Fishy, borderline, or ok?

Gunther S. · #1 11-01-2005, 04:25 PM

PokerStars limit HE 1/2.
This table is 10 handed and pretty tight--can't remember any specific reads on the players in question just now:

Hero is dealt 22 in EP+1.

1 fold, Hero calls, 2 folds, MP+1 raises, all fold to BB who calls, Hero calls.

Flop: A35 rainbow. 3 handed, 6.5 SB

BB checks, hero bets, MP+1 raises, BB raises all in to $2.50, Hero calls $1.50, MP+1 raises to $3, Hero calls.

Turn: blank (7 or something). 3 handed--1 all in, 7.5 BB

Hero checks, MP+1 bets, Hero calls.

Question: On the flop, 6 outs gives me 1 to 3 on the following to streets, so with three players I'm not losing money by betting here? Should I have continued the aggression after the BB went all in? Or is check/folding better?

I can't think specifics right now. Any suggestions will be appreciated. I'll post the results in a reply, although that doesn't seem so important for this hand.

Gunther S. · #2 11-01-2005, 04:29 PM

River: 2

Hero checks, MP+1 bets, Hero raises, MP+1 calls.

Hero wins.

MP+1 makes a rude comment about bad play.

Hero can't get it out of his head, and runs for consolation on the 2+2 forums. Perhaps only to find derision and scorn here too.

Hero continues to try.

gharp · #3 11-01-2005, 04:45 PM

You're overcounting your outs a bit here. Both of the cards you want to see will put 4 to a straight on board, so I wouldn't bet that flop.

ajm36 · #4 11-01-2005, 04:46 PM

You don't have 6 outs on the flop--your 2's could be counterfeit and a 4 can make a bigger straight for someone else. This hand is terribly weak--fold every time to aggression on the flop. You won because you got lucky--it happens.

DCWildcat · #5 11-01-2005, 04:55 PM

You don't have six outs, but you don't have zero either. I'm thinking around 4-4.5 (1 for the 2's, 3 for the straight). I'm still check/folding.

AASooted · #6 11-01-2005, 05:19 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Question: On the flop, 6 outs gives me 1 to 3 on the following to streets, so with three players I'm not losing money by betting here?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure betting costs you money here. There were three players, but only two opponents. If you had six outs and were 3 to 1 to make your hand by the river, you don't have enough pot equity to pump the pot. You were getting 2 to 1 on every bet that went in on the flop (two of their bets for every one of yours), not 3 to 1.

Depending on what you mean by a tight table, I probably wouldn't play 22 in EP -- especially if raises were common. You're playing 22 to make a set, and a tight table usually won't pay you off enough when you hit it to make up for the times you don't.

Gunther S. · #7 11-01-2005, 06:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Depending on what you mean by a tight table, I probably wouldn't play 22 in EP -- especially if raises were common. You're playing 22 to make a set, and a tight table usually won't pay you off enough when you hit it to make up for the times you don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and this would explain how I trapped myself into (yet another) sketchy situation.

Gunther S. · #8 11-01-2005, 06:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You don't have six outs, but you don't have zero either. I'm thinking around 4-4.5 (1 for the 2's, 3 for the straight). I'm still check/folding.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this can't be right. One opponent shows aggression pf. Both show agression on the flop. The pre-flop aggressor is likely on A + high card, or a good pair that he's trying to make good by bullying the flop. The BB has a wider range, but has also raised the flop. What could he have? Certainly not 45s for the gutshot. 33 and 55 are the scariest possibilities. A4s is possible.

So given that any 4 improves me to the second nut straight (only losing to the unlikely 56s gutshot flop raise in the BB), I'd have to say that almost all 4 outs are good there.

Either 2 is also really good. It loses to 4 possible hands: AA by the pre-flop aggressor, 33 or 55 by the BB, and A4 by the big blind (ignoring the redraws--can I ignore the redraws?). So what percentage of the time will those hands come up vs. other hands? 5% = 1.9 outs? It seems that most of the 2s are good as well.

So maybe I have something like 5.85 outs. How much did I lose by putting more money in on the flop? This can't be an easy fold. But maybe I'm missing something. Course, it would be even better if I could think of this stuff while I was playing.

gharp · #9 11-01-2005, 06:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You don't have six outs, but you don't have zero either. I'm thinking around 4-4.5 (1 for the 2's, 3 for the straight). I'm still check/folding.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this can't be right. One opponent shows aggression pf. Both show agression on the flop. The pre-flop aggressor is likely on A + high card, or a good pair that he's trying to make good by bullying the flop. The BB has a wider range, but has also raised the flop. What could he have? Certainly not 45s for the gutshot. 33 and 55 are the scariest possibilities. A4s is possible.

So given that any 4 improves me to the second nut straight (only losing to the unlikely 56s gutshot flop raise in the BB), I'd have to say that almost all 4 outs are good there.

Either 2 is also really good. It loses to 4 possible hands: AA by the pre-flop aggressor, 33 or 55 by the BB, and A4 by the big blind (ignoring the redraws--can I ignore the redraws?). So what percentage of the time will those hands come up vs. other hands? 5% = 1.9 outs? It seems that most of the 2s are good as well.

So maybe I have something like 5.85 outs. How much did I lose by putting more money in on the flop? This can't be an easy fold. But maybe I'm missing something. Course, it would be even better if I could think of this stuff while I was playing.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think your analysis is a little skewed because of the way the action went. I'll agree that if you had checked and it had been bet and raised behind you, you could think it's more likely that all your outs were clean (I think you still wouldn't have odds to call). But when you lead the flop you can't be thinking that -- you don't have the information yet that the BB will raise. Also, BB's raise puts him all-in which greatly increases his hand range. I don't think you can count on him not having a 4 or 2 (which decreases your outs).

Also, I just caught this from the OP:

[ QUOTE ]
Question: On the flop, 6 outs gives me 1 to 3 on the following to streets, so with three players I'm not losing money by betting here?

[/ QUOTE ]
This isn't quite right. You would be getting about 3:1 on your money (if you had six outs), but that means you need more than 3 other people contributing to the pot to have an equity edge. Here you have two (plus one of them has no money).

#10 11-01-2005, 07:26 PM

grunching...

pre-flop: I would just fold any small pair, 22-66 up-front in a tight game. You need 4 players with you to the flop to give you the implied odds to hit a set.
flop: You should not calculate odds to the river, since you plan on calling another bet at the turn. With 6 outs, you are about 7:1 to make your draw on the turn. You are most certainly betting without the best hand. Now it gets raised & reraised, so you are getting under 7:1 to call. You should probably fold. Not likely, but on this board, someone could already have a straight, which gives you less outs.
turn: May as well call, right?
river: I hope you folded when you didn't hit, right?

Play on the flop is not fishy, but spewy. The only time you want to bet with your draw is when you have enough players in the pot because the percentage you draw to your winning hand is equal to the amount you are putting in the pot. This is usually done in the right position, and in such a way not to force others out of the pot. These concepts are discussed throught this forum. Try search, and use "pot equity" in quotes.