I really dont know how to account for the bubble here....

[A_PLUS]

Had a nice post written up, and somehow lost it.

summary:
-Agree with Adanthar


Turn:

9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

-about the worst natural 2 pair hand imaginable. Pretty much leaves my equity vs his range unchanged, but given that the pot is larger, thats not really a bad thing, just not a great thing.

[registrar]

[ QUOTE ]
Had a nice post written up, and somehow lost it.

summary:
-Agree with Adanthar


Turn:

9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

-about the worst natural 2 pair hand imaginable. Pretty much leaves my equity vs his range unchanged, but given that the pot is larger, thats not really a bad thing, just not a great thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

So he min-raises before the flop and then donks the flop, when checked to? You then turn a shitbox two pair. Sorry, man, I'm lost here and I'm still liking my float/lead line.

If I haven't done anything aggressive on the flop, then there seems even less reason to start getting busy now, so I'd check to the raiser and hope he allows my boat to come on the river.

Adanthar suggests leading the turn but I'm going to need someone to explain why.

[adanthar]

OK, the concrete reason the flop lead sucks is this:

-anyone good always raises you
-anyone who is *not* good, but hyperaggro, especially on the bubble (which = lots of people) also raises you
-Say he just calls (which he will do with a billion hands, because almost everything has at least a draw here). You check the 2 of hearts (or the 9 of spades) on the turn. He decides he wants to bluff here and bets a nice 2/3 pot. Can you call? Nope, that's half your stack by now. Can you CR AI? Barf. Can you open shove the turn to prevent this? Yeah sure, and then you've accomplished everything you set out not to do when you saw this flop.

---

Leading a blank was a good plan on the turn, because it's way stronger than leading the flop (and now even if he calls with QT on the turn, he will often check behind on the river) and you're pretty done if you're called. But, this isn't a blank.

I am unsure of what I'd actually do here. Probably still lead (I think I can fold to a raise vs. a bad player), but I might c/c any bet too. Dunno.

[registrar]

[ QUOTE ]
OK, the concrete reason the flop lead sucks is this:

-anyone good always raises you
-anyone who is *not* good, but hyperaggro, especially on the bubble (which = lots of people) also raises you
-Say he just calls (which he will do with a billion hands, because almost everything has at least a draw here). You check the 2 of hearts (or the 9 of spades) on the turn. He decides he wants to bluff here and bets a nice 2/3 pot. Can you call? Nope, that's half your stack by now. Can you CR AI? Barf. Can you open shove the turn to prevent this? Yeah sure, and then you've accomplished everything you set out not to do when you saw this flop.

---

Leading a blank was a good plan on the turn, because it's way stronger than leading the flop (and now even if he calls with QT on the turn, he will often check behind on the river) and you're pretty done if you're called. But, this isn't a blank.

I am unsure of what I'd actually do here. Probably still lead (I think I can fold to a raise vs. a bad player), but I might c/c any bet too. Dunno.

[/ QUOTE ]

More nice responses. There are some days that I feel that I am close to poker enlightenment. This is not one of those days.

Leading this flop sucks, granted and the turn is just messy. But what I'm having difficulty 'getting', and I have difficulty 'getting' this when playing is how a good player knows to push if I lead the flop.

Take this hand, both you and Funkii indicate that you're pushing over a lead here. You raise whatever it is you might raise from the button (as an aside, when is a good player min-raising from the button?), you get floated. The flop comes with cards that connect to what you might expect a random floater to call with from BB, having seen only two orbits. That floater, who has a stack large enough to cripple you, then leads 2/3 pot, more or less committing himself.

Why is a good player pushing here? Is this read-based or simply an EV claculation: floater maye have a hand, but more often than not, if I push he folds, or I win, enough times to make this profitable?

In my experience, as I say, float/lead with these stack sizes is a profitable move. I'm more than prepared to accept that I am working on too small a sample or am most experienced at limits and on sites where this works.

I also fully accept that, on this flop, check calling is better.

But what I don't get is, if I post this hand as villain, holding two cards that villain might min-raise with from the button and explained that competent 2/3 my stack BB callls and then leads the KQ8 flop 2/3 pot, leaving himself the size of the pot behind, you or Funkii would then push with, for example pocket pairs, suited connectors etc. (I'm sort of answering my own question here - there's not much on this flop that has missed you to such an extent that pushing is not +EV)

So let's assume the flop is different. Rainbow, a broadway card or two, reasonably, but not dangerously connected and you've raised from the button, BB calls and leads the flop, why is a 'good player' pushing OTT?

I'm not sceptical here, just curious. I don't feel I get owned that much at MTTs anymore but when I do, it's always like this.

[Jason Strasser (strassa2)]

[ QUOTE ]

Obviously I have F.E. on a jam, but his ramge should be tight enough that K9s = 72o here.

[/ QUOTE ]

logic fart

[adanthar]

Not necessarily every flop (although many flops) but on this particular KQJ flop, nobody ever bets out into the PFR with anything they want to call a push with, x3 on the bubble

[A_PLUS]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Obviously I have F.E. on a jam, but his ramge should be tight enough that K9s = 72o here.

[/ QUOTE ]

logic fart

[/ QUOTE ] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Would it clear things up if I said it like this:
Obviously I have F.E. on a jam, but his range that will call a push should be tight enough that K9s = 72o here.

If not, could you explain what you mean?
I think, when you hold an opening range constant,
the tighter of a calling range you give the villan
-we showdown less (so K9s vs. 72o matters less)
-We are crushed when we are called (the difference in equity, when we are against TT+, AK is 5~6%, if his range is 66+, AJ the difference grows to ~15%)

[TakenItEasy]

[ QUOTE ]
Not necessarily every flop (although many flops) but on this particular KQJ flop, nobody ever bets out into the PFR with anything they want to call a push with, x3 on the bubble

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, so what was wrong with the check push plan to a standard size bet. Lets forget about the min bet for now. I still think it's the most EV+ plan.

a) Villain is likely to CBet hands we have beat as opposed to calling.

b) We have decent FE over villain compounded by the bubble.

c) We don't allow villain to push against us at any future point where FE would reverse.

d) We are in decent shape against villains calling range with a nice overlay.

e) We can try to see a turn/river cheaply, but we can't know what outs are good thus reducing any strategic gain even if we hit.

So with the overlay + FE + bubble FE + slight edge over calling range, this +CEV should override any $EV bubble disparity.

Now with the minbet our push would be a little oversized, reducing the overlay and skewing the risk reward and giving us a great price to hopefully hit a K or heart. This may sway me towards a call but I'm not convinced yet simply because a 9 or T leaves me just as confused and perhaps villain holds even more FE if he suddenly changes his passive behavior.

Edit:
BTW
[ QUOTE ]
(I think I can fold to a raise vs. a bad player)

[/ QUOTE ]

I think when you call a bet, improve your hand and then begin thinking about escaping kind of proves one of my points.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, so what was wrong with the check push plan to a standard size bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

because when you get called, I hope you are good at turning _______ (insert the exact nature of the necessary 2-4 outer here)

[TakenItEasy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ok, so what was wrong with the check push plan to a standard size bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

because when you get called, I hope you are good at turning _______ (insert the exact nature of the necessary 2-4 outer here)

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point so lets look at it. You won't get rid of AT and AK, KQ, KJ, K9, QJ, AQ, AJ, TT are all possible calls/folds to some degree and you get 99-, A8- to fold (remember it's a button minraise). If the bet were around 5K than even < 66% FE would justify the push. You convinced me that calling the minbet would be correct at this point but I'm not convinced that we don't have more than enough gap over villains range for a push over a 5K bet and I still see more reverse implied odds than implied odds down the road.