PNL Study Group Day 5: Pot Control

[Matt Flynn]

[ QUOTE ]

2. I'm also interested in the topic of taking advantage of the pot control turn check and the defense against it. I had the following hand the other day that got me thinking about it.

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $2 BB (8 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

saw flop|saw showdown

MP2 ($133)
Hero ($105.30)
Button ($77.85)
SB ($204.60)
BB ($243.15)
UTG ($47)
UTG+1 ($136.35)
MP1 ($35)

Preflop: Hero is CO with K [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 9 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img].
4 folds, Hero raises to $7, 1 fold, SB calls $6, 1 fold.

Flop: ($16) K [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 5 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 7 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 players)
SB bets $10, Hero calls $10.

Turn: ($36) 2 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 players)
SB checks, Hero checks.

River: ($36) 4 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 players)
SB bets $187.6 (All-In)

Even tho this is a massive bet, the concept is there, and I thought what a powerful move this is.

[/ QUOTE ]


you'll see many high-stakes players doing just this. it's all math. if he has the best hand and you call, it's a disaster for you. if he is bluffing, folding is a disaster. you won't call that bet often. what could you have to call with other than 86? maybe a random hand here and there but c'mon. his bet is expected to succeed so often that the only bound on his making that play is you adjusting to it. then after a few of those you will likely overadjust and call the next one with one pair. that time he'll have the goods. Prahlad (Mahatma/Spirit Rock) used to do that all the time and was good at figuring out when it would take one or two pushes before you'd steel yourself for a big call. or at least he was good at it hu and shorthanded. longhanded he way overdid it for a while - i just waited for sets and checked/called all the way.

in microstakes opponents tend to either always have it there (or almost) or go way overboard using it and get clipped. so there's plenty of room to execute this strategy well. better be bankrolled for it though.

matt

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

2. I'm also interested in the topic of taking advantage of the pot control turn check and the defense against it. I had the following hand the other day that got me thinking about it.

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $2 BB (8 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

saw flop|saw showdown

MP2 ($133)
Hero ($105.30)
Button ($77.85)
SB ($204.60)
BB ($243.15)
UTG ($47)
UTG+1 ($136.35)
MP1 ($35)

Preflop: Hero is CO with K [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 9 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img].
4 folds, Hero raises to $7, 1 fold, SB calls $6, 1 fold.

Flop: ($16) K [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 5 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 7 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 players)
SB bets $10, Hero calls $10.

Turn: ($36) 2 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 players)
SB checks, Hero checks.

River: ($36) 4 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 players)
SB bets $187.6 (All-In)

Even tho this is a massive bet, the concept is there, and I thought what a powerful move this is.

[/ QUOTE ]


you'll see many high-stakes players doing just this. it's all math. if he has the best hand and you call, it's a disaster for you. if he is bluffing, folding is a disaster. you won't call that bet often. what could you have to call with other than 86? maybe a random hand here and there but c'mon. his bet is expected to succeed so often that the only bound on his making that play is you adjusting to it. then after a few of those you will likely overadjust and call the next one with one pair. that time he'll have the goods. Prahlad (Mahatma/Spirit Rock) used to do that all the time and was good at figuring out when it would take one or two pushes before you'd steel yourself for a big call. or at least he was good at it hu and shorthanded. longhanded he way overdid it for a while - i just waited for sets and checked/called all the way.

in microstakes opponents tend to either always have it there (or almost) or go way overboard using it and get clipped. so there's plenty of room to execute this strategy well. better be bankrolled for it though.

matt

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for your response on both of my questions. Good things to think about.

Thx.

[QTip]

One more thing I wanted to just bring up here and perhaps jog some thoughts is pot control when oop. Sometimes it seems to me that when oop the best way to control the pot is to simply bet small as opposed to checking (unless you're against an opponent who is very passive and likes checking or betting small). However, these small bets look so weak and they just cry for someone to raise them. I guess the only way to get around this is to sometimes bet small with your big hands waiting to punish a raise (at least against observant opponents).

Anyway, I'm just trying to think of ways to excute pot control when oop and it's obvious that oop sucks for so many reasons.

[inverted]

QTip I agree with you at low stakes OOP, people seem to be passive and not raise terribly often. But as to your other post I have seen the massive overbet on the river and sometimes even the turn alot this week.

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $0.04 BB (6 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

BB ($3.96)
Hero ($6.61)
MP ($5)
CO ($6.76)
Button ($4.76)
SB ($6.09)

Preflop: Hero is UTG with T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]. MP posts a blind of $0.04.
<font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to $0.14</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, CO calls $0.14, <font color="#666666">3 folds</font>.

Flop: ($0.38) 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 5[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $0.26</font>, CO calls $0.26.

Turn: ($0.90) 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $0.6</font>, CO calls $0.60.

River: ($2.10) 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, CO calls $6.76 (All-In), Hero folds.

Final Pot: $8.86

Results in white below: <font color="#FFFFFF">
CO doesn't show.
Outcome: CO wins $8.86. </font>

I've been trying to work out what to do about this/or how to use it in my game.

[Matt Flynn]

[ QUOTE ]
One more thing I wanted to just bring up here and perhaps jog some thoughts is pot control when oop. Sometimes it seems to me that when oop the best way to control the pot is to simply bet small as opposed to checking (unless you're against an opponent who is very passive and likes checking or betting small). However, these small bets look so weak and they just cry for someone to raise them. I guess the only way to get around this is to sometimes bet small with your big hands waiting to punish a raise (at least against observant opponents).

[/ QUOTE ]


absolutely. e.g., pot is $35. you bet $10. he calls. one street down, pot's only 1.6x. now say you bet $20 on the turn. that's a tricky bet because a lot of players make small bets with the nuts, so opponent may get confused. if he calls, pot is $95. two streets down and you're not even at 3x / haven't put in an SPR of 1 yet.

[Genz]

I have a question, that I am not sure of, if it is answered in the book:

You say that when you don't want to commit, you shouldn't put more than 1/3 of your stack in the pot as a general goal. The whole chapter seems to assume that you are playing a medium or deep stack. I'd like to toy with the 40-60BB stack a little, so I am wondering if I have to adjust this guideline. I think I read in the book that it's always 1/3 of the effective stacks. So when I am playing a short stack with 40BB, I don't want to put more than 13BBs in the pot? Did I get that correctly? Or is the 1/3 portion to be understood playing a 100BB stack, so that I don't want to put more than 30BBs in a pot, that would leave me with a mere 10BBs when I am playing a short stack.

[WarhammerIIC]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a question, that I am not sure of, if it is answered in the book:

You say that when you don't want to commit, you shouldn't put more than 1/3 of your stack in the pot as a general goal. The whole chapter seems to assume that you are playing a medium or deep stack. I'd like to toy with the 40-60BB stack a little, so I am wondering if I have to adjust this guideline. I think I read in the book that it's always 1/3 of the effective stacks. So when I am playing a short stack with 40BB, I don't want to put more than 13BBs in the pot? Did I get that correctly? Or is the 1/3 portion to be understood playing a 100BB stack, so that I don't want to put more than 30BBs in a pot, that would leave me with a mere 10BBs when I am playing a short stack.

[/ QUOTE ]
You don't want to put more than 1/3 of the EFFECTIVE stack in the pot. It doesn't matter if that's your stack or not.

The point of buying in short for 40-60BBs is that it's easier to get committed, so playing AK, AQ, JJ, etc is easier. In terms of PNL, it's easy to get 1/3 of the effective stack in, so it's easy to commit. So, yes, it still applies when you buy in short.

[Genz]

OTOH I have to go easy on the cbetting then, because I commit so easily, haven't I?