that annoying turn c/r

pryor15 · #1 11-02-2005, 04:28 AM

looking for leaks where maybe i should know better...

villain is 15.7/6.3/0.86

is there a fold here or do we call it down?

PokerRoom 2/4 Hold'em (10 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

Preflop: Hero is MP3 with J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] , J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] .
UTG calls, 3 folds, MP2 calls, Hero raises, 3 folds, BB calls, UTG calls, MP2 calls.

Flop: (8.50 SB) 4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (4 players)
BB checks, UTG checks, MP2 bets, Hero raises, BB calls, UTG folds, MP2 calls.

Turn: (7.25 BB) 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (3 players)
BB checks, MP2 checks, Hero bets, BB raises, MP2 folds, Hero?

2+2 wannabe · #2 11-02-2005, 04:34 AM

I know it sounds super weak-tight - but you've represented an overpair the whole way, and BB doesn't care (it seems like he's not expecting you to fold to this c/r)

playing PR often, this smells so much like a set, and I think it's -EV to call down here, but you DO have outs against 2 pair here

the problem is that if the board doesn't pair and I don't hit my set, I pay the river off anyways

if I'm playing this hand, I expect 44 and punch the keyboard

P.S. how do you get PR hand histories to work in the converter?

pryor15 · #3 11-02-2005, 04:38 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I know it sounds super weak-tight - but you've represented an overpair the whole way, and BB doesn't care (it seems like he's not expecting you to fold to this c/r)

playing PR often, this smells so much like a set, and I think it's -EV to call down here, but you DO have outs against 2 pair here

the problem is that if the board doesn't pair and I don't hit my set, I pay the river off anyways

if I'm playing this hand, I expect 44 and punch the keyboard

P.S. how do you get PR hand histories to work in the converter?

[/ QUOTE ]

it takes a tiny bit of fiddling with the code and it's a major pain.

yeah, it seems to frequently be a set, but i'm hesitant to give it up b/c i'm a bit stubborn.

thesharpie · #4 11-02-2005, 06:51 AM

Against a looser opponent you'd (obviously) be more likely to call it since there are alot of 2 pairs you have hidden outs against, there would also usually be a higher chance you have the current best hand as most loose players are more aggressive/unpredictable than this cat. This opponent seems the type that isn't going to play many hands that hit 2 pair on this board, and he's almost certainly not checkraising with a hand you beat except maybe something like A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] once in a blue moon. I think a fold is alright, if I call I'm folding the river unless I improve (to a set or the board pairs).

If he does have 2 pair he almost certainly holds a suited hand since he's not calling with stuff like 92o in the BB, this really reduces the ways he can have a hand like 92 for 2 pair, 2 ways versus 9 ways if he would play 92o.

If you think he'd call PF with any 2 suited in this position then you should call the turn and fold the river since you have 8 outs often enough, you'll often have 0 outs but you'll have over 4 outs overall. This guy is probably not calling with 42s or 92s getting 7 to 1 though so I suspect you have less than 4 effective outs on the turn.

thesharpie · #5 11-02-2005, 07:01 AM

Something as simple as him capable of holding only 98o or 94s (hands you have 8 outs against) would make it closer to a call. 98o might look like a call PF to this guy whereas 42s might not.

There are 9 ways he could hold 98o and 3 ways he could have 94s, for a total of 12 ways you have 8 outs against him. There are 12 ways he can have a set against you if we don't discount stuff like 99 which we probably should, you have 0 outs if he holds this.

(12*8)*(12*0)/12+12 = 4 effective outs

Aaron_ · #6 11-02-2005, 07:03 AM

[ QUOTE ]
P.S. how do you get PR hand histories to work in the converter?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you guys think it would be a worthwhile contribution, send me a PokerRoom hand history and I'll whip up a convertor in PHP.

(sorry to interrupt your hand eval)

2+2 wannabe · #7 11-02-2005, 07:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
P.S. how do you get PR hand histories to work in the converter?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you guys think it would be a worthwhile contribution, send me a PokerRoom hand history and I'll whip up a convertor in PHP.

(sorry to interrupt your hand eval)

[/ QUOTE ]

If you could do this that would be amazing!

PM sent

pryor15 · #8 11-02-2005, 02:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
P.S. how do you get PR hand histories to work in the converter?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you guys think it would be a worthwhile contribution, send me a PokerRoom hand history and I'll whip up a convertor in PHP.

(sorry to interrupt your hand eval)

[/ QUOTE ]

that would be so awesome. it looks like you already got a history, but let me know if you still need one.

Buckmulligan · #9 11-02-2005, 02:17 PM

We have a lot of outs to conterfeit. I think a call down is warranted here, unless we have a more definitive read on button, I.E. repeatedly plays tptk passively. We are only beat by 88 and 99 here, because a 16 vpip isnt limping the two pair hands in MP.

TomBrooks · #10 11-02-2005, 02:50 PM

RIVER:

A villian that passive is not checkraising with top pair, top kicker. In fact, no villian would checkraise TPTK after a turn bet and raise by others. He has at least an overpair. There are one of those you beat, one you split, and three you lose to. It's possible BB could have AA, KK or QQ and not have raised it preflop because it was a raise to him and he's OOP. His other logical holdings could include any pair that made a set or 98.

With JJ, calling is probably not too bad getting 10:1. If you catch a TT or split with a JJ now and then, and perhaps catch the occassional guy on tilt who oddly bluffs this, I don't think you can go too far wrong.

However, I have a feeling it is slightly -EV to call and folding would be at least a little better.

Edit after reading thread: Were talking about the river here, not the turn, right? Some replies seem to be addressing the turn. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]