|
|
#22
11-20-2005, 03:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Another 77 hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I have the same stats as UTG+2 and on the rare occasion I can beat 7's in this spot I'm not calling a raise because I certainly don't have a K. MP1 has 2 cards, so this is standard I guess. [/ QUOTE ] you never have 66/44/33 here or a big flush draw ever? [/ QUOTE ] Yeah sometimes - all the more reason to raise. [/ QUOTE ] Are you saying you're folding to a 3 bet? 
|
|
#23
11-20-2005, 04:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another 77 hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I have the same stats as UTG+2 and on the rare occasion I can beat 7's in this spot I'm not calling a raise because I certainly don't have a K. MP1 has 2 cards, so this is standard I guess. [/ QUOTE ] you never have 66/44/33 here or a big flush draw ever? [/ QUOTE ] Yeah sometimes - all the more reason to raise. [/ QUOTE ] Are you saying you're folding to a 3 bet? [/ QUOTE ] Folding to a 3-bet here is a pretty large error. Rob
|
|
#24
11-20-2005, 04:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another 77 hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I have the same stats as UTG+2 and on the rare occasion I can beat 7's in this spot I'm not calling a raise because I certainly don't have a K. MP1 has 2 cards, so this is standard I guess. [/ QUOTE ] you never have 66/44/33 here or a big flush draw ever? [/ QUOTE ] Yeah sometimes - all the more reason to raise. [/ QUOTE ] Are you saying you're folding to a 3 bet? [/ QUOTE ] Folding to a 3-bet here is a pretty large error. Rob [/ QUOTE ] I disagree. It's marginal at best. We have 6 full outs here almost never and 3 or fewer quite often.
|
|
#25
11-20-2005, 04:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another 77 hand
[ QUOTE ]
We can see the river and the river action action last for only 1 BB. As it stands, we may end up paying 3 BBs on this turn (With 3 outs to the nuts, folding that turn is not in my book, especially if sb and/or MP are still in the hand, of course.) [/ QUOTE ] We have sketchy set and one-card (non-nut) straight outs, but I wouldn't be able to fold to a 3-bet either. So I found it reassuring when Entity said that doing so would be a mistake. Edit: And if by some chance we get 3-bet and that 3-bet leaves us heads-up, I think folding would be really bad. I think we can count on six full outs, at that point.
|
|
#26
11-20-2005, 04:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another 77 hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I have the same stats as UTG+2 and on the rare occasion I can beat 7's in this spot I'm not calling a raise because I certainly don't have a K. MP1 has 2 cards, so this is standard I guess. [/ QUOTE ] you never have 66/44/33 here or a big flush draw ever? [/ QUOTE ] Yeah sometimes - all the more reason to raise. [/ QUOTE ] Are you saying you're folding to a 3 bet? [/ QUOTE ] Folding to a 3-bet here is a pretty large error. Rob [/ QUOTE ] I disagree. It's marginal at best. We have 6 full outs here almost never and 3 or fewer quite often. [/ QUOTE ] The parlay for us to have fewer than 3 outs would require one person to have a set or a King, another to have a [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] draw, and another to have a 5 (or two people to have a 5 while another has a King/set). I can't believe you think that parlay is going to happen "quite often," even when we're 3-bet. I'd go as far to say it's rare at best, maybe even less often than that. Rob
|
|
#27
11-20-2005, 04:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another 77 hand
I'm not sure I like the turn raise given the action from UTG+2. I can't think of many hands that an 18/12/2 would open limp UTG+2 and play this way that we beat. Perhaps if it was a very loose tables something like a suited 65 or A6. Otherwise I would think you are often looking at a set, possibly a bigger overpair like 88,99 or a couple of diamonds with a King. I can't imagine many other hands UTG+2 has that he would bet into a field of 4 with on the turn after seeing 2 people cold call his flop raise.
I prefer 3-betting the flop here as well.
|
|
#28
11-20-2005, 05:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another 77 hand
It's true we don't have fewer than three outs all that often here, but consider:
1. If we get three-bet, how often are we ahead? I think very rarely. 2. If we get three-bet and either the SB or the flop cold-caller comes along, how often do we have 6 clean outs? I think it's unlikely that either player is calling two cold here without a big draw, meaning a flush draw or a 5. If we are up against a flush draw, we have 4-5 outs depending on the color of our set. If we are up against a 5, we have 3 outs at best. 4. If both players come along, how often do we even have three outs? If both players call two cold, we might hope that we're up against two Ks and only one draw, but a significant portion of the time we are up against two draws. If there is a flush draw and a 5 in play, we're in bad shape. The basic point is this: If we raise and get three-bet and the pot is heads-up, we can safely call as our 6 outs are likely to be clean. If we raise and get three-bet and others hand around, our equity is probably cut at least in half and the couple extra bets in the pot may not make up for this loss in equity.
|
|
#29
11-21-2005, 02:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another 77 hand
[ QUOTE ]
It's true we don't have fewer than three outs all that often here, but consider: 1. If we get three-bet, how often are we ahead? I think very rarely. 2. If we get three-bet and either the SB or the flop cold-caller comes along, how often do we have 6 clean outs? I think it's unlikely that either player is calling two cold here without a big draw, meaning a flush draw or a 5. If we are up against a flush draw, we have 4-5 outs depending on the color of our set. If we are up against a 5, we have 3 outs at best. 4. If both players come along, how often do we even have three outs? If both players call two cold, we might hope that we're up against two Ks and only one draw, but a significant portion of the time we are up against two draws. If there is a flush draw and a 5 in play, we're in bad shape. The basic point is this: If we raise and get three-bet and the pot is heads-up, we can safely call as our 6 outs are likely to be clean. If we raise and get three-bet and others hand around, our equity is probably cut at least in half and the couple extra bets in the pot may not make up for this loss in equity. [/ QUOTE ] Deranged, It really comes down to this. We need about 3.4 outs to continue. That means even if we're drawing to 2 outs 40% (I think this is an overestimate) of the time, 3 outs 25% of the time, 5 outs 20% of the time and 6 outs 15% of the time, we're making a profitable call. That means we can be drawing to 3 outs or less 65% of the time and still be calling, and I don't think there's any way we're drawing to 3 outs or less nearly that often. Given the pot size, I think folding to a turn 3-bet would be a bad decision. Obviously this depends on who 3-bets (if SB does we're [censored]), but when the TAG 3-bets and the other guys are calling we only need a small percentage of the time that they're calling with a hand like A6 (given the loose passive description) for it to become a profitable call. Rob
|
|
#30
11-21-2005, 02:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another 77 hand
I'd rather 3 bet the flop and play from there. I think you have a better chance of getting the most value by raising the flop. If UTG is raising a draw, he may not bet again on the turn. Sb likely hit some piece of the flop so getting him to pay the most to see the turn is good. I also don't like to open myself up for a 3 bet on the turn w/a hand like this, I'd rather find out where I stand on the flop and play from there
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
