O/8 hand: Fear the higher boat?

GMan42 · #1 09-09-2004, 12:43 AM

Party Poker 0.50/1 Omaha/8 (10 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is CO with 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].
UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, UTG+2 calls, MP1 calls, MP2 folds, MP3 calls, Hero calls, Button folds, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (8 SB) 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (8 players)
SB checks, BB checks, UTG checks, UTG+1 folds, UTG+2 checks, MP1 checks, MP3 checks, Hero bets, SB folds, BB calls, UTG folds, UTG+2 calls, MP1 calls, MP3 calls.

Turn: (6.50 BB) 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (5 players)
BB bets, UTG+2 folds, MP1 calls, MP3 calls, Hero calls.

River: (10.50 BB) 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (4 players)
BB bets, MP1 folds, MP3 folds, Hero raises, BB 3-bets, Hero calls.

Final Pot: 16.50 BB
Main Pot: 16.50 BB, between Hero and BB.
Results:
BB has 5s Jh 3d 6c (High: full house, jacks full of sixes).
Hero has 2s 4s Jc 3h (High: full house, jacks full of twos).
Outcome: BB wins 16.50 BB.

Here's my thinking:
I bet my set on the flop since I was in good position and thought I could chase out any ragged flush draws.

When BB bet on the turn, I figured him for a full house, but possibly with a pair of 6's (table is pretty loose...am I wrong to think he would have bet the flop himself with a set of jacks?)...therefore with my 10 outs to make either jacks full or quads I felt I was OK to call.

On the river, I obviously knew I was in trouble after he 3-bet me, but there was too much $$$ in the pot not to make the crying call. I think the raise on the river might have been my dumbest move...how careful should I be when I hold 3rd-nut boat like this?

Of course the flip side of this is that with the pair and the flush draw on the board, I may have no business betting the flop at all. Any thoughts? I'm still learning the ropes at O8 so if my play here was tremendously stupid, feel free to tell me. I can take it. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

vetman81 · #2 09-09-2004, 01:18 AM

Once again I think you played fairly well. Betting the flop is your best move here, since you have the set and everyone checked it to you. I would be worried about not having a kicker, but it seems noone else does either. I think anyone calling this flop either has the other J or is stupidly chasing a straight or flush. Since the turn made neither a straight or flush, when BB bets, I would figure him for J6. I may be tempted to fold here, given the fact that I have no kicker and BB likely has a boat. That being said, just call on the river.

[ QUOTE ]
am I wrong to think he would have bet the flop himself with a set of jacks?)...

[/ QUOTE ]

He may not have bet the flop for a couple of reasons. First, he is out of position, and second, he too has no kicker. He could be worried about drawing dead to a J9. Once he bets on the turn, a J9 would have raised him, so now he is likely to know his boat is good, especially when an undercard hits the river.

I can see going either way here on the flop for him. I probably would have went ahead and bet, but thats just me. HTH.

Matt Ruff · #3 09-09-2004, 07:16 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Of course the flip side of this is that with the pair and the flush draw on the board, I may have no business betting the flop at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Betting the flop was fine. Yeah, the board is paired, but it's *your* pair -- your boat draw. As far as someone with a flush draw, you have more outs and are currently ahead with top set, so you want to bet against them.

I think your big mistake here was raising on the river. If you were going to raise, you should have done it on the turn, looking to bluff out J6 by representing J9. Raising on the river *looks* like a bluff, and even if he thinks you might have the king, he's probably going to make the crying call.

-- M. Ruff

Buzz · #4 09-09-2004, 10:44 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Flop:... SB checks, BB checks, UTG checks, UTG+1 folds, UTG+2 checks, MP1 checks, MP3 checks, Hero bets, SB folds, BB calls, UTG folds, UTG+2 calls, MP1 calls, MP3 calls.

[/ QUOTE ]

G-Man - You flopped trip jacks, but your kicker is no good. (More about this below).

[ QUOTE ]
River: ... BB bets, MP1 folds, MP3 folds, Hero raises, BB 3-bets, Hero calls.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yikes!! You sure don't have a raise!

[ QUOTE ]
I bet my set on the flop since I was in good position and thought I could chase out any ragged flush draws.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not unreasonable. But your kicker is no good. If you don't make a full house, and neither does an opponent with a jack, your opponent with the jack plus a five or better will have you out-kicked. If you do make a full house it will often be 2nd best. That's one reason why A34J is so much stronger than 234J.

With 234J as a starting hand, you really want to see an ace plus at least one other low card on the flop. Anything else and it's easy to get in trouble with the hand.

(But I'm usually going to see the flop with it and might get in almost as much trouble as you here if there are two jacks on the flop).

[ QUOTE ]
When BB bet on the turn, I figured him for a full house, but possibly with a pair of 6's (table is pretty loose...am I wrong to think he would have bet the flop himself with a set of jacks?)

[/ QUOTE ]

He might or might not bet the flop himself with a set of jacks. Not at all unusual, in real life, for a player to check a flopped set. Depends on the player.

But do you really think he's sitting there sith a pair of sixes after this flop, hoping for a six on the turn so that he can make a second rate full house? Isn't J-6-X-X (or a pure bluff) more likely?

[ QUOTE ]
...therefore with my 10 outs to make either jacks full or quads I felt I was OK to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't know if he has a full house or not when he bets the turn. Could be a delayed bet of the set from the flop. of it could be an underboat, sixes over jacks. Hard to tell. But the bet _represents jacks over sixes (or quad jacks, which are impossible here because of your own hand).

[ QUOTE ]
I think the raise on the river might have been my dumbest move.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you put your opponent on a full house, whether your opponent has a better full house than you or not is a coin flip, IMHO. But when your opponent boldly bets it, after you have already bet the flop and called the turn, it looks suspiciously like a better full house than yours, IMHO.

[ QUOTE ]
..how careful should I be when I hold 3rd-nut boat like this?

[/ QUOTE ]

There is not a simple answer. 3rd nut boats are not all the same. And what to do depends very much on the betting.

The way you played it, you wasted two big bets. Getting one extra big bet from an opponent the half of the time you have the better full house does not make up for losing two extra big bets the half of the time your opponent has the better full house. Of course there's always the possibility your opponent doesn't have a full house, but in that case your opponent may well fold to your raise anyhow.

All things considered, a call on the river seems more in order than a raise.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

Matt Ruff · #5 09-09-2004, 11:44 AM

[ QUOTE ]
But do you really think he's sitting there sith a pair of sixes after this flop, hoping for a six on the turn so that he can make a second rate full house? Isn't J-6-X-X (or a pure bluff) more likely?

[/ QUOTE ]

Remember this is .50/$1 Party. I agree that it's unlikely that someone would hang in with just two sixes, but he could be facing something like A366 suited in spades, or even 66 with a queen-high straight draw. J6 does seem like the most likely candidate, though.

[ QUOTE ]
You don't know if he has a full house or not when he bets the turn. Could be a delayed bet of the set from the flop. of it could be an underboat, sixes over jacks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or -- and I'm not making this up -- the guy could have a 78 of spades...

[ QUOTE ]
All things considered, a call on the river seems more in order than a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you think about raising on the turn, to represent J9? Too aggressive?

-- M. Ruff

Buzz · #6 09-09-2004, 05:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Or -- and I'm not making this up -- the guy could have a 78 of spades...

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Matt - Yes.... hoping to catch the ten of spades for the straight flush - and also hoping that someone else has a KQ of spades or the board will pair making someone four of a kind, so as to get a nice share of the jackpot.

Some people do things like this sometimes in the live games in which I play too. (God bless 'em). Or someone might be drawing for the flush even though the board is already paired - or someone might even be holding an offsuit T8 and be drawing for the low end of a straight. And then when they make their flush or straight, they'll bet the hand, not even trying to be tricky, but just thinking or hoping that they may have a winner.

Or someone who is a shrewd player, especially in higher limit games, might think or hope that you are playing too weak/tight and throw a bluff at you when the board is paired, just in case you don't have a full house.

And that's why you have to call, when (1) the board is paired, when (2) you have a non-nut full house (or maybe even worse) and when (3) someone like this bets into you.

I think the value of a top and bottom boat depends a bet on the order in shich the cards are dleivered to the board - and also on the betting. When the flop is J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], and when your opponents check the flop to you, in a tight game you might try a semi-bluff from the cut-off seat. Then if the J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] pairs the board on the turn and BB bets, you have a reasonable raise with G-man's hand, even though a higher full house is possible.

[ QUOTE ]
What do you think about raising on the turn, to represent J9? Too aggressive?

[/ QUOTE ]

In the card and betting sequence represented here, I have to tentatively put BB on the very possible JJJ66 boat, (just as you do). And if BB does have a JJJ66 boat, and you raise, I think you'll at least get called, if not re-raised.

On the other hand, if BB has some other hand and you re-raise, you may lose BB as a customer for the 4th betting round.

And there also are MP1 and MP2 to be considered. Although as it turned out, they both folded on the 4th betting round anyhow, you don't know that they won't chase on the 4th betting round if you just call here, whereas if you bet and BB raises, they both are very likely, if chasing with hands that have no chance to beat your JJJ22, to fold to the double bet with you still to act.

Thus I think the more lucrative (if you make a winning boat on the river) and also much safer route (if you don't) is to simply call on the turn and also on the river. Chasing goes against the grain, but because when BB doesn't necessarily have JJJ66 when he bets the turn (even though it looks very, very much like he has JJJ66 or JJJ99, especially when he also bets the river), I think you're stuck chasing.

Getting stuck in these sorts of situations is a reason why 234J is not as good a hand as it may at first seem. I think 234J-double-suited is marginally playable from late position. That would make
2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] submarginal as a starting hand, even from the cut-off seat.

I play in mostly very loose ring games myself, so that I'm probably going to be seeing the flop with the hand even though I consider it sub-marginal as a starting hand. But if I somehow found myself seated in a rock garden, and if someone in front of me had already called the blind, I wouldn't generally play the hand from the cut-off seat, nor even from the button. If in a rock garden and if BB never raised his own blind pre-flop, _maybe I'd see the flop for a half bet from the small blind.

But in G-man's game, with all those callers, sure, I'd want to see the flop, and then after all those checks on the second betting round, I'd probably bet, hoping nobody else had the case jack (or was slow-playing a flopped full house). Seven players seeing the flop have 28 cards amongst themselves. With that many players seeing the flop, I'd figure that jacks would neither be enhanced not depleted in the stub.

If so, 1*C(44,27)/C(45,28) = 27/45, or 3/5 or 60%. That's the probability of one of the seven opponents still in the hand holding the missing jack, assuming a random chance for the jack to be amongst the 28 cards held by your opponents. (Jacks would probably not be favored more than aces or wheel cards, but they'd probably be more favored than middle cards, thus making the chances of an opponent selecting a starting hand with a jack more or less random). I don't know how you'd figure it any other way.

By the way, if you're interested in seeing how to make a quick approximation under game conditions, write out all the numbers in the first line of the preceeding paragraph and see how they cancel. (All that's left is 27/45 after you cancel like terms in the numerator and denominator). The 45 is always the number of cards left in the stub after you see your own hand and the flop. The twenty seven is one less than four times the number of opponents who are still in the hand. Get it? Do you see it? Maybe you have to be a bit mathematically inclined to easily see it - but seeing it is kind of nifty.

Enough.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

Matt Ruff · #7 09-10-2004, 11:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Or -- and I'm not making this up -- the guy could have a 78 of spades...

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Matt - Yes.... hoping to catch the ten of spades for the straight flush

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I was thinking of players who'd continue to bet 78 of spades even without the inside straight flush draw. In other words, somebody who thinks the 9-high straight might still have a chance here...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What do you think about raising on the turn, to represent J9? Too aggressive?

[/ QUOTE ]

In the card and betting sequence represented here, I have to tentatively put BB on the very possible JJJ66 boat, (just as you do). And if BB does have a JJJ66 boat, and you raise, I think you'll at least get called, if not re-raised.

On the other hand, if BB has some other hand and you re-raise, you may lose BB as a customer for the 4th betting round.

[/ QUOTE ]

My thinking, for what it's worth: I don't believe this hand is strong enough to be worrying about maximizing my winnings if I somehow come out on top. Even if I make my boat on the river, I can't be confident of winning a showdown. On the other hand, if I do make a boat, I am willing to call a bet on the river, and if I'm willing to risk two bets anyway, why not risk them both here? If he re-raises, I know I'm beat and I fold; if he calls, I hope he checks the river and lets me see the showdown for the same price I'd have paid anyway.

[ QUOTE ]
And there also are MP1 and MP2 to be considered.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, my hope would be that my raise would get them both to fold, even if BB called. Could be one of them has the 66, or 99, or maybe it really is BB with 66 and MP1 with third jack, better kicker. At this point I don't see MP1 and MP2 as potential sources of money, I see them as additional ways to lose.

[ QUOTE ]
Getting stuck in these sorts of situations is a reason why 234J is not as good a hand as it may at first seem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. Good hands don't make you agonize quite this much.

[ QUOTE ]
...

Enough.

Just my opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

As always, thanks for the analysis.

-- M. Ruff

Buzz · #8 09-10-2004, 08:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
My thinking, for what it's worth:

[/ QUOTE ]

Matt - Your thinking is good. I respect your thinking.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't believe this hand is strong enough to be worrying about maximizing my winnings if I somehow come out on top.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that GMan's hand is not strong after the turn. But in case it should become strong after the river, I think it's worth considering how to get the most out of it.

If BB has a full house, as represented by the bet on the third betting round, GMan should fold, plain and simple. But although BB's bet after the six on the turn does look very much like JJJ66 (or maybe JJJ99), it could easily be a fake (basically the same sort of fake as a your proposed raise).

From the perspective of a BB with trip jacks after the turn, GMan could have some sort of straight or flush draw that, if made, will beat three jacks.

Therefore BB (1) could have the missing jack with a draw to the full house, (2) could suspect that GMan might have been trying to steal the pot on the 2nd betting round, and (3) if holding the case jack with only a full house draw, might be afraid GMan will take a free card.

A raise is very unlikely to shake BB loose of JJJ66. Possible, but very unlikely. With one card yet to come, a raise is very unlikely to even shake BB (or whoever else might have the case jack) off a full house draw. Possible, but very unlikely.

A raise (especially coupled with a re-raise) might shake off flush or straight draws and therefore would increase the chances of trip jacks. (I wouldn't be playing a flush or straight draw after a paired flop to begin with, but someone must be). At any rate, I'll concede that a raise that would limit the field would increase the chances of trip jacks.

How well any tactic works depends on your opponents and your interaction with them, but I don't honestly think a raise generally would get rid of an opponent with the case jack, with or without a full house already. Would a raise get rid of you if you held A3JK, or even A38J? (That's a rhetorical question).

• Primarily, I wouldn't raise on the turn because I simply don't think a raise has a decent chance to be effective here.
• Secondarily, I can see how a raise might cost GMan money if he does someone end up with a winner.
• Finally, and as a sort of after thought, if BB really does have JJJ66 or JJJ99, GMan saves money by not raising.

[ QUOTE ]
Even if I make my boat on the river, I can't be confident of winning a showdown.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point.

GMan makes a reasonable grab at the pot after the flop. But there are four (!!!) callers. They can't _all have the missing jack but there's a good chance one of them does.

I already estimated odds of 3 to 2 in favor of one of GMan's opponents holding the missing jack on the basis of random selection of a jack. But maybe that estimation is a bit low, considering four (!!!) opponents see the bet after a two-jack flop. Wow! I think some of GMan's opponents simply must not have a clue! In that case, there's no telling what they'll do.

Then when BB bets the turn, it looks a lot like BB holds the missing jack. Has BB already made a full house? Hard to say, IMHO.

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, if I do make a boat, I am willing to call a bet on the river, and if I'm willing to risk two bets anyway, why not risk them both here?

[/ QUOTE ]

After the turn, GMan doesn't _have his boat yet. GMan is only risking one bet. Depending somewhat on the river card, BB might not bet the river.

In the scenario described up through the turn, there seems no desperation to maximize chances for win at any cost. Raising on the turn seems a desperation tactic, like pulling the goalkeeper in the final minute of a hockey or soccer game to create the maximum offense.

[ QUOTE ]
If he re-raises, I know I'm beat and I fold;

[/ QUOTE ]

Fold? Yikes! The trouble with folding is twofold (at least):
• (1) BB may not necessarily have a full house to bet the turn after the scenario described up to this point - and BB may not necessarily have a full house to re-raise. I know BB's who, if holding a hand like AJQK, would slow play the flop, then bet the turn, and then re-raise (rightly or wrongly) if raised on the turn.
• (2) GMan projects a weak image by raising and then folding to the re-raise. This weak image can haunt GMan on subsequent hands.

[ QUOTE ]
if he calls, I hope he checks the river and lets me see the showdown for the same price I'd have paid anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a possibility.

If BB calls and then checks the river, and if you also check the river (even if you make your full house), the cost to you if you lose and your gain if you win is the same.

Yes, a distinct possibility. However there are two other strong possibilities as well.
• (1) BB can call your raise on the turn and then bet the river (whether you make your full house on the river or not). That's how I'd certainly play JJJ99, and how I'd probably play JJJ66.
• (2) BB can re-raise (already discussed above).

[ QUOTE ]
And there also are MP1 and MP2 to be considered.

Well, my hope would be that my raise would get them both to fold, even if BB called. Could be one of them has the 66, or 99, or maybe it really is BB with 66 and MP1 with third jack, better kicker. At this point I don't see MP1 and MP2 as potential sources of money, I see them as additional ways to lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. Depends at least partly on MP1 and MP2, I suppose.

I'm pretty much assuming it's far fetched to expect somebody holding the case jack to fold here. That's because I'm not used to playing against a bunch of scared rabbits. And maybe not even a scared rabbit, if holding the case jack, would fold to a raise on the turn.

And if somebody _does have the case jack, you don't know if it's part of a full house or not. But whether part of a full house or not, the case jack is almost certainly part of a better hand than yours.

Would BB, without the missing jack, with just a straight and flush draw here, bet into three hands on the turn with a pair of jacks on the board? I don't know the answer, (although I know players who would bet here without the jack).

There are 6.5 big bets in the pot at the start of the 3rd betting round. When the betting gets to GMan, there are 9.5 big bets in the pot and three active opponents, all of whom have already paid one big bet to see the river. Hard for me to imagine them all folding to one more bet from GMan (or me, if in GMan's shoes). In other words there is less than a 10% probability of a single raise stealing the pot (There's probably less than a 2% probability of a single raise stealing here, but I'm using 10% because there are 9.5 big bets in the pot to possibly steal with a 1 bet raise). Thus there's not an odds-on chance, and probably only a negligible chance, of stealing with a raise here.

If BB (or somebody else) _doesn't re-raise, you're getting three to one fresh money odds for a raise. Your odds against improving on the river are 3.4 to 1. Thus you don't quite have odds to initiate fresh money into the pot, even not considering the strong possibility you're drawing dead.

If there's no re-raise, you'll be facing three opponents on the river. With three opponents and this board, you have to think that you'll probably have to improve to a full house to win (and you may be drawing dead).

We've already been over the ugly ramifications of BB re-raising.

Have I thought of everything? If so, all things considered, I vote against a raise on the third betting round. Interesting idea though... a tactic that might work well in another scenario.

Just my opinion.

Buzz