in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

No reads, second hand at table.

Ultimate Bet 3/6 Hold'em (10 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

Preflop: marchron is SB with 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG+1 calls, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, MP2 calls, MP3 calls, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, marchron completes, BB checks.

UB 3/6 has a 1/3 blind structure, so I had to pay $2 just to complete, and a raise would be $5. I decided that was too much to pay for being OOP to the world. Maybe another limper and I raise just for set equity alone. TT I'd auto-raise.

Have I lost my mind here, or just my spine?



Flop: (5 SB) 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
marchron . . .

Good flop, but one that's fraught with danger. I, however, have a very well-disguised hand. How do I go from here?

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

i don't raise 99 preflop here.

bet/3bet

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

I don't think the structure makes much difference on the hands you raise in this spot. You're definitely at least calling so either way it's only costing you 1SB more to raise.

I haven't played fullring in awhile so I've got no idea what type of hands people limp, but I can say I'd definitely raise TT and definitely limp 88. I think limping is fine as we're OOP and bloating the pot is only really gonna be good if we flop a set. The flop will often not be worth continuing on.

Lead the flop and hope to 3 bet.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

march ron do you ever lose a hand? lol

bet obv

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think the structure makes much difference on the hands you raise in this spot. You're definitely at least calling so either way it's only costing you 1SB more to raise.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't know. Maybe I'm giving DavidC a run for the "Nit Of The Month" award he's won every month for the last three years, or maybe I'm totally talking out of my ass, but this is how I look at it:

Assume the BB and all of the limpers will always call. If I raise, I'm investing $5 more to get $12 more into the pot. So, in a way, I'm giving myself 12-5 or 2.4-1 "odds" on the raise.

Now let's instead pretend that we're playing some bizarre structure where I post a live $5 blind but it still remains $3 to call preflop. If I "raise," I'm only putting in another $1 to get the same $12 into the pot, giving myself 12-1 "odds." In theory, it would be then profitable to raise with anything I'd be willing to take 12-1 odds on to strictly call.

Am I making the slightest bit of sense at all?

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

[ QUOTE ]
Assume the BB and all of the limpers will always call. If I raise, I'm investing $5 more to get $12 more into the pot. So, in a way, I'm giving myself 12-5 or 2.4-1 "odds" on the raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

This would be correct if you was going to either raise or fold, but it's between call or raise, so you only count the odds you're getting on the $3 raise.

[ QUOTE ]

Now let's instead pretend that we're playing some bizarre structure where I post a live $5 blind but it still remains $3 to call preflop. If I "raise," I'm only putting in another $1 to get the same $12 into the pot, giving myself 12-1 "odds." In theory, it would be then profitable to raise with anything I'd be willing to take 12-1 odds on to strictly call.

Am I making the slightest bit of sense at all?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true, but doesn't really relate to the actual hand.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

looks like you flopped a set. I think I'd start putting money in the pot right away.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

Yeah you are still getting 4:1 on the raise. Even if you can't complete you are still getting 5:1 and should certainly do it.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

Call most of the time, raise it infrequently.

Lead that flop.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

[ QUOTE ]
Even if you can't complete you are still getting 5:1 and should certainly do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

when and why would you not be able to complete with this?

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Assume the BB and all of the limpers will always call. If I raise, I'm investing $5 more to get $12 more into the pot. So, in a way, I'm giving myself 12-5 or 2.4-1 "odds" on the raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

This would be correct if you was going to either raise or fold, but it's between call or raise, so you only count the odds you're getting on the $3 raise.

[ QUOTE ]

Now let's instead pretend that we're playing some bizarre structure where I post a live $5 blind but it still remains $3 to call preflop. If I "raise," I'm only putting in another $1 to get the same $12 into the pot, giving myself 12-1 "odds." In theory, it would be then profitable to raise with anything I'd be willing to take 12-1 odds on to strictly call.

Am I making the slightest bit of sense at all?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true, but doesn't really relate to the actual hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
Okay. I've been known to talk out of my ass before, but less since I've been on my diet and quit eating at Taco Bell.

I was working from a similar concept as to why I don't steal from the SB as often at 3/6, because I have to invest $5 to win $4. Obviously it's not totally analagous, since in a steal I'm banking on folding equity more than pot equity in this example, but I thought maybe the $5-to-raise concept would make it similar enough.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

You have enough opponents so that any overcards would be very problematic. So you're usually banking on the set potential. Your set comes in what, 9:1? So it seems like putting extra money in for your 5:1 talk is unprofitable. Do you think the 9s hold up often enough aside from the set to make up for the difference? Pocket pairs are good versus lots or a little, with a few opponents it seems better to just be happy to see the flop.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Now let's instead pretend that we're playing some bizarre structure where I post a live $5 blind but it still remains $3 to call preflop. If I "raise," I'm only putting in another $1 to get the same $12 into the pot, giving myself 12-1 "odds." In theory, it would be then profitable to raise with anything I'd be willing to take 12-1 odds on to strictly call.

Am I making the slightest bit of sense at all?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true, but doesn't really relate to the actual hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
Okay. I've been known to talk out of my ass before, but less since I've been on my diet and quit eating at Taco Bell.

I was working from a similar concept as to why I don't steal from the SB as often at 3/6, because I have to invest $5 to win $4. Obviously it's not totally analagous, since in a steal I'm banking on folding equity more than pot equity in this example, but I thought maybe the $5-to-raise concept would make it similar enough.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. The reason is that with 99 you're *ALWAYS* seeing the flop from this position, so your $2 to complete is a de facto pot contribution (proper use of latin phrase?). Therefore, the raising question is only a matter of the $3 above the de facto $2.

In a blind steal, you're not presuming the $2 is already pot-ward bound, so you need to consider the whole chunk of $5 all at once.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

preflop is fine, regardless of structure

obv bet the flop

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

[ QUOTE ]
looks like you flopped a set. I think I'd start putting money in the pot right away.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what it looks like to me, too.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

OK we all know about jamming this flop--is there some other action you want to show, e.g. the turn is 8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]? Let's see it!

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

Nah, not really. It gets less interesting and more painful from there. Your pattern mapper isn't far off, though:

Ultimate Bet 3/6 Hold'em (10 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

Preflop: marchron is SB with 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG+1 calls, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, MP2 calls, MP3 calls, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, marchron completes, BB checks.

Flop: (5 SB) 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">marchron bets</font>, BB folds, UTG+1 folds, MP2 folds, MP3 calls.

Turn: (3.50 BB) Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">marchron bets</font>, MP3 calls.

River: (5.50 BB) K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">marchron bets</font>, MP3 calls.

Final Pot: 7.50 BB

Results in white below: <font color="#FFFFFF">
marchron has 9c 9s (three of a kind, nines).
MP3 has Td Jc (straight, king high).
Outcome: MP3 wins 7.50 BB. </font>

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

[ QUOTE ]
march ron do you ever lose a hand? lol

bet obv

[/ QUOTE ]
Sure, not only this one, but this one at a different 3/6 table not five minutes later:

Ultimate Bet 3/6 Hold'em (9 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

Preflop: marchron is MP2 with Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">marchron raises</font>, <font color="#666666">4 folds</font>, BB calls.

Flop: (4.33 SB) T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">marchron bets</font>, BB calls.

Turn: (3.16 BB) 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">marchron bets</font>, BB calls.

River: (5.16 BB) 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
BB checks, marchron checks.

Final Pot: 5.16 BB

Results in white below: <font color="#FFFFFF">
BB has Jc Td (straight, king high).
marchron has Qc Qd (three of a kind, queens).
Outcome: BB wins 5.16 BB. </font>

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
march ron do you ever lose a hand? lol

bet obv

[/ QUOTE ]
Sure, not only this one, but this one at a different 3/6 table not five minutes later:

Ultimate Bet 3/6 Hold'em (9 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

Preflop: marchron is MP2 with Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">marchron raises</font>, <font color="#666666">4 folds</font>, BB calls.

Flop: (4.33 SB) T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">marchron bets</font>, BB calls.

Turn: (3.16 BB) 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">marchron bets</font>, BB calls.

River: (5.16 BB) 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
BB checks, marchron checks.

Final Pot: 5.16 BB

Results in white below: <font color="#FFFFFF">
BB has Jc Td (straight, king high).
marchron has Qc Qd (three of a kind, queens).
Outcome: BB wins 5.16 BB. </font>

[/ QUOTE ]

The river check behind is sexy

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

[ QUOTE ]
The river check behind is sexy

[/ QUOTE ]
Seconded.

Care to share the thoughts behind that, Marchron?

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

So you are only only completing at 3 limpers? Are you raising in the exact same situation but you are the button?

Seems at obvious raise at one limper and even with two getting the BB out would seem beneficial for a mediumish pair.

Anyhow, I think not raising here is bad. Equity edge blah blah.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The river check behind is sexy

[/ QUOTE ]
Seconded.

Care to share the thoughts behind that, Marchron?

[/ QUOTE ]
A read. He's a checkraiseaholic. So if he had something I'd like to have pay off the river, like say KT, he would have checkraised me beforehand.

So I bet, he'd either checkraise or fold if he was hopelessly behind. I pay two bets to see Jx or a flush and only occasionally snap off K9/Q9/T9.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The river check behind is sexy

[/ QUOTE ]
Seconded.

Care to share the thoughts behind that, Marchron?

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO this is the default if you can't fold to the c/r.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

[ QUOTE ]
You have enough opponents so that any overcards would be very problematic. So you're usually banking on the set potential. Your set comes in what, 7.5:1? So it seems like putting extra money in for your 5:1 talk is unprofitable. Do you think the 9s hold up often enough aside from the set to make up for the difference? Pocket pairs are good versus lots or a little, with a few opponents it seems better to just be happy to see the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]
Follow-up bump! HEPFAP, Pg 82. You guys will see some familiar numbers:

Odds of flopping a set: 7.5:1 instead of my remembered 9:1.
Suggested odds for calling with a small PP: Around 5:1.

So I guess the answer to my question is: Sometimes. I guess your 5:1 PF raise isn't so nutty laggro afterall. Though there are some other factors to consider which makes it less clean.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You have enough opponents so that any overcards would be very problematic. So you're usually banking on the set potential. Your set comes in what, 7.5:1? So it seems like putting extra money in for your 5:1 talk is unprofitable. Do you think the 9s hold up often enough aside from the set to make up for the difference? Pocket pairs are good versus lots or a little, with a few opponents it seems better to just be happy to see the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]
Follow-up bump! HEPFAP, Pg 82. You guys will see some familiar numbers:

Odds of flopping a set: 7.5:1 instead of my remembered 9:1.
Suggested odds for calling with a small PP: Around 5:1.

So I guess the answer to my question is: Sometimes. I guess your 5:1 PF raise isn't so nutty laggro afterall. Though there are some other factors to consider which makes it less clean.

[/ QUOTE ]

When they suggest 5:1 to call for set value they're counting implied odds. Raising and getting 5:1 on the current round is just an equity play, and isn't enough unless your hand is gonna hold up on it's own sometimes, or there are other reasons for raising such as getting a free card.

Also a set won't always hold up, IIRC the odds of flopping a set and it holding up are somewhere around 10:1.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

My last sentence! Other factors, less clean Etc. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

You've also taken the initiative while you're OOP, which will affect the flow of the betting and could affect the implied odds in ways we don't prefer. You can run into some odd flops that can make your hand very difficult to play. You could reopen the action to the field so anyone can reraise. Etc.

I still think calling is best but I thought that was worth pointing out since I coincidently read that going through the book again anyways. But like I said, raising seems like a more reasonable mix-up now.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

EDIT: nvm, I read your post again and realized I agree with it, lol. I also agree with sharpie that TT is a clear raise and 88 is a clear limp while this is meh

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

[ QUOTE ]
You've also taken the initiative while you're OOP, which will affect the flow of the betting and could affect the implied odds in ways we don't prefer. You can run into some odd flops that can make your hand very difficult to play. You could reopen the action to the field so anyone can reraise. Etc.


[/ QUOTE ]

yeah this why I limp here, and raise like 33-77.

Re: in which I only complete 99 from the SB
 

yo march

you played both hands fantastically.

legtilt4tw!