1/2 limit hand. Time to slow down?

[Fadook]

[ QUOTE ]
And to add, I think I'd actually call the turn 3bet to see if your nuts are still the nuts on the river, and then cap.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] Sigh, another post that reminds me how much I have to learn. That's a pretty sophisticated play.

[Burning_K]

I came up with this mainly for Hero's decision on the river. Hopefully I can get some feedback on the EV stuff (basically just if it's correct or not).

Hand range for villain:
(Considering that on the River he most likely has a straight or full house and also hands that might explain his flop and turn actions)

Full house or better hands:
88, 99, TT, T8s, T9s, TJ

Straight hands:
78s, Q7s, Q8s, Q9s, QTs, QJ, QK, AQ,

57 combos.
33 Hero beats.
20 Hero loses.
4 Split pot.

Equity:
Hero - 60.5%
Villain - 39.5%
(Stove results with hand range - Hero 61.5% Villain 38.5%)

Pot is 19BB at River.

If SB bets and Hero raises (SB calls) then EV is:
(0.6 x 21) - (0.4 x 2) = 11.8

If SB bets and Hero calls then EV is:
(0.6 x 20) - (0.4x1) = 11.6


Questions:
1. How does those numbers look?
2. What do I do if I want to figure in SB 3-betting on the River? Would I have to estimate the probability of him 3-betting and the probability of that 3-bet meaning I'm beaten?
Then work out the EV and average it from the original 'Hero raises SB calls' EV?

Example:

I estimate that SB will 3-bet 60% of the time and ALSO (now I think about it) that the above thinking for Hero raising SB's river bet is not correct because if SB just calls my raise then it means that I'm more likely to be ahead (like, a huge amount of the time). So if he calls my raise then we'll get rid of all his winning hands except for maybe the KQ hands to split leaving us with 4 draws for him and 33 losing combos meaning I win the pot 90% of the time and split 10%.
(0.9 x 21) + (0.1 x 10.5) = 18.9 + 1.05 = 19.95BB's EV 40% of the time.

I estimate that SB will 3-bet 60% of time (40% with the hands that beat me from his range and equity and 20% with a smaller straight, so when he 3-bets I call and will win 34% of those times, lose 66%:

SB bets, Hero raises, SB 3bets:
24 in pot, 2 to call.
(0.34 x 24) - (0.66 x 2) = 6.84 EV.

So to summarize, If Hero raises SB's river bet:

SB 3-bets 60% of the time and Hero's EV is 6.84 and 40% of the time (when he calls Hero's raise) Hero's EV is 19.95.
So does this mean:
(0.4 x 19.95) + (0.6 x 6.84) = 12.1BB's EV?


Question 4. Who thinks this was a massive waste of time?


Oh yeah, and to answer OP's question. If the numbers above are right I'd raise the river and call a 3-bet.

[Romulus141]

*Grunch*

You have to at least call here, the pot is too big. He may have been raising a straight that he also has. If he has something like JQs (reasonable for his psuedo SB cold-call given your read and his behavior throughout the hand), you'll win with the better straight. He may have the full house, but, with the pot that big, I call. No point in raising (its marginal at best), since you may lose or split the pot too often.

[MrWookie]

On your EV calculations, the math is correct given the assumptions you make. You could maybe tweak things and put some of the splits as hands he'd 3bet and some of them as hands he'd calll with, but it looks pretty good as an estimate.

Your hand ranges are questionable. I don't think 88 caps that flop (prolly not turn, either), and I don't think 87 caps that turn with the sucker end. Q7s is also a pretty exceptional cool call for villain here, even multiway.

Also, looking at this again, I'm reaaaally tempted to go ahead and cap the river. Given the lack of a preflop 3bet, we can discount JJ and TT a fair bit, and on the turn, any idiot can see that there are four consecutive cards on the board. If this guy is idiotic enough to be b/3b'ing a set on that turn, well, he's probably idiotic enough to have a lot of non-boat hands on the river, such as KJ or whatever. This is a Q or a chop almsot every time, and I want to take that Q's money. I might go with raise/call, but I think that calling here is a mistake now. I'm also now less in favor of my proposed turn line, where we wait to the river to see what happens. Since it's less likely we're against a set than I was thinking at the time, then foregoing a cap may just be missing a bet.

[Burning_K]

Brilliant, thanks Mr Wookie.
Tweaking the numbers I don't mind as long as what I'm doing is correct and valid in the first place.
I considered sorting some of the Qx hands into a 3-bet range to go with the Full House hands but wanted to keep things simple for now. I agree with the general hand range comments.

[Richas]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
GRUNCH

Call - it's either way ahead or way behind, (or split pot) let's see em not coin toss for more raises, he ain't going away if you reraise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thinking WA/WB is pretty stupid on the river. OF COURSE you're way ahead or way behind. There are no more cards to come, so either you're winning, or you're not. I think WA/WB is one of the top 5 things that new posters get wrong (hmmm, I may have to write that post...).

[/ QUOTE ]

I look forward to it, meanwhile here is what I meant by it.

On the river we have a scare card that may put us behind. It seems at first glance given that villain has bet that there is at least a 50% chance we are down. Naturally we call even if 90% sure we are down because of the pot odds.

The argument for a raise here must rely on it being a value bet - I reckon there is close to 0% chance villain will fold to the raise on the river so if we are 51% sure we are ahead we might raise here with the hope of +ev

Here I don't think we have that but let us assume we do - it's 51% likely we are ahead so we reraise - villain will not fold if he calls fine it is positive ev but the villain knows if has the boat and in 49% of cases when he has it he will reraise us.

Now we have another choice, we are more sure that we are behind say 60% but we have to call for the pot odds - if we work out the ev for both events a raise is -ev

Naturally I could be wrong about this so I look forward to the response. I just can't see how the raise here is +ev - the call obviously is but why put in extra now if as I believe it is -ev.

[MrWookie]

If English isn't your first language, that's fine, but it's going to take some effort on both our parts for me to divine what you're talking about here. Here's what I think you're talking about.

If you assume we're ahead 51% of the time and we raise, you then assume that he'll call the 51% of the time we win, and reraise the 49% of the time we're losing, in which case we call, and lose. If your assumptions about this are true, yes, raising is -EV in this case. What if, however, we're ahead here 67% of the time? 80% of the time? 90% of the time? What if villain is willing to 3bet us with any of the hands he's gotten this far with?

Naturally, too, if we're only winning this 40% of the time, we want to call instead of raise. But that doesn't take into account the fact that I think we're winning here a lot more than that. Put villian on a range of hands. What do you think he cool calls preflop instead of folding or raising that then caps the flop and 3bets the turn on a 4-straight board?

[Richas]

Looks like you understood my assumptions OK. I reckon it is 50/50 we are up/down so a raise is - ev. He capped the flop he pretty mch must have the trips or our hand there.

I don't think he is on a lower str8 anywhere like as often as you, he is an average player, not overly agg, not a maniac. Most likely hand is trips now FH, then the same as hero and only then a hand we beat.

My other point is that with each raise on the river here he is also defining his hand - if he reraises us what odds the lower str8? You seem to want to cap that too - if he reraises us how can that not be a 40% or less chance of being ahead?

As for English being my first language. Yep English, not American and not Pokerese.

[MrWookie]

You "reckon" we're 50/50. OK. Why? Put villain on an explicit range of hands and prove me wrong.

1. You really think a set or two pair is 3betting that turn?

2. You really think it's impossible for him to have just a Q here? I think QJ and Q8 are pretty reasonable holdings for him.

Did you see Burning_K's math? He seems to think that we're about 2:1 to be ahead here.

[Richas]

[ QUOTE ]
You "reckon" we're 50/50. OK. Why? Put villain on an explicit range of hands and prove me wrong.


[/ QUOTE ]

1. You really think a set or two pair is 3betting that turn?

2. You really think it's impossible for him to have just a Q here? I think QJ and Q8 are pretty reasonable holdings for him.

Did you see Burning_K's math? He seems to think that we're about 2:1 to be ahead here.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) Yes - given that he capped the flop I can see him capping the turn against an aggressive opponent figuring that either he is ahead or he still has draws for a boat.

what I don't see is a lower str8 capping both the flop and the turn - also he didn't cap the turn hero did. He capped the flop - what hand that we beat did he have on the flop?

2)Not impossible just unlikely - less likely than a hand that beats us.

3)Yes I saw Burning K's maths. I confess to some ignorance as to how pokestove allocates probabilities to the hands given a range - is it likelihood of being dealt? If so I think that not only is the range off - I can't see anything less than an open ended str8, a made str8, 2 pair or trips capping the flop, I doubt the ignorant end caps it either.

I also think you need to rerun it for the reraise scenario, what has it got then - it certainly is not 60/40 equity.

The ev choice is call - essentially neutral - call is a no brainer here or raise - so far 8 posters here say call, 7 raise. I just can't see what proportion of the time villain having a lower str8 can justify this raise given that the boat reraises us. We either get called with some chance of winning or we get reraised and we are forced to call pretty certain we are beaten hoping we are chopping. This feller bet into someone who capped the turn - do you seriously think he is doing this with just the Q when the board paired - if he had the Q only he wants to see a cheap showdown and would expect a raise.

Anyway, sorry for being a cheeky newbie, no doubt I am wrong I just don't see how the extra $1 raise is +ev and given your greater experience maybe you could explain it - in particular how the hand we beat caps the flop, reraises the turn and still bets at us on the river once we capped the turn.