PNL Study Group Day 6: Position/Hand Reading/FIP

[BobboFitos]

Sunny - thx for responding [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
i.e. - if he'll fold a pair on the turn if a one-card straight card comes, or if he'll call on the flop with overcards but fold the turn, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

You really think anyone in their right mind will bet/call with say KQ on the flop? Obviously if you can push 6s there for that much value, that's the clear plan, but normally 6s have THIN value (although certainly some) but technically win the pot when you already had the best hand. Again, you have to worry about fading a ~6 outer, but villain only has to bluff a small % to make up for it. About them folding to a scarecard; the flop has 2 clubs, if they're not going broke on a 4card straight, doesnt this mean they shell up a lot of turns? IE, an ace if they actually have the overpair, or a club if they have the overpair, etc. etc. again it's somewhat nitpicky of me, but you make alot of money encouraging bluffs in spots where you have both a made hand AND a draw, and are not folding. (So you can fall back on the made hand potential of your draw)

About hand 3, you're right, and I did say I think you guys hit the right move, but it's somewhat important to stress it's close. I feel it is anyway!

[ QUOTE ]

Hand 4: I like your line. Perhaps a bit advanced for that point in the book though.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks

[ QUOTE ]

Hand 5: Again, your line has merit. The only thing I don't like about the installment plan in this scenario is that the board is SO draw heavy. He's likely to have hands that will call now but fold later (without improvement) as opposed to slightly weaker made hands that are calling regardless.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'll have to recheck the book, but I seemed to recall it was a fairly dry ace high board? I'll check this and bow out [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]

Hand 6: I don't think we give a "definitive" answer on this hand because, as we mention, you have a few different options here. Not sure if I'd *always* bet here, but I do see your point.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think it was left vague, and clearly DID demonstrate that the right play changes based on who exactly will play on, but the thing is... There's only one way to find out who wants to play ball on the flop, and that's to bet!

[ QUOTE ]

Hand 10: Not sure if you misread or if I am misunderstanding you, but note that we do NOT have position in this hand. I agree that perhaps against certain wily players I might 4-bet, but for the most part I'd fold here a lot.

[/ QUOTE ]
This speaks in volumes to spr, but the less the ratio, the less relevant position becomes. Thus, in a 3bet pot the fact (to play or not to play AQo) we don't have position is not as important. There's actually a thread going on right now in MSNL about this, I'll link it: It starts with a poll
The consensus is not clear, and of course it's tricky about "what to do." I do know that if I'm opening X% of hands, and folding Y% (including AQo) to a 3bet there, people make money with ATC. This encourages 3betting, and for my game this is a nightmare. I don't like getting 3bet, mainly because my profit comes from people not adjusting correctly to my LAG game (calling too much and giving me too much credit postflop). The more you fold to 3bets, typically the more you should be 3bet. That argument in a vacuum is terrible to use to say you "need" to defend with AQo, but it meshes with the rest of my range there (I do need to defend "X%" to discourage people outplaying my loose opens by in turn upping the preflop price, so to speak)

Really, there is little shame in calling and taking a flop, alot of people fear "losing a big pot with TPTK to an overpair," but this parlay is TINY. Something to add is very few people will even push a bigger 1 pair hard against you because such a small % of your range can really be taken "to valuetown". ie. the board comes Axx, you really think AK 200bbs will always stack you? They will against me if they fastplay, but they may be mistaken since only a small % of my range that "gets stacked" is behind AK. Likewise, Qxx vs KK/AA.

I don't mean to digress, and this is for another article/a chapter/post, but "avoiding the doomsday scenario" happens alot in NLH and frankly people are wrong to avoid them. Yes, sometimes you run against a hand that has you in a bind (or a position) but the % it happens (and you lose your stack) in essence is a low number...

Also, Sunny, can't wait for volume 2, perhaps I'll get an advanced copy.... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Sunny Mehta]

[ QUOTE ]
"avoiding the doomsday scenario" happens alot in NLH and frankly people are wrong to avoid them. Yes, sometimes you run against a hand that has you in a bind (or a position) but the % it happens (and you lose your stack) in essence is a low number...


[/ QUOTE ]

totally TOTALLY agree with this....I was just having a very similar discussion the other day with Cero about just this thing, and the position I took was right in line with your camp....I am writing a section on 3-betting in Volume Two that will hit on all of this - I'm actually in the process right now of trying to get some hardcore math to back up a lot of my intuitions - it's a complicated decision tree though....

thanks again for all the great comments...

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



EDIT: One thing I do think needs to be mentioned in this discussion though Bobbo is that there is a difference (even if it's not necessarily enough to change your plan in this particular hand) between a 3-bet pot with 100bb stacks and a 3-bet pot with 200bb stacks - purely due to the ratios.

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]


totally TOTALLY agree with this....I was just having a very similar discussion the other day with Cero about just this thing, and the position I took was right in line with your camp....I am writing a section on 3-betting in Volume Two that will hit on all of this - I'm actually in the process right now of trying to get some hardcore math to back up a lot of my intuitions - it's a complicated decision tree though....

[/ QUOTE ]
haha dont write too fast sunny PLEASE!!!!! I have alot of stuff on 3betting that I dont want to be obsolete because you beat me to it ;p (having it published)

[ QUOTE ]
One thing I do think needs to be mentioned in this discussion though Bobbo is that there is a difference (even if it's not necessarily enough to change your plan in this particular hand) between a 3-bet pot with 100bb stacks and a 3-bet pot with 200bb stacks - purely due to the ratios.

[/ QUOTE ]
agree fully

[ QUOTE ]

thanks again for all the great comments...

[/ QUOTE ]
thanks for the great answers

[VoxGibson]

I hope this is the correct place for this, but i'm having an issue with hand #4 on page 88-89, lets say we play as the hand suggests, and the river hits a 9c. Villian then bets the pot. Would we reraise? Villian pushes, would we call? Villian bets, we reraise, he pushes, would we call and pray we don't see KJ, if we do see KJ do we chalk it up to varience, or figure perhaps we should have played differently on the turn? I see alot of advantage to pot control and checking behind that i had never thought of before, however in this particular hand with the check call on the flop, on a draw heavy board with a preflop limper, shouldnt we be charging draws here, or trying to find out where we are in the hand on the turn. Does checking the turn really preserve the most value here? I think i might be missing the point, but i find in this particular hand, if i faced a big bet on the river, i'd feel as though i led myself into this tough decision by not betting the turn. assuming the 9 doesn't hit the river then i would find myself asking questions like this - Did he miss his flush and is trying to buy the pot? I would be less concerned (potientially more annoyed though) buy getting check-raised on the turn, and knowing i'm beat and having to fold, then by facing a big or even moderately large bet on the river and not feeling i've defined his or my hand at all. I may also be forced to fold the best hand because my turn play induced a large bluff. I'm wondering if betting the turn and hoping for a check down on the river may be better?

[Sunny Mehta]

[ QUOTE ]
I hope this is the correct place for this, but i'm having an issue with hand #4 on page 88-89, lets say we play as the hand suggests, and the river hits a 9c. Villian then bets the pot. Would we reraise? Villian pushes, would we call? Villian bets, we reraise, he pushes, would we call and pray we don't see KJ, if we do see KJ do we chalk it up to varience, or figure perhaps we should have played differently on the turn? I see alot of advantage to pot control and checking behind that i had never thought of before, however in this particular hand with the check call on the flop, on a draw heavy board with a preflop limper, shouldnt we be charging draws here, or trying to find out where we are in the hand on the turn. Does checking the turn really preserve the most value here? I think i might be missing the point, but i find in this particular hand, if i faced a big bet on the river, i'd feel as though i led myself into this tough decision by not betting the turn. assuming the 9 doesn't hit the river then i would find myself asking questions like this - Did he miss his flush and is trying to buy the pot? I would be less concerned (potientially more annoyed though) buy getting check-raised on the turn, and knowing i'm beat and having to fold, then by facing a big or even moderately large bet on the river and not feeling i've defined his or my hand at all. I may also be forced to fold the best hand because my turn play induced a large bluff. I'm wondering if betting the turn and hoping for a check down on the river may be better?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Vox,

I agree with you that if you're playing an opponent who really won't checkraise the turn often with a worse hand, I like betting the turn and folding to a raise.

Thanks for the post,

Sunny

[VoxGibson]

Thanks for the answer, and thanks for the book, its been the most exciting poker book i've read since SSHE (i've read many) I am still curious though if we play the hand as stated in the book, would we call a or reraise a large bet on the river, if we hit a 9 making our straight. Or is this read dependant. (sorry to be hung up on this one particular hand)

[VoxGibson]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the answer, and thanks for the book, its been the most exciting poker book i've read since SSHE (i've read many) I am still curious though if we play the hand as stated in the book, would we call a or reraise a large bet on the river, if we hit a 9 making our straight. Or is this read dependant. (sorry to be hung up on this one particular hand)

[/ QUOTE ]I withdraw the question, and chalk this particular hand up to the "It depends" catagory