ QUOTE ]

according to your logic, if they're drawing dead, it's automatically better to raise. this isn't true. often, the higher your equity, the more reason there is to keep them in. having a flush draw makes their draws much worse. not only do they lose any heart outs, they are up against a big redraw as well.

[ QUOTE ]
4. The chance that CO has pocket second pair is fairly large. If you call he is unlikely to fold. If you raise there is a fair chance he will fold, especially if his pair is only intermediate. Remember, no reads were provided. Probably half the players in this game are reasonable players (TAG, tight/passive, etc.). Not everyone is always willing to call multiple bets to draw to two outs. Missing a chance to fold a better hand in a big pot is one of the worst mistakes you can make.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is the only thing I agree with. if he folds a pocket pair a significant amount of the time (like say 8%) then you have to raise even though the other guy might have you beat anyway. but the 8th percentile of 3/6 6-max players probably still has a hard time laying this hand down.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not raising the flop is awful

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]


if you're going to disagree with someone in a 40 post thread maybe you should actually type something? I don't mean to single you out, but a lot of people do it that is my biggest pet peeve here. if you feel it's terrible, tell me why. I want to understand and I don't agree right now


EDIT: I came off as a prick and I apologize for that, but I'm leaving it because maybe someone will read it and think about it

[TStoneMBD]

I am going to chime in here even though I have followed this thread from the very beginning and haven't said a word.

When first looking at this hand I told Bdids he should raise the flop. I feel that he should be ahead of a donkbettor often enough that raising is profitable. He argued that the donkbettor here will almost always have a queen.

So under the pretense that the donkbettor ALWAYS has a queen I think it becomes quite clear that calling is better than raising.

However, under the pretense that the donk bettor NEVER has a hand that beats you, I think the correct play is to raise. (Please feel free to debate that, but at least were getting somewhere.)

Therefore, if its correct to raise when ahead but call when behind there must be a distinct % of the time where you need to be ahead in order for raising to be profitable. I would really like for twoplustwo to evolve into such a science that we are able to analyze hands from this perspective because it is truly necessary for growth as a skilled poker player.

When we are sitting at a table and are donkbet like this, we intuitively estimate the percentage of time we are ahead of the donkbettor. We should then be able to distinguish exactly when raising becomes profitable and when it does not depending upon that percentage.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is a very common error that I see in these forums. Failure to recognize that the implied odds on this type of flop are about triple the pot odds. If this bet reaches the button unraised he can correctly call with practically anything because he is getting about 30-1 to close.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you explain this to me because it seems to me to be a mistake because Button has to invest monies on multiple streets. So you're saying he's getting around 30:1 because you're using an average final pot size of 14 BB. I say that he's getting less than that, namely around 23:5.

[/ QUOTE ]

in addition, all those "implied odds" he's gaining are not 100% equity ones. say we let the PFR in with AK. oops. there are 4 remaining kings and he'll have the Kh half the time. so he has 2.5 outs. so we let him hit his 2.5 outer for 12-1. so we lose 2 bets on the turn with 11 outs, so he's only winning the pot 3/4 of the time. we make 2 bets the times we hit, so he's only making 2*3/4-2*1/4 = 1 BB in implied odds, or 14-1 on a 2.5 outer, or not even close to enough