A really cool hand I played

[shpanko]

Redgrape every post you've made in this thread has been condescending, arrogant, and wrong. Plz stop posting in this thread k thx

[shipship]

I see that you've answered the big pair pf question a million times but I still think it's something to consider because he really shouldn't be calling this raise pf with anything, should he? that makes me think, since he's solid, that he's doing it with the intention of trapping rather than making a mistake by calling w/ some other type of hand.

[craigthedeac]

[ QUOTE ]
You say he's a solid player who made a mistake by calling with whatever hand he has here. If he's solid, isn't mistake weighted towards a real hand (AA-TT) that he knows he can play for stacks against you on a lot of flops more often than it is some 34s or JTs type hand that he is planning on shoving all flops with?

I've read this through a couple times and I have trouble finding reasons for how we know he is making a mistake, because to me when it looks like a solid thinking player is making a mistake he generally has thought a step ahead and is actually laying a trap or something. no? i know you have said a bunch of times that's he shoving 99+ AQ+ so doesn't it make it valuable to NOT shove those hands a certain % of the time? I would think the % he opts to call w/ those hands is much greater than the % that he calls with some type of trash and trys to steal the pot on the flop (but I might be wrong). It just seems strange to me that a solid player at that level would make such an elementary error.

i mean it doesn't make sense for him to have any type of hand here, but since he's a good player i'd expect to find a big hand that he's trapping with more often than a weak hand that he intends to steal from you with.

thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]
My thoughts: it doesn't take much watching the highstakes game to see that it is freakin' crazy up there. People take bluff lines like this all the time and they have to, it's the only way to not get eaten up.

Greg is not saying his call preflop was a mistake. Rather, he is saying that calling preflop was either A) a mistake or B) a plan to have to bluff a lot on the flop. He rules out A based on his read of the guy being a solid player. Therefore, Greg deduces that the guy is going to HAVE to bluff the flop a lot for his call to become correct preflop.

[shpanko]

@shipship

The villain in the hand isn't making a fundamental error because he is calling preflop with the intention of taking the pot away from us on a lot of flops. This makes up for the fact that he isn't getting good enough odds to play for set/monster flop value.

Also, he basically will never have a "monster" hand like AQ+/99+ because he needs to shove those preflop. First because there is a lot of dead money in the pot so it's +EV to shove here to tak it down without letting us catch up on a good flop. Second because since his shove may look like a resqueeze we will be calling him with a larger range giving him higher equity when his pf shove is called.

[MYNAMEIZGREG]

[ QUOTE ]
You say he's a solid player who made a mistake by calling with whatever hand he has here. If he's solid, isn't mistake weighted towards a real hand (AA-TT) that he knows he can play for stacks against you on a lot of flops more often than it is some 34s or JTs type hand that he is planning on shoving all flops with?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. He's aggressive, remember, which means that he will be more likely to shove those hands (99-aa) preflop (or 4bet, it's interchangable). Additionally, consider that there are 2 other people in the pot. It's silly to call with like 99 preflop here, because you are expecting at least one other person to come along. The same logic for any high pocket pair, because you don't want to see a flop in a multiway pot in a situation where you will be forced to put all your money in the pot with one pair like 80% of the time, and leaving 1-2 people to now gauge their hand while your whole stack sits in the middle and hopes for the best.
[ QUOTE ]

I've read this through a couple times and I have trouble finding reasons for how we know he is making a mistake, because to me when it looks like a solid thinking player is making a mistake he generally has thought a step ahead and is actually laying a trap or something. no?

[/ QUOTE ]
Sometimes, yes, but he can't be trapping here. Think about what Craig said before about levels. Levels aren't infinte because eventually playing a hand in an abnormal fashion becomes so -EV that it is just better to play it in a straightforward, +EV manner.
[ QUOTE ]

i know you have said a bunch of times that's he shoving 99+ AQ+ so doesn't it make it valuable to NOT shove those hands a certain % of the time?

[/ QUOTE ]
Not in a potentially 4 way pot. Remember also that his range is "semi-"wide here so that does provide some sort of deception.[ QUOTE ]

I would think the % he opts to call w/ those hands is much greater than the % that he calls with some type of trash and trys to steal the pot on the flop (but I might be wrong). It just seems strange to me that a solid player at that level would make such an elementary error.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are wrong. It's not that elementary of an error because there are about 2 players at NL600 that will be able to figure out what he's doing.
[ QUOTE ]

i mean it doesn't make sense for him to have any type of hand here, but since he's a good player i'd expect to find a big hand that he's trapping with more often than a weak hand that he intends to steal from you with.

thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with you and I've stated why.

[MYNAMEIZGREG]

Also the last two posts above mine (shpanko and Craig's) are spot on.

[shipship]

OK thanks guys. I'm not familiar with games over 400 no limit and didn't realize this type of play was what people did. And I guess I misread something somewhere since I thought the consensus was that calling with whatever he had was a mistake, but it sounds now like he could have called w/ PP, suited cards, etc if he intended to shove a lot of flops. And since this flop looks like one that missed a lot of those hands or gave them a big draw that we're almost ahead or ahead of, we have to call the push i guess.

What about this thought, we don't know how often he will be shoving the flop, so if he is only doing it w/ pairs (either on board or PP), FD, overs or SDs, I still don't think we're in that great of shape, unless we think he's reckless enough to shove almost EVERYTHING he might call with pf like 98spades, A2 diamonds, etc because if he folded everything that didn't give him a pair or a draw here and shoved the rest it'd be really, really close wouldn't it?

[MYNAMEIZGREG]

ship read the post where I go through the math. He has to bluff, and we beat those bluffs a very large % of the time (always on this particular board). Also my original post addresses that he isn't necessarily making a preflop mistake, as long as he's going to be bluffing the flop sometimes.

[craigthedeac]

[ QUOTE ]
What about this thought, we don't know how often he will be shoving the flop, so if he is only doing it w/ pairs (either on board or PP), FD, overs or SDs, I still don't think we're in that great of shape, unless we think he's reckless enough to shove almost EVERYTHING he might call with pf like 98spades, A2 diamonds, etc because if he folded everything that didn't give him a pair or a draw here and shoved the rest it'd be really, really close wouldn't it?

[/ QUOTE ]
This is a good point but what makes the call still +EV in my opinion is that the ranges are much more heavily weighted towards air/draws for all the analysis already listed.

So by the time you add up all the money in the pot, it becomes a call even if you assume the range you listed, which I feel exaggerates the chance of Villain being ahead.

[shipship]

ok thanks guys, cool thread.