50/100 party hand

[NYplayer]

you get 4 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif5 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif in the big blind.

There is a raise and 3 callers and you call getting 9.5:1

the flop is 2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif6 /images/graemlins/diamond.gifJ /images/graemlins/heart.gif

PFRaiser bets, First caller raises, second caller folds, 3rd caller Reraises.

What's your play?

[eviljeff]

seems like the only question to be answered is if there's a higher flush draw out there

[Turning Stone Pro]

I would bet the flop here. I like your hand.

TSP

[NLfool]

you called with 5 high and got almost the perfect flop with lots of people in there with a straight flush draw. Call and don't go too crazy if you hit your 5 high flush. Only way you fold is if it's 3 bets to you on the turn and the board is paired.

[DpR]

I think you can muck here.

[JeffO]

I think I'm calling here. Pre flop raiser is in auto lead mode since he was the PFR. First raiser likely has a Jack or a pocket pair and is trying to protect his hand. The 3rd caller reraiser could have anything from AJ to a set or diamonds.

Without the gutshot draw I think it's close, add in the gutshot draw and I'm definatly calling here.

[SA125]

This is similar to Easy Goer's post. I'm surprised if it's different from mid limits where it's almost a given that the flop, whatever it is here, will be played fast and attacked.

If you're playing it, why start out sitting back hoping for the perfect scenario of facing the field with 2 bets after c/r'ing the LP's bet? It's too easy to get moved off your hand that way. Bet out and get it rolling.

[ActionBob]

[ QUOTE ]
I would bet the flop here. I like your hand.

TSP

[/ QUOTE ]

I like the hand too, but do you really want to bet out here. Looking at a likely raise from the preflop raiser, do you want to end up head up? When this happens you still likely end up with the same outs you had before. Its not like he can clear out a hand you want out either. Anyone with a better flush draw is calling two cold anyway.

I certainly don't mind tryin to get in some bets here on the flop but I think you're better off doing it by check raising the field when you get a bet and a caller or two.

-ActionBob

[NYplayer]

what about a fold? out of the question?

[stoxtrader]

[ QUOTE ]
what about a fold? out of the question?

[/ QUOTE ]

not an easy fold, but my play is fold.

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
what about a fold? out of the question?

[/ QUOTE ]

that was my first thought when reading this hand.

you are really in trouble here (vs. a higher flush draw) unless you are against only good hands, which would also cost you a bit in terms of redraws available. again, unless you're against idiots.

id probably fold it if i checked this hand. calling 3 bets cold is risky, especailly since youcan't be as agressive as you'd like to be if you hit (unless you catch perfect of course).

EDIT: w/o decent reads

Barron

[GreywolfNYC]

You're probably drawing to one out here. Dump it.

[Paluka]

I think this is probably a fold, but we should probably do some math.

[MNpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
You're probably drawing to one out here. Dump it.

[/ QUOTE ]

He has at least 4 (all the 3's).

I think it's a fold.

[HiatusOver]

Just wanted to step in and say I really dont think this is a fold here. I am not sure and a bunch of good players in succession just leaned towards fold but I really doubt it. Maybe I will try to do some math later while I pack for the Bahammas.

I think if anything, the gutshot outs keep u in there. You guys are overestimating the times a higher draw is out there IMO. It has to be pretty often to make this a fold.

[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]
Just wanted to step in and say I really dont think this is a fold here. I am not sure and a bunch of good players in succession just leaned towards fold but I really doubt it. Maybe I will try to do some math later while I pack for the Bahammas.

I think if anything, the gutshot outs keep u in there. You guys are overestimating the times a higher draw is out there IMO. It has to be pretty often to make this a fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that we really need to do some math. I don't have time during the day to do it.

[ggbman]

I'm guessing that the math will show that continuing with the hand is best if people don't get overzealous and assume bigger diamonds are out there more than say 40-50% of the time. Also, even if it's correct to fold, i am never doing it, this flop is too pretty for this hand, and you HAVE A CHANCE AT STRAIGHT FLUSH!

[Nikla]

I def. like a fold and I hate a flop lead.

[DpR]

I would run some poker stove sims, but I have convinced myself that it is a trojan horse for spyware that sends DERB my hole cards - thus I can not install it on my computer :-)

[brick]

definite possibility

[GreywolfNYC]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're probably drawing to one out here. Dump it.

[/ QUOTE ]

He has at least 4 (all the 3's).

I think it's a fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right. Thanks for correcting me.

[Leaky Eye]

Edit

[shmahappens]

Calculate your number of outs. Balance for those that are clean (straight), those that aren't (flush/twopair) and decide if those warrant a call based on the pot size. Isn't this SSHE?

Is your question on leading the flop or not? Don't lead.

Iyou make your flush on the turn, lead.
If you make your straight, checkraise.

[HiatusOver]

I want all experts in succession who said fold to get back in this thread. Its almost for sure u have to continue here. There is no real reason to put anyone on a flush draw. A cap for value and to disguise your hand makes more sense to me than a fold (although I think call is best so u keep everyone in)

[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]
I want all experts in succession who said fold to get back in this thread. Its almost for sure u have to continue here. There is no real reason to put anyone on a flush draw. A cap for value and to disguise your hand makes more sense to me than a fold (although I think call is best so u keep everyone in)

[/ QUOTE ]

Math pls.

[baronzeus]

I never give opponents credit for flush draws, so I'd call 3 cold.

[HiatusOver]

I dont really think its close so I dont see why I have to do the math. You guys are the one who want to fold a big draw here, I would think u would have some idea of how many times the flush draw is out there and how often that has to happen to turn it into a fold.

I do agree that it comes down to a math problem but I would be kind of suprised if my variables make it close.

Maybe I will attempt it later I dunno

[Turning Stone Pro]

I stand behind my original post. I lead on the flop, and check-call the turn if the turn doesnt help me. No way do i put folks on a diamond draw on the flop (remember, I am acting first).

I like my hand, I'm going to put $ in the pot. It's really that simple. I rather start the betting than be sitting around calling 2 or 3 bets cold when it comes back to me on the flop after checking. The main reason for this is that folks will know for sure what I have when this happens.

I bet the flop, and try to make a move on the turn if I hit. Not playing this hand with this flop, as is recommended by some highly respected posters, is incorrect in my humble opinion.

TSP

[HiatusOver]

Good post TSP. Its an interesting idea to lead here, but the position of the pre-flop raise in my opinions makes a lead here worse than other options. U leading and the PF raiser clearing the field is a horrible result for u. You dont want anyone folding on this flop.

What do u think about that? Dont u want to trap the field in here for atleast one bet on the flop when your equity should be huge instead of getting HU and being a dog?

[Turning Stone Pro]

I definately see your point. My experience indicates that if you have 3 cold callers after an early raise pre-flop (which is unusual in and of itself), they are not all going to muck if it is two small bets to them with this type of flop. What did these cold callers have preflop? I'd have to put them on medium pairs or various high cards, maybe suited connectors (hopefully not diamonds).

I do see your point, and I think the flop lead would be significantly better if you had 3 limpers and a late raise PF.

The only thing I know for sure is that I would never lay this hand down on the flop from the BB -- if I ever would, I would never have called with it PF in the first place.

TSP

[DavidC]

If it's not too much trouble, why do you guys think that the three-bettor could have diamonds... it's a pretty uncommon play for that hand at the limits that I play.

[catlover]

Well I'm guessing it's about 50/50 you are up against a higher flush draw. So that means you effectively have 8 outs -- three straight outs, the straight flush out, and eight flush outs which are good half the time. Effectively you are about as likely to win with this hand as you are with an open ended straight draw. Which means you should call.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
Well I'm guessing it's about 50/50 you are up against a higher flush draw. So that means you effectively have 8 outs -- three straight outs, the straight flush out, and eight flush outs which are good half the time. Effectively you are about as likely to win with this hand as you are with an open ended straight draw. Which means you should call.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're up against a higher draw, count on losing at least 2 BB when you hit, but once you call 3 cold here you kill all of your action if you aren't. Your implied odds suck so I think this is a pass.

Edit: I guess you can cap to disguise it and maybe be sure to fold something like A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif Kx but it sure feels like spewing /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[TxRedMan]

Easy fold IMO. Sure the pots big, but the action indicated that unless these guys are morons you're drawing at a gutshot most of the time to win, and i dont think your flush draw will be good here very often, especially when you take into consideration the times it will come diamond, diamond.

Looks a lot like someone having TP w/ f draw here.

I'd fold this hand PF though, so i wouldnt be in this spot, but, assuming i was in this hand, i'd probably see a draw at the total nuts and lead at it. But, given the situation, if i checked the flop, i'm folding here when it's 3 to me.




Tex

[JeffO]

[ QUOTE ]


I'd fold this hand PF though, so i wouldnt be in this spot, but, assuming i was in this hand, i'd probably see a draw at the total nuts and lead at it.




Tex

[/ QUOTE ]

Folding this hand preflop would be just plain wrong.

[Net Warrior]

Per Catalin Barboianu in "Texas Hold'em Odds", if you flop a 4 flush when you have 2 of a suit then the probability of AT LEAST ONE OF YOUR OPPONENTS making a flush vs 3 opponents is 4.439%. OTOH, if there are 3 flush cards on the board by the river (giving you a flush) then the probability of AT LEAST ONE OF YOUR OPPONENTS making a flush vs 3 opponents is 7.075%.

[KathleenStand]

You guys are nuts. Cap.

[ihardlyknowher]

[ QUOTE ]
I think this is probably a fold, but we should probably do some math.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would think that you will lose about 30-35% of the time you hit one of your draws here, other than your 4% chance at the stone cold nuts. But I am not sure whether this would make it a call, fold, or raise.

[The Dude]

Let's do some very quick math here. Assuming the pfr is going to fold for two more AND the flop raiser is going to cap (this is worst-case scenario as far as pot odds goes), you'll be getting 19:4 to see a turn card (9.5:2 is a better way to look at it, since you're impied odds are in terms of big bets).

So if we ignore implied odds altogether, you need just under 10 outs in order to call. You have 4 outs 100% of the time, so your other 8 flush outs must be good roughly 75% of the time in order to call. (This is a bit over-simplified, but I think it's a good place to start.)

I'm not sure why everybody seems so convinced that there's a bigger flush draw out there. The flop raiser almost certainly doesn't have one, and while the 3-better could have a flush draw, I think it'd be more likely had he just cold-called. The original pfr could have a flush draw, but there's no reason to think he does either.

I really can't see folding being the best play. Nothing about the way the action's gone down so far screams flush draw to me. I think you're more likely to be up against a set than a flush draw.

Cap it up. You've got pretty good equity in this hand, and capping it keeps your hand disguised.

[KingJtheStandard]

call for another card, hit the flush and on the turn and make them go away or pray one of them doesn't fill up.

[KingJtheStandard]

or hit another diamond on the river and smack you.

[Jay.]

This is a call, probably even so if you knew the worst case, odds wise, would happen.

[stoxtrader]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a call, probably even so if you knew the worst case, odds wise, would happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

you gotta say why though.

please allow for set redraws.

[The Dude]

[ QUOTE ]
please allow for set redraws.

[/ QUOTE ]
The flop getting bet, raised, and 3-bet doesn't necessarily mean there's a set out there against you. The first flop raiser could easily have just about any pocket pair or J, and the 3-better a hand like AJs or TT or something. Sure, there's a pretty decent chance somebody's got a set, but it's nowhere near 100%.

I haven't ever played in Party's 50-100, so it would be impracticle for me to try and put a precise number on how often they will have a set, but I'm not quite ready to be entirely scared yet.

The fact that somebody could have a lone /images/graemlins/diamond.gif (either in a pocket pair or a hand like AJ), or that A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif J/images/graemlins/diamond.gif is a reasonable hand for any of them to have (which would give them more reason to raise or 3-bet their flush draw) should be taken into consideration, though.

[Jay.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is a call, probably even so if you knew the worst case, odds wise, would happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

you gotta say why though.

please allow for set redraws.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude gave good enough math here. Everyone is overest. the chance we are against a flush here.

We have nice implied odds.

P.s. who is wannabestox?

[stoxtrader]

I didnt see dude's post, sorry about that. It's close anyways, and I dont think clear at all - it all depends on the assumptions. People may be overestimating the odds of a higher flush draw out there, but being against a set is also a killer. On average you MAYBE have positive implied odds here. It's very possible you have negative or zero impplied odds because of flush and set redraws.

so saying you only need 10 outs to make it right, could be pushing it. you also need to make assumptions about how much actino goes in on the turn and river with different hands and under different scenarios.

wannabestox is a good friend. I will let him choose to reveal himself if he wants.

[mikenike]

how much did they raise? minimum? then fold.

[dankhank]

[ QUOTE ]
how much did they raise? minimum? then fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

good first post. welcome to the forums

[wdcbooks]

[ QUOTE ]
how much did they raise? minimum? then fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that is part of the confusion. They raised both the minimum and the maximum . . . AT THE SAME TIME!!

[Jules22]

[ QUOTE ]
how much did they raise? minimum? then fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

definitely the best advice ive seen in the thread so far lol

[tgoodwin]

[ QUOTE ]
I do see your point, and I think the flop lead would be significantly better if you had 3 limpers and a late raise PF.

The only thing I know for sure is that I would never lay this hand down on the flop from the BB -- if I ever would, I would never have called with it PF in the first place.

TSP

[/ QUOTE ]

EXACTLY!! GOOD CALL TSP...IF YOURE THE TYP E OF PLAYER WHO SHYS AWAY FROM A DRAW LIKE THIS BECAUSE YOU MAY BE AGAINST A BETTER DRAW THE FOLD THE SMALL SUITED CARDS PREFLOP...BEST LINE IS TO CHECK CALL AS THE ACTION WENT

[Equal]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
how much did they raise? minimum? then fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that is part of the confusion. They raised both the minimum and the maximum . . . AT THE SAME TIME!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't foget some crucial information is missing here... what are the stack sizes!!

[Rotting]

ANYONE who said to fold this is most definitely not an expert, and is probably more along on the lines of a downright fool. You are getting some of the best odds you could ask for on this flop. Folding is the devil in this hand.

[jtomon]

think I fold, the first raise smells overpair, the re-raise smells bigger flush draw than 5d.

[lippy]

People saying you have huge implied odds; isn't cold calling 3 bets practically turning your hand (w/o straight draw) over? A turn diamond kills any action unless your beat, yes?

[mikelow]

a marginal call at best with all your non-nut draws.

I don't mind folding, especially when you may have to call another bet on the flop.

[Peter_rus]

I'd call it. Jacks are very likely for cold callers. And they are very likely to defend such hands hardly on a flop as well.

66 and 22 especially having position aren't going to defend their hand by raise/3-bet such dry flop 4-way with only one obvious and non-foldable draw too often at these limits i believe. 2 Diamonds won't push too much as well, given this hand has a huge probability to get to SD and they often actually need more callers on the flop rather than clean out some pair outs.

[iggymcfly]

[ QUOTE ]
ANYONE who said to fold this is most definitely not an expert, and is probably more along on the lines of a downright fool. You are getting some of the best odds you could ask for on this flop. Folding is the devil in this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's good to see that the 50/100 players on the site could get advice from someone who thinks that LHE is stupid because you don't have to figure out pot odds when you flop a flush draw.

[Rotting]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ANYONE who said to fold this is most definitely not an expert, and is probably more along on the lines of a downright fool. You are getting some of the best odds you could ask for on this flop. Folding is the devil in this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's good to see that the 50/100 players on the site could get advice from someone who thinks that LHE is stupid because you don't have to figure out pot odds when you flop a flush draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

You make sense. A lot of it. I mean, that post is PURE gold. Save this one for the archives, everyone. Brilliant. By the way, what the hell does it even mean?

[brianmarc]

Folding is such a no-brainer that if you call, you certifiably have no (poker) brain. Short of flopping a boat, what can you even be hoping for? Bottom set? So a couple hearts come on the flop and you pay a couple bets to see the turn. Now you hit the flush (forget the straight flush-that's pixie dust poker!). Now what? With all the preflop action strong likelihood that there are a couple (at least) A's out there-and that includes the nut heart. So you pay a couple more big bets to see the turn praying for a non-diamond. And if you dodge that bullet, you could still be beat by a bigger flush or possibly a boat.

Recently I have seen more and more of this kind of tautological rationalizaton ("getting 9.5/1") for expensive, super-loose preflop calls of hands that are designed for playing cheaply. Duh...Course the odds are high-that's because there's a lot of opposition!

Ironically, it seems that these kind of mistakes may be more frquent at high- rather than low-limit poker. The only possible explanation is that the rich fish are less concerned about their money than the stiffs grinding out a few bucks at 5/10 or whatever.

[brianmarc]

Jacks likely for cold callers? I guess if you're in a fish tank. Surely AK is the most likely cc hand. JJ has to be fold or reraise.

[gobboboy]

This thread is over a year old. Why has it been resurrected?

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
Folding is such a no-brainer that if you call, you certifiably have no (poker) brain. Short of flopping a boat, what can you even be hoping for? Bottom set? So a couple hearts come on the flop and you pay a couple bets to see the turn. Now you hit the flush (forget the straight flush-that's pixie dust poker!). Now what? With all the preflop action strong likelihood that there are a couple (at least) A's out there-and that includes the nut heart. So you pay a couple more big bets to see the turn praying for a non-diamond. And if you dodge that bullet, you could still be beat by a bigger flush or possibly a boat.

Recently I have seen more and more of this kind of tautological rationalizaton ("getting 9.5/1") for expensive, super-loose preflop calls of hands that are designed for playing cheaply. Duh...Course the odds are high-that's because there's a lot of opposition!

Ironically, it seems that these kind of mistakes may be more frquent at high- rather than low-limit poker. The only possible explanation is that the rich fish are less concerned about their money than the stiffs grinding out a few bucks at 5/10 or whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

Folding preflop is absolutely horrible.

James

[brianmarc]

So is your reply! We're supposed to take this random comment from you on faith? I guess that's because you have no supporting argument/counter-argument to those presented here.

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
So is your reply! We're supposed to take this random comment from you on faith? I guess that's because you have no supporting argument/counter-argument to those presented here.

[/ QUOTE ]

i will take James282's argument on faith. he is a well respected poster and knows his [censored]. i, on the other hand, am not. but even i know that folding preflop here is a crime.

[brianmarc]

Sorry, but I never heard of (King?) James; and if he's such a genius (at least YOU say so-but maybe you;re just a shill for another donk?), how come you guys can't articlulate an explanation on this? Is it possible that you guys are all hat and no horse?

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, but I never heard of (King?) James; and if he's such a genius (at least YOU say so-but maybe you;re just a shill for another donk?), how come you guys can't articlulate an explanation on this? Is it possible that you guys are all hat and no horse?

[/ QUOTE ]

ok, i'll be the [censored] who says it. this preflop call is fundamental. it is something that is discussed in the micro-limits, not in high stakes. i think this is because most people who are learning the game start at very low stakes, and get the fundamentals there. this forum is is not for discussing obvious plays.

[moneyshot]

you also need to consider that there are significant redraws against you even if you hit.

[brianmarc]

What's your point? the beat is less bad? My oppnent is not the imbecile that some "cannot imagine" playing the hand out? And what about my redraw for the boat?

[brianmarc]

Ouch! That hurts to the quick. I am humiliated, chagrined and mortified! Poker cop has spoken! Guess I never saw those "rules". (Prob since I haven't spent as much time trolling the micros as pokercop apparently has.) But last time I looked in this thread WAS actually commenting on this play, so I guess pokercop may have missed something. (Something about none are so blind as those who will not see). Notice also that his answer is still another non-answer. If he really had something intellignet to say wouldn't he have said it, instead of a fruitless continuation of the dissing my comment seems to have occasioned. Could it be that the (poker) emperors really have no clothes...? (Not a pretty picture, I konow, but, hey, I can't protect him forever)

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
Ouch! That hurts to the quick. I am humiliated, chagrined and mortified! Poker cop has spoken! Guess I never saw those "rules". (Prob since I haven't spent as much time trolling the micros as pokercop apparently has.) But last time I looked in this thread WAS actually commenting on this play, so I guess pokercop may have missed something. (Something about none are so blind as those who will not see). Notice also that his answer is still another non-answer. If he really had something intellignet to say wouldn't he have said it, instead of a fruitless continuation of the dissing my comment seems to have occasioned. Could it be that the (poker) emperors really have no clothes...? (Not a pretty picture, I konow, but, hey, I can't protect him forever)

[/ QUOTE ]

what the hell is your problem? you asked why james didn't give a reason for his response, and i tried to explain that. my intention was not to humiliate you. if i did, i apologize. that was not my intention. but if you do feel humiliated, i think you need to look inward, not outward.

the bottom line is that you likely will have better luck getting an answer for why this is a preflop call in a different forum. if you want to label everyone in this forum an [censored] because of that, well, that is your choice.

[brianmarc]

God, what a waste of good sarcasm! Nothing worse than a humorless prig.

But still no substantive answer. The emperor now officially has no clothes!

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
God, what a waste of godd sarcasm! Nothing worse than a humorless prig.

But still no substantive answer. The emperor now officially has no clothes!

[/ QUOTE ]

you're an idiot. byebye.

[brianmarc]

Ah, yes. Invective as a last resort. (But the emperor is still totally naked)

[mmcd]

[ QUOTE ]
Surely AK is the most likely cc hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe in the 50 game on Mars, but here on Earth, 3 bets go in.

[Victor]

[ QUOTE ]
This thread is over a year old. Why has it been resurrected?

[/ QUOTE ]

my fault. our friend rotting was making asinine posts in ssf about how its NEVER correct to fold a flush draw on the flop i lhe. so i linked him to this gem where a bunch of high stakesers advocated folding not only a flush draw but a flush and straight draw. o0o

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ouch! That hurts to the quick. I am humiliated, chagrined and mortified! Poker cop has spoken! Guess I never saw those "rules". (Prob since I haven't spent as much time trolling the micros as pokercop apparently has.) But last time I looked in this thread WAS actually commenting on this play, so I guess pokercop may have missed something. (Something about none are so blind as those who will not see). Notice also that his answer is still another non-answer. If he really had something intellignet to say wouldn't he have said it, instead of a fruitless continuation of the dissing my comment seems to have occasioned. Could it be that the (poker) emperors really have no clothes...? (Not a pretty picture, I konow, but, hey, I can't protect him forever)

[/ QUOTE ]

what the hell is your problem? you asked why james didn't give a reason for his response, and i tried to explain that. my intention was not to humiliate you. if i did, i apologize. that was not my intention. but if you do feel humiliated, i think you need to look inward, not outward.

the bottom line is that you likely will have better luck getting an answer for why this is a preflop call in a different forum. if you want to label everyone in this forum an [censored] because of that, well, that is your choice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I mean no offense but this is 1st grade poker stuff. If you fold your expectation of the hand is -1 SB. If you call, you put in 1 small bet while there are already 9.5 small bets in the pot. On average, in this situation, calling will give you a better expectation than -1 sb. It will likely turn a negative expectation situation into a positive expectation one. Get lost, man, your abrasive(and wrong) input really isn't welcome here.

James

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
Just wanted to step in and say I really dont think this is a fold here. I am not sure and a bunch of good players in succession just leaned towards fold but I really doubt it. Maybe I will try to do some math later while I pack for the Bahammas.

I think if anything, the gutshot outs keep u in there. You guys are overestimating the times a higher draw is out there IMO. It has to be pretty often to make this a fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

im glad this thread came back b/c i was, so far as i can tell from here, wrong.

after thinking about this in terms of hand values on the flop, what does the pfr have?

most often it is AQ/AK type hands that missed, followed AJ/pair type hands, followed by other high card hands KQ/ATs/ATo even(some that may have a diamond that he just cont.bet with). he may have JJ or 66, however given the following action that is less likely.

both players cold called 2 after the pfr opened. JJ is unlikely, however QJ/JT/J9/J8 (suited or unsuited) are most likely frmo these raisers. then comes the 66 and 22 from the 2nd and 3rd pf cold caller. against them, we have a strong spot, but their redraws and cards that kill our draws hurt. what sux for us also here is that the J isn't a diamond, amking those that have a jack going to the river in almost all cicumstances if we hit the diamond and def. calling the river bet if it's out there and it almost certainly is given the action.

so those are the combinations that seem by far the most likely both hand range wise and combinatorically.

the real question i think we have to ask ourselves here now is whether we can increase our equity relatively more by capping than by cold calling. i.e. will the pfr or first raiser fold hands for 3 or 2 more bets that they'd call for 2 or 1 more bets. in the case of the pfr i think he's pretty much otuta here w/o a solid hand. if he has a solid hand, he's not folding for 3 and calling for 2.

the first raiser is the main swing vote for capping here. JT doesn't look so good right now, and neither does QJ or any of those jack (with or without) a diamond in there. getting some dead money in the pot is a big advantage and increases our equity alot (both due to increased pot odds and increased probability of winning the pot/paying less to see the draw on future streets...which brings up turn action but we'll get to that in a sec).

so if we can get one of them out we should probably put the other bet in. either way our hand is pretty exposed.

capping and betting the turn may get expensive in that you've now given the option to open the action upa lot to those who put in a lot of it on the flop. if you cap to try to get guys out and they stay, checking the turn (depending on what it is) mayb e best.

so jesse, i think you're right that it's closer to a cap than a fold, and overall i think a call is best.

i still haven't done the math, and im not going to due to laziness. but logic here so far says this is a call and i was wrong in my initial post.

in terms of preflop...wow...that is a simple ass call and it isn't even remotely close.

this is a profitable preflop call if the pf raiser opens, ONE person calls and it's folded to you getting 5.5:1 on your call. if you fold, you've lost a small bet. if you call, you'll likely earn on averave more than 1.2-1.5 bets netting you .2-.5 small bets in expectation. i could open up poker tracker and mess around to find out what those type of hands have shown inf ull ring limit games but it's almost my bedtime and i've put enough into this post for now.

needless to say, insults, while fun and definitely entertaining, dont get us anywhere analytically. that said, brian dude, you are way out of your league here if your issue with this hand is the pre flop call. i hope the analysis above is enough for you.

Barron

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This thread is over a year old. Why has it been resurrected?

[/ QUOTE ]

my fault. our friend rotting was making asinine posts in ssf about how its NEVER correct to fold a flush draw on the flop i lhe. so i linked him to this gem where a bunch of high stakesers advocated folding not only a flush draw but a flush and straight draw. o0o

[/ QUOTE ]

well turns out some of us high stakes players who advocated folding a flush draw could be wrong. 3:1 on the flop or even 2:1 w/ some dead money is a good thing.

glad it got resurrected and jesse looks like a savior from this perspective (for new guys, im referring to hiatusover...very good respected player)

Barron

[brianmarc]

Talk about debating how many angels can danceon the head of a pin! Elegant as this analysis is, it's essentially irrelevant since the error estimate in each supposition is so great that the standard error will totally oblitertae the value of the single, determinsitic point estimate decision you have to make. The only way this kind of analysis can be of anything but academic value is in the event that you get to face this decision repeatedly so that your large number of trials give you a chance to benefit from the value added of the analysis. So I conclude that the only times this kind of micro-analysis is justified is for situations that occur frequently (e.g., overcards on th flop; small pocket pairs) In fact, this discussion reminds me of a succinct bit of Sklanksy wisdom (cannot recall source) in wich he castigates 2+2'ers for obsessing over intersting but rare hands at the expense of more common situations. Barron has, in this post, perfectly illustrated this fault.

[siegfriedandroy]

he meant that one of the cold callers may well have a jack in their hand, making top pair.

[brianmarc]

Ouch (again). King James has spoken. I am abrasive. I am not welcome. You take a poll on that dude, or you just having a 2+2 tilt?

And, for the record, your analysis is so bogus that even my college-age son picked up on it: Dad, he said, maybe you could lose a lot more than the 1 sb if you get a tough situation on the flop, like facing 2 bets with a flush or straight draw. You could get sucked into this so easily since the only way you can fit into the King's scenario is if you flop the straight flush or miss totally. Neither of these situations is a certainty. If that guy was so smart he would do a Bayesian analysis on the various outcomes.

Smart kid, huh! I'm gonna stake him and hope one day he gets to meet some of you pontificating experts over the felt.

So while I don't take you tilt personally, you should be a little more circumspect before you shoot your mouth off; the foot that steps into may be your own.

[Peter_rus]

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, this discussion reminds me of a succinct bit of Sklanksy wisdom (cannot recall source) in wich he castigates 2+2'ers for obsessing over intersting but rare hands at the expense of more common situations.

[/ QUOTE ]

While i agree that Dcfrthis's analysis as well as mine are far from accurate and actually it needs a millions of simulations and very good read on players to find decision close to perfect in vacuum (not including image, timing etc..). No one here pretend to be perfect with his estimation. The reason of such topics is to collect the opinions of good players and weigh for yourself - which one arguments you trust more.

I disagree that rare situations in poker aren't worth discussing much. In standart situations most players play good especially at high stakes. Avoiding simple mistakes is the task for beginners. No one discuss them here cause it's boring and they often don't worth much (though they occur often). If everyone plays good in standart say 90% of poker situations - from what do you think big part of EV comes? I think it comes from the last 10% of rare situations and mistakes there cost you much more if you really don't care how to handle them.

[brianmarc]

A legitiamte argument, but from a strict cost-benefit standpoint, Sklanksy was suggesting that the time taken to participate in, read, evaluate and internalize all these arguments will more often than not not be justified by the marginal increase in expected winnings. On the other hand, a much more plausible argument would be that it is fun, interesting etc. to engage in this. Finally, to suggest that just because this is high stakes that all the players play well is laughable. As I have pointed out in a previous post to this thread, I have seen more donky plays at 50/100 than at 10/20.

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
Ouch (again). King James has spoken. I am abrasive. I am not welcome. You take a poll on that dude, or you just having a 2+2 tilt?

And, for the record, your analysis is so bogus that even my college-age son picked up on it: Dad, he said, maybe you could lose a lot more than the 1 sb if you get a tough situation on the flop, like facing 2 bets with a flush or straight draw. You could get sucked into this so easily since the only way you can fit into the King's scenario is if you flop the straight flush or miss totally. Neither of these situations is a certainty. If that guy was so smart he would do a Bayesian analysis on the various outcomes.

Smart kid, huh! I'm gonna stake him and hope one day he gets to meet some of you pontificating experts over the felt.

So while I don't take you tilt personally, you should be a little more circumspect before you shoot your mouth off; the foot that steps into may be your own.

[/ QUOTE ]

If facing 2 bets on the flop with a flush or straight draw is a profitable proposition, then you haven't lost anything. You take an average of the possible outcomes, and decide the profitability based on that. You are basically doing the reverse of the donks at .5/1 who say hey, this J4s could flop a flush, or quads! I mean yeah what happens when the board comes 444KK and you are up against KK?? Good way to go broke. Anyway, I am fairly convinced that you are just baiting me, and if you aren't yikes, gl man. We should all be so lucky to be able to lose 36k per hour at 50/100!

a nice bbv thread by our boy! (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=8722941&an=0&page=0&gone w=1#UNREAD)

[Entity]

James,

I know you're aware of this, but I thought your memory might be able to use a bit of a refresher:

[ QUOTE ]
You are now ignoring this user. You will no longer see the body of any of their posts.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's solid advice. Trust me.

Rob

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
Talk about debating how many angels can danceon the head of a pin! Elegant as this analysis is, it's essentially irrelevant since the error estimate in each supposition is so great that the standard error will totally oblitertae the value of the single, determinsitic point estimate decision you have to make. The only way this kind of analysis can be of anything but academic value is in the event that you get to face this decision repeatedly so that your large number of trials give you a chance to benefit from the value added of the analysis. So I conclude that the only times this kind of micro-analysis is justified is for situations that occur frequently (e.g., overcards on th flop; small pocket pairs) In fact, this discussion reminds me of a succinct bit of Sklanksy wisdom (cannot recall source) in wich he castigates 2+2'ers for obsessing over intersting but rare hands at the expense of more common situations. Barron has, in this post, perfectly illustrated this fault.

[/ QUOTE ]


EDIT: brian, hold old are you? what are you studying/doing for a living? i'm curious to see how this relates to your choice of language in above post (i'm 26...which is old to ancient on this board apparantly... and work as an analyst for the 2nd largest hedge fund in the US)



wow!! it's like talking to the old me here!

now to address your arguments.

i THINK you are saying (please correct me where im wrong because me level of knowledge may be below yours) that it is useless to engage in hand range estimates (the exercise of summing point estimate of hands) unless the situation is likely to occur frequently since any such estimation will bring with it such a large variance (= standard deviation^2, my rephrasing of standard error and "error estimate" around each supposition) that you won't observe enough occurances to bring the estimates to an observable probability, and thus, any level of usefulness? is that right?

so if it if... then thats the heart of your argument ...

before i go on here, id like to ask humbly that you present an alternative analysis and the conclusion for your play on the flop (it's far easier to poke holes in an analysis than to present an alternative).

now, please note that the only consideration of our continuing here is whether your equity vs. the field, given your pot+implied odds, is large enough.

your equity vs. the field is determined by hand ranges that they likely hold given the information available to you from 1.75 streets of action and the number of outs you have in this scenario.

outs: you have 1 nut out and 2 chances to hit it (4.3%). there are no redraws against you here.

you have 3 other gutshot outs (12.5%). there are only redraws for 2 pairs and sets + other pairs both hitting their 2 outs + another hiting their 10 outs or vice versa. the following goes for all redraws here. given ONLY one set is out there (redraws are reduced significantly if > 1 set is out), the redraw has 7 outs on the flop to fill up and 10 from the turn to the river. thats 27.8% (7 outs from flop to river) + 6.5% (3 outs from turn to river). thats 35.3% GIVEN a set is out there. minus the times you hit your nut out and their dead (4.3%)= 31%. how likely is it that a set is out. think of ALLLL the possible hands out there against you. a short list includes starting w/t he

PFR: ([pausing the analysis here due to time constraints. i'll finish up tonight when i get home, or tomorrow]

redraw calc concluded.

next we do diamond outs

then 2 pair outs - redraw to set/better 2 pair.

then we compare it to total equity estimate vs. immediate + implied odds (you'll have to pay a lot in some situations on teh turn to see river etc.)

then we conclude (my guess is that you shoudl almost certainly continue, but, ala bacon, we'll see if that hypothesis holds water vs. the estimate analysis that will result from above.

in the meantime, if you can please help me not do all the work above by simply proving how naive i am in engaging in it, i'll be greatly appreciative.

Barron

(PS- there is a chacne brian is levelling ALL of us here, in which case, i've been caught hook+line+sinker)

[brianmarc]

Not sure what this post is saying-but if it results in the digital beheading of King James, that is appreciated.

[brianmarc]

bbv?

[DcifrThs]

brian,

please elaborate on my requests in the above post. thanks
Barron

[brianmarc]

[ QUOTE ]
brian,

please elaborate on my requests in the above post. thanks
Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

Barron:

Sorry, but I have no view on the postflop analysis. I'm sure, though, that your analysis is accurate and that if not, the attack dogs on 2+2 will let you know soon enough.

[felson]

Barron,

Brian maintains that the preflop call is a mistake.

[johnnyrocket]

yea, it all depends if you put someone on a higher flush draw, if so you should fold and save yourself before you get deep in the pot with a flush, if you dont then definitely call here and see what happens, dont push real hard if you do catch your 5 high flush though as you could be in danger

[Sebastian Knight]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would bet the flop here. I like your hand.

TSP

[/ QUOTE ]

I like the hand too, but do you really want to bet out here. Looking at a likely raise from the preflop raiser, do you want to end up head up? When this happens you still likely end up with the same outs you had before. Its not like he can clear out a hand you want out either. Anyone with a better flush draw is calling two cold anyway.

I certainly don't mind tryin to get in some bets here on the flop but I think you're better off doing it by check raising the field when you get a bet and a caller or two.

-ActionBob

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe you DO want to be heads up here. A bet by you and a raise by preflop raiser may drive out one-card backdoor diamond draws. T'would be a shame to lose this already fairly large pot to diamond runner-runner.

Not sure whether this is a compelling argument, but it's at least worth considering.
SK

[sacker]

wow. cant believe this is still be debated. this was my hand and had asked nyplayer to post it.
i folded the flop because i felt on a j26 board with 3 players in and only 1 raise pre-flop it was likely i was up against a higher flush.

[i3betwidposition]

With THAT many callers.....you might be facing a higher flush.