Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

Villain is a Tight-Aggressive player according to PT and is a straightforward player. 14.9% hands played, 7.7% preflop raise, 1.33 aggression factor after 200+ hands.

Paradise Poker 1/2 Hold'em (9 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)


Preflop: Hero is MP2 with J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
UTG calls, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, CO :#A500AF(villain)/ calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, SB calls, <font color="#CC3333">BB 3-bets</font>, UTG calls, Hero calls, CO :#A500AF(villain)/ calls, SB calls.

Flop: (15 SB) 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
SB checks, <font color="#CC3333">BB bets</font>, UTG folds, Hero calls, <font color="#CC3333">villain raises</font>, SB folds, BB calls, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">villain caps</font>, BB calls, Hero calls.

Turn: (13.50 BB) 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">villain raises</font>, BB calls, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">villain caps</font>, BB calls, Hero calls.

River: (25.50 BB) 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">villain raises</font>, BB folds, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">villain caps</font>, Hero calls.

Final Pot: 33.50 BB

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

Yeah, I think playing it slower is best. Its not like you'd like to see every street capped [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

Hmmm - this type of player knows what a paired board and a ton of action means. Once the villain raises the turn, I think it's pretty safe to put his range precisely on 99 or 88 an extremely high percentage of the time here. Cold calling first in preflop, then never stopping once the flop hits is almost always a set from him.

With that said though, once the turn hits, there's 3 combos of 88 and only one combo of 99 that he could have. And with BB padding the pot with his worthless AA [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I'd 3bet and call the cap.

Once I lead and he still raises on the river, and then we lose BB's dead money, I'm inclined to just call at that point. If Villain has 88, Hero's play throughout the entire hand looks like JJ or 99. I doubt Villain is raising the river as often anymore with just 88. And we get into the whole "if he has 88, a 3bet by us only gains us one bet from him most of the time, while if he has 99, a 3bet by us loses 2 bets"

So I'd play it exactly the same up until he raises the river, and I'd just call.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

Why would you play it slower?

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

its hard to put someone on quads, but i think after the 2 caps and his raise on the river, im just calling.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

Weak. He may be in love with a flopped straight or some other set.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

I put him on a set immediately too. I respected his raises and bets the entire time sitting with him, but I had trouble believing he turned the case 9. I took my max time before making it 3 bets on the turn just because I wasn't sure, but he capped it on the flop with a bare set, so thought maybe he was capping the turn still with a bare set (8-8). If I'm going to lose 10 BB in a pot, I don't mind losing it in this one.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

you have the 2nd nuts, just don't stop betting. If you lost, no one cares.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

Huh? Is this serious?

BTW,

[ QUOTE ]
Villain is a Tight-Aggressive player according to PT and is a straightforward player. 14.9% hands played, 7.7% preflop raise, 1.33 aggression factor after 200+ hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

7.7 PFR% and 1.33 AF isn't aggressive....

Haupt_234

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Huh? Is this serious?

BTW,

[ QUOTE ]
Villain is a Tight-Aggressive player according to PT and is a straightforward player. 14.9% hands played, 7.7% preflop raise, 1.33 aggression factor after 200+ hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

7.7 PFR% and 1.33 AF isn't aggressive....

Haupt_234

[/ QUOTE ]

He's passive post flop, and raising with more than half of your starting hands preflop is fairly aggressive.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]

He's passive post flop, and raising with more than half of your starting hands preflop is fairly aggressive.

[/ QUOTE ]

But seriously, you know you played this hand fine and even though I am guessing you ran into quad 9s, this is incredibly standard...

Haupt_234

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

He's passive post flop, and raising with more than half of your starting hands preflop is fairly aggressive.

[/ QUOTE ]

But seriously, you know you played this hand fine and even though I am guessing you ran into quad 9s, this is incredibly standard...

Haupt_234

[/ QUOTE ]

While I'm glad to have someone who contributes to the 2+2 forums as much as you do to agree with how I played it, not everyone agrees. Some of the posts recommended me slowing down on the river to save a lone bet which I seriously considered at the time.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
While I'm glad to have someone who contributes to the 2+2 forums as much as you do to agree with how I played it, not everyone agrees. Some of the posts recommended me slowing down on the river to save a lone bet which I seriously considered at the time.


[/ QUOTE ]

His action is confusing given his stats, though. How many hands is your read based on? I can't see this player 3betting out of the BB w/ 88 or 99 with a 7.7 PFR%, and I can't see him playing the way he did postflop with a 1.33(?) without one of these hands....

Haupt_234

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

He's passive post flop, and raising with more than half of your starting hands preflop is fairly aggressive.

[/ QUOTE ]

But seriously, you know you played this hand fine and even though I am guessing you ran into quad 9s, this is incredibly standard...

Haupt_234

[/ QUOTE ]

While I'm glad to have someone who contributes to the 2+2 forums as much as you do to agree with how I played it, not everyone agrees. Some of the posts recommended me slowing down on the river to save a lone bet which I seriously considered at the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

You could slow down on the river. The guy isn't a total idiot that isn't putting you on a hand. But ya never know, some do get enamored with their hands.

But losing lots of chips in this type of situation is hardly considered a big leak.

b

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
While I'm glad to have someone who contributes to the 2+2 forums as much as you do to agree with how I played it, not everyone agrees. Some of the posts recommended me slowing down on the river to save a lone bet which I seriously considered at the time.


[/ QUOTE ]

His action is confusing given his stats, though. How many hands is your read based on? I can't see this player 3betting out of the BB w/ 88 or 99 with a 7.7 PFR%, and I can't see him playing the way he did postflop with a 1.33(?) without one of these hands....

Haupt_234

[/ QUOTE ]

He coldcalled preflop. He wasn't in the BB.

God knows what the 3rd guy was waiting for playing all the way to the river then folding. Gotta love that action.

b

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]

He coldcalled preflop. He wasn't in the BB.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doh, that makes more sense then. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
God knows what the 3rd guy was waiting for playing all the way to the river then folding. Gotta love that action.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea, thats nuts.

Haupt_234

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

For all of those who are advocating a 3bet on the river, can you please give me a hand range that you are putting Villain on, and the percentage likelyhood of Villain holding each of those hands?

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

Played it fine, dont look back, dont think quads, just keep raising.

Remember there are 3 times as many 88s as 99s out there.

Dont slow down please.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Played it fine, dont look back, dont think quads, just keep raising.

Remember there are 3 times as many 88s as 99s out there.

[/ QUOTE ]

But does a 14.9/7.7/1.33 player play 88 and 99 the same in this position?

With his willingness to go to the felt and with every raise that he keeps throwing in, 99 must be weighted higher than 88. So it's not a sttictly 3-1 card combination ratio, and I still think it gets closer to 1-1 than most people think.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Played it fine, dont look back, dont think quads, just keep raising.

Remember there are 3 times as many 88s as 99s out there.

[/ QUOTE ]

But does a 14.9/7.7/1.33 player play 88 and 99 the same in this position?

With his willingness to go to the felt and with every raise that he keeps throwing in, 99 must be weighted higher than 88. So it's not a sttictly 3-1 card combination ratio, and I still think it gets closer to 1-1 than most people think.

[/ QUOTE ]

It still isn't 1-1, so cap it. Lets face it, when you have the second nuts and run up against the nuts, you're gonna (and you should) lose some bets.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
It still isn't 1-1, so cap it. Lets face it, when you have the second nuts and run up against the nuts, you're gonna (and you should) lose some bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

But do you really need to lose the last 2?

Let's face it - Hero 3bet the flop and was capped. Hero 3bet the turn and was capped. Hero leads out the river and Villain is STILL raising. Hero's hand is well defined. And Villain still keep's going.

This is simply a matter of EV. So let's look at the EV. Folding the river is ridiculous. Everyone knows that. Hero is getting 28.5-1 to call. Since we know that Hero will win this hand well more than the 3.5% or so that he needs to for calling to be correct, calling is therefore +EV.

For raising to be +EV, it's a much different situation. We need to make sure that:

(the percentage of times Villain has 88 or worse and calls * 1)
plus
(the percentage of times Villain has 88 or worse and caps * 2)
minus
(the percentage of times Villain has 99 * 2)

is greater than zero.

If you look at these equations and numbers closely, I think that those advocating a river 3bet are putting too much belief into 2 things:

- the likelyhood of Villain having any of the four hands 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], is equal given the action so far
- Villain will still cap the river with a worse hand a somewhat significant portion of the time

So let's say we grant both of these assumptions. Let's say that each of the 4 hands listed is equally likely and Villain will always cap the river with 88. This is best case scenario for Hero. Then the EV of a 3 bet is:

(0.75*2) - (0.25*2) = 1

So absolute best case scenario if we grant those assumptions is that Hero's EV is +1.

But look what happens when we change those assumptions and make them a bit more rational. If we switch things up so that Villain is smart enough to cap with 99 but only call down with 88:

(0.75*1) - (0.25*2) = 0.25

Hero's EV drops to only 1/4 of a bet.

If we change things to weight 99 a little bit higher than the 88's, let's say 99 is 40% likely and each of the three 88 hands is 20% likely. And let's say that Villain will only cap with 88 half the time, and the other half he'll just call:

(0.30*2) + (0.30*) - (0.40*2) = 0.1

A razor thin +EV edge.

If Villain starts capping anywhere less than half the time with 88, then we start getting into a -EV situation. And that's if we keep 99 weighted at only 40%.

I honestly believe that we should be weighting the single 99 at least 50% here given all the action Villain has given us so far. And I honestly think that we can assume Villain will not cap with his 88 anywhere close to 50% of the time given all of the action that Hero has given so far.

So I stand by the fact that I think 3betting here is anywhere from a slightly negative -EV situation to a relatively large -EV situation.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

Sierra,
I agree with what you're saying. What I don't agree with is:
[ QUOTE ]
So I stand by the fact that I think 3betting here is anywhere from a slightly negative -EV situation to a relatively large -EV situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not a relatively large -EV situation in the longrun. The situation doesn't come up enough for it to have that significant of an impact. I'd agree more if the OP had 88 instead of the 2nd nut.

b

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

Grunch. You missed a bet preflop ;-)

This should really go on BBV...

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's not a relatively large -EV situation in the longrun. The situation doesn't come up enough for it to have that significant of an impact. I'd agree more if the OP had 88 instead of the 2nd nut.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay - large is definitely a relative term here obviously. I just meant that it's often -EV in the range of maybe -0.5 to -1 BB.

And you're right, it doesn't happen often enough to make a big long term impact. But situations similar to this, where you have an extremely strong hand against someone else who has an extremely strong hand, happen often enough that "just keep capping" shouldn't be the default play if someone has shown themselves to be a competent player.

I guess to me it seems like such an good time to slow down after the river raise that I was surprised so many people advocate 3betting so easily here.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I guess to me it seems like such an good time to slow down after the river raise that I was surprised so many people advocate 3betting so easily here.

[/ QUOTE ]

It wasn't an easy bet at the time. I was 90% sure he had pocket 9's, and I'm an optimist. But being an optimist wouldn't let me believe he caught the case 9 he needed to win it.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I guess to me it seems like such an good time to slow down after the river raise that I was surprised so many people advocate 3betting so easily here.

[/ QUOTE ]

It wasn't an easy bet at the time. I was 90% sure he had pocket 9's, and I'm an optimist. But being an optimist wouldn't let me believe he caught the case 9 he needed to win it.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you were only 90% sure, then 3-betting would be correct. Oh, and I would never put the guy on quads. Limit or NL, I'm getting fully stacked with your hand, everytime, period. Too often the guy has a great, but worse hand than you.

But of course, this has happened to all of us. It definitely doesn't imply that you misplayed on any street.

Also, not sure if I've thought about this before, but I don't know if being "optimistic" is generally a positive trait in a poker player. I think you want to try to be fairly neutral.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

It wasn't an easy bet at the time. I was 90% sure he had pocket 9's, and I'm an optimist. But being an optimist wouldn't let me believe he caught the case 9 he needed to win it.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you were only 90% sure, then 3-betting would be correct.

[/ QUOTE ]


If you are 90% sure that the guy has 99, then 3betting is absolutely horrible!

Even if he caps with worse hands and only calls with 99, (which is the exact opposite of what he would most likely do, and is the best case scenario for Hero), then 3betting when you are 90% sure you are behind is a HUGE -EV play: -0.7 BB to be exact.

I can't put Villain on 99 with 90% certainty here, but I'd probably say somewhere between 60% and 75%

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
But situations similar to this, where you have an extremely strong hand against someone else who has an extremely strong hand, happen often enough that "just keep capping" shouldn't be the default play if someone has shown themselves to be a competent player.


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Otherwise, you're ignoring the other player completely. Which isn't good and could bleed into other situations.

But if this player is known to be able to jam a lesser hand, like 88 on here, then I can see it as a much easier 3 bet.

Say you just call, and he turns over 88. Ok, ya missed a bet at that point, but the next time, I'd be 3 betting him on the river now knowing he's capable of it.

Now if this is the type of player where you've seen him just call with 2nd nut, or even a nut hand(yes, this happens) then it's a different situation. He'd be more likely to have the quads here.

I posted a hand in a response in another thread awhile ago where I went 4 bets on a river with a more passive player when I had (running)quads and she had the low boat. I was kind of suprised. However, a factor could've also been how I played my hand during it. Some passives will put you on a hand and not stray from it. Especially when they have a great hand themselves. They can be a little blinded by it.

b

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
But if this player is known to be able to jam a lesser hand, like 88 on here, then I can see it as a much easier 3 bet.

Say you just call, and he turns over 88. Ok, ya missed a bet at that point, but the next time, I'd be 3 betting him on the river now knowing he's capable of it.


[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely true. The more that we can narrow our reads on specific players, the better we can get at properly weighting all the hands that we put in an opponent's hand range. And the better decisions we can make.

Good post.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But if this player is known to be able to jam a lesser hand, like 88 on here, then I can see it as a much easier 3 bet.

Say you just call, and he turns over 88. Ok, ya missed a bet at that point, but the next time, I'd be 3 betting him on the river now knowing he's capable of it.


[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely true. The more that we can narrow our reads on specific players, the better we can get at properly weighting all the hands that we put in an opponent's hand range. And the better decisions we can make.

Good post.

[/ QUOTE ]

Woah woah woah. Am I to understand that you think if Villain has played 88 (or even J9) this way, he's "incompetent"?

I think a player who just called down the turn with 88 is a bit weak, honestly. Sure, with 88 I just call the river 3-bet, but I'm not slowing down on the flop or the turn.

[ QUOTE ]
If you are 90% sure he has 99, then 3-betting the river is a bad play.

[/ QUOTE ]
I suppose this is true assuming that the other 10% will not cap. If they will, however, then 3-betting isn't a bad play. Big assumption, I guess.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Woah woah woah. Am I to understand that you think if Villain has played 88 (or even J9) this way, he's "incompetent"?

[/ QUOTE ]

No - not incompetent. But what I was saying is that if I know that someone will cap every street with the 3rd, 4th, 5th, or 6th nuts, then I can open up my capping range to include more hands as well. It's just like playing a maniac who will cap with A-high lots of times. I'll cap him heads up with two pair on a board that has a 3flush and a 3straight.

All I said was that the better I can weight an oppoenents hand range, the better decisions I can make against that opponent.

[ QUOTE ]
I think a player who just called down the turn with 88 is a bit weak, honestly. Sure, with 88 I just call the river 3-bet, but I'm not slowing down on the flop or the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh - if I am Villain here, and I cap the flop and turn and still get bet into on the river, I don't even raise it. Unless I know the guy betting into me is prone to betting into me quite light here.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you are 90% sure he has 99, then 3-betting the river is a bad play.

[/ QUOTE ]
I suppose this is true assuming that the other 10% will not cap. If they will, however, then 3-betting isn't a bad play. Big assumption, I guess.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if it does get capped by the Villain all the time, whether he's holding 99 or 88 (or even worse) it's still -EV. If we know Villain is going to have 99 here 90% of the time, then 90% of the time we get capped and lose two bets (net -1.8 bets) and 10% of the time we get capped and win two bets (net +0.2 bets) So 3betting has an average EV of -1.6 bets. I'd say that's a bad play!

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But if this player is known to be able to jam a lesser hand, like 88 on here, then I can see it as a much easier 3 bet.

Say you just call, and he turns over 88. Ok, ya missed a bet at that point, but the next time, I'd be 3 betting him on the river now knowing he's capable of it.


[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely true. The more that we can narrow our reads on specific players, the better we can get at properly weighting all the hands that we put in an opponent's hand range. And the better decisions we can make.

Good post.

[/ QUOTE ]

Woah woah woah. Am I to understand that you think if Villain has played 88 (or even J9) this way, he's "incompetent"?

I think a player who just called down the turn with 88 is a bit weak, honestly. Sure, with 88 I just call the river 3-bet, but I'm not slowing down on the flop or the turn.



[/ QUOTE ]

We're not talking about slowing down on the turn. A turn cap is a wider range than a river raise in this case.

If a player caps this river with 88, against a good player after all that action, he's not really reading the hands much beyone his own. So yes, his competency would come into question a bit.

b

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

no, with the exception of check raising the river possibly.

Re: Paradise 1/2 -- Should I play this slower?
 

easy cap on turn and river