Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

lol @ your reasoning for your turn bet

you give advice to others, sigh

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Baltosar: 2/3 of your decisions this hand were incorrect.

The fact that we have to talk about your 4th is a result of your poor play from other spots in the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you referring to ?

Limping big pairs in EP didn't yield results in this hand, but that doesn't mean it's always 100% wrong.

I assume you're not referring to the flop. I likely have the best hand.........

[/ QUOTE ]


hello balto,

i think this is where your analysis runs aground. you are very likely a 2-1 dog on this flop 6 ways.

i mucked around with poker stove giving you kk and the bb as random with the 4 other limpers as any pair, any 2 b'way, sc's 54+, 1 gappers 75s+, 2 gappers T7s+ and all Axs. that's about 24.6% of hands.

once you limp with every succeeding player, their odds to come in the pot get better and better.

in this 6 way pot, KK is no better than 35% to win this hand on this flop. there are just so many players that at least one of them will run into a flop here.

which is , of course, why one endeavors to play big pairs heads up, not 6 ways.

if you are going to play this hand by limping utg, you must have a plan ahead of time to hit the eject button at some point if it isn't raised pf. there is no way to put the caller of your flop bet on any real range. but you do know many of his possible hands that you were ahead of on the flop, have you almost drawing dead after the turn.

i just don't see the point in getting broke with one pair when 6 people see a flop in an unraised pot.

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
The psychology of this thread is more interesting than the hand. Balto posts a hand that he had to have known would engender some hostility, given how people feel about his other posts. Then he gets the hostility in spades. If anybody read this thread in isolation, they would think that you guys are a bunch of [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never read anything from baltostar or most of the others here, and that's exactly what I'm thinking.

baltostar is now on my must-read list. (He may be wrong. I dunno, not good enough to tell. But damn there's some thinking material in his posts.)

edit: and some of that thinking material undoubtedly comes from others trying to show he's wrong, so long live provocateurs.

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The psychology of this thread is more interesting than the hand. Balto posts a hand that he had to have known would engender some hostility, given how people feel about his other posts. Then he gets the hostility in spades. If anybody read this thread in isolation, they would think that you guys are a bunch of [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never read anything from baltostar or most of the others here, and that's exactly what I'm thinking.

baltostar is now on my must-read list. (He may be wrong. I dunno, not good enough to tell. . But damn there's some thinking material in his posts.)



[/ QUOTE ]

That's the problem with blatostar's posts. He is wrong, and most of his reasoning is really off and backward. Players who are not good might be impressed with his "deep analysis", which is dangerous and bad for them obviously. I agree however that any discussion is good, and him being a provocateur sometimes helps in creating interesting discussions.

As to the hand - it's the 3rd time that balto posts a hand in which he open limps utg (with 99, QJs if I remember correctly, and now KK). In short - most of the hands he posts are utg limps at full table. This is the worst of them. He doesn't mention any indication for this table being particularly loose-aggressive PF, or willing to stack-off with ridiculous hands post-flop (on the contrary - he mentions the over-tightness of this tournament in its early stages). His reasons for limping (8% mix-up or whatever) are over the top irrelevant here, and borderline joke. I won't get into other parts of his thinking, others have done that.

He is obviously a provocateur who loves to listen to himself, judging from the hands he posts and his theoretic posts. I am also 100% certain that he is a weak poker player. This is all fine and great, he has any right to post, I only feel it is important to warn "not good enough" players about his material, and make them be much more critical about it.

(BTW sometimes people naturally feel sympathy for the "underdog", the "deep thinking" poster who is constantly being "attacked". But in this case we are talking about a poster who is being "attacked" for some very good reasons (being simply flat out wrong, time and again), and he obviously enjoys it too.)

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Baltosar: 2/3 of your decisions this hand were incorrect.

The fact that we have to talk about your 4th is a result of your poor play from other spots in the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you referring to ?

Limping big pairs in EP didn't yield results in this hand, but that doesn't mean it's always 100% wrong.

I assume you're not referring to the flop. I likely have the best hand.........

[/ QUOTE ]


hello balto,

i think this is where your analysis runs aground. you are very likely a 2-1 dog on this flop 6 ways.

i mucked around with poker stove giving you kk and the bb as random with the 4 other limpers as any pair, any 2 b'way, sc's 54+, 1 gappers 75s+, 2 gappers T7s+ and all Axs. that's about 24.6% of hands.

once you limp with every succeeding player, their odds to come in the pot get better and better.

in this 6 way pot, KK is no better than 35% to win this hand on this flop. there are just so many players that at least one of them will run into a flop here.

which is , of course, why one endeavors to play big pairs heads up, not 6 ways.

if you are going to play this hand by limping utg, you must have a plan ahead of time to hit the eject button at some point if it isn't raised pf. there is no way to put the caller of your flop bet on any real range. but you do know many of his possible hands that you were ahead of on the flop, have you almost drawing dead after the turn.

i just don't see the point in getting broke with one pair when 6 people see a flop in an unraised pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, I totally agree. That's why I said above that having a bunch of limpers call was not one of my hand goals, and once it happenned I reduced my reasonable expectation for the hand way down: I knew the odds were against me to get much out of the hand.

Interesting stuff you did with stove, b/c that's exactly what I started thinking yesterday. I am thinking you have to check most flops in this scenario. With 5 opponents, you could easily see one of them lead-out and get raised, which allows you to bail.

But none of the above is why I posted the hand. I was just interested in what people thought about the ratio of the chance the turn shove is a semi-bluff to chance it's a panicky over-value-bet.

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

so really early without reads u want thoughts on how likely anyone is to bluff u big. thats not really intresting since its really hard (impossible?) to do. i´d say that the discussion as to not get to this situation like this is far more valuable. Anyhow as for your question, at least db your villain so we know something about him??

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

OPR says 46 tournies, ITM once 11/266, ranked 184,065 of 185,959 on FTP, 647,650 of 654,003 overall.

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

I am not sure I like the weak turn bet. However, I would call the push. The turn bet seems strange on the connected board, and could provoke a push from a weaker hand. I think villain rarely has a set due to the overbet push and the limp behind preflop. Villain probably has two pair or a pair plus a draw, but he could have less.

You have 8 outs against two pair. Even with the push, you are getting decent pot odds. So I would call and gamble.

As I indicated, there may be questionable plays in this hand, but no terrible ones. I think this is an interesting hand for this forum. I also think this is a good example of why anyone should be allowed to post here. It is good to have hands where everything isn't played the "standard" way.

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
OPR says 46 tournies, ITM once 11/266, ranked 184,065 of 185,959 on FTP, 647,650 of 654,003 overall.

[/ QUOTE ]
Out of curiosity, why did you choose these stats to quote instead of ROI and ABI?

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OPR says 46 tournies, ITM once 11/266, ranked 184,065 of 185,959 on FTP, 647,650 of 654,003 overall.

[/ QUOTE ]
Out of curiosity, why did you choose these stats to quote instead of ROI and ABI?

[/ QUOTE ]

ROI=-88% , ABI=$40

Avg. Finish
Early 37% (10%)
EM 28% (20%)
Mid. 33% (40%)
ML 0% (20%)
Late 2% (10%)

Are you guys basing real-time decisions on OPR ?

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

Without direct reads, the stats can help you in establishing indirect leads. Like, "Wow, this clown has an ROI of -88%" as you push the call button on the turn.

Betgo, I like your reasoning for a call on the turn, but I have a question: Is leading the turn the best line? Would Hero be better off check/calling the turn and river?

It seems that this line allows us to still make chips off Villain betting TP or bluffing, while we lose less when Villain shows up with better than one pair.

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
Without direct reads, the stats can help you in establishing indirect leads. Like, "Wow, this clown has an ROI of -88%" as you push the call button on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

I kind of see it the opposite way.

I play a lot of cheap SnGs, and the donk play I see most often is someone flopping a nice hand, getting bet into, and throwing it all in.

I think someone in the STT forum was talking about this: at the low levels, the players tend to be very straightforward; most likely if they make a very large bet they have a very strong hand. (This might be part of Phil Hellmouth's rationale for not likely to call big river bets.)

I'm not sure how many players satellite in to the FTP $750K $1M. The primary turbo satellite 2.5 hrs before awards about 200 seats. Also not sure if you can correlate satelliting-in with weak players; I've see lots of FTP pros in the primary satellite.

Turns out that this player did satellite in. In fact, that was his only career ITM.

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

The rule with AA is that "if you limp with aces, you never go broke with aces". Obviously there are exceptions, but that's the rule (flop a set and go broke, have a read on some jackass but he gets lucky, etc).

Why should it be any different with KK?

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
The rule with AA is that "if you limp with aces, you never go broke with aces". Obviously there are exceptions, but that's the rule (flop a set and go broke, have a read on some jackass but he gets lucky, etc).

Why should it be any different with KK?

[/ QUOTE ]

because it's a stupid fkin rule re: a stupid fkin play

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
The rule with AA is that "if you limp with aces, you never go broke with aces". Obviously there are exceptions, but that's the rule (flop a set and go broke, have a read on some jackass but he gets lucky, etc).

Why should it be any different with KK?

[/ QUOTE ]
This is incorrect. I believe it comes from Cloutier/McEvoy, which is pretty much all misinformation.

If you limp AA/KK, of course you sometimes go broke with it. There are some situations where you can get away from it. You don't automatically go allin with one pair in a limped pot, but of course you sometimes go broke or double up with it.

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
Are you guys basing real-time decisions on OPR ?

[/ QUOTE ]
Sometimes, but obviously taken with a huge grain of salt. E.g. I might be willing to give a solid winner on high stakes more credit for floating. You need a solid sample size though, and it's not like it's a big factor in making a decision.

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

Which is why I said "Obviously there are exceptions...", however, in this particular hand, it's not the exception and you do NOT want to go broke here.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The rule with AA is that "if you limp with aces, you never go broke with aces". Obviously there are exceptions, but that's the rule (flop a set and go broke, have a read on some jackass but he gets lucky, etc).

Why should it be any different with KK?

[/ QUOTE ]
This is incorrect. I believe it comes from Cloutier/McEvoy, which is pretty much all misinformation.

If you limp AA/KK, of course you sometimes go broke with it. There are some situations where you can get away from it. You don't automatically go allin with one pair in a limped pot, but of course you sometimes go broke or double up with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

Well, if you NEVER limp with big pairs, then you shouldn't be interested in this thread so don't reply at all. If you do limp once in a while, then once in a while you'll find yourself in a position where you *thought* there would be a raise behind you, but there wasn't, and then maybe you do get interested in this thread.

It's funny how some people seem to never make mistakes and know everything, yet have a significantly lower ROI than other people that willingly admit their mistakes. I'm not specifically referring to anyone in particular here, but I'm always amused (and sometimes disgusted) by that.

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

balto, i don't mind limping with hands like AA/KK now and then, but i don't subscribe to harrington's idea to do it at random. i like to do it when i'm pretty sure someone behind me WILL raise who would have otherwise folded if i had raised. if the guy is probably going to be on my immediate left and is over aggressive, i specifically like this because he can raise, i can see what everyone else does pf, then i get to close the action. if everyone else folds, i have the option of smooth calling. if there is one or more calls, i can re-raise and win a much sweeter pot than the blinds/antes. obviously, there is a place for limping with big pairs at later stages in a tournament where there are lots of short stacks that are desperate and moving all-in every hand, but folding to a raise in front of them.

again, i like limping at times with big pairs, but i like to do it for a reason rather than on a purely random "mix it up" whim.

edit: i don't like being in the spot you are where reads are tough and you're OOP. i'm fairly good at putting my opponents on a range of hands in other spots, but not in a spot like this, which is why *for me*, this is a spot where i see no point in going broke.

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
Which is why I said "Obviously there are exceptions...", however, in this particular hand, it's not the exception and you do NOT want to go broke here.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The rule with AA is that "if you limp with aces, you never go broke with aces". Obviously there are exceptions, but that's the rule (flop a set and go broke, have a read on some jackass but he gets lucky, etc).

Why should it be any different with KK?

[/ QUOTE ]
This is incorrect. I believe it comes from Cloutier/McEvoy, which is pretty much all misinformation.

If you limp AA/KK, of course you sometimes go broke with it. There are some situations where you can get away from it. You don't automatically go allin with one pair in a limped pot, but of course you sometimes go broke or double up with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO that rule is incorrect. First of all, the money is shallow by cash game standards. A big pair plays about the same as TPTK or bottom two pair. You should sometimes be willing to go allin with those hands in a limped pot. Also, when you limp KK and don't get a reraise, your hand is well disguised.

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well, if you NEVER limp with big pairs, then you shouldn't be interested in this thread so don't reply at all. If you do limp once in a while, then once in a while you'll find yourself in a position where you *thought* there would be a raise behind you, but there wasn't, and then maybe you do get interested in this thread.

It's funny how some people seem to never make mistakes and know everything, yet have a significantly lower ROI than other people that willingly admit their mistakes. I'm not specifically referring to anyone in particular here, but I'm always amused (and sometimes disgusted) by that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I mostly agree with this, but I also don't understand the people who think the hand isn't worth discussing because you wouldn't be in this situation if you weren't stupid enough to limp a big pair. I mean the situation on the turn is still interesting even if you may have made a huge error preflop.

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

If I have a read on the opponent I'm sometimes willing to go broke or double through in a limped pot, so sometimes, sure. But if I'm in the dark (which is where I usually am if I limp, expecting a raise, and then a bunch of people see the flop for cheap), then I highly prefer playing cautiously. BTW, why bring "cash game standards" into this?

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well, if you NEVER limp with big pairs, then you shouldn't be interested in this thread so don't reply at all. If you do limp once in a while, then once in a while you'll find yourself in a position where you *thought* there would be a raise behind you, but there wasn't, and then maybe you do get interested in this thread.

It's funny how some people seem to never make mistakes and know everything, yet have a significantly lower ROI than other people that willingly admit their mistakes. I'm not specifically referring to anyone in particular here, but I'm always amused (and sometimes disgusted) by that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I mostly agree with this, but I also don't understand the people who think the hand isn't worth discussing because you wouldn't be in this situation if you weren't stupid enough to limp a big pair. I mean the situation on the turn is still interesting even if you may have made a huge error preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. I enjoyed going through all of the HoH hands and analyzing them throughout that series, and there are PLENTY of times that Harrington say stuff like "You actually call for $300..." (even though he prefers a fold or raise), because you are analyzing actual hands where errors were made. Part of the idea is that even the best pros make mistakes now and then, so YOU will too, but to play your best, you should still realize when you made a mistake and then do your best to play optimal from that point on.

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The rule with AA is that "if you limp with aces, you never go broke with aces". Obviously there are exceptions, but that's the rule (flop a set and go broke, have a read on some jackass but he gets lucky, etc).

Why should it be any different with KK?

[/ QUOTE ]

because it's a stupid fkin rule re: a stupid fkin play

[/ QUOTE ]

Can we please ban 0evg0 before we ban Baltostar? I've always found your posts to be unnecessarily condescending and rude. You have no significant results to back up your advice, and you offer very little to other posters. You put very little effort and thinking into your 9000 empty posts.

Balty, on the other hand, is focusing on the game rather than belittling others. Even if his play is flawed, I respect his willingness to learn and I'm sure he can become a better player if we were less critical of his errors. He also makes us better players by offering us his thought process. Poker isn't about how we play. It's about how others play, and how we adjust accordingly.

As to the hand, I always raise KK 100% in EP w/100BB. And I always fold the turn. Exploit me.

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well, if you NEVER limp with big pairs, then you shouldn't be interested in this thread so don't reply at all. If you do limp once in a while, then once in a while you'll find yourself in a position where you *thought* there would be a raise behind you, but there wasn't, and then maybe you do get interested in this thread.

It's funny how some people seem to never make mistakes and know everything, yet have a significantly lower ROI than other people that willingly admit their mistakes. I'm not specifically referring to anyone in particular here, but I'm always amused (and sometimes disgusted) by that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I mostly agree with this, but I also don't understand the people who think the hand isn't worth discussing because you wouldn't be in this situation if you weren't stupid enough to limp a big pair. I mean the situation on the turn is still interesting even if you may have made a huge error preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. I enjoyed going through all of the HoH hands and analyzing them throughout that series, and there are PLENTY of times that Harrington say stuff like "You actually call for $300..." (even though he prefers a fold or raise), because you are analyzing actual hands where errors were made. Part of the idea is that even the best pros make mistakes now and then, so YOU will too, but to play your best, you should still realize when you made a mistake and then do your best to play optimal from that point on.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

Re: FTP $750K : M=60 : KK OOP facing turn shove rr on scary board
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Without direct reads, the stats can help you in establishing indirect leads. Like, "Wow, this clown has an ROI of -88%" as you push the call button on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

I kind of see it the opposite way.

I play a lot of cheap SnGs, and the donk play I see most often is someone flopping a nice hand, getting bet into, and throwing it all in.

I think someone in the STT forum was talking about this: at the low levels, the players tend to be very straightforward; most likely if they make a very large bet they have a very strong hand. (This might be part of Phil Hellmouth's rationale for not likely to call big river bets.)

I'm not sure how many players satellite in to the FTP $750K $1M. The primary turbo satellite 2.5 hrs before awards about 200 seats. Also not sure if you can correlate satelliting-in with weak players; I've see lots of FTP pros in the primary satellite.

Turns out that this player did satellite in. In fact, that was his only career ITM.

[/ QUOTE ]

I completely disagree with this.

I use stats for live decision making constantly and it's almost always a good idea.
Donkeys push their chips in with garbage ALL THE TIME. That's why they are donkeys.

Anyway, w/e happened, results?