Math question: folding an underfull
 

Here's a strange hand I played at full table 5-10NL.

Hero is BB (1050) with 88 and has a rocky image.
Villain is just as rocky in the cut-off (2000+).

Villain raises to 35, button calls, hero calls with 88.
Flop: K,K,2 rainbow
Everyone checks. I'm not sure why villain is checking here, but I don't like it because it seems like he could bet with just about any pocket pair here and take down the pot most of the time the way the game was playing.

Turn: 8 that puts a second spade on board. I have 8s full, I check and now villain bets 90. Button folds and I just call.

River: A, no spade. I check, he bets 200, and as much as I hate it, I fold.

Now whether this was right or wrong I'll never know because I never saw his hand, and of course the more I think about it the more nitty I feel.

That said, on the river after his bet pot is laying 2.4-1.
but I think by his river action his range of hands is pretty small but of course I could be wrong. Though the turn did bring a flush draw, I doubt he thinks I'd just call with a flush draw out of position with 1 card to come on a paired board with my rocky image, so I'm thinking my turn action tells him I have something I like. This is why I folded to his river bet.

All that said, what hands do I have to narrow him down to make folding the proper play? (I suck at math and this seems like soemthing that could be solved mathematically).

Let's say his range is, KJs and KQs which I beat but also AA, KK, and AK which beat me- is the fold proper at 2.4-1? What if we add AQ, AJ and AT? Basically I'm wondering what the smallest range I have to have him on is in order for me to lay down this hand and be mathematically correct?

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

uh, wow

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

OOOOLLLLLLOOLOPLO<L<OOL< LL< O OL L LL L LOLO L L L LOO LO L OPL OL }OL OPL O L POL

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

er in other words, you played this hand bad....c/r turn, lead turn barring that if for some reason you really don't like river, just chk call you have a boat for god's sake.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

Holy cow.

Bet turn, re-raise get it in, etc.

On the river, if he's the tightest player in the history of poker, call quick.

If you have a tendency to make these type of folds, ALWAYS fastplay your big hands WHEN you pick them up.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

There was a group of children touring my workplace today, and I decided to read this thread to them. It made them cry. See what you've done?

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

This hand did not happen.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

[ QUOTE ]
This hand did not happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tell that to the kids who are scarred for life now.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

I think he probably has AK or KK, but I would call anyway.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

[ QUOTE ]
Holy cow.

Bet turn, re-raise get it in, etc.

On the river, if he's the tightest player in the history of poker, call quick.

If you have a tendency to make these type of folds, ALWAYS fastplay your big hands WHEN you pick them up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't make folds like this often. In fact in the last few months I can count the number of times on 1 finger.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

Dear. God. Why would you EVER check call that turn???????

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think he probably has AK or KK, but I would call anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is what I felt and I was thinking why should I give this guy a payoff when I feel so strongly he has me beat? This guy had been showing down the goods when he played hands and so had I and his line spelled monster when I considred all the image factors and the board.

BUT- If I felt great about my play I'd never have posted the hand. I'm still wondering about the math if anyone has an answer.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

i really hate how low limit players post their hands with 2 extra zeroes in front of everything.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

My attempt at math: If I narrow him to only 1 hand that I beat and all other possible holdings that beat me discounting K8 and K2 there are

8 combinations of KQ
6 combinations of AK
1 comb. of KK
3 comb. of AA

so I beat 8, I lose to 10. Thus bad fold unless I am sure he has exactly one of the three combos that I lose to. While I still feel like he had a monster I can't discount KQ and if I did this math right the fold is stupid.

I was tired....

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

[ QUOTE ]
My attempt at math: If I narrow him to only 1 hand that I beat and all other possible holdings that beat me discounting K8 and K2 there are

8 combinations of KQ
6 combinations of AK
1 comb. of KK
3 comb. of AA

so I beat 8, I lose to 10. Thus bad fold unless I am sure he has exactly one of the three combos that I lose to. While I still feel like he had a monster I can't discount KQ and if I did this math right the fold is stupid.

I was tired....

[/ QUOTE ]

Blah, Blah, Blah.... None of this defends your turn play. If you felt that his play really demonstrated him slowplaying a monster then check calling the turn is even more ridiculous.

No one is going to get past your turn play. Not leading that turn and 3-betting all in is dumbfounding.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

Shaun,

As swarm asks, given your read, why did you check-call the turn?

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

[censored] the math. Shove it in on the turn

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

I'm not sure poker is the right card game for you. Maybe you should try and become a professional Old Maid player.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

[ QUOTE ]
uh, wow

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

quit poker

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

[ QUOTE ]
i really hate how low limit players post their hands with 2 extra zeroes in front of everything.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think low limit players have enough grasp of math to put the zeroes behind everything...

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

I am nominating that for one of the funniest posts this month. Hilarious.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

[ QUOTE ]
Dear. God. Why would you EVER check call that turn???????

[/ QUOTE ]
i would really like to hear something on trhis from the OP... could be educational for me.
plz explain!

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

i like how the title of this thread is "math question:..."

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

[ QUOTE ]

No one is going to get past your turn play. Not leading that turn and 3-betting all in is dumbfounding.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

Either a.) he made up this hand or b.) LOLOLOLOL ROFL LOLOLOL HAHAHAHAHHAHAL OLO OL OL OJ OH MY GOD LOLOLOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

Ok ok enough.

I think the consensus here is saying you should be looking for every opportunity possible to push your stack in the middle, not to try and find ways to fold.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

Whether it's "funny" or not there is a math question here that is legitimate.

The joke is this forum. Basically someone who doesn't post much asks a question and all the parrots ignore his actual question and post pages and pages of infantile babble about what an idiot he is or that it's a fake hand or that he must've added zeroes to the limit.

What's really funny is how much time you people spend berating anonymous people on an internet message board over a hand of poker...

To those people who did try to help I appreciate it and you're right the turn play was bad. I still think I was right to fold the river but you had to be there I guess.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

[ QUOTE ]
Whether it's "funny" or not there is a math question here that is legitimate.

The joke is this forum. Basically someone who doesn't post much asks a question and all the parrots ignore his actual question and post pages and pages of infantile babble about what an idiot he is or that it's a fake hand or that he must've added zeroes to the limit.

What's really funny is how much time you people spend berating anonymous people on an internet message board over a hand of poker...

To those people who did try to help I appreciate it and you're right the turn play was bad. I still think I was right to fold the river but you had to be there I guess.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you, your original post was lame but the responses were even lamer. [censored] them.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

while some of the posts were lame, i think we would do this guy a dis-service if we didn't try to pound the fact that he must, must, must bet and raise this turn card. if he wants to be a winning no limit player he must understand this. after saying this, i agree, that we got a whole bunch of that and no answer to the other question.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

[ QUOTE ]
while some of the posts were lame, i think we would do this guy a dis-service if we didn't try to pound the fact that he must, must, must bet and raise this turn card. if he wants to be a winning no limit player he must understand this. after saying this, i agree, that we got a whole bunch of that and no answer to the other question.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, some of the flame posts mention the turn, but half of them don't have any strategic content at all. Either "LOLOMGHAHA" or "you should quit playing poker" etc... This isn't going to pound anything into the guys head except anger or embarassment.

If you are going to blatantly flame someone, at least include some strategy in the post, unless the guy is just trolling.

/derail

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

at the same time, this is an internet forum, you are gonna get flamed for this post. no way around it

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

Ben, BF, Shaun:

I believe a number of the responses in this and some other recent threads are because this forum was created largely due to people's desire of having an NL forum where the discussion was oriented around somewhat advanced concepts. The level of hands that have been posted lately often are obvious in nature or show glaring basic mistakes. There are two other NL forums where people can learn basic stuff.

Additionally, Shaun, I and a couple of others asked you a simple serious question about your turn reasoning. Instead of focusing on the responses you did not like, how about just addressing the question that was asked? Perhaps that could result in some actual poker discussion that you could learn from. Yet, for some reason, you did not even respond to the question.

Mods, I think you guys should change the guidelines for this forum to 10-20NL and higher. People w/ interesting hands can use their judgement as to when something at lower stakes is interesting enough to post in this forum.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

[ QUOTE ]
Mods, I think you guys should change the guidelines for this forum to 10-20NL and higher.

[/ QUOTE ]

As a new 5/10 player I completely agree. I think the discussion will be better for the group of us that just moved up in medium stakes room. I feel out of place posting 5/10 hands in high stakes forum.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

uh u left out bottom set in your range.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

I appreciate the last few posts. I will try and answer questions.

Bugman you mentioned 22- the way this guy was playing, I didn't see him coming in for a raise with 22 position or not, because I'd seen him limp quite a few hands, pocket pair that turned into a set included. 22 is definitely a possibility for a lot of players in this spot and may have been for him too, but I'm pretty sure it was out of his range. This guy was playing in a way that I thought his range could include KQ here, but not 22.

As for the turn and why I played it the way I did, I really didn't like this guy's flop check because the way he was playing it seemed unneccessary- like he was trying to let us catch up. There was another guy in the pot too who was not nearly as tight and it's the kind of situation where I thought a check from the PF raiser was asking for trouble, and that made me think maybe he wants trouble?

If I checkraise the turn it's going to be big enough to where I am committed to the pot. Of course if I lead the turn he is going to likely fold all pocket pairs because he's tight and knows I am too.

So it's a case of hoping for a bet from him when he is either way behind, has a lock, or has a few outs to beat me that I can see (A, 2, K, maybe Q). Not raising the turn is bad in the last scenario and that scenario is most likely so again, I'm not happy with how I played the turn. Then again, not raising the turn is fine when he holds something like JJ IMO.

If the river was not an Ace, I would have lead out small enough that I could call a raise and small enough that he would pay off with the hands I beat.

I guess another factor is that I basically ran bad for a month where being in spots like this and ending up with the losing hand became fairly common. A lot of those times I felt like I was probably beat but still put in money only to find out, yeah, I was beat.

That isn't logical but you get conditioned to expect it after seeing it for a while right or wrong. I still think I was beat on the river and I can't explain why. That's why I was looking for some sort of math that would give me a better idea of how to handle the river in future situations.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

It appears your problem is more "emotional" than mathematical.

You are trying to use math to justify "tilted" play.

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

The hand ranges you put him on are inconsistant from one street to another.
[ QUOTE ]
Let's say his range is, KJs and KQs which I beat but also AA, KK, and AK which beat me

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As for the turn and why I played it the way I did, I really didn't like this guy's flop check because the way he was playing it seemed unneccessary- like he was trying to let us catch up

[/ QUOTE ]
You have to decide what he's doing with AA. Leaving that to one side, though, if his turn range is likely quads or trips why would you not be eager to get the money in.
[ QUOTE ]
Of course if I lead the turn he is going to likely fold all pocket pairs because he's tight and knows I am too.

[/ QUOTE ]
So now you think he checks the flop with pocket pairs. Does he wants to let you catch up? On the turn, do expect him to bluff these pairs? If so why are you so confident in his river range?
[ QUOTE ]
he is either way behind, has a lock, or has a few outs to beat me that I can see

[/ QUOTE ]
Pot control is not an issue here. Increasing your equity in a small pot is unimportant when you have a big edge in a big pot. Your only concern is to play the big pot as often as possible.

James

Re: Math question: folding an underfull
 

[ QUOTE ]
It appears your problem is more "emotional" than mathematical.

You are trying to use math to justify "tilted" play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably true. It isn't even that I was on tilt during the hand (when I'm on tilt I donk my stack into the middle with far worse hands and try to make fancy plays- I don't fold), but I think the memory of being on tilt affected my judgment. Still I have never used math with hand ranges- more just played on feel, and I'm trying to expand my approach.