Terms & Conditions

Internet Magazine

Non–US new players
Get five 2+2 books


Order Books
Book Translations
Forum Login
 
 
Expand All   Collapse All

 Two Plus Two 
2+2 Magazine Forum
Special Sklansky Forum
2+2 Pokercast
About the Forums

 General Poker Discussion 
Beginners Questions
Books and Publications
Televised Poker
News, Views, and Gossip
Brick and Mortar
Home Poker
Beats, Brags, and Variance
Poker Theory
Poker Legislation

 Coaching/Training 
StoxPoker
DeucesCracked

 German Forums 
Poker Allgemein
Strategie: Holdem NL cash
Strategie: Sonstige
Internet/Online
BBV
Small Talk
German Poker News

 French Forums 
Forum francophone
Strategie
BBV (French)

 Limit Texas Hold'em 
High Stakes Limit
Medium Stakes Limit
Small Stakes Limit
Micro Stakes Limit
Mid-High Short-handed
Small Stakes Shorthanded
Limit––>NL

 PL/NL Texas Hold'em 
High Stakes
Medium Stakes
Small Stakes
Micro Stakes
Small-High Full Ring
Micro Full Ring

 Tournament Poker 
Small Stakes MTT
High Stakes MTT
MTT Community
STT Strategy
Tournament Circuit

 Other Poker 
Omaha/8
Omaha High
Stud
Heads Up Poker
Other Poker Games

 General Gambling 
Probability
Psychology
Sports Betting
Other Gambling Games
Entertainment Betting

 Internet Gambling 
Internet Gambling
Internet Bonuses
Affiliates/RakeBack
Software

 2+2 Communities 
Other Other Topics
The Lounge: Discussion+Review
El Diablo's General Discussion
BBV4Life

 Other Topics 
Golf
Sporting Events
Politics
Business, Finance, and Investing
Travel
Science, Math, and Philosophy
Health and Fitness
Student Life
Puzzles and Other Games
Video Games
Laughs or Links!
Computer Technical Help
Sponsored Support Forums
RakebackNetwork
RakeReduction.com
Other Links
Books
Authors
Abbreviations
Calendar
Order Books
Books by Others
Favorite Links
Feedback
Advertising Information
Home
Posting Hints
Privacy Notice
Forum Archives

The 2+2 Forums

Before using this Forum, please refer to the Terms and Conditions (Last modified: 2/26/2006)

Be sure to read the   Two Plus Two Internet Magazine

This is an archive. The main forums are here

These forums are read only.


 
UBB.threads™ Groupee, Inc.

PL/NL Texas Hold'em >> Small Stakes

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | >> (show all)
BalugaWhale
Busto on tatas


Reged: 01/25/06
Posts: 4869
Loc: blog: http://letsdosomethingcr...
the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long)
      #6605819 - 07/19/06 09:17 PM

no, I didn't name it after myself. Somebody suggested it and I guess it caught on.

I've gotten a few questions about it and there have been some threads recently, so I thought I'd clarify some examples where I think it applies and some where it doesn't.

You (100bb) have AK in MP at a 6max game. UTG (100bb) limps, you raise to 5xBB, Button (100bb) calls, UTG calls.

Three to the flop (pot ~15bb), which is:

A46

UTG checks, you lead out for 12bb, Button folds, UTG calls.

On to the turn (pot~ 36bb)

8

UTG checks, you bet 25bb, he raises all-in.

We fold. One pair is not good here. A draw does this about never. We have to bet this turn because we can't let spades draw, and we need value from worse A's, but now that he raises, we can rule out worse A's and draws.

However, to slightly alter Isura's example, lets say we have AA, same pf action as before and the flop (pot~15bb) comes down:

K22

UTG checks, we bet 12bb, Button calls, UTG folds.

the turn (pot ~36bb) comes:
J

We bet 25bb, Button raises all in.

Here, I think we should call. We are very likely to see KJ here, as well as AK or KQ. Occassionally we see a random 2, but we are ahead of his range more often than not.

Basically, the whole point of the "Baluga theorem", as I see it, is to strongly reevaluate one-pair hands facing a turn raise.

A few notes to remember-
turn checkraises are more frightening than turn raises

big turn raises are rarely pure draws-- occassionally they will be draws that pick up a pair, or pairs that pick up draws, but most of the time you can count on a strong made hand.

when playing against a goood TAG, particularly a 2p2er, most especially me, raising the turn with a draw is a powerful (but risky) play.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
cbloom
Carpal \'Tunnel


Reged: 07/20/03
Posts: 8940
Loc: communist
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
      #6606001 - 07/19/06 09:38 PM

Word. I dig the Baluga Theorem.

I think there are a few general principles at work :

1. People tend to play more tight-weak / straightforward when the pot & bets are big. On the turn, if it was PFR'ed and the flop was bet, the pot will be quite big. Very few people make moves for lots of chips.

2. People tend to make moves on the flop much more for various reasons. One is that people know they can raise draws on the flop & get free cards or at least have good equity if they get all in. Another is that people are used to cbets and trying to pick off cbets, so they have a habit of messing around on the flop.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
goofyballer
Emo Communist


Reged: 06/12/05
Posts: 7108
Loc: THESE IZ THE OLD FORUMZ
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
      #6606053 - 07/19/06 09:46 PM

BW, the second example is clearly a two-pair hand

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
BalugaWhale
Busto on tatas


Reged: 01/25/06
Posts: 4869
Loc: blog: http://letsdosomethingcr...
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: goofyballer]
      #6606096 - 07/19/06 09:49 PM

Quote:


BW, the second example is clearly a two-pair hand



doh.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Black winter day
Carpal \'Tunnel


Reged: 06/20/05
Posts: 4420
Loc: Don't you dare to call!
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
      #6606132 - 07/19/06 09:53 PM

Thanks,i actually asked about the theorem today in one the thread.
For me it's autofold in hand 1.I would call a shortstack who had 50BB or less at the start of the hand.
I may call in hand 2 but only against a donk who would overplay a good K.

Against a solid player i would very much suspect slowplayed KK,JJ or A2s.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rev. Good Will
Carpal \'Tunnel


Reged: 01/25/05
Posts: 2824
Loc: greener pastures
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
      #6606464 - 07/19/06 10:26 PM

I might need this

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
MyTurn2Raise
The drug-free MVP


Reged: 06/28/05
Posts: 18508
Loc: Evolving Day-By-Day
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
      #6607581 - 07/20/06 12:20 AM



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Grunch
Bounty Hunter


Reged: 08/25/04
Posts: 9623
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
      #6607951 - 07/20/06 12:55 AM

Very nice, you get an entry in the MS.

One thing, tho:

Quote:

We have to bet this turn because we can't let spades draw




Being heads-up, I can't say I totally agree. Without a read or against default opponents, I agree. Must bet. But against opponents you know well, opponents you know will play any piece of the board this way, it is possible to be correct to just check.

I'm not saying that it's correct to check a lot, just that it's not always incorrect to check, and sometimes it's best to check.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
yad
veteran


Reged: 08/31/05
Posts: 1546
Loc: stealing the button
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: Grunch]
      #6608026 - 07/20/06 01:04 AM

Nice post, Baluga.

I do agree with Grunch though that in your first example it is often better to check behind the turn though. Depends on your opponent. Against a donk I would never do it, but against a decent aggressive player check that behind all day.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
nickcee
member


Reged: 05/10/06
Posts: 170
Loc: @ the coffee shop
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: yad]
      #6608229 - 07/20/06 01:29 AM

I think checking, when in position, is somewhat of a standard play when head-up. By checking your representing weakness,managing the pot size, and making it more likely you will get paid off or make a little something when they decide to bluff. You can't do this all the time, but I think it's a decent play especially in situations similar to the first hand.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
BalugaWhale
Busto on tatas


Reged: 01/25/06
Posts: 4869
Loc: blog: http://letsdosomethingcr...
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: nickcee]
      #6608759 - 07/20/06 02:49 AM

yad/grunch,

this is kinda a hijack, but what does a decent aggressive player CRAI with here (in hand 1)?

AQ? I doubt it.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Grunch
Bounty Hunter


Reged: 08/25/04
Posts: 9623
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
      #6610016 - 07/20/06 08:05 AM

Well, AQ/AK is about the only 1-pair hand in the universe that would CRAI here. But it still doesn't CRAI here often, so I agree that 1-pair is generally no good.

But that's not really what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the need to protect against a flush draw. When you're up against just one oppponent, the chance that he's on a flush draw is reduced. Just how much it's reduced depends on the opponent. I draw the line at two opponents, and even that may be a little WT, but I'm putting off getting better at this until later.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
c_strong
addict


Reged: 06/27/05
Posts: 471
Loc: Climbing back from almost BUST...
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: Grunch]
      #6610219 - 07/20/06 08:53 AM

How many opponents you had on the flop is at least as important as how many you have on the flop. If it was HU on the flop I wouldn't be worried about a flush draw on the turn, without a read. If there had been three callers pf, two had folded the flop and one had called, I would definitely bet the turn to protect. Two callers (as in BW's example) is borderline IMO.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Grunch
Bounty Hunter


Reged: 08/25/04
Posts: 9623
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: c_strong]
      #6610241 - 07/20/06 08:56 AM

I agree, and what I'm talking about is when its heads-up.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
yad
veteran


Reged: 08/31/05
Posts: 1546
Loc: stealing the button
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
      #6616236 - 07/20/06 04:51 PM

Quote:

yad/grunch,

this is kinda a hijack, but what does a decent aggressive player CRAI with here (in hand 1)?

AQ? I doubt it.




Something like 7 8 or A Q or A J or even 8 9 , as well as air sometimes, and all sorts of stuff that is crushing you.I know that you don't want to give a free card to all those spade draws, but:

1. If he c/r with them at the right frequencies, you are in an impossible spot.

2. To balance the fact that sometimes he will outdraw you, more often he will miss and bluff the river where he would either have folded the turn or c/r the turn forcing you to fold.

3. Most of the time on this turn he will not have a hand that will c/r. Things like AQo and AJo. I think you get more value out of most of those hands by checking behind turn and either betting or calling the river.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bilbo-san
Carpal \'Tunnel


Reged: 07/08/04
Posts: 4103
Loc: In ur game, pickin off ur bluf...
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: Grunch]
      #6616476 - 07/20/06 05:10 PM

Quote:

Very nice, you get an entry in the MS.

One thing, tho:

Quote:

We have to bet this turn because we can't let spades draw




Being heads-up, I can't say I totally agree. Without a read or against default opponents, I agree. Must bet. But against opponents you know well, opponents you know will play any piece of the board this way, it is possible to be correct to just check.

I'm not saying that it's correct to check a lot, just that it's not always incorrect to check, and sometimes it's best to check.




I'd rarely check against a good LAG, as he'll recognize a pot-control check from a mile away.

Such players are very likely to pot the river with all their holdings, be they bluffs, weak made hands, monsters.

And then you are faced with a pretty ugly river decision.

On the other hand, those same players are not very likely to make a move on a the turn versus a player who has shown a lot of strength, so even vs. most decent LAGs, your turn decision is very easy if you get raised.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Freelancer
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 07/12/05
Posts: 2215
Loc: Embrace the variance !!
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: bilbo-san]
      #8032263 - 11/13/06 04:21 AM

If you have a fear of losing you shouldn't be playing poker for sure.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
GameTheory
enthusiast


Reged: 11/16/04
Posts: 315
Loc: MN
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: nickcee]
      #8032393 - 11/13/06 04:47 AM

The real question is, what happens in hand one when you get minraised on the flop?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Freelancer
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 07/12/05
Posts: 2215
Loc: Embrace the variance !!
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: bilbo-san]
      #8032635 - 11/13/06 06:05 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Very nice, you get an entry in the MS.

One thing, tho:

Quote:

We have to bet this turn because we can't let spades draw




Being heads-up, I can't say I totally agree. Without a read or against default opponents, I agree. Must bet. But against opponents you know well, opponents you know will play any piece of the board this way, it is possible to be correct to just check.

I'm not saying that it's correct to check a lot, just that it's not always incorrect to check, and sometimes it's best to check.




I'd rarely check against a good LAG, as he'll recognize a pot-control check from a mile away.

Such players are very likely to pot the river with all their holdings, be they bluffs, weak made hands, monsters.

And then you are faced with a pretty ugly river decision.

On the other hand, those same players are not very likely to make a move on a the turn versus a player who has shown a lot of strength, so even vs. most decent LAGs, your turn decision is very easy if you get raised.



How is the river a ugly decisions if you know your up against a good LAG AND you know he knows that with checking the turn you have a hand that cant stand a lot of heat (ie. call if its likely he'll bluff). It gets interesting if he knows that you know he's likely to make a play on the river...(if your still following me)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Montezuma21
old hand


Reged: 07/27/06
Posts: 1088
Loc: london
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
      #9253167 - 02/20/07 10:20 AM

extremely interesting thread. it makes me think of a hand i saw the other day at 100NL which i think might apply.

100BB stacks

MP: good TAG
SB: bad LAG

MP opens for 4BB
SB calls 4BB

(2 players see the flop)
Flop is: Th4s3c (9BB)
SB checks
MP bets 8BB
SB calls 8BB

Turn is Th4s2c (Ah) (25BB)


SB checks
MP checks

River Th4s2cAh (Ts) (25BB)

SB checks
MP checks

MP shows down AQ
SB mucks
TAG's turn decision striked me at the time as very unusual, as my default would be to bet. is this play normal? would a twoflush board change your decision?

This concept is presumably much less applicable OOP, is it ever?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
MTSuper7
journeyman


Reged: 02/14/07
Posts: 89
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: BalugaWhale]
      #9253293 - 02/20/07 10:34 AM

Quote:


We fold. One pair is not good here. A draw does this about never. We have to bet this turn because we can't let spades draw, and we need value from worse A's, but now that he raises, we can rule out worse A's and draws.





One hand we have beat that might reraise all-in here is both a worse A AND a draw: A5 of spades or A7 of spades. I agree that we are beat most of the time, and probably by two pair since UTG limped then called our raise. A-8 would make the most sense, unless he flopped a set (but I don't see someone flopping a set not raising this flop considering it has two spades and that you probably hit your A). Of course, heads-up it isn't unreasonable to slow play a set with that board. In summary, yes we should fold because we are behind most of the time (though not always).


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
recallme
Carpal \'Tunnel


Reged: 10/25/06
Posts: 2759
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: MTSuper7]
      #10883402 - 06/21/07 03:42 PM

Would we call the second one if flop was 23K and turn is the J again?
I think this is really tough.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
892King
enthusiast


Reged: 11/17/06
Posts: 261
Loc: Shove for the variance
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: recallme]
      #10978273 - 06/28/07 04:55 PM

quite nice...

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wrkingtobegreat
old hand


Reged: 03/07/07
Posts: 1008
Loc: changing
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: 892King]
      #11501492 - 08/02/07 02:49 PM

nice post baluga

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
kytra
stranger


Reged: 03/27/07
Posts: 2
Loc: dark side of the moon
Re: the so-called Baluga Theorem (kinda long) [Re: GameTheory]
      #11880975 - 08/30/07 10:11 AM

Quote:

The real question is, what happens in hand one when you get minraised on the flop?




Lets talk about this case. If we have a LAG image (lot of c-bets) people can raise here with Ax or middle pair.

If we reraise we'll not be able to get out of this pot easy. He maybe will just call with a set to keep us in pot.

So how is the perfect play here not to lose 1 buyin when we are beaten on flop?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | >> (show all)



Extra information
0 registered and 8 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Isura, orange, ajmargarine, 4_2_it, Matt Flynn, Sunny Mehta, Mike Haven 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 20549

Rate this topic

Jump to

contact us 2+2 Publishing

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5


Message Boards and Forums Directory

Pages provided by ConJelCo