Semibluffing into a dry side pot

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
What are you going to do on the turn if he calls and you don't hit? Check and hope he checks? Check fold? Bet again? I was just wondering if you even considered this scenario.

[/ QUOTE ]
Check-fold obviously.

[curtains]

I dunno if I buy it.... but maybe, too tired to think about it [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Ansky]

M.B.E.,

Just a guess, people called you a moron in the chatbox after?

I like your reasoning and don't mind it, but I just assume people would have called you retarded.

[M.B.E.]

No; I love being called a retard in chat, but surprisingly no one said anything after this hand, even the player that folded to my flop bet.

[Ansky]

Weird. I've had people berate me in the chat for betting with the nuts into a dry side pot.

[Exitonly]

alright, this shouold be real easy to figure out dunno why anynone hasnt yet.

BB is random,
button i gave KTs-K7s,Q9s-Q7s,J7s+,T8s+,97s+,86s+,75s+,64s+,53s+,KTo-K6o,J5o+,T6o+,96o+,85o+,75o+,64o+,53o+
which is kinda a crazy range, but i duunno how to represent what the [censored] he could be limping with here. Not too strong, but not complete garbage.. but all the ranges i played around with all had similar equities on this flop so doesnt matter much.

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

42,738,864 games 54.344 secs 786,450 games/sec

Board: 8h 8d 5h
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 35.2949 % 33.21% 02.08% { random }
Hand 2: 40.1072 % 37.40% 02.70% { KTs-K7s, Q9s-Q7s, J7s+, T8s+, 97s+, 86s+, 75s+, 64s+, 53s+, KTo-K6o, J5o+, T6o+, 96o+, 85o+, 75o+, 64o+, 53o+ }
Hand 3: 24.5979 % 22.50% 02.10% { 9h6c }

24.5979% of the pot,
---------
Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

31,836,977 games 21.156 secs 1,504,867 games/sec

Board: 8h 8d 5h
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 58.7688 % 55.78% 02.99% { random }
Hand 2: 41.2312 % 38.24% 02.99% { 9h6c }

41.2312% of the pot.

So, by getting button to fold, we gain 16.6333% of the pot.

we're risking ~30% of the pot, so i think, is he folds a little less than half the time here, it's +cEV. and i think he folds way more than that.

Awesome post, the numbers worked out a lot better than i'd have thouogh. (if i didnt botch them)


---

Edit:

also, thats assuming that when he calls your 2000, that you're toast, which you're not.. but that probably balances out with him not alwys checking it down (and you not seeing all 5 cards and having that 26% equity)

[curtains]

Exit I think the range you gave the button is too loose without a doubt. Also I sort of misread hand that BB basically has a random hand. Our 9 high could feasibly be ahead! Anyway the more I think about it the more I think that betting something is correct here.

[PokrLikeItsProse]

[ QUOTE ]
In a nutshell, I like my bet of 2000 because it's the cheapest way to get to the river.


[/ QUOTE ]

Given the tendency of players to check it down when a third player is all-in, isn't the cheapest way to get to the river likely to be check-check on the flop, check-check on the turn?

You're basically risking 2000 for about a 41% chance to win 6540 against a random hand. You're probably under 30% to win in a three-way pot. If you are absolutely certain that the button has a hand that can't call you, then betting is a good idea, I suppose, for increasing your equity by perhaps 600-800 chips. (Based on the assumption that you are up against two randomish hands. You probably gain a little more equity, since the button probably has somewhat better than a random hand.) I leave it up to someone else to figure out how often your opponent has to call you to make this a bad idea.

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In a nutshell, I like my bet of 2000 because it's the cheapest way to get to the river.


[/ QUOTE ]

Given the tendency of players to check it down when a third player is all-in, isn't the cheapest way to get to the river likely to be check-check on the flop, check-check on the turn?

[/ QUOTE ]
That's a good question, and I acknowledge that most of the time, my opponent would check the flop if I check. However, those hands with which he would check are mostly the same hands that he would fold to my bet of 2000.

But suppose my opponent has a pocket pair, like 22. With a hand like that, it would be foolish for him to check behind on this flop; from his perspective after I check there would be a very high chance that his hand is currently best on the 885 flop. Now how much is he going to bet? Likely 4000 or so; certainly more than 2000.

But if I bet out 2000 rather than checking, and he has a small pocket pair, he most likely would call that bet (not raise). And then he would often check behind on the turn, suspicious that I could have trip eights, or a 5, or some other hand that beats him.

So in situations like that, where my opponent does have a "betting hand" on this flop, my play of betting 2000 is generally the cheapest way to get to the river.

In the majority of cases, when my opponent's hand is not a "betting hand" on this flop, it usually is not a "calling hand" either. So in those situations he will fold and it costs me 0 chips to get to the river.

The remainder of cases, where he has a hand that he wouldn't bet himself but he would call (or raise) my bet of 2000, are I think a small subset of his range -- mostly consisting of heart draws (and perhaps gutshot straight draws). It's only in these situations where I am paying 2000 for something that I'd otherwise get for free. The majority of the time I am either saving chips (by getting something for 2000 that would otherwise cost 4000) or getting the hand headsup at no cost.

[PokrLikeItsProse]

[ QUOTE ]
But suppose my opponent has a pocket pair, like 22. With a hand like that, it would be foolish for him to check behind on this flop; from his perspective after I check there would be a very high chance that his hand is currently best on the 885 flop. Now how much is he going to bet? Likely 4000 or so; certainly more than 2000.


[/ QUOTE ]

In my experience, that's the sort of hand that players will often check, since it is so vulnerable and they are checking under the (wrong) assumption that they should maximize the probability that the all-in player is eliminated, not the size of their chip stack. And keep in mind that your opponent open-limped on the button, which is often either a passive player or one who is trapping with a big hand. An opponent who would bet a small pair on this flop would most likely have raised preflop. I don't think it is realistic to include small pairs in your opponent's likely range unless you know that this is how your opponent plays small pairs on the button.

I don't think that betting the flop is worthwhile unless you think you are 100% likely to not get called or if you expect to have a decent chance of bluffing your opponent out of the side pot that you have created if called in the situations where you miss your draw.

Have I mentioned yet that I think you should have just folded preflop? I would have preferred your raising preflop to isolate the big blind rather than this silly little flop game you're trying to play.