rabman50
Forum Replies Created
-
We are not voting for these we are looking for books to add to the list. Voting will start next week!
-
It seems that the SB is playing more aggressive than optimal and the BB is playing less aggressive than optimal. It is hard to put SB on a hand like 89s. That is a hand that likes to limp call rather than raise pre and face a potential 3! Unless villain assumed you would play passive most of the time. Your hand plays well as a re-shove in the BB vs SB open. As played, yes, I raise here. Villain has plenty of hands that we can get value from. It’s unfortunate that villain had a hand that was ahead.
-
First I need to nitpick. I assume when you give your stack size and nobody else’s that you are the effective stack.
Hand 1: Was this a normal raise size. 3.75 UTG seems fairly big. This may skew us from mixing calls and folds 50/50 to a pure folding strategy with 44. When he checks to you on the flop do you see him as a player capable of checking a strong hand to protect his checking range or is he the type of player to bet his strongest hands as well as his strongest draws for protection? When the blank hits the turn I would probably raise his small bet. If he calls the turn and checks river I would probably check back. As played when he checks the river he appears to be giving up. You’re probably not getting calls from worse so checking back is fine.
Hand 2: You could have CB a little less like 1100 but you should mostly be continuing here. I would have played it the same way.
Hand 3: Just a really gross spot. I hate getting it all in pre with 100BB so I agree with the call pre. Hard to fold on this flop, but definitely fold on the turn.
-
From his perspective this flop did not hit you at all. He has shown the ability to open, even UTG, with a very wide range. He called your three bet which doesn’t mean as much as it would against a normal UTG opening range. He has a lot more misses in his range than he does monsters. He is a maniac and maniacs bet whether they have it or not. In this spot I can’t fold Kings. There is just too many hands in his range where we are way ahead. I could see folding on an Ace high flop but not here. If he happens to have a hand like 88 or 85s so be it, but with a hand as strong as Kings on this flop I’m willing to take the risk.
Against this type of player the best way to beat them is to get them to bluff into you. Play hands in-position with a dominating range. When you show weakness by checking or betting small this type of player will attempt to bluff with big bets. Only continue with big top pair hands (or better) and draws to the nuts.
-
I would probably fold the river as the BB. I would think that a lot of opener’s bluffs would contain As. Even though he may not have the flush he still got there on the river with the Ace. When medium stacked your bubble factor is higher than the small stacks or the large stacks. Bluff catching is risky. Like you said everything is diminished. A normal call becomes a fold.
-
Even 5 years ago most recreational players did not have access to solvers or solver solutions like they do today. When we think about hands today we think in terms of ranges and balance. I had been playing for 18 years at that time and I still did not have a handle on pre flop ranges or the shape of ranges that people used. Today we have access to solved pre flop ranges. There are books explaining GTO and solvers help us understand how to be balanced. Would I have played the hand differently back then? I may have folded the turn because monsters under the bed were very real to me back then. I would have checked to see a free flop. I agree with your logic to not bet the flop, but back then I probably would have just check called taking a passive line with my draw. For clarification the bet on the flop would have been a lead and not a donk bet as no one raised preflop. Once the board pairs on the turn I would probably check call the bet by the button and when MP goes all-in and the button calls I would fold. The paired board is very scary to me. I would have struggled to put them on a range but I would have assumed one of them had a full house. Monsters under the bed are even bigger when two players make these kinds of actions in front of me. That was the level of player I was at the time. I played a lot of live poker and survived by not getting into tough spots without near the nuts. This is interesting to try to imagine my frame of mind back then. So much has changed in the last five years. Thanks for the memories.
-
I’m going to share a thought from our previous book “The Poker Brain”. “With two streets to come the aggressor doesn’t need their bluffs to work immediately.” “They can therefore bluff (or semibluff) the flop much more frequently then they could if the action ended immediately.” I think what Matt is saying is that you can bluff the flop and turn more frequently because there are still cards to come.
-
Agree with Chris this is a cbet. Not worried so much about getting value as much as we are trying to deny equity to overcards. As far as the shove on the turn this is an automatic call. I ran the range you put him on in Flopzilla and if he only shoves sets and straights it is a slam dunk call.
-
Call here all day. He has many more trips and A highs then he does flushes. A lot of the hands that could beat you would have bet the turn. Did some playing around on Flopzilla and ended up here:
-
Risk Premium or Bubble Factor is the amount of equity required to call an all-in based on $EV. This varies based on the stack size of the opponent. So in this scenario your Bubble Factors are as follows:
Ivor_Bigone1 – 342.57/259.23=-1.3215 1.32/(1.32+1)=56%
Mattiebumpo – 421.24/220.48=-1.9106 1.91/(1.91+1)=65%
okie@cars – 421.24/292.32=-1.441 1.44/(1.44+1)=59%
Mbabker – 281.47/228.55=-1.2315 1.23/(1.23+1)=55%
The formula is $EV risked / $EV gained = Bubble Factor
Bubble Factor/(Bubble Factor+1) = Equity required to call an all-in
I used Nate Mayves’ new ICM Calculator. Seems to work well and is very easy to use.
-
Trick question. There is no risk premium in a winner take all tournament.
-
This is a low stakes tournament and the players have not done a lot of studying. The villain in this hand made many mistakes. The flop call was not the biggest. First he limped in EP with the second worse Axo, the A6o being the worst, and then called a 4x raise from out of position. A lot of players don’t believe the c-better has a hand and will call with their A highs on the flop. You don’t want him to fold hands that you are clearly dominating. Unfortunately, he sucked out on you and won the pot. He now thinks that he played correctly and will continue to play this way. I want him at my table all day long.
-
I think we can go either way on this. A bet of about 65K will leave him with 20BB that might be enough to invoke a call. On the other hand some people will become entitled with AA or KK and will not fold it even to an all-in. You mentioned that he always opens to 3x regardless of stack depth. He also only 3-bet to 2.4x from out of position. This probably means he is not a studied player which could be another reason to just jam here. If he calls and loses he can tell his friends about the donkey who called his 3-bet with KJo.
As far as the call preflop, I agree that his sizing made it easy to call. 35K might be enough to get me to fold KJo which is, as I like to say, a reverse implied odds hand, but I would definitely fold to a 50K 3-bet.
-
This looks great. I’ll be up for whatever date you choose.
-
This spot is tricky to me. The fact that you called IP means that our ranges will be much closer in equity. I still have the nut advantage so I went with a big c-bet. this makes it tougher for you to check-raise as you would have to put me all-in. I would have an easy fold to any check raise on this board. Had I made a smaller c-bet you could easily check raise and I would have to fold. With my specific hand you would have been able to get a fold had you bet the turn. But against my range this might not have worked. I would have called with most Qs and all As. With the equity you had with a pair and nut flush draw I can see why you checked it down.
-
Matt says that there comes a point in a poker hand where the brain can become overtaxed which often happens on the river. He should have thought that he unblocked 77 and 66 when bluffing here because those are the hands he would want his opponent to fold. So KQ makes a better bluff candidate than Ac6c or Ac7c. None of the missed flush draws are good bluffing candidates because they block the opponents missed flush draws. In fact KQ looks like a good bluff hand here. In the actually hand he checked back and lost to AcKh. He felt that he was locked into bluffing if a club came on the river and didn’t give enough thought to hands to bluff if a club does not come. As the pot gets bigger it is important to slow down and think through the scenario.
-
Yes it is a great book. We’ve had Jason on the pod a few times. So your vote for the first four is Poker with Presence. How about the rest?
-
Thanks for the suggestion I’ve added “The Final Table” by Gareth James to the list.
-
I’ve added “Pot-Limit Omaha” by Jeff Hwang to the list.
Thanks for the suggestion.
-
I’ve added the Gareth James book to the list and we have Elements of Poker by Tommy on the list.