Need a line check in the BB - Page 2

tinhat · #1 12-05-2005, 02:55 AM

Personally I never would've called the first raise; you only have one thing going for this hand and IMM is a marginal mway hand to begin with. Would be interesting to know how many times you could play J2s even @ 6:1 and make any money.

I don't get the flop check - what's its purpose? Are you trying to build a bigger pot or trying to win this already humungoid pot? (For all you know utg limped a mway hand and 3-bet pf to maximize implieds and pairing 2's could beat it.)

IMM you should not be trying to tie 4 others to the pot - you should be trying to win it because it was already huge...

Mike

bozlax · #2 12-05-2005, 03:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't get the flop check - what's its purpose? Are you trying to build a bigger pot or trying to win this already humungoid pot? (For all you know utg limped a mway hand and 3-bet pf to maximize implieds and pairing 2's could beat it.)

IMM you should not be trying to tie 4 others to the pot - you should be trying to win it because it was already huge...

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that the preflop call was marginal, but I made it, and I'd make it again at an unknown 6max table. 'nuff said.

On the flop I was going for building the pot with the anticipated agressor to my immediate left. The worst possible play would be to bet and have UTG blow everybody else out leaving me with no value. I have 15 outs, only 3 of which I'd even consider discounting (the 3 non-spade 9s)! I want every single one of those effers tied to the pot, as the chances are very good that at least 2 of them are contributing dead money.

Also, with 2 preflop aggressors, my chances of winning this huge pot without showing down the best hand is somewhere in the neighborhood of zero, if not less than that.

tinhat · #3 12-05-2005, 03:26 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't get the flop check - what's its purpose? Are you trying to build a bigger pot or trying to win this already humungoid pot? (For all you know utg limped a mway hand and 3-bet pf to maximize implieds and pairing 2's could beat it.)

IMM you should not be trying to tie 4 others to the pot - you should be trying to win it because it was already huge...

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that the preflop call was marginal, but I made it, and I'd make it again at an unknown 6max table. 'nuff said.

On the flop I was going for building the pot with the anticipated agressor to my immediate left. The worst possible play would be to bet and have UTG blow everybody else out leaving me with no value. I have 15 outs, only 3 of which I'd even consider discounting (the 3 non-spade 9s)! I want every single one of those effers tied to the pot, as the chances are very good that at least 2 of them are contributing dead money.

Also, with 2 preflop aggressors, my chances of winning this huge pot without showing down the best hand is somewhere in the neighborhood of zero, if not less than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

This seems fairly sensible; but you said you had 10 hands w/them (IIRC) so really you have no idea what your worst outs are (IMO).

When I see large flop pots I think of sshe/hepfap; "large pots" pg 148 sshe #2: "Sieze opportunities to knock out players..." So when I saw 16sb and a c-r on the field, it didn't seem like trying to knock anybody out.

I understand your rationale; and the way it played out is pretty cool. I'm just wondering, technically, what's "correct" here...

Mike

milesdyson · #4 12-05-2005, 03:30 AM

yeah you should try to win pots fast, but you can't win this pot without improving. so we keep everyone in to basically pad the pot for our draw.

bozlax · #5 12-05-2005, 11:03 AM

[ QUOTE ]
This seems fairly sensible; but you said you had 10 hands w/them (IIRC) so really you have no idea what your worst outs are (IMO).

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I do. 95% of the time a two-card flush (i.e. a flush that uses both of your hole cards) is going to be good, so until that third [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] falls and somebody's still going hard at the pot, I'm figuring all 9 spades in the deck to be good for me. I suppose I over-stated the worrying about the 9 falling...if it falls and makes my hand, I'm still losing to AJ, which I'd be losing to on the flop, so I guess all 8 9s and aces should be counted as good, too, so in reality I have 17 clean outs, here, until one of them falls and somebody is still hitting me hard (if the ace falls, of course, I'm not slowing down).

[ QUOTE ]
When I see large flop pots I think of sshe/hepfap; "large pots" pg 148 sshe #2: "Sieze opportunities to knock out players..." So when I saw 16sb and a c-r on the field, it didn't seem like trying to knock anybody out.

I understand your rationale; and the way it played out is pretty cool. I'm just wondering, technically, what's "correct" here...

[/ QUOTE ]

What's "correct", of course, depends.[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] However, with this big a pot and this number of players at this limit, you're not going to be able to knock anybody out most of the time, so instead you go for building the biggest pot possible with a couple of strong draws and hope that (a) you make your hand, and (b) it holds up.

tinhat · #6 12-05-2005, 04:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This seems fairly sensible; but you said you had 10 hands w/them (IIRC) so really you have no idea what your worst outs are (IMO).

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I do. 95% of the time a two-card flush (i.e. a flush that uses both of your hole cards) is going to be good, so until that third

[/ QUOTE ]

W/all due respect, IMO no you don't; I'm not sure you're following what I'm getting at: I have one and only one overriding thought here - the flop pot was plenty large to try winning right from the start. And that's all that's on my mind

So as simply as I can put it, IMO c-r flop means you have now virtually guaranteed that you MUST hit the fl to win. You have foregone what was already a great pot and (I'm assuming) tossed out any other options, locking yourself into a must-hit draw by tying everyone to the pot.

Consider the unk but assumed 3-out gutshots; betting into utg and praying for a raise, folding any of them is huge because if you hit your J's you're now not losing to their str. Tying them to the pot means that option is gone.

Consider the 45o idiot that isn't going anywhere now because he's put so much in the pot; he could conceivably hit a 4 or 5 and win; IMM ANY hand is a threat with a pot this large; folding them is an option now gone.

What I have the problem with is instead of having the fl as a backup if you cannot win the already large pot w/a lesser hand, IMO tying everyone to it right from the start makes hitting the fl your ONLY option.

I'm going to catch a lot of [censored] for this but IMM helps demonstrate my point; we're not talking about highly skilled, extremely clever players here; they're morons and I don't discount anything happening at $1/2 (and I expect to be called a moron after posting this hand):

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

Preflop: Hero is MP with 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
1 fold, Hero raises, 1 fold, Button 3-bets, SB caps, 1 fold, Hero calls, Button calls.

Flop: (13 SB) 5[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (3 players)
SB checks, Hero bets, Button folds, SB folds.

Final Pot: 7 BB

Some ppl (maybe most/all) think betting flop is stupid; but IMO there is no other option on a 3-way pf capped pot - it's too big. I can either give up w/o even trying, get cute, etc., but I had 0 chance to win by checking and IMO is easily worth a 1 sb stab.

So the chance of folding pf aggressors is not 0; it isn't high, but it's not 0. My point is that assuming you're against awesome hands and fl is only alternative is I think a mistake. And, IMO, the likelihood of a lesser hand for you winning a 10bb+ flop pot by playing aggressively to eliminate instead of trying to make a huge pot even larger is FAR from 0.

What hands can be eliminated? Who knows; but my point is that you have thrown out right from the start any other possibility other than the flush. All I'm getting at is locking yourself into a must-hit draw is too extreme when the pot was big to begin with...

Mike

JerseyTom · #7 12-05-2005, 12:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Personally I never would've called the first raise; you only have one thing going for this hand and IMM is a marginal mway hand to begin with. Would be interesting to know how many times you could play J2s even @ 6:1 and make any money.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm ususally folding this preflop as well, but I may be a bit too tight out of the blinds. I think this hand only has value for making a flush value and the occasional one card straight that you'll often have to pay many bets to miss (with 2 PF aggressors and a Broadway-ish board)

[ QUOTE ]

I don't get the flop check - what's its purpose? Are you trying to build a bigger pot or trying to win this already humungoid pot? (For all you know utg limped a mway hand and 3-bet pf to maximize implieds and pairing 2's could beat it.)

IMM you should not be trying to tie 4 others to the pot - you should be trying to win it because it was already huge...

Mike

[/ QUOTE ]

Others have already said this, but hero has exactly 0% chance of winning this without completeing his (fairly strong) draw, so the flop C/R for value is perfect IMO. Build a monster.

Tom

jba · #8 12-05-2005, 11:08 AM

a suited jack is definitely playable in a five handed pot against any raise let alone a poster raise

I'm surprised there is any debate about this.

OP: nice hand, I like everything you did here

tinhat · #9 12-05-2005, 04:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
a suited jack is definitely playable in a five handed pot against any raise let alone a poster raise

I'm surprised there is any debate about this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, help me out here. I don't hesitate to toss this w/o second thought. After a cpl replies thought maybe I better see if pokerstove shows me I'm misplaying.

blinds == rake; I picked two reasonable $1/2 hands for co/button.

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

850,668 games 0.016 secs 53,166,750 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 32.0279 % 31.48% 00.55% { JcJd }
Hand 2: 27.9696 % 27.09% 00.88% { AcQs }
Hand 3: 09.9262 % 09.05% 00.88% { AdTh }
Hand 4: 19.6313 % 19.60% 00.03% { 9c8c }
Hand 5: 10.4449 % 09.90% 00.55% { Js2s }

Based only on what he knows for certain (pot size when he called), he needs 6:1 to break even. Pokerstove in this case says J2s needs 9+:1.

If my math is correct and assuming any unk hands weren't even better than what I picked, the best case might be break even longterm IF sb always calls and no one ever folds the raise.

According to what I see, J2s doesn't even have a chance to be anything other than a longterm loser. Am I missing something?

Mike

jba · #10 12-05-2005, 04:46 PM

pokerstove is not the tool to use in this situation
using your methodology looks like QJs is a fold too huh

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 37.3233 % 36.95% 00.37% { JcJd }
Hand 2: 31.0122 % 30.68% 00.33% { AcQs }
Hand 3: 17.7185 % 17.67% 00.05% { 9c8c }
Hand 4: 13.9459 % 13.29% 00.65% { QhJh }

there are a zillion threads out there that will explain in better detail why pokerstove is worthless for a thread like this, all it gives you is hot/cold equity if everyone goes to showdown. there are other factors at work like implied odds, etc that can make calling > folding.

look for old peter rus post about calling suited trash in the BB after a raise and ONE cold caller (so in a 3way pot). I wouldn't advocate loosening up that much until you are playing at an expert level and the rake does not have nearly the impact as it does at 1/2 (I only play 5/10 where rake is still a big concern and i'm not close to expert -- so I don't go that far either). basically what it comes down to in the blinds is that if you fold you have -.5bb EV, so if you can find a way to make -.3 or -.4 bbs it is better than folding.

editted grammar