Stop N Go...Using An Agressive Player To Protect My Aces

[Milky]

That's exactly the example I was thinking of when I saw this hand. Does anyone here like the line of check/calling the flop and then betting the turn, hoping your opponent will raise your bet and shut down some people behind you?

[chief444]

[ QUOTE ]
But 98 and 87 also beat him; with the action on the turn and the callers he got, this river is a good place for a weeping check-call.


[/ QUOTE ]
98 is possible. 87 you probably hear from on the turn. I don't have a real issue with the river since you almost have to call a raise. I was just pointing out that I think it's close.

[ QUOTE ]
I like this hand all the way through. If you 3-bet the flop, chances are people will be more likely to call 2 cold on the turn. I like the way you used him to face the field with 2

[/ QUOTE ]
If I knew he would raise the turn then I would like it. But you don't know that.

[The Goober]

I'm confused by some of the responses here. The pot is capped 5 ways PF, and the board is draw-heavy. Doesn't this fall thoroughly into the "win it now" category? If hero is confident that UTG will raise the turn bet (which I think is reasonable - he sure looks like someone desperately trying to protect his big PP) then the stop n' go faces UTG+2 with 17:2 odds. If we 3-bet the flop and UTG cooperates by capping, they still have something like 15:1 odds. If the 3-bet scares UTG and everyone goes into call down mode, then the whole field has odds to draw to practically anything. It seems to me like the stop n' go is a good choice.

am I missing something?

[chief444]

[ QUOTE ]
I think we can infer that he will raise. Hes raising UTG and capping what is most assuredly going to be a five handed hand. Furthermore, hes willing to raise his hand into the field on the flop. He either A) obviously likes his hand B) is a maniac

[/ QUOTE ]
And my thought is that a lot of opponent just raise whatever they're holding by default here. AND...the fact that it was obviously going to be a 5-way pot preflop does NOT mean the chances of him holding a high pocket pair are better. I'll cap with a broader range of hands including AQs, AJs,... when there are 5 players than I will with 2-3. Also, he may just be raising a flush draw on the flop. I just am not convinced that his turn raise is a sure enough thing to make it worth the bets missed. Plus the pot is already huge and there aren't many hands that will call 2 on the flop but fold the turn. Any pair still has odds. There may be a gutshot possibility. But I don't know that this will increase your equity percentage enough to make it worth it. It is an interesting line though and this pot is obviously worth doing what you can to protect. I'm just not convinced this line yields the best expectation.

[jt1]

I disagree with the consensus, and am not sure if my analysis is the right way of looking at it....

UTG has KK and should raise a turn bet so Hero went for it. Myself, I like the way he played it. He's trading value for the possibility for protecting his investment. After the turn action a gutshot has 2 bb of that pot and put in 3 bb. A 5 outer hs 2.5 bb of it. <font color="green"> gutshot looses a bb. 5 outer looses 1/2 a bb</font>

if he pumped the flop making KK slowdown on the turn, a gutshot has 2.67 sb of the pot on the flop after calling 2 sb. A 5 outer has 3.5 sb or it. <font color="green">gutshot gains .67 sb. 5 outer wins 1.5 sb </font>

Looking at the totals, the way Hero played it, a gutshot put in 4 bb when only 3.52 bb of the pot is his. A 5 outer has 4.1 bb. <font color="red">gutshot loose .48 bb. 5 outer wins .1 bb </font>

If he had pumped the flop and KK slowed down on turn than gutshot only has to put in 2 bb to win 20. His equity is 3.2 bb, and the 5 outer has 4 bb of that. <font color="red"> gutshot wins 1.2 bb 5 outer wins 2 bb </font>

[jt1]

[ QUOTE ]
the fact that it was obviously going to be a 5-way pot preflop does NOT mean the chances of him holding a high pocket pair are better. I'll cap with a broader range of hands including AQs, AJs

[/ QUOTE ]


This is an excellent point. But I still think he should be confident that he'll be raised on the turn because villian capped preflop and raised on the flop. This indicates KK, QQ to me.


BTW, with so many players in, i'd bet the river -- 2 or more players could easily be holding overpairs.

[gman420]

I'm not entirely sure, but I think your numbers are a little off. MP2, if he had a gutshot, has 9% of a 19.33bb pot, and paid 2 bb to stay in, but he is also has some implied odds if he mades his hand (the two agressive players will surely call his bet on the river with such a large pot). Thus with a gut shot MP2 actually made the right move by paying the 2 bets. When it got back to him on the turn for one more, he made the right call again (now the pot is even bigger and he only has to pay one bb). MP2's call on the flop could have also been correct if he had a flush draw (this obsviously drastically changes the previous analysis for the turn, as the flush draw plus a gut shot are more than enough to justify the call) and a back door straight draw. In that case he has about 10 outs (if you count the back door draw as one out) twice, which makes him less than a 2:1 underdog. If he called two bets cold on the flop, forcing him to call two more cold on the flop is not going to make him fold. Basically, I think you played the hand exactly as it should have been played, but (assuming your opponent showed down a straight) your action on the turn was not going to get him to fold with that draw(since the pot was so big). If your opponent had no flush draw, then his calling your raise on the flop was definitely incorrect. In fact probably any hand he had he should have abandoned preflop with that kind of action. In the end though, all you can really say is "That's poker."

[chief444]

I'm not sure where you're getting some of your numbers but you need to figure in a certain percentage of the time when UTG doesn't raise because you can't just say "UTG has KK". You don't know that. And your assuming there is a gutshot draw. You don't know that. You're assuming if there is a gutshot draw that folds it actually increases your equity. You don't know that because some outs will be "shared". Same thing for a 5 outer. In other words, they're unlikely to all be drawing live. You're assuming that UTG caps the flop but calls the turn if you 3-bet. There seem to be a lot of assumptions that will each only be true some of the time.

Also, gutshots or 5 outers do not "gain" when you 3-bet the flop.

Just out of curiosity, how much does everyone feel that hero's pot equity, as a percentage, will increase using this line when it does go as planned? How often, as a percentage, does everyone feel this play goes as planned (meaning UTG does in fact raise the turn)? How many bets do you feel are sacrificed to gain this additional equity? How many bets are sacrificed when UTG doesn't cooperate?

I could very well be wrong in saying this play isn't worth it. It probably is close. But these are the questions that make that difference.

[jt1]

In response to Gman and chief:

my numbers come from the probability that a gutshot and 5 outer will win by the river. 16.5% for a gutshot and 20.5% for a 5 outer.

I just wanted to demonstrate that hero's equity goes up by taking the line that he did. Even if the implied odds make it a necessary call for a gutshot, the hero's equity is still higher than it would otherwise be.

I think it's safe to put opponent on a big pair. Now, as for him raising a turn bet, that's a different story.

Chief, if a player has pot odds to call than he does "gain" a certain amount of bets for that call.

not confident about the percentages so pleze correct if i'm wrong, but equity does go up, i'm pretty sure - i'm already late, and gtg.

[chief444]

jt,

I don't question that this line will generally increase hero's pot equity somewhat. The question is will the higher percentage of the resulting smaller pot be better than a slightly smaller percentage of what will likely be a bigger pot. My thought is that this line on average will only increase the equity percentage by less than 5% (including the times UTG doesn't raise...there are hands you can give incorrect odds to...they call anyway...etc). But who knows and I admit that based on the other responses I very well could be underestimating this. And looking at it objectively I'm assuming that the resulting pot after continued aggression will be substantially bigger than after the line taken and that may not always be true. Sometimes it will actually be the other way around although I don't think very often.

[ QUOTE ]
Chief, if a player has pot odds to call than he does "gain" a certain amount of bets for that call.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes but that doesn't mean he gains less by not having to call another bet. And if you and UTG keep raising each other even though these gutshots or 5 outers don't seem to be making a mistake calling a bet or two at a time they ARE making a mistake in not anticipating the action and ending up putting 2BB's into a pot not big enough to justify putting 2BB's into.

This is defninitely a more interesting hand and line to take than I first thought.

Chief