[150NL] 88 Flopped set 550bb's Deep

[shpanko]

[ QUOTE ]
I never level :P
Yes I understand that it's the action that leads to the bet on the river that is important. But I got the impression from some of the responses that (ignoring previous action) they would be less likely to call a 1k bet into a 1k pot than a 5$ bet into a 5$ pot.
Just pointing out that this mindset should be lost as soon as possible because I know I struggled with this a lot (still do)

tl;dr: The absolute size of the final bet should not influence the decision making but the way the betting escalated the absolute size should

[/ QUOTE ]

But it does, and until we're all pros it always will. Villain just bet several buy ins on the river. THis is hugely different than a psb for a single BI or less. Villain is almost never making this kind of bet for value with a worse hand in my opinion (sometimes 44 but only sometimes and that's it).

So yeah even though it shouldn't make a difference in theory, to this villain it definitely does and thus this really skews his range to AA/KK. I know it doesn't affect the percentage of the time we need to have the best hand to be able to call, because a psb is a psb, but the way in which the amount of money is affecting the villain is very important imo, and he almost never does it with a worse hand.

[Danibusman]

very nicely put

[Keyser.]

[ QUOTE ]
I never level :P
Yes I understand that it's the action that leads to the bet on the river that is important. But I got the impression from some of the responses that (ignoring previous action) they would be less likely to call a 1k bet into a 1k pot than a 5$ bet into a 5$ pot.
Just pointing out that this mindset should be lost as soon as possible because I know I struggled with this a lot (still do)

tl;dr: The absolute size of the final bet should not influence the decision making but the way the betting escalated the absolute size should

[/ QUOTE ]

shpanko just said said it shouldn't matter in theory but it actually still should. A 400 bb bet into a 400 bb pot is the same at micro stakes or nose bleed stakes, and both are different than a 5 bb bet into a 5 bb pot at any level or a 100bb bet into a 100 bb pot at any level.

I would be less likely to call a $1k bet into a $1k pot than I would a $5 bet into a $5 pot (like statistically less likely because my range for calling the first is tighter than the second) if both were at 1/2nl. This is not a bad habit or a mindset we should strive to break; it is the correct way to play poker.

but at the same time I would be more likely to call a $2000 bet into a $10,000 pot if I was playing 25/50nl (because once again my range for winning that pot is larger).

[ QUOTE ]
tl;dr: The absolute size of the final bet should not influence the decision making but the way the betting escalated the absolute size should

[/ QUOTE ]

but the absolute size of the number of big blinds should. Another example-- should you get all-in preflop with QQ for 2,000 bbs? Usually no. Should you get all-in preflop with QQ for 20 bbs? Every time. The absolute size of big blinds IS and SHOULD BE affecting how you play.

[Dr_Doctr]

Yes I know what you mean now and agree. It can be confusing. The issue is distinguishing (using your example)

correct - I am less likely to call this 1k bet into this 1k pot because wtf this guy must have the nuts due to the previous action and his range has been narrowed to basically 2 hands on that basis.

incorrect - I am less likely to call this 1k bet into this 1k pot because wtf this guy must have the nuts due to him betting 1 [censored] k (that's like 5 buyins!!!).

[Benzooor]

Wow thanks so much for all of the discussion on this hand. I had to take a break afterwards and it's good to have all this to read when I get back [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

To clarify a few things... I didn't raise the flop because essentially I wanted to extract more value from the hand. If I raise here he's probably folding out alot of hands that might pick up a draw // improve on the turn.

I'm in position, and the flop texture is pretty much as safe as can be for a set, I couldn't think of any turn card making my set lose much equity.

I raised the turn for a couple of reasons -- I don't think he double barrels that turn unless it had improved his hand, and if he had picked up a flush draw I wanted to make him pay for it. I don't think the turn raise is bad at all, and I think I'm losing out on value by not raising there.

I remember while playing the hand that I'd ruled out KK because I just really couldn't see someone hitting a flop that dry that hard and leading out, for the same reasons that I didn't raise him on the flop.

--

As far as the turn 3-bet and river decisions go, I agree with the people that have said his willingness to commit 500bb's in this hand is a key factor. He never has AK.

I also agree with the people who have stated that my decision should have been made on the turn.

The turn 3-bet I can definitely see being done with 44 but I don't know if he shoves the river, as he'd probably be scared of an overset when I call his 3-bet on this board.

I think it's very very close, but against this player with these stacks that I should be folding to the turn 3-bet. Again I believe he is never doing that with AK, so he could only have 44/KK/AA at that point.

As played, even with the odds I'm getting, there is so much strength and so many BB's being put in by the villain that I think a river fold is still viable, but sooo borderline.


Benzooor calls $500.45, and is all in
Uncalled bet of $222.25 returned to Danibusman
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Danibusman shows [Kc Kd] three of a kind, Kings
Benzooor shows [8d 8h] three of a kind, Eights
Danibusman wins the pot ($1,658.40) with three of a kind, Kings
Benzooor is sitting out


Definitely the sickest spot I've been in and the sickest hand I've played. I was very surprised to see KK, though.

The day that I can correctly fold to the turn 3-bet here or the river shove while actually playing the hand has not come yet; I only reached that conclusion after alot of hard thinking and it's sickening to think that someone could have good enough hand analysis skills to fold there.

Sick life [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Again, thanks for all of the analysis and comments.

[Benzooor]

[ QUOTE ]

So yeah even though it shouldn't make a difference in theory, to this villain it definitely does and thus this really skews his range to AA/KK. I know it doesn't affect the percentage of the time we need to have the best hand to be able to call, because a psb is a psb, but the way in which the amount of money is affecting the villain is very important imo, and he almost never does it with a worse hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

100% agree

[SheepSuit]

Wow, sick hand.

[Mothercanuck]

this is so simple...hes obviously got 52 IMO

[Mothercanuck]

but for real..at 150nl he can easily have AK

[Dr_Doctr]

A nitty villian who never has AK here is still a nitty villian who never has AK whether he's playing .01-.02 or 1k-2k