uh-oh
 

live 100 game
SB = very strong player. tight, aggressive. never seen him get out of line/do anything stupid.

MP = regular in the game who probably wins around $60-70/hr, but is prone to tilt and being an idiot.

Both likely view me as a strong player.

1 limper, MP raises, SB calls, I call in the BB with black 33, limper calls.

Flop 4 ways for 8SB: K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

checks to MP who bets, SB calls, I c/r, limper folds, MP 3bets, SB deliberates and then calls, I cap, both call.

turn 3 ways for 10BB: 7[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
SB checks, I bet, MP calls but looks unhappy, SB calls.

river 3 ways for 13BB: 2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
SB checks, I bet, MP tanks and after 5 seconds calls, SB now c/rs, my play?

Re: uh-oh
 

looks like Qc Jc is the only hand that beats you.
I dunno what other hands he can have but getting 16:1 I couldnt fold anything here, and never a set.

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
looks like Qc Jc is the only hand that beats you.
I dunno what other hands he can have but getting 16:1 I couldnt fold anything here, and never a set.

[/ QUOTE ]

so, would you fold KT?

Re: uh-oh
 

Dude I am a .5/1$ onlinegrinderdonk so I have learned never to laydown anything to 1 bet, especialy when a backdoor flush is your only real concern.
But getting this odds and beating the 3rd player in the pot for sure, I think if you just call for metagame it cant be that bad at all(of course his most likely hand is QcJc since it makes absoloute sence, but how sure can you be that you fold if you are only need to be good ~ 7%).
With KT I would also call, but the hand would be diffrent I guess since Mps most likely hand is KT,K3 or some other strange 2pair.

Re: uh-oh
 

MP has been telegraphing the whole hand that he hates calling to the river, but he's going to do it, dammit.

If the SB is making a move with QJ (no flush) it's really really strong against you, because what else could he have but QJ [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]? You have to fold. So, good bluff . . . except, no, because MP is not going to fold the river getting 16:1 and being last to act.

From his point of view, the chance you fold KT or a set is probably in the 25% range, and the chance that Mr. I'm Calling Down With AK Dammit folds is 25%. 1/16 . . . so his bluff works 1/16 times. Probably not -EV, maybe those percentages are a little low, but because he could actually be ahead with his QJ [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], you aren't getting odds to call.

I'm kidding, of course. I could never fold on the river getting 16:1 when I have a set. But mathematically, given MP is obviously a stubborn ass, it seems like a fold is in order.

Re: uh-oh
 

id fold the way you described sb but wouldnt fault someone for calling. i know that i have bluffed in this spot before so even though i dont give most people credit for being as moronic and spazzy as i am there is always that possibility i guess. my answer might change if i knew who the players were but probably not.

Re: uh-oh
 

you cant do anything but call here

Re: uh-oh
 

Tough spot.

Since you describe SB as a very strong player, this seems like a reasonable time to do some game theory analysis.

What's your river range? I'd guess that after this action, you probably hold

{QJc(1), 33(3), KQo(9), KT(9)}

Villain, a strong player, is getting 17:2 to bluff raise, so between you and the 3rd player you have to call him 90% of the time to stop him from exploiting you by bluff-raising missed straight draws.

IMO, villain has made it clear that he may not call a raise. He's been looking for an excuse to fold this whole hand, and this may well push him over the edge. So you can't really count on the 3rd guy to eat up a lot of that 90% you need between you.

Returning to your hand range... 33 is in the top 18% of the narrow hand range I gave for you. As such, this is a clear call from a game theory POV. I'd say you should call KT as well, fold KQ.


So, back to the hand... we can't fold by default. Can we make an exploitable fold to take advantage of this player's passive tendencies? Let's recheck that description "very strong player. tight, aggressive." nope. Doesn't seem like a good guy to fold to.

make the crying call.
-Eric

PS. Although I'd expect SB to raise the turn with KT, it doesn't seem like an impossible holding here. Admittedly, it would be very tricky to wait for the river to check-raise, but given that you have represented a made hand, and the 3rd guy looks like he wants to fold, waiting until the river to trap the 3rd guy for an extra bet feels like a thought a very strong player might have.

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
Tough spot.

IMO, villain has made it clear that he may not call a raise. He's been looking for an excuse to fold this whole hand, and this may well push him over the edge. So you can't really count on the 3rd guy to eat up a lot of that 90% you need between you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't played live a ton, but I got the exact opposite impression. This guy has deliberated, called, deliberated, called, deliberated, called. For him to fold on the end getting 16:1 and not get to see his opponent's cards, after all that pain he's put himself through, just seems really unlikely to me.

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Tough spot.

IMO, villain has made it clear that he may not call a raise. He's been looking for an excuse to fold this whole hand, and this may well push him over the edge. So you can't really count on the 3rd guy to eat up a lot of that 90% you need between you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't played live a ton, but I got the exact opposite impression. This guy has deliberated, called, deliberated, called, deliberated, called. For him to fold on the end getting 16:1 and not get to see his opponent's cards, after all that pain he's put himself through, just seems really unlikely to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess we'll see in the results! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

From a game theory POV, your read is important though... if 3rd guy will always call, then we can fold 33 unexploitably. Given that our hand is in the top echelon of our possible holdings though, we have to quite sure the 3rd guy is calling before we can think about folding.

I don't think we can be that sure, so I call.

-eric

Re: uh-oh
 

eric,

Nice post. Thanks.

Re: uh-oh
 

calllllllllll

it's obvious you have a big hand and telling him he can get you off it when the backdoor flush comes in is stupido

Re: uh-oh
 

Putting yourself in villains shoes, would anyone here in their right mind try to push TWO players off a likely set/top2 and top pair with a river check/raise bluff on a barely scary backdoor flush?
Especially when one of those players was considered only "OK? (and therefore more likely to call)"

You guys must be playing in some damn tough games, cause ive never seen anything close from a solid player unless they were a super spazz or on tilt (ive done it before, but certainly not to push someone off bottom set).

Its not like its unlikely that he hit this flush either.
His hand is wayyy more likely QJs instead of QJo because of the preflop SB call.

~1/4 of the time he's check/raising this on the river with his rivered flush.

However, stinkypetes advice is pretty important... What kind of image are you trying to build? By folding this river, you've basically announced to the table that you can fold a monster on the river in a big pot to someone repping a backdoor flush.

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
{QJc(1), 33(3), KQo(9), KT(9)}

[/ QUOTE ]
doubt if pbob caps the flop with kq or qj. I'd guess we're more likely to see a semi-slowplayed TT. So make his range:
{K3s (2), KT (9), 33(3), TT(1)}.

Obviously it doesn't change your calculation, except that now he can fold KT at least some of the time.

Re: uh-oh
 

Thanks vma. I wondered about KQ as well when I was posting.

I'm a bit surprised to see you discount QJ so heavily. If your range is correct, the pbob always has a made hand when he caps the flop. Given how easily exploited that is, I'd be surprised to see a good player not add about the right number of draws to his capping range, especially given that it costs so little getting 2:1 on his money.

So, to sum up... it's pretty clear that calling here is the "default" play, and folding is exploitable but arguably correct since it's so difficult for villain to bluff-raise the "correct" amount here.

It's fun to wonder though... what is pokerbob's flop capping range really? Care to give us some insight pbob?

thanks,
Eric

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks vma. I wondered about KQ as well when I was posting.

I'm a bit surprised to see you discount QJ so heavily. If your range is correct, the pbob always has a made hand when he caps the flop. Given how easily exploited that is, I'd be surprised to see a good player not add about the right number of draws to his capping range, especially given that it costs so little getting 2:1 on his money.

So, to sum up... it's pretty clear that calling here is the "default" play, and folding is exploitable but arguably correct since it's so difficult for villain to bluff-raise the "correct" amount here.

It's fun to wonder though... what is pokerbob's flop capping range really? Care to give us some insight pbob?

thanks,
Eric

[/ QUOTE ]

i have KT or 33 here nearly always.

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
What kind of image are you trying to build? By folding this river, you've basically announced to the table that you can fold a monster on the river in a big pot to someone repping a backdoor flush.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure, but I'm *pretty* sure that folding here doesn't commit PBob to folding in similar situations in the future. Unless there's some sort of contract signed that he didn't mention.

Re: uh-oh
 

folding in huge pots with a set is just a bad idea

Re: uh-oh
 

Maybe it's a leak of mine, but I apply the "I HAVE SET, CAN'T FOLD!!!" mantra here and call.

Re: uh-oh
 

I call and wouldn't beat myself up at all afterwards.

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe it's a leak of mine, but I apply the "I HAVE SET, CAN'T FOLD!!!" mantra here and call.

[/ QUOTE ]

a set and 2 pair are the same hand here.

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe it's a leak of mine, but I apply the "I HAVE SET, CAN'T FOLD!!!" mantra here and call.

[/ QUOTE ]

a set and 2 pair are the same hand here.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you had KT i think id say call too...

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe it's a leak of mine, but I apply the "I HAVE SET, CAN'T FOLD!!!" mantra here and call.

[/ QUOTE ]

a set and 2 pair are the same hand here.

[/ QUOTE ]

y is this not true?

Re: uh-oh
 

If you fold I don't think you necessarily are saying that you can fold monsters for one more bet. They will still have some doubt (small maybe but still there) that you decided to go super aggressive with QJ and your plan failed.

I fold here. I feel like I always see QJ of clubs in this spot.

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe it's a leak of mine, but I apply the "I HAVE SET, CAN'T FOLD!!!" mantra here and call.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
I fold here. I feel like I always see QJ of clubs in this spot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Damn. How many times have you been in this spot? You must play a lot of hands... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I fold here. I feel like I always see QJ of clubs in this spot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Damn. How many times have you been in this spot? You must play a lot of hands... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

lol . . . I'm curious, though, whether anyone has *ever* seen someone checkraise the river here when a relative blank falls in a 3-way pot against two people who seem to love their hands (or at least are signalling that they want to get to the river). I mean, like, ever. 16:1 isn't 100:1, but I don't know that I see a move like that as a bluff even 1 in 100 times.

Re: uh-oh
 

admittedly this is closer than your last one its still the fur coat and sore dick principle.

Re: uh-oh
 

I think he has J9cc, cant really see how 33 is ever ahead.

Probably at some point
 

Pokerbob should tell us what in the hell happened.

Re: Probably at some point
 

seriously, results gogo.

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]

lol . . . I'm curious, though, whether anyone has *ever* seen someone checkraise the river here when a relative blank falls in a 3-way pot against two people who seem to love their hands (or at least are signalling that they want to get to the river). I mean, like, ever. 16:1 isn't 100:1, but I don't know that I see a move like that as a bluff even 1 in 100 times.

[/ QUOTE ]

Online I have seen stuff like this and even worse at 30 and 50....

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

lol . . . I'm curious, though, whether anyone has *ever* seen someone checkraise the river here when a relative blank falls in a 3-way pot against two people who seem to love their hands (or at least are signalling that they want to get to the river). I mean, like, ever. 16:1 isn't 100:1, but I don't know that I see a move like that as a bluff even 1 in 100 times.

[/ QUOTE ]

Online I have seen stuff like this and even worse at 30 and 50....

[/ QUOTE ]

yes, online one can never fold ever because those guys are idiots. but this is a live setting.

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

lol . . . I'm curious, though, whether anyone has *ever* seen someone checkraise the river here when a relative blank falls in a 3-way pot against two people who seem to love their hands (or at least are signalling that they want to get to the river). I mean, like, ever. 16:1 isn't 100:1, but I don't know that I see a move like that as a bluff even 1 in 100 times.

[/ QUOTE ]

Online I have seen stuff like this and even worse at 30 and 50....

[/ QUOTE ]

yes, online one can never fold ever because those guys are idiots. but this is a live setting.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're such a tease. This hand didn't even happen, did it?

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

lol . . . I'm curious, though, whether anyone has *ever* seen someone checkraise the river here when a relative blank falls in a 3-way pot against two people who seem to love their hands (or at least are signalling that they want to get to the river). I mean, like, ever. 16:1 isn't 100:1, but I don't know that I see a move like that as a bluff even 1 in 100 times.

[/ QUOTE ]

Online I have seen stuff like this and even worse at 30 and 50....

[/ QUOTE ]

yes, online one can never fold ever because those guys are idiots. but this is a live setting.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're such a tease. This hand didn't even happen, did it?

[/ QUOTE ]

i folded. as did the other moron.

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]

i folded. as did the other moron.

[/ QUOTE ]

Silly moron. I was sure he'd call.

If Villain didn't show a bluff, though, I doubt he was bluffing. The amount of action/tilt you could achieve by showing a bluff here is through the roof. And it's not like you're going to be making a fold like that in the future anyway, is it? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
lol . . . I'm curious, though, whether anyone has *ever* seen someone checkraise the river here when a relative blank falls in a 3-way pot against two people who seem to love their hands (or at least are signalling that they want to get to the river). I mean, like, ever. 16:1 isn't 100:1, but I don't know that I see a move like that as a bluff even 1 in 100 times.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that trying to make an exploitable fold here is very reasonable. It's a really hard spot for villain to bluff-raise, much less bluff-raise so often that he is exploiting us.

Then again, villain is described as a very strong high stakes player... so calling against THIS guy may be better. I mean, if you aren't sure you can fold, then you can always take the "safe" way out and call. You can't lose calling here.

But you can't win as much either. If you fold and it turns out that villain is in fact not bluffing "enough" hands here, then you win, possibly exploiting him for as much as a full big bet. That's a lot of money to leave on the table, IF IT'S ACTUALLY THERE TO BE TAKEN.

which leads us all the way back to square 1. What's the read? Can we exploit this guy or not? The read in the OP seems to say no, unless you are prepared to say that even the best players can be exploited here...

-eric

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

i folded. as did the other moron.

[/ QUOTE ]

Silly moron. I was sure he'd call.

If Villain didn't show a bluff, though, I doubt he was bluffing. The amount of action/tilt you could achieve by showing a bluff here is through the roof. And it's not like you're going to be making a fold like that in the future anyway, is it? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

imo showing a bluff here would be very bad.

Re: uh-oh
 

qjdd would be so sick here.

pbob im curious if you would fold to the cr from:

hoss
schnieds
dd
me

Re: uh-oh
 

[ QUOTE ]
qjdd would be so sick here.

pbob im curious if you would fold to the cr from:

hoss
schnieds
dd
me

[/ QUOTE ]

no to all.