200-400 During LAPC...Im such a donkey!!!!

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry to say, but this is a very bad analyses IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're sorry to say it, why did you post it? If you are so poor that you can't afford to buy a keyboard with a delete key, why should anyone take your poker advice?

[ QUOTE ]
No way that "just going crazy" is +EV. Thats ridiculous, especially on this type of board.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can't argue with someone who just says "you're wrong", can you?

[ QUOTE ]
Raising the turn?? No way thats +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

So... you're saying you think I'm wrong. Does that about sum it up so far?

[ QUOTE ]
The only hand your opponent might fold is if hes drawing himself and misses. But this is gonna take a bet on the river as well. But since , especially given heros image, a made hand is way more likely, a turn raise is spewing. Clearly -EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

What odds would you assign to a turn fold given hero's image? Are you sure that the villain can't fold a made hand? I'm clearly assuming that a solid-type 200/400 player may fold a pair against a tight opponent who shows a lot of strength.

[ QUOTE ]
You also contradict yourself. On the one hand you say that "the guy clearly believes you hit the flop", yet he still 4-bets you, and you think there still is enough fold equity on the turn?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not contradictory. I think villain is likely to have a made hand, however, given hero's image, he should play back at him anyways and hope to draw a fold. You don't need a lot of fold equity getting 10:1 with may well be a 7 out draw.

It's a longshot play, but given the current long odds offered, hero's image, and the future money earned via pots stolen by maintaining his tight image, I think he should continue attacking now that he has chosen this hand to go after.

[ QUOTE ]
It was just a spew-play. Not much too it.

[/ QUOTE ]

So... you don't like it then? I'm not convinced. Maybe if you say it a few more times I'll believe you. :P

-eric

[Schneids]

I've been on the fence for a day or two but I've decided I like your flop check-3bet.

I don't like a turn checkraise because I think once the flop gets 4-bet and he still bets the turn, it's with a hand that is folding a super small amount of the time. If it had been you checkraising and Sang 3-betting the flop, then I think there's enough fold equity on the turn to consider checkraising it again with your image.

Good hand post Nomar, and good analysis Elindauer even though I've decided I don't agree with the idea of a turn checkraise (but IMO it's still an interesting enough of an idea that it's worthy of discussion).

[elindauer]

thanks Schneids. I agree that villain is likely to have a made hand here, and he may well be unwilling to fold it. I don't know the player / stakes well enough to know for sure. I'll defer to you there.

-eric

[Charon]

I am truly amazed that so many people defend this play. And, to elindauer, I don't want to just state that this is a spew play, without the reasoning behind it. So here goes.

The flop is 653. All low cards. This is a terrible board to bluff at because of the obvious straight draws and the low cards on the board.

Let's first assume Nomar had a pair. Wouldn't it make a lot of sense for him to bet out, hoping for a button raise to shut out Roman? It also seems a bet is way better for information gathering purpose (related to invested money), since if you check you are facing a near guaranteed check-raise (as described in OP)(so this contains no info).

So, with a pair, I think Nomar is at least betting out some of the time (Nomar, is this correct?).

Both players should know this (decreasing the probability that Nomar has a one pair hand after his 3-bet). Also, a check-3-bet play is consistent with draws like 87 or a 4.

Now, because of this, I think it is wishful thinking that players fold a pair. I do not play a lot live 200/400, but I do play that limit online a lot, and really, with those potential draws out, on this kind of low board, I think it isn't good to fold any pair. Especially with this fairly big pot (you created for a big part yourself).

Bottom-line: IMO there isn't much fold equity, because of the type of flop you're facing.

The play J.A. Sucker proposed has way more merit than check-3-betting IMO (mostly for reasons stated above). But I still think it's inferior to just folding.

[Charon]

[ QUOTE ]
What odds would you assign to a turn fold given hero's image? Are you sure that the villain can't fold a made hand? I'm clearly assuming that a solid-type 200/400 player may fold a pair against a tight opponent who shows a lot of strength.



[/ QUOTE ]

Close to 0%. Yes, I'm almost positive that villain can't fold a made hand. But this is from playing a lot 200/400 online, not live. So maybe people do fold a made hand live. But as I stated in my other post, I think that is a bad play (because of all the obvious draws out).

[ QUOTE ]
I think villain is likely to have a made hand, however, given hero's image, he should play back at him anyways and hope to draw a fold. You don't need a lot of fold equity getting 10:1 with may well be a 7 out draw.



[/ QUOTE ]

Again, I think a fold on the turn is max only a few percent. Also, I agree with Nate that you will get 3-bet a significant percentage of the times, which further diminishes the value of a raise.

[Nomar]

[ QUOTE ]

So, with a pair, I think Nomar is at least betting out some of the time (Nomar, is this correct?).

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this has a lot to do with the eb and flow of the game, if I had been leading at a lot of flops or just checkraising...my general tendency is to checkraise, checkraise, checkraise (pairs, draws, overcards, big hands, small hands, just all hands in general...)

[ QUOTE ]
Bottom-line: IMO there isn't much fold equity, because of the type of flop you're facing.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is 3 handed, nobody has to have a hand thats showdownable. Sangs preflop/flop bet range is not any 2 but its close and Romans range, now with the checkraise is not as big but its up there. I dont find out until the flop 4 bet that I am now on a draw opposed to my original squeeze.

[ QUOTE ]
The play J.A. Sucker proposed has way more merit than check-3-betting IMO (mostly for reasons stated above). But I still think it's inferior to just folding.

[/ QUOTE ]

Personally when someone bets into me (preflop raiser), I give them zero credit for a hand and look for anyway I can to get to showdown, which makes me hesistant about leading with these types of hands, because I am fearful preflop raiser will see what it really is, a feable attempt to win the pot with a crap hand. Folding may be better, and is the standard line, but if I folded, I certainly would not have posted the hand.

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
Now, because of this, I think it is wishful thinking that players fold a pair. I do not play a lot live 200/400, but I do play that limit online a lot, and really, with those potential draws out, on this kind of low board, I think it isn't good to fold any pair. Especially with this fairly big pot (you created for a big part yourself).


[/ QUOTE ]

You may be right. I would not expect someone with a normal image to get this fold, the question is mainly how tight do the villains view the hero at this point... might they make a big fold. I thought it might be close, but perhaps it's actually not. It's pretty hard for me to know.

As to choosing this flop... yeah, I agree it's an awkward flop to make a move at. We've basically agreed on this all along by the way, as I think I said this in my first post. I'd have passed here, though I don't think it's terrible to have made the move.

Finally, on check-3-betting vs betting... given the player descriptions, I assumed OP was mostly check-3-betting any hand he was going to play on the flop, and would therefore be check-3-bet bluffing when he decided to make his moves. It's true that he didn't state this in the OP, but apparently this is in fact correct, which makes sense given the way the game is playing. Why would you bet a pair when your 2 opponents are going to put in 3 SB with just about anything if you check? I think the OP is right to play this way, and right to be looking to make some big moves (though perhaps not here).

Thanks for taking the time to write out your thoughts. It's appreciated. Good luck in your 200/400 games... the closest I've come is the occassional foray to 100/200, and even there the variance can be brutal!

-Eric

[jkamowitz]

Wow, I've played with Sang a number of times at 20/40. He always just sorta falls asleep and cold calls too much. Maybe he's not too good full ring. it's surprising to here that you say he's solid. Maybe he's much better shorthanded.

[Charon]

[ QUOTE ]
this is 3 handed, nobody has to have a hand thats showdownable. Sangs preflop/flop bet range is not any 2 but its close and Romans range, now with the checkraise is not as big but its up there.


[/ QUOTE ]

Does this imply you should 3-bet here regardless of your image?

[Charon]

[ QUOTE ]
As to choosing this flop... yeah, I agree it's an awkward flop to make a move at.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed. Because of the texture of the flop, I strongly believe that both opponents are not going to lay down anything showdownable. So, in this case, I don't think heros image matters too much. His image comes into play if he's making moves on Qxy type flops, but not draw-heavy, low cards boards.

As for betting out; I'm also not a big fan of this, because of the enhanced risk of being played back at with nothing (as Nomar states in another post). For the rest, I agree with what you're saying.

[ QUOTE ]
Good luck in your 200/400 games... the closest I've come is the occassional foray to 100/200, and even there the variance can be brutal!


[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you, and good luck to you as well. I apologize if I overreacted in my first response to you. But I felt (and still feel) strongly about the incorrectness of this play.