68s monster pot
 

5 limpers, i raise 6 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]8 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] from co, sb calls, bb accidentally 3-bets (the way sb called in 3 stacks made bb put in 3 bets and it was obvious mistake). everyone calls, so 12 bb in the pot.

flop is K [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 10 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 5 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

bb bets, 4 callers, i peel. 15 bb in pot.

turn is 4 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] bb bets, 1 caller, than i call. 18 bb in pot.

river is 8 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
bb bets, i plan to fold if other player calls, but he folds. getting 19 to 1 on my money, with 3rd pair, I call. i beat a diamond draw or jq enough of the time, right?

Re: 68s monster pot
 

pls limp pf
pls fold the flop
river is fine

Re: 68s monster pot
 

pf, i was trying to a) loosen my image and b) try to turn the table into an action table, which had seemed to have bogged down some.

flop, i guess this is a leak, but when i'm close to closing the action (only sb to act after me), i really feel like peeling these sometimes, even if its runner runner, cuz its a monster pot. is this mathematically retarded?

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]


flop, i guess this is a leak

[/ QUOTE ]

flop is more like a flood than a leak [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]. just limp preflop.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
pls limp pf
pls fold the flop
river is fine

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
is this mathematically retarded?

[/ QUOTE ]

is this a trick question?

Re: 68s monster pot
 

maybe i'm a nut job but i think the whole hand is fine. Raising pre is ok, limping is obv better though. flop peel is fine getting 29.5/1, turns ok. river looks fine as pot is so big

Re: 68s monster pot
 

The PFR is meh. Not really a big deal. You definately should have capped the second time around though. Peeling the flop getting 30-1 is fine. Peeling the flop getting 38-1 would have been better. Getting it checked to you would have been great.

Equity wise, I'm sure there's enough garbage out there that you that you have more than your fair share of PF equity, especially given that BB's 3-bet was accidental.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
pls limp pf
pls fold the flop
river is fine

[/ QUOTE ]

he actually does have odds for his back door flush

Re: 68s monster pot
 

yea, i thought it was 15 SB's.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
pls limp pf
pls fold the flop
river is fine

[/ QUOTE ]

he actually does have odds for his back door flush

[/ QUOTE ]

and a weak bd straight draw. i def. peel. i def. limp pf. you think a table with 5 limpers to you in the CO needs to be juiced up? normally, i'd raise no less than 89s there.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
normally, i'd raise no less than 89s there.


[/ QUOTE ]

lol

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
normally, i'd raise no less than 89s there.


[/ QUOTE ]

lol

[/ QUOTE ]

lol? nice response. well thought out.

so you dispute that we have an equity edge in the CO with 89s versus 5 bad, loose live limpers? so you dispute that it's not worth buying the button for the extra sb pf? and possible get a free card on the flop?

i'm not sure because all i read was "lol".

Re: 68s monster pot
 

James,

I think he means, if your only raising 98s+ then your range is to tight.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
normally, i'd raise no less than 89s there.


[/ QUOTE ]

lol

[/ QUOTE ]

lol? nice response. well thought out.

so you dispute that we have an equity edge in the CO with 89s versus 5 bad, loose live limpers? so you dispute that it's not worth buying the button for the extra sb pf? and possible get a free card on the flop?

i'm not sure because all i read was "lol".

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a marginal raise.Personally, I think this style of play just isn't practical though for live players.
Live players should try to minimize their variance while not sacrificing significant edges.
That way, you can have a more steady income, and move up aggressively in limits. Even small increases in your hourly standard deviation have huge effects on your bankroll requirements. Personally, I like being able to play with 200bb and a 2% risk of ruin.

If you don't really care about that stuff, then raising can be fine, but there are also strategic drawbacks to it.

Namely, when you flop a medium strength hand (which is what you will flop most of the time), you will be in a lot of trouble for 2 reasons:

1. You will be unable to protect your hand
2. You will be tied onto the pot, forcing you to draw to what may easily end up being a 2nd or 3rd best hand

I'll admit that I don't have a method for quantifying the pros and cons of playing a larger pot in this situation with this hand versus these opponents.

Certainly, there is value to getting a free card on the flop, and buying the button, and I think your equity should be fine so it is a play that should be considered at least some of the time.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

Do the two [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]'s out there concern anyone? How many clean BD outs are we looking at here on the flop?

Re: 68s monster pot
 

My two cents:

Just limp pf, like everyone says. But raising can't be terrible. I agree that once the BB accidentally pops you, you really should have just capped it. I mean, you said you wanted to loosen up your imagine right? Well capping with 68s and creating the biggest pot the table's seen in 3 hours will do that. Capping it will likely get you a free turn (which you ended up paying for anyway) and, unless I'm missing something, the only thing raising before could accomplish that raising now can't is buying the button. If you thought you hand faired well enough against the field to raise, then you should conclude it fairs well enough against the field and an accidental raise to cap.

On the flop....getting 29 to 1...I think you can take one off. The pot is huge. How bad can it be, really? Calling costs at most 1 bet....

On the turn...call obviously. You have real outs now!!!

On the river...I can't possibly see a fold with a pair here. You have to be good 5% of the time. Not to mention you'll obviously monkey-tilt if you fold and he tables a missed draw.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
Do the two [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]'s out there concern anyone? How many clean BD outs are we looking at here on the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

Like 1.5-2. The running spades are clean unless he gets toileted, and he could hit a straight without the diamonds showing up.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

Well in that case, peel the grape.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

Just call preflop. 68s is a highly speculative hand and you want to play it as cheaply as possible every time.

I'm not sold on the call on the flop. We're getting great pot odds, but we have maybe 2 outs at best? Not only that, but we may run into a bigger spade flush if we get there and our bd straight outs could complete the diamond flush. I think the board is has enough draws that we're not getting much value from chasing.

As played the turn is an obvious call and I would probably call the river too due to the pot size. In my experience though, a BB donk bet on the flop is almost always a strong hand - Like KT in this case.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
normally, i'd raise no less than 89s there.


[/ QUOTE ]

lol

[/ QUOTE ]

lol? nice response. well thought out.

so you dispute that we have an equity edge in the CO with 89s versus 5 bad, loose live limpers? so you dispute that it's not worth buying the button for the extra sb pf? and possible get a free card on the flop?

i'm not sure because all i read was "lol".

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a marginal raise.Personally, I think this style of play just isn't practical though for live players.
Live players should try to minimize their variance while not sacrificing significant edges.
That way, you can have a more steady income, and move up aggressively in limits. Even small increases in your hourly standard deviation have huge effects on your bankroll requirements. Personally, I like being able to play with 200bb and a 2% risk of ruin.

If you don't really care about that stuff, then raising can be fine, but there are also strategic drawbacks to it.

Namely, when you flop a medium strength hand (which is what you will flop most of the time), you will be in a lot of trouble for 2 reasons:

1. You will be unable to protect your hand
2. You will be tied onto the pot, forcing you to draw to what may easily end up being a 2nd or 3rd best hand

I'll admit that I don't have a method for quantifying the pros and cons of playing a larger pot in this situation with this hand versus these opponents.

Certainly, there is value to getting a free card on the flop, and buying the button, and I think your equity should be fine so it is a play that should be considered at least some of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks for expanding on your original post snowball. before i respond, i would like to know:

what's your CO PFR range with 5 loose limpers?

Re: 68s monster pot
 

can we not hijack another thread with this same discussion?

Re: 68s monster pot
 

Snowball,

I kinda agree/disagree with what you've said. There are pro's con's to both styles which are fairly obv, although i don't think 98s is a marginal raise given the situation, you have a tonne of equity vs 5 limping ranges and are raising for value.

My other main problem with trying to decrease variance in such a way is it kills your learning curve which has an effect on your hourly earn as your going to end up learning at a higher cost.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]

what's your CO PFR range with 5 loose limpers?

[/ QUOTE ]

A9s+, AQo+, 99+, JTs, QTs+, KTs+

I like to have some high card equity.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]

My other main problem with trying to decrease variance in such a way is it kills your learning curve which has an effect on your hourly earn as your going to end up learning at a higher cost.

[/ QUOTE ]

what does this mean?

Re: 68s monster pot
 

I only go as low as JTs, but I'm surely a bit too tight.

I think a lot of these hands like 98s have a pre flop equity edge that is not quite as large as we think. In my game people limp all the time with AK,AQ,QQ,JJ all the time, so when alot of the LPPs limp about all I can rule out is AA,KK. On the other hand, these same people don't limp with the 25o, 93o type hands outside the blinds.So while they may call with junk is not truely random hands.

Also, when we raise we are making the pot bigger and decrease our post flop expectation by giving our opponents correct odds to draw.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

one of the reasons i posted was to figure out situations when i should call/fold/bluff on the river in big pots.

- if the river was 8 diamonds, bb bets and other player doesnt call, should i still call?

- if river is same 8 clubs, bb bets, and other player calls, should i still call?

- if my read on bb was aggressive who continued to bet missed draws on river, do you go for a bluff-raise if the river completely blanks off? i don't have this play in my arsenal at live $3/6 games...

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
so you dispute that we have an equity edge in the CO with 89s versus 5 bad, loose live limpers?

[/ QUOTE ]

I did some experiments with PokerStove to try to understand how much of an equity edge 98s really has. It looks to me against 5 player that are playing 50% of their hands preflop 98s has no equity edge. Against players that are playing 66% there is a small equity edge and it gets larger as the opponents play more. It looks to me that raising 98s for value requires really bad opponents. If 5 limpers to the CO is normal for this game, the raise can be for value.

For 86s it did not look like there was an equity edge even over players playing 85% of their hands.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

what's your CO PFR range with 5 loose limpers?

[/ QUOTE ]

A9s+, AQo+, 99+, JTs, QTs+, KTs+

I like to have some high card equity.

[/ QUOTE ]

then we're arguing over very little difference. i'm guessing 6-8 ways against loose crappy limpers, AQo holds about 2% more of an edge than 89s.

in other words a)we're not arguing over much of a difference and b)we likely should not hijack this thread any further.

my original point is it's not as "lol" as you first said.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


My other main problem with trying to decrease variance in such a way is it kills your learning curve which has an effect on your hourly earn as your going to end up learning at a higher cost.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



what does this mean?

[/ QUOTE ]

means that if you try to decrease variance your not pushing your edges enough, which in turn means that when you move up you'll be weaker than most postflop.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


My other main problem with trying to decrease variance in such a way is it kills your learning curve which has an effect on your hourly earn as your going to end up learning at a higher cost.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



what does this mean?

[/ QUOTE ]

means that if you try to decrease variance your not pushing your edges enough, which in turn means that when you move up you'll be weaker than most postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I suggest you read about the relationshop between edge and bankroll. You need a HUGE bankroll to make certain very very thin plays.

It's a fine balance, because you can't just give up edges all the time or you become a loser, and you can't just push everything or else you will run a very high risk of ruin OR have to play at a lower limit to minimize your ROR.

Balancing ROR and expectation is tough, but it's not something you should ignore.

Anyway, as to your comment, it may or may not apply, depending on what game I move up to. If you're talking about moving from 15-30 to 20-40, you are wrong, at least in my case.

Anyway, making that raise for value at 20-40 would be wrong anyway. You might make it for a different reason though.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


My other main problem with trying to decrease variance in such a way is it kills your learning curve which has an effect on your hourly earn as your going to end up learning at a higher cost.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



what does this mean?

[/ QUOTE ]

means that if you try to decrease variance your not pushing your edges enough, which in turn means that when you move up you'll be weaker than most postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

"better weaktight than strongbroke"
-Tommy Angelo

Re: 68s monster pot
 

Another point here: The pot is HUGE and you turn a gutshot + flushdraw with only 2 other players left in the pot, one of whom has shown no strength whatsoever. Raise the turn and bet any river. BB has to fold a better hand like 2% of the time for this to show a profit. The turn is 3-way and your gutshot/flush draw has just under 30% equity, so the turn raise costs you almost nothing. On the river, the pot will be big enough to justify a bet no matter what hits.

Re: 68s monster pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
Another point here: The pot is HUGE and you turn a gutshot + flushdraw with only 2 other players left in the pot, one of whom has shown no strength whatsoever. Raise the turn and bet any river. BB has to fold a better hand like 2% of the time for this to show a profit. The turn is 3-way and your gutshot/flush draw has just under 30% equity, so the turn raise costs you almost nothing. On the river, the pot will be big enough to justify a bet no matter what hits.

[/ QUOTE ]

i like this.