a fun 97s hand

[SNOWBALL]

I GUESS think this is barely worth playing preflop, but why did you limp 3 bet it? How is that not awful?

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
I GUESS think this is barely worth playing preflop, but why did you limp 3 bet it? How is that not awful?

[/ QUOTE ]

you don't think 97s wins more than 17% of the time 6handed? 20% of the time 5handed? someone needs to do some stoving!

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I GUESS think this is barely worth playing preflop, but why did you limp 3 bet it? How is that not awful?

[/ QUOTE ]

you don't think 97s wins more than 17% of the time 6handed? 20% of the time 5handed? someone needs to do some stoving!

[/ QUOTE ]

I gave the limpers 23% of hands excluding their raising hands from their VPIP and trimming a tiny bit of other stuff because they are in EP.
I gave the BB a 40ish % defense range. Basically any 2 suited, and pair excluding the higher pairs, and some other connecty stuff. I gave the sb the same.
I think the SB's range was prob actually tighter than that though, so I was prob being overly generous to you. I also gave the button raiser a wider range than you mentioned. This is the 6 handed calc, and you can see you are below equity.

Even if you were slightly above equity, the 3 bet would still be bad though, because you are forcing yourself to play badly after the flop and lose money. Like whenever you flop a pair you have to see the river. Whenever you flop a gutshot you have to stay in even for like 3 cold if you also have backdoor spades. This isn't good news for you. Basically, you are creating a situation where you and the fish would play exactly the same postflop, i.e. you have less of a postflop edge, according to the principal of
--- Reciprocality

Double edit: basically, you are turning a decent speculative hand into one that will lose money after the flop in a lot of situations, i.e. you will put money in with negative postflop equity. So you managed to take an implied odds hand and give it reverse implied odds qualities. HER NAME IS RIO AND SHE DANCES ON THE SAND, HER NAME IS RIO AND YOU JUST BUTCHERED YOUR HAND

GG bro

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

4,912,085 games 225.297 secs 21,802 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 15.094% 14.33% 00.77% 703882 37967.83 { 9s7s }
Hand 1: 27.537% 26.73% 00.83% 1312798 40586.92 { 99+, ATs+, KJs+, AJo+, KQo }
Hand 2: 14.268% 13.33% 00.95% 654607 46622.17 { 66-22, A6s-A2s, KTs-K6s, Q8s+, J7s+, T7s+, 96s+, 86s+, 75s+, 64s+, 54s, A9o-A6o, KQo, KTo-K9o, QTo-Q9o, J8o+, T9o }
Hand 3: 14.280% 13.34% 00.95% 655278 46562.50 { 66-22, A6s-A2s, KTs-K6s, Q8s+, J7s+, T7s+, 96s+, 86s+, 75s+, 64s+, 54s, A9o-A6o, KQo, KTo-K9o, QTo-Q9o, J8o+, T9o }
Hand 4: 14.426% 13.54% 00.89% 665316 43708.58 { 88-22, AQs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A7o, K9o+, Q9o+, J8o+, T8o+, 98o, 87o }
Hand 5: 14.394% 13.52% 00.89% 663934 43510.00 { 88-22, AQs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A7o, K9o+, Q9o+, J8o+, T8o+, 98o, 87o }

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I GUESS think this is barely worth playing preflop, but why did you limp 3 bet it? How is that not awful?

[/ QUOTE ]

you don't think 97s wins more than 17% of the time 6handed? 20% of the time 5handed? someone needs to do some stoving!

[/ QUOTE ]

I gave the limpers 23% of hands excluding their raising hands from their VPIP and trimming a tiny bit of other stuff because they are in EP.
I gave the BB a 40ish % defense range. Basically any 2 suited, and pair excluding the higher pairs, and some other connecty stuff. I gave the sb the same.
I think the SB's range was prob actually tighter than that though, so I was prob being overly generous to you. I also gave the button raiser a wider range than you mentioned. This is the 6 handed calc, and you can see you are below equity.

Even if you were slightly above equity, the 3 bet would still be bad though, because you are forcing yourself to play badly after the flop and lose money. Like whenever you flop a pair you have to see the river. Whenever you flop a gutshot you have to stay in even for like 3 cold if you also have backdoor spades. This isn't good news for you. Basically, you are creating a situation where you and the fish would play exactly the same postflop, i.e. you have less of a postflop edge, according to the principal of
--- Reciprocality

Double edit: basically, you are turning a decent speculative hand into one that will lose money after the flop in a lot of situations, i.e. you will put money in with negative postflop equity. So you managed to take an implied odds hand and give it reverse implied odds qualities. HER NAME IS RIO AND SHE DANCES ON THE SAND, HER NAME IS RIO AND YOU JUST BUTCHERED YOUR HAND

GG bro

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

4,912,085 games 225.297 secs 21,802 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 15.094% 14.33% 00.77% 703882 37967.83 { 9s7s }
Hand 1: 27.537% 26.73% 00.83% 1312798 40586.92 { 99+, ATs+, KJs+, AJo+, KQo }
Hand 2: 14.268% 13.33% 00.95% 654607 46622.17 { 66-22, A6s-A2s, KTs-K6s, Q8s+, J7s+, T7s+, 96s+, 86s+, 75s+, 64s+, 54s, A9o-A6o, KQo, KTo-K9o, QTo-Q9o, J8o+, T9o }
Hand 3: 14.280% 13.34% 00.95% 655278 46562.50 { 66-22, A6s-A2s, KTs-K6s, Q8s+, J7s+, T7s+, 96s+, 86s+, 75s+, 64s+, 54s, A9o-A6o, KQo, KTo-K9o, QTo-Q9o, J8o+, T9o }
Hand 4: 14.426% 13.54% 00.89% 665316 43708.58 { 88-22, AQs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A7o, K9o+, Q9o+, J8o+, T8o+, 98o, 87o }
Hand 5: 14.394% 13.52% 00.89% 663934 43510.00 { 88-22, AQs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A7o, K9o+, Q9o+, J8o+, T8o+, 98o, 87o }




[/ QUOTE ]

GREAT BALLS OF SNOW! you're busting out Tommy Angelo on me. damn. i can't compete with that. log me out mama, i'm comin' home with my tail between my legs.

i posted this from memory at work. i've screwed something up because last night i stoved it afterwards and showed like 23% 5handed and 20% 6handed. for that reason i think i've missposted some stats on players. the ranges must be wider than we've assigned or i would have never done this.

fwiw, last night i assigned a random hand to the first UTG limper(horrible ATC player), top 40% less premium holdings for the second limper, i gave the button's range earlier, around top 30% for sb and top 50% for the bb(less the prem. hands obv). as i said, in my OP i've screwed something up.

i do agree with your comments about postflop. generally speaking this certainly levels the playing field and helps the bad players avoid the mistakes from which we profit. but specifically speaking, when the pot's going to be large anyway(as it is here), this effect is somewhat mitigated because they're calling correctly regardless. what's do i care if they're getting 12-1 or 24-1? also, i'm chasing anyway as well. so what does that leave? table image 101. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]

GREAT BALLS OF SNOW! you're busting out duran duran on me. damn. i can't compete with that. log me out mama, i'm comin' home with my tail between my legs.

[/ QUOTE ]

fyp

[Budget Boy]

[ QUOTE ]

Even if you were slightly above equity, the 3 bet would still be bad though, because you are forcing yourself to play badly after the flop and lose money.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't really understand this statement. Just because an extra bet goes in pre-flop you are suddenly going to start playing "badly" after the flop? I understand that inflating the pot increases the odds that everyone is getting to call including ours, but why would you have to play "bad." Either a play is +EV or it isn't, and you can certainly still "play poker" in a big pot.

[One Outer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Even if you were slightly above equity, the 3 bet would still be bad though, because you are forcing yourself to play badly after the flop and lose money.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't really understand this statement. Just because an extra bet goes in pre-flop you are suddenly going to start playing "badly" after the flop? I understand that inflating the pot increases the odds that everyone is getting to call including ours, but why would you have to play "bad." Either a play is +EV or it isn't, and you can certainly still "play poker" in a big pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Snowball is saying that you're creating a pot so big it would be incorrect to fold before the river if you flopped a pair or any draw, no matter how weak. It's essentially taking our decision making edge out of the hand, seeing as how we're mathematically forced into the vast majority of our postflop play.

Hence, turning into a fish. Sometimes being good at the pokers is confusing.

[Hair_of_the_Dog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Even if you were slightly above equity, the 3 bet would still be bad though, because you are forcing yourself to play badly after the flop and lose money.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't really understand this statement. Just because an extra bet goes in pre-flop you are suddenly going to start playing "badly" after the flop? I understand that inflating the pot increases the odds that everyone is getting to call including ours, but why would you have to play "bad." Either a play is +EV or it isn't, and you can certainly still "play poker" in a big pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a better way to say this is that you are allowing your opponents to play better, meaning the bigger pot gives them +EV to call. I can't remember the quote or what book it was from, but it basically says that when you give your opponents -EV to continue and they continue you win.

Hands like this become more difficult when you hit top pair with your 9 and now you want to try to protect your TP. With a weak kicker and a large pot it becomes very difficult to protect.

BTW: Nice flop [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Dhani]

[ QUOTE ]
I GUESS think this is barely worth playing preflop, but why did you limp 3 bet it? How is that not awful?

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think that the OP is advocating this as a standard practice. Once in a while to throw others off, it might work, if you are in a gambling mind set for that hand. IF you miss on the flop, then you check fold. I wouldn't call this spewing if it's in a controlled enviornment.

[Man of Means]

I think the theorem developed in part by TPK and BBB states that it is incorrect to raise with 97s but if you get a chance to 3-bet it, THATS TEH MAGIK NUTZ, take me to the river.

p.s. I liked/agree with SNOWBALL's post and I too have been trying to work "...and she dances in the sand" every time I see reverse implied odds. Good job.