I just raise/folded my flush on the turn. Wow.

[Mitke]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
7:1 ~= 12.5%.

You are beaten by:

AQ-AT of clubs (3 combos), KK (3), 99 (1).

For calling down getting 7:1 to be profitable the range of your Villain needs to contain only 2 combinations that you beat if we assume those 7 combinations are all in your villain's range.

I think there's plenty more that your Villain could have:

Hands that you beat:

AxA[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]Kx, KxQ[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] QxQ[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], JxJ[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] - JJ and QQ heavily discounted on basis of turn

[/ QUOTE ]

[X] arbitrary

That is a huge range to give an unknown preflop raiser in a typical live game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't play live so can admittedly be mistaken here. I tried to keep both ranges wide.

Are these ranges anywhere closer for a typical unknown preflop UTG raiser in a live game?

[One Outer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
7:1 ~= 12.5%.

You are beaten by:

AQ-AT of clubs (3 combos), KK (3), 99 (1).

For calling down getting 7:1 to be profitable the range of your Villain needs to contain only 2 combinations that you beat if we assume those 7 combinations are all in your villain's range.

I think there's plenty more that your Villain could have:

Hands that you beat:

AxA[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]Kx, KxQ[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] QxQ[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], JxJ[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] - JJ and QQ heavily discounted on basis of turn

[/ QUOTE ]

[X] arbitrary

That is a huge range to give an unknown preflop raiser in a typical live game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't play live so can admittedly be mistaken here. I tried to keep both ranges wide.

Are these ranges anywhere closer for a typical unknown preflop UTG raiser in a live game?

[/ QUOTE ]

They're not crazy wide, but they're highly, highly improbable. He'd have to be a real maniac. One can't weigh them very heavily.

I love this post of yours, because when I saw your first post with all the math, etc., I said to myself, "that has to be someone who only plays online."

[Mitke]

OK [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I am used to the aggressive onlive games and seem to have trouble adjusting when analysing live hands. Hence, I've tried to not post on live hands.

I always frown when I see the B&M posts beginning: "The table is full of loose donks who call with anything and nothing to the river." I'm jealous! I'm very happy to see a table with 30%-35% to flop in full ring (2/4-3/6 Ongame, Stars, Party, iPoker).

Let's then assume that your villain would only raise preflop from UTG with AA/KK and AK. You're then beat by the 3 KK combos and would have to completely discard the possibility that he could play the way he did with A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]Ax (3 combos). This may be fine in live with good reads.

Just don't do it online, ok [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[gobbledygeek]

I have to admit, I'm a little surprised as the turn fold being identified as horrible. This is live poker, right? And the villain just 3bet (3bet! In live poker!) a flush paired board after a raise on the turn? I do bite the bullet and call down but I'm surprised to think the opinion here is that I'm good 1 in 7.

GcluelessnoobG

[One Outer]

[ QUOTE ]
OK [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I am used to the aggressive onlive games and seem to have trouble adjusting when analysing live hands. Hence, I've tried to not post on live hands.

I always frown when I see the B&M posts beginning: "The table is full of loose donks who call with anything and nothing to the river." I'm jealous! I'm very happy to see a table with 30%-35% to flop in full ring (2/4-3/6 Ongame, Stars, Party, iPoker).

Let's then assume that your villain would only raise preflop from UTG with AA/KK and AK. You're then beat by the 3 KK combos and would have to completely discard the possibility that he could play the way he did with A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]Ax (3 combos). This may be fine in live with good reads.

Just don't do it online, ok [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I would never do this online. In live play, you can give him credit for A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] and up and J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] and up in addition to KK. Bet/threebet in a live 6/12 (at Canterbury Park no less, the North American capitol of passive) is just so strong that this is almost always a made hand. I'll admit to him having AA[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] or A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]K a small percentage of the time (maybe 5% to 10%?) in this spot but it's just so unlikely. In my experience in this game (the only one I play, BTW) I'm always ultra screwed.

Of course, that doesn't justify my preflop call. And given that this is my third hand, I think the other posters are right that I have to see a showdown provided the river doesn't suck. However, after an hour of play in which the villain does prove himself passive (he did) this isn't even debatable, IMO. I think this situation is very, very unique and I can't remember ever doing this before.

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
I have to admit, I'm a little surprised as the turn fold being identified as horrible. This is live poker, right? And the villain just 3bet (3bet! In live poker!) a flush paired board after a raise on the turn? I do bite the bullet and call down but I'm surprised to think the opinion here is that I'm good 1 in 7.

GcluelessnoobG

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, to be fair, he didn't specify that it was live play until most of the responses had already been made. And we also don't know what limit it is.

And we don't know anything about the villian. James is right; OP's "read" here is completely meaningless. In fact, this hand is a good illustration of why you can't put too much stock into reads until you have a significant sample. OP folded a flush -- a flush! -- in large part because his opponent check-called top pair weak kicker in a small pot.

-McGee

[TheCount212]

I'm not folding 76s on the button for one raise. Ever. And I'm not loose.
As played a fold is fine. The board paired. Your baby flush is now very, very vulnerable.
Nice hand.

[One Outer]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, to be fair, he didn't specify that it was live play until most of the responses had already been made.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. Normally I do specify; I just forgot this time.

Canterbury Park 6/12

[Niediam]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not folding 76s on the button for one raise. Ever. And I'm not loose.


[/ QUOTE ]

That is 'Hi, I'm a fish' loose.

[Hyperrrprank]

I think the real gem from this type of hand is the reminder that you need to take into account all possibilities and have a plan for each before acting. If you feel weak enough with your small flush that you will fold to a 3-bet, then raising the river is a mistake. Call and showdown your hand. You're giving up some value here, but when the outcome is uncertain this is better then giving up an entire pot.

This hand is a tough place to think this way, since it was only on the river that you suspected your opponent might have cards of the same suit as you, but folding the made flush is bad enough that this is something you need to consider.

I had a very similar hand last night, where I completed a from the SB with 72s. I made my flush on the river, and the woman who had bet all streets continued to lead. She seemed unafraid (in her reaction to people's comments as well as in her betting patterns) of the flush draw coming in so I flat called her instead of putting myself in the awkward position of needing to decide if a 3-bet was absolute proof of a bigger flush.