#71
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Play a Hand With the Masters #1 Turn
What else would you include? I'd consider adding pocket pairs but thats about it. I can't see him limping behind with KJ, KT, QJ, QT, JT.
|
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Play a Hand With the Masters #1 Turn
Agreed. Thats why I said I could probably tighten it up even more.
|
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Play a Hand With the Masters #1 Turn
I just call the turn. Co has over twice your chip stack and very likely has a set or two pair that will call your push because of the chance that you are betting a draw or AQ/KQ or AA here.
If villain's hand truly is weak enough to fold to a bet on the turn then you may get a better sense of this by his behavior on the river and may be able to pick up the pot there. Most likely though, I'm just planning to value bet the river if I make my hand with the intention of folding if I miss. I'm counting on villain paying off a value bet on the river because he's got a mountain of chips and my draw is pretty disguised. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Play a Hand With the Masters #1 Turn
This is exactly the situation I was hoping for in my post on the flop. I put in a pot-sized semi-bluff raise, 'cause it sure looks like someone made their hand with that card, and after my check-behind on the flop, it looks like it's me. I then call any reraise knowing I have about a billion outs.
Smooth-calling is also a possibility, although it could induce a big check-raise from MJ. Assuming no check-raise, I'd find out for sure whether I have the best hand, and might collect a little more from an overcall. The trouble with calling is that even if I end up making my hand on the river, I might not get any more action, as the board will be seriously scary at that point. All in all I like a raise best. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Play a Hand With the Masters #1 Turn
This is sticky. Things going for this situation. I've got lots of outs. Against. I'm caught in a sandwich positionally. MJ could be done with the hand, he might not be. That's a problem. The CO has got chips to burn and can bust my ass if I push and miss. That's another problem. I hate to fold because of the position problem, but I'm not jammin this pot just yet either. I know it's weak but I'm just gonna call and gamble that MJ isn't going to push and squeeze me out of the pot. I'm not married to this hand either. If MJ pushs and the CO folds Im gone too. Still plenty of chips left and time to play.
Yours Koy |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Play a Hand With the Masters #1 Turn
Let's start with hand ranges:
MJ: He called from the SB, then checked the flop and checked the turn. Any made hand would need to have bet at least once by now, since slowplaying on this board into two players is suicide. This is given weight by his reputation as being aggressive (is this true? i'm ashamed to admit I don't know Miami John, so I have no idea how he plays.). Unless he's making a very strange move, I figure we can count him out of this hand. CO: CO probably doesn't have a set -- why would he check the flop? Since he's a tight player and there are two others in the hand, he would probably bet the flop with a set, especially since there is a draw out there. Given the previous action, he didn't turn the set either. Given his description as being tight, I doubt he bets a naked draw here, especially given there are two other people in the hand. So this leads me to believe CO has one of the following hands: QJ, Q10, QK, KJ, or maybe J10. Hero's options are to either call or raise. Call: Pro = good pot odds (~2 1/3 to 1, while against most of villain's hand range we're about 38% to win the hand). Also, in the off chance MJ wants to stay in the hand, this will make it easier for him to call. Since we're only staying in on the river if we hit our draw, we welcome his presence in this pot. Con = unlikely to get much more out of Villain if one of our draws hits (unless we're behind). Raise: Pros - Villain's likely holdings aren't really premium hands, so we have a good deal of fold equity (especially since Villain is tight). I expect him only to reraise with KJ or maybe Q-10. Also, a raise here disguises our hand, making it likely that a larger river bet will get paid off. Con - It would sure suck to get reraised when we could have drawn to our hand cheaply. We are exactly 3:1 underdog against KJ, but less than a 2:1 underdog against Q-10. Also, if Villain calls our raise and the river is a brick, we're in a tough spot. Any significant raise on the turn would be roughly half of our stack, so if Villain calls the turn he isn't going anywhere on the river. I have homework to do, so I'm not going to do the math. However, I think it's a close decision. Given position, my monster draw, and fold equity, I would probably raise to ~t4500. Assuming I check/fold the river unimproved (like I said, if he calls this raise he's not going anywhere for what will be a less than 1/2 pot bet), it seems that this raise is more +EV than calling (depending on how much of a value bet Villain would be willing to call). Though I'm in bad tournament shape if Villain calls and I lose, I still have more than 20 BBs, so I'm not crippled. If Villain raises, I vomit, kick myself in the balls, and push the rest of my chips in. -cj |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Play a Hand With the Masters #1 Turn
1 hand, 300+ posts and we've only just reached the turn with the experts' analysis still to come. This has all the makings of a book - one hand per chapter.
Now I've got some vacation reading, well-played Lloyd. |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Play a Hand With the Masters #1 Turn
[ QUOTE ]
1 hand, 300+ posts and we've only just reached the turn with the experts' analysis still to come. This has all the makings of a book - one hand per chapter. Now I've got some vacation reading, well-played Lloyd. [/ QUOTE ]who are the expert panel? or is it a secret |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Play a Hand With the Masters #1 Turn
Well it looks like we got what we wanted. With nut flush and OESD outs the turn helps us.
We are drawing but have many outs. I think I flat call here rather than raise and see the river some what cheaply. |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Play a Hand With the Masters #1 Turn
First thing to ask, IMHO, is "is this a bluff or semibluff?" Both are unlikely as the board is draw heavy, two opponents are in, and our read on CO is tight. I doubt he's betting 44-88 on this scary board either, but I'll throw in 88 to represent the small chance that he does. Of course, Harrington says to always give someone 10% chance of bluffing, and though I don't think it's likely here, I'll oblige. I also think his check on the flop doesn't tell us much, as he probably expected us to bet. So, hands in CO's preflop range that are betting here are something like:
KJ(12), QJ (9), TJ (9), 99(3), TT(3), 33(3), QT(9), KT(12), 89c(1), 88(6), 9T(9) 10% chance of bluffing is taken into account by adding all combos 56 suited, and 5c6s, 5s6h, 5s6d, 5d6c, for a total of 8 bluffing hands. Against this range, we're a little worse than a 3-2 dog. We're getting better than 2-1 to call, and since MJ's declined to bet a draw-heavy board twice, we can assume that the -EV from a raise is more than countered by implied odds from CO (and maybe him) and the extra pot odds we get if he calls. But what about raising? Any reasonable raise here would have to be a push, so if we raise, we push. Our stack now has 10.9k, so it'll be 9400 back to CO. The pot'll have 3k + 1950 + 9.4k = t14350 in it. Let's say CO instantly folds all of his bluffs (8), 88 (6), and TK(12). We're laying him 1.53:1, so he needs to think he has 18 outs to call on a draw. His "drawing" hands have that many, so he'll fold them, or TJ(9) and 89c (1). I'll be pessimistic and assume he calls with QJ or better. That means he's folding 38/84 = ~45% of hands. Against his calling range, we're 31/69. So, 45% of the time, we end with t14350. 55% of the time he calls. When he calls, we end up with t0 69% of the time and t23750 31% of the time. So, our total (not net) cEV on the play is .45 * 14350 + .55*(.31*23750 + 0) = t10506. Thus, this play is clearly -cEV given my assumptions. Given that this is a tourny and this play risks our entire stack, I think this play is -EV (if not -cEV) given any reasonable assumptions. Thus, calling is correct. |
|
|