Two Plus Two Newer Archives

Two Plus Two Newer Archives (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/index.php)
-   High Stakes MTT (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=89)
-   -   A5s in blind battle. (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=523052)

gobboboy 10-14-2007 10:28 PM

A5s in blind battle.
 
Poker Stars, $200 + $15 NL Hold'em Tournament, 750/1,500 Blinds, 9 Players
LegoPoker Hand History Converter

gobbo (SB): 36,815
BB: 49,991
UTG: 47,635
UTG+1: 29,911
UTG+2: 9,221
MP1: 28,701
MP2: 49,125
CO: 25,734
BTN: 31,334

Pre-Flop: (2,925) 5http://www.legopoker.com/hh/images/diamond.gif Ahttp://www.legopoker.com/hh/images/diamond.gif dealt to gobbo (SB)
7 folds, gobbo calls 750, BB checks

Flop: (3,675) 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 5http://www.legopoker.com/hh/images/club.gif 2http://www.legopoker.com/hh/images/diamond.gif (2 Players)
gobbo checks, BB checks

Turn: (3,675) 2http://www.legopoker.com/hh/images/club.gif (2 Players)
<font color="red">gobbo bets 3,000</font>, BB calls 3,000

River: (9,675) 9http://www.legopoker.com/hh/images/diamond.gif (2 Players)

gobbo..?

Are you a bad enough dude to play this river profitably?

g-p 10-14-2007 10:38 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
you must know something about villain because you limped preflop

so what is it??

Ansky 10-14-2007 10:39 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
6000

gobboboy 10-14-2007 10:46 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
I always limp in these situations, I think raising all the way up to A9 puts me in horrible positions in spots where it's better to limp.

betgo 10-14-2007 10:48 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
6000

[/ QUOTE ]
Is that a value bet or a bluff?

flyingmoose 10-14-2007 10:50 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
It's gotta be for value and I like it.

I check/call here way too often, I think.

djk123 10-14-2007 10:50 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
6000

[/ QUOTE ]
Is that a value bet or a bluff?

[/ QUOTE ]

value

Pasterbator 10-14-2007 10:52 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
6000

[/ QUOTE ]
Is that a value bet or a bluff?

[/ QUOTE ]

really??

I like betting ~5k but anywhere in that general area is good. He probably has a weaker 5.

betgo 10-14-2007 10:52 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
you must know something about villain because you limped preflop

so what is it??

[/ QUOTE ]
If you raise preflop, you are not thrilled with a reraise or with playing this hand OOP to a call.

I assume gobbo is limpreraising if villain raises.

gobboboy 10-14-2007 11:05 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you must know something about villain because you limped preflop

so what is it??

[/ QUOTE ]
If you raise preflop, you are not thrilled with a reraise or with playing this hand OOP to a call.

I assume gobbo is limpreraising if villain raises.

[/ QUOTE ]

I definitely throw in an LRR from time to time but raising so few hands lets me limp with an extremely wide range and people check a lot, so I might fold this time.

g-p 10-15-2007 12:17 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
"raising so few hands lets me limp with an extremely wide range"

thats also assuming you know something about the villian (or they know something about you), against an unknown id always raise

baltostar 10-15-2007 12:20 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
Limping is fine, but on pairing a 5 (bottom 1/3 of rank range) you need to bet that flop. Free card here is a clear mistake. Plus you're pushing the boundary of reasonable expectation for this hand -- asking for trouble.

Ansky 10-15-2007 12:22 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Limping is fine, but on pairing a 5 (bottom 1/3 of rank range) you need to bet that flop. Free card here is a clear mistake. Plus you're pushing the boundary of reasonable expectation for this hand -- asking for trouble.

[/ QUOTE ]

What is the "boundary of reasonable expectation for this hand" ???

betgo 10-15-2007 12:24 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
"raising so few hands lets me limp with an extremely wide range"

thats also assuming you know something about the villian (or they know something about you), against an unknown id always raise

[/ QUOTE ]
In general, I like to open raise often from the SB. Here, I like the complete better for the reasons I mentioned. If villain raises, you can push, call, or fold. In a limped pot, our hand has deception, and we can often get paid off if an ace hits. If you raise, you are not happy unless villain folds.

Incidently, open pushing is cEV+ here, and avoids playing a hand OOP, but I am sure gobbo thinks he has a skill advantage and can get the most EV by playing a limped pot.

Pudge714 10-15-2007 12:45 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
One thing I love about limping here is guys will look you up and play back at you so much when you flop TP because NOBODDY LIMPS ACES.
There is value in betting this river, but I might prefer to c/c and get straight draws or clubs to bet. He also might check back sevens because people can't vbet.

EC10 10-15-2007 12:48 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Limping is fine, but on pairing a 5 (bottom 1/3 of rank range) you need to bet that flop. Free card here is a clear mistake. Plus you're pushing the boundary of reasonable expectation for this hand -- asking for trouble.

[/ QUOTE ]

What is the "boundary of reasonable expectation for this hand" ???

[/ QUOTE ]

its, like, this boundary.........and it bounds reasonable expectations in

NoahSD 10-15-2007 01:40 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
I like preflop, flop, and turn. River is a small bet, like 5k, cause he's almost never got you beat and he's almost always checking back.

apestyles 10-15-2007 01:51 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
bet bet bet river... even a bigger bet than 6k is fine vs. a thinking player/calling station like myself.

g-p 10-15-2007 02:08 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Limping is fine, but on pairing a 5 (bottom 1/3 of rank range) you need to bet that flop. Free card here is a clear mistake. Plus you're pushing the boundary of reasonable expectation for this hand -- asking for trouble.

[/ QUOTE ]

What is the "boundary of reasonable expectation for this hand" ???

[/ QUOTE ]

its, like, this boundary.........and it bounds reasonable expectations in

[/ QUOTE ]
ahhhhhhh i see what u did there

JSchnett 10-15-2007 02:54 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
I feel like he is betting too many of his weaker 5s on the flop to bet the river.

Superfluous Man 10-15-2007 04:15 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
My default is to c/c this river if he's likely to bluff, but I do that a lot. I feel like he's bluffing whiffed a draw more than he's calling with exactly a worse 5 or 44-33 here. Meh.

shaundeeb 10-15-2007 04:51 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
My default is to c/c this river if he's likely to bluff, but I do that a lot. I feel like he's bluffing whiffed a draw more than he's calling with exactly a worse 5 or 44-33 here. Meh.

[/ QUOTE ]

registrar 10-15-2007 05:39 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
Ditto. Reads/image can make betting more profitable obviously.

baltostar 10-15-2007 06:09 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Limping is fine, but on pairing a 5 (bottom 1/3 of rank range) you need to bet that flop. Free card here is a clear mistake. Plus you're pushing the boundary of reasonable expectation for this hand -- asking for trouble.

[/ QUOTE ]

What is the "boundary of reasonable expectation for this hand" ???

[/ QUOTE ]

I would say a reasonable expectation for being folded to A5s in the SB is not a whole lot more than the blinds. So, perhaps the boundary is twice the blinds.

Raising it up 3x bb is your best shot to achieve your expectation. But it opens you up to exploitation if skilled villain knows your blind steal range and is aggressive in triple 3-betting you. If you don't want to play post-flop for 18bb pot, he can fold you perhaps 80% of the time, making his 3-bet move EV+.

Completing is not nearly as exploitable because playing for 6bb pot involves 1/3 risk of playing for 18 bb pot.

Many good players will argue for completing because they hold an advantage over opponent in post-flop play. And predictably that's the direction so many of these threads go: discussions of advanced post-flop play which pile-up assumptions about opponent play in an increasingly fragile manner, attempting to use skill to artifically increase opportunity beyond reason.

I don't think that superiority of post-flop play alone is a good enough reason to complete.

Probably is a good enough reason in a cash game, but in a tournament you can easily find yourself escalated into an outlay way out of proportion to the relative opportunity of A5s OOP single opponent.

So you complete mainly to minimize your exploitability in the metagame. Therefore you should try to take this down on the flop whether you hit or not.

Of course if villain figures this out then you are exploitable on flop. But that's a 2nd-order metagame that villain is much less likely to put you on.

Kala1928 10-15-2007 07:53 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Limping is fine, but on pairing a 5 (bottom 1/3 of rank range) you need to bet that flop. Free card here is a clear mistake. Plus you're pushing the boundary of reasonable expectation for this hand -- asking for trouble.

[/ QUOTE ]

What is the "boundary of reasonable expectation for this hand" ???

[/ QUOTE ]

I would say a reasonable expectation for being folded to A5s in the SB is not a whole lot more than the blinds. So, perhaps the boundary is twice the blinds.

Raising it up 3x bb is your best shot to achieve your expectation. But it opens you up to exploitation if skilled villain knows your blind steal range and is aggressive in triple 3-betting you. If you don't want to play post-flop for 18bb pot, he can fold you perhaps 80% of the time, making his 3-bet move EV+.

Completing is not nearly as exploitable because playing for 6bb pot involves 1/3 risk of playing for 18 bb pot.

Many good players will argue for completing because they hold an advantage over opponent in post-flop play. And predictably that's the direction so many of these threads go: discussions of advanced post-flop play which pile-up assumptions about opponent play in an increasingly fragile manner, attempting to use skill to artifically increase opportunity beyond reason.

I don't think that superiority of post-flop play alone is a good enough reason to complete.

Probably is a good enough reason in a cash game, but in a tournament you can easily find yourself escalated into an outlay way out of proportion to the relative opportunity of A5s OOP single opponent.

So you complete mainly to minimize your exploitability in the metagame. Therefore you should try to take this down on the flop whether you hit or not.

Of course if villain figures this out then you are exploitable on flop. But that's a 2nd-order metagame that villain is much less likely to put you on.

[/ QUOTE ]

read and memorize

oh and lol at triple 3-bet

baltostar 10-15-2007 08:48 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
read and memorize

oh and lol at triple 3-bet

[/ QUOTE ]

Instead of another lame ass one liner, why don't you actually do some thinking ?

gobboboy 10-15-2007 10:18 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
read and memorize

oh and lol at triple 3-bet

[/ QUOTE ]

Instead of another lame ass one liner, why don't you actually do some thinking ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because you're retarded and we're making fun of you.

Ansky 10-15-2007 10:34 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
baltosar you have the most backward, unintuitive way of thinking of EV as I have ever seen. You should never consider the EV of a hand by the max you "should" be making with it, it is all about making the most you can possibly make given the situation.

registrar 10-15-2007 10:37 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
Can someone explain Baltostar's theory to me or link me to a thread where it is outlined?

PrayingMantis 10-15-2007 11:30 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
I believe that with the gobbo image betting 5-6K is superior to c/c. But c/c can be better sometimes if you have history vs. BB and know his tendencies.

As to other parts of the hand, if villain is weak tight I'd raise a lot of hands pf and also this (not always tho). Otherwise limping is fine. Flop I'd check or bet, checking is fine IMO.

gobboboy 10-15-2007 11:51 AM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
This hand really isn't that interesting, I bet 6k pretty quickly and he called with T5o.

Randal told me to post this thread to level some bitches and I said okay. I thought this was a very easy valuebet at the time because his range is almost exclusively a five.

Todd Terry 10-15-2007 12:07 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
baltosar you have the most backward, unintuitive way of thinking of EV as I have ever seen. You should never consider the EV of a hand by the max you "should" be making with it, it is all about making the most you can possibly make given the situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Baltostar's ideas regarding expected EV given a particular hand are actually conceptually similar to those expressed in Professional NLH Volume 1, which focuses on SPR (stack-to-pot ratio) and optimal SPR's for given hands. So perhaps we'll be seeing a book by Baltostar published by 2p2 in the near future.

betgo 10-15-2007 12:54 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
In this case, I don't think Baltostar is FOS.

Despite results, river is close decision.

Ship Ship McGipp 10-15-2007 01:58 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
i'd either bet or crai

Ansky 10-15-2007 02:07 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
i'd either bet or crai

[/ QUOTE ]

you are the worst at river check raises

shaundeeb 10-15-2007 02:20 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
gobbo most villains will bet their midpair on the flop and rightfully so.

g-p 10-15-2007 02:46 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
gobbo most villains will bet their midpair on the flop and rightfully so.

[/ QUOTE ]
same goes for hero, theres no deception involved through checking a pair of fives and sneaking in a value bet on river

j4lvlie 10-15-2007 03:23 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
fold

EC10 10-15-2007 04:08 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Limping is fine, but on pairing a 5 (bottom 1/3 of rank range) you need to bet that flop. Free card here is a clear mistake. Plus you're pushing the boundary of reasonable expectation for this hand -- asking for trouble.

[/ QUOTE ]

What is the "boundary of reasonable expectation for this hand" ???

[/ QUOTE ]

its, like, this boundary.........and it bounds reasonable expectations in

[/ QUOTE ]
ahhhhhhh i see what u did there

[/ QUOTE ]

you know, i dont think i was actually going for it when i did it but i see what i did there now as well. maybe i was, subconsciously.

AcTiOnJaCsOn 10-15-2007 04:17 PM

Re: A5s in blind battle.
 
c/c river vrs a bad player bet vrs a thinking one


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.