Triple draw: hold them dead?

[Nate.]

Triple draw.

Folded to me on the button and I raise with KQ542. Player who's very loose and somewhat aggressive on the early streets threebets in the SB. Big blind, a decent-playing regular, fourbets. I call, SB calls.

SB draws 3, BB draws 2, I draw 2. I improve to 7542 (and catch another 4). SB checks, BB bets, I raise, SB calls, BB three-bets, I call, SB calls.

SB draws 2, BB draws 1, I draw 1 and catch an 8 for 87432. Checked to me. Bet for value or check and try to hold them dead? I am confident that BB was drawing to a wheel before the second draw. SB has shown the ability to stand pat with things like rough jacks when he thinks multiple opponents are drawing.

--Nate

[Soviet Exile]

Is this live? Absent any more information, I'd bet and hope to knock out the SB. If the BB makes a hand, is he likely to try a check raise here?

[DeathDonkey]

Definitely bet for value. BB is a huge dog to beat you and SB sounds like he may call and draw dead. I might cap after the first draw.

-DeathDonkey

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
Definitely bet for value. BB is a huge dog to beat you and SB sounds like he may call and draw dead. I might cap after the first draw.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed with the value bet statement. Think of it this way, you are 99.9% positive they are calling you down, get the money in the pot NOW rather than later, because you don't know if there will be a later. Its the same reason why you will often raise and re-raise on the flop, rather than wait for the turn in a multi-way pot... the concepts never change, its just a different game.

As for the flop, there is merit in capping and there is merit in calling. If your opponents are over-aggressive with loose draws then I like the cap allot, except for the type of opponent who will stand pat after someone caps with J high just to see if you will break (this opponent type is rare on UB, but they exist). If they are laggy but generally draw to good hands a cap is not recommended because the good cards you need may already be out there.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[Nate.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Definitely bet for value. BB is a huge dog to beat you and SB sounds like he may call and draw dead. I might cap after the first draw.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed with the value bet statement. Think of it this way, you are 99.9% positive they are calling you down, get the money in the pot NOW rather than later, because you don't know if there will be a later. Its the same reason why you will often raise and re-raise on the flop, rather than wait for the turn in a multi-way pot... the concepts never change, its just a different game.

As for the flop, there is merit in capping and there is merit in calling. If your opponents are over-aggressive with loose draws then I like the cap allot, except for the type of opponent who will stand pat after someone caps with J high just to see if you will break (this opponent type is rare on UB, but they exist). If they are laggy but generally draw to good hands a cap is not recommended because the good cards you need may already be out there.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

TT --

Thanks for the comments. I know a bet has value, but I'm worried it will cost me the pot if it causes the BB to break and draw -- and if he draws I think he'll be drawing plenty live -- when I'm all but positive my hand beats his.

One thing I didn't mention is that the BB isn't a frequent checkraiser in spots like this one. Thus I think I can be pretty sure he doesn't have a 7 or 8. Supposing he was drawing to 2345, he's something like a 2-1 dog to have a 9 through J. To bound the question as favorably as possible for checking, let's suppose he drew to 5432 and his check means he doesn't have a 7 or 8. Let's also suppose SB drew to 732 and checked in the dark.

Then we know 15 cards; of the 37 remaining, 5 are 7's and 8's; of the other 32, 12 are 9 through J. If he will always break those to a bet but stand on them to a check, the pot-losing cost of my bet is 12/32 * 12 outs / 36 cards * 10.5 bets = 10.5/8 of a bet. Supposing that he won't always break/stand as I outline, we can adjust downward to 1 bet.

When we bet the BB will always call and he will win a little less than 1/3 of the time. When the SB calls he will win less than that, and he will call too much. Together that's about half a bet of equity. We also save the pot when SB would have drawn two and won (almost never).

These numbers seem to indicate a check. Of course the assumptions are extreme, but:

-BB is drawing very smooth: I was very confident of this.
-BB will break 9-J to a bet: I'm confident he'd fold jacks and tens, but I could also see him puffing his chest out and standing pat sometimes, especially with 9-perfect.
-BB will stand pat with 9-J if I check: this is tougher but I think it's pretty close. On the other hand the smoothness of his draw will tempt him to check. One thing here is that I think he perceives me as playing the big streets predictably.

Oh, checking might also get me a bet on the last round that I wouldn't have done otherwise. On the other hand, it could let them play better if they figure out what's up.

So I guess I lean toward checking. Of course, smart money says I made a mistake somewhere up there... please let me know what you think.

--Nate

[Nate.]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this live? Absent any more information, I'd bet and hope to knock out the SB. If the BB makes a hand, is he likely to try a check raise here?

[/ QUOTE ]

It is live.

The BB is unlikely to attempt a checkraise.

--Nate

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Definitely bet for value. BB is a huge dog to beat you and SB sounds like he may call and draw dead. I might cap after the first draw.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed with the value bet statement. Think of it this way, you are 99.9% positive they are calling you down, get the money in the pot NOW rather than later, because you don't know if there will be a later. Its the same reason why you will often raise and re-raise on the flop, rather than wait for the turn in a multi-way pot... the concepts never change, its just a different game.

As for the flop, there is merit in capping and there is merit in calling. If your opponents are over-aggressive with loose draws then I like the cap allot, except for the type of opponent who will stand pat after someone caps with J high just to see if you will break (this opponent type is rare on UB, but they exist). If they are laggy but generally draw to good hands a cap is not recommended because the good cards you need may already be out there.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

TT --

Thanks for the comments. I know a bet has value, but I'm worried it will cost me the pot if it causes the BB to break and draw -- and if he draws I think he'll be drawing plenty live -- when I'm all but positive my hand beats his.

[/ QUOTE ]

He THINKS he is drawing live, but in reality he probably isn't since a lot of the cards he needs are most likely in your or your opponent's hands. This is a concept borrowed from Razz, I advise all serious TD players to read Sklansky on Poker because although its a different game the thought process is exactly the same. Always consider live cards, number of opponents, and pot size when playing Triple Draw - its a safe bet your opponent does not include these factors when making decisions.

Anyway lets use a hold'em analogy again. You have Aces pre-flop, villain open-raises, you 3-bet, and he caps (he sucks at poker) with KJ - 9.5 SB to the flop . Flop comes 345 double suited then your opponent turns over his cards. You know he has a 4-flush and 2 overcards but you have him beat. Do you still bet the flop? If he raises, do you still 3-bet or do you call down hoping he doesn't hit his card 1 in 4 times? Of course you are going to get your money in there knowing your ahead, because if you play it the same each and every times you will show a significant profit in the long run. Each bet and raise is +EV for you.

Now apply the same thinking to Triple Draw. Your argument doesn't hold up anymore right?

I hope this helps, its the simplest way I could think of explaining the concept.

PS: If you are also nate on UB, you have become a much better player. You used to put too many bets in when it wasn't called for, I don't see that as much now from what I remember.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[Nate.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Definitely bet for value. BB is a huge dog to beat you and SB sounds like he may call and draw dead. I might cap after the first draw.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed with the value bet statement. Think of it this way, you are 99.9% positive they are calling you down, get the money in the pot NOW rather than later, because you don't know if there will be a later. Its the same reason why you will often raise and re-raise on the flop, rather than wait for the turn in a multi-way pot... the concepts never change, its just a different game.

As for the flop, there is merit in capping and there is merit in calling. If your opponents are over-aggressive with loose draws then I like the cap allot, except for the type of opponent who will stand pat after someone caps with J high just to see if you will break (this opponent type is rare on UB, but they exist). If they are laggy but generally draw to good hands a cap is not recommended because the good cards you need may already be out there.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

TT --

Thanks for the comments. I know a bet has value, but I'm worried it will cost me the pot if it causes the BB to break and draw -- and if he draws I think he'll be drawing plenty live -- when I'm all but positive my hand beats his.

[/ QUOTE ]

He THINKS he is drawing live, but in reality he probably isn't since a lot of the cards he needs are most likely in your or your opponent's hands. This is a concept borrowed from Razz, I advise all serious TD players to read Sklansky on Poker because although its a different game the thought process is exactly the same. Always consider live cards, number of opponents, and pot size when playing Triple Draw - its a safe bet your opponent does not include these factors when making decisions.

Anyway lets use a hold'em analogy again. You have Aces pre-flop, villain open-raises, you 3-bet, and he caps (he sucks at poker) with KJ - 9.5 SB to the flop . Flop comes 345 double suited then your opponent turns over his cards. You know he has a 4-flush and 2 overcards but you have him beat. Do you still bet the flop? If he raises, do you still 3-bet or do you call down hoping he doesn't hit his card 1 in 4 times? Of course you are going to get your money in there knowing your ahead, because if you play it the same each and every times you will show a significant profit in the long run. Each bet and raise is +EV for you.

Now apply the same thinking to Triple Draw. Your argument doesn't hold up anymore right?

I hope this helps, its the simplest way I could think of explaining the concept.

PS: If you are also nate on UB, you have become a much better player. You used to put too many bets in when it wasn't called for, I don't see that as much now from what I remember.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

TT --

Thanks again.

I'm not "nate" on UB.

I'm taking into account, or attempting to, the factors you mention. Of course, I tried to take into account cards being in other people's hands, but I think I miscounted them badly, because he should only have 5 or 6 or so, on average. That right there probably invalidates the calculations I made in the post above and swings it to a bet.

Anyway, I very much appreciate your comments on the equities in this situation and I'd like to hear anything anyone has to say specifically about the value of inducing an incorrect stand-pat.

--Nate

[Nate.]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a concept borrowed from Razz, I advise all serious TD players to read Sklansky on Poker because although its a different game the thought process is exactly the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

A quick note...

Some of Sklansky's old-school essays on single-draw lowball have some good discussions on the value of "holding them dead." (Indeed, that's where I learned the phrase.) Agreed that triple draw players would do well to read them.

--Nate

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is a concept borrowed from Razz, I advise all serious TD players to read Sklansky on Poker because although its a different game the thought process is exactly the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

A quick note...

Some of Sklansky's old-school essays on single-draw lowball have some good discussions on the value of "holding them dead." (Indeed, that's where I learned the phrase.) Agreed that triple draw players would do well to read them.

--Nate

[/ QUOTE ]

Where can I find those? Also Mason's draw book is helpful and perhaps the most authoritative on the subject of draw, although the style of game is no longer played. Get it now because its out of print, 2+2 won't be reissuing it.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]