TD27: I hate this spot

[2461Badugi]

I'm used to being button here, and I love it because this is such a ridiculously powerful raise on third. But I have no idea how to defend against it. Button in this hand is one of the best 5/10 regulars.

Triple Draw 2-7 Lowball Limit ($5/$10) (converter)

SB ($227), Seat 6
BB ($61), Seat 1
UTG ($538), Seat 2
MP ($139.50), Seat 3
Hero ($534), Seat 4
Button ($186.50), Seat 5

Button at Seat 5.
SB posts $2. BB posts $5.

Hand: [6c 2s Qc 7d 9c]

Round 1: (1.40 SB)

<font color="red">UTG raises. </font><font color="#666666">MP folds. </font><font color="red">Hero raises. </font><font color="red">Button raises. </font><font color="#666666">SB folds. </font><font color="#666666">BB folds. </font><font color="green">UTG calls. </font><font color="green">Hero calls. </font>
UTG takes 2. Hero discards Qc 9c. Button takes 1.

Hand: [6c 2s 7d 6d 3c]

Round 2: (13.40 SB)

<font color="green">UTG checks. </font><font color="green">Hero checks. </font><font color="red">Button bets. </font><font color="green">UTG calls. </font><font color="green">Hero calls. </font>
UTG takes 1. Hero discards 6d. Button takes 1.

Hand: [6c 2s 7d 3c 9d]

Round 3: (8.20 BB)

<font color="green">UTG checks. </font><font color="red">Hero bets. </font><font color="red">Button raises. </font><font color="#666666">UTG folds. </font><font color="green">Hero calls. </font>
Hero discards 9d. Button stands pat.

Hand: [6c 2s 7d 3c 8c]

Round 4: (12.20 BB)

<font color="green">Hero checks. </font>

Total pot: (12.20 BB - $122)

[MarkGritter]

I turned my third-round solver lose on the situation where he has a wheel draw--- 7432.

In no case does it recommend breaking after getting raised here. The 3rd-round bet/call lines are a mix of bet/call or check/call on 4th if he is drawing, and check/call or check/fold on 4th if he is pat.

If you are going to do this then occasionally I think you have to just check/call or bet/call with your #2. (In fact that is the recommended line a large percentage of the time.)

After the run finishes--- I looked at an intermediate result-- I will look at what happens if he has a rougher draw than you do. (And of course since the hand started three-handed your should take this with a grain of salt--- checking instead of betting is disastrous here, I think--- but once it gets HU, the HU game-theory strategy can provide some guidance.)

I think it makes a lot of sense to just pat the third draw and give up the pot if he persists. Yes, you can be pushed off a winning 9, but you're not going to break an 8 here, and you'll occasionally pat + check/raise with your best hands, so your opponent can't make a lot of profit patting his T's here.

The recommended line might involve a break if the pot were a bit smaller.

[MarkGritter]

After a bit more thought I think that giving your opponent such a strong draw may tilt things quite a bit toward patting. After all, if he's hit a 75 or 76 you are dead or have just 3 outs to a tie. Like I said, I'll try with a worse draw in a bit--- it might then become correct to draw because then, when you are behind, you are not so far behind.

[Jigsaws]

Appreciate the compliment, though I actually think I'm just a break-even player at 5/10. Probably because 2-7 brings out the worst tiltmonkey in me.

Mark, could you expand a bit on your 3rd-round solver? How do you come to a conclusion one way or the other? I must admit I'm more of a touchie-feelie poker player, but I'm interested in seeing how you come up with a range for me.

I guess I'll withhold comment on the hand itself for now.

[Phat Mack]

[ QUOTE ]
If you are going to do this then occasionally I think you have to just check/call or bet/call with your #2.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure what you are referring to as #2.

[MarkGritter]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you are going to do this then occasionally I think you have to just check/call or bet/call with your #2.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure what you are referring to as #2.

[/ QUOTE ]

When T hits a 4 instead of a 9 he makes 76432 (#2) which he would ordinarily want to jam--- but if he occasionally bet/calls or even check/calls it adds some deception and protects the weaker holdings.

[MarkGritter]

[ QUOTE ]

Mark, could you expand a bit on your 3rd-round solver? How do you come to a conclusion one way or the other? I must admit I'm more of a touchie-feelie poker player, but I'm interested in seeing how you come up with a range for me.


[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately I can't yet solve for a range of hands on the 3rd round, I just have to look at individual cases.

What the solver answers is: Given a particular 1-card draw for each player (like 7632 vs. 7432 or 7632 vs. 8752), what are the game-theoretic optimal strategies for the two players? It produces strategies that are unexploitable and "guarantee" a certain portion of the pot in the long run. (And it is certainly possible to earn more with these strategies against a player who makes mistakes--- just not as much as if you could predict what those mistakes were.) These strategies are of the form "if you drew X, play Y some percent of the time and Z the rest of the time" for each X.

Unfortunately, when examining one hand vs. one hand there is an implicit knowledge of how good the other player's draw is, which affects the strategy. This can be overcome by using a range of hands for each player. Which is feasible for the 3rd draw + 4th round play at the moment, but not for the 2nd draw + 3rd round play + later action, which is what I'm looking at here.

(BTW, I would actually expect your raising range to be somewhat wider here than if it were just heads-up.)

What I plan to do is give you a variety of one-card draws and see what the calculator says Badugi's game-theoretic line is with the 97632. If there is substantial agreement for a variety of hands, then that suggests that it's a sound strategy against the range as well.

[MarkGritter]

I ran 7632 vs. 8752 through the solver to get a feel for what the strategy vs. a rougher hand looks like. In this case you are still hardly ever breaking the 9.

The most common line recommended with the 97632 is to bet/call (about 81%.) If there is just a call from the 8752x, then bet the river; if he raises, call, pat, and check-call the river.

About 15% of the time the solver says to bet/raise/call instead, and break if he calls the 3-bet (but not, strangely, if there is a cap--- which is probably a solver artifact.) When you break you're still calling down with any card, and check-raising both your made 7's as well as check-raise bluffing with the pair of 6's or 7's.

Based on those two examples, I'd say that you shouldn't break here as a matter of course. I think you only have a check/call after you catch the 8.

[soulvamp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you are going to do this then occasionally I think you have to just check/call or bet/call with your #2.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure what you are referring to as #2.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's the hand ranking. 23457 is #1 (the nuts), 23467 is #2 (the second-best possible hand), 23567 is #3, etc.

[InWithTheBest]

I think im breaking nearly always, and check calling river but expecting to lose if he bets. I find bet/folding too dangrous in these spots to be of much value.