quiz number 20 From Stox book

[topspinner]

I realize that the book is geared to much higher stakes, than I play....so i was wondering if you were playing low stakes if the answer would be different.

You have QS6s and open raise from the button, loose passive in the big blind calls.

Flop comes 8d7s2d,you bet, bb calls. Turn is kh, you bet bb calls. River is Ac. Stox advocates betting the river, to get the BB to fold a better hand (only needs to fold 16% of time to be profitable). At the stakes I play, a loose passive will almost never fold a better hand on the river for one bet. If they have a pair they are calling down for one bet. Is this the proper play against a player who let's say folds to river bet 30% of the time?

[Oink]

The notion that a loose passive fish at high stakes will play different than a loose passive fish at low stakes is silly.

If you are in a pot with a 60/5 guy stakes dont matter.


So if this is a profitable bet at 150/300 it is a profitable bet at 1/2.


BTW this hand was discussed intensely in MHSSH a few months ago. Try searching for Stox quiz threads there.

[Guy McSucker]

This has been discussed a few times before in this forum and the mid-high shorthanded forum I think. People have varying opinions. Mine is that there's not much value in this bet since we have almost the nut no-pair. YMMV.

MHSH thread

Micro stakes thread including response from Stox

[HoneyBadger]

[ QUOTE ]
I realize that the book is geared to much higher stakes, than I play....so i was wondering if you were playing low stakes if the answer would be different.

You have QS6s and open raise from the button, loose passive in the big blind calls.

Flop comes 8d7s2d,you bet, bb calls. Turn is kh, you bet bb calls. River is Ac. Stox advocates betting the river, to get the BB to fold a better hand (only needs to fold 16% of time to be profitable). At the stakes I play, a loose passive will almost never fold a better hand on the river for one bet. If they have a pair they are calling down for one bet. Is this the proper play against a player who let's say folds to river bet 30% of the time?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, the pot is 5 BB at that point (disregard the half SB for rake) so you get 5:1 on your bluff. 1/(5+1) = 0.1667. that's where the 16% comes from. So assuming if he calls, or both check, you're always beat, he has to call less often than 84% of the time. Therefore, if your passive players calls "only" 70% of the time it's still profitable. This disregards the times both of you check and you win queen high, which would be rare (quite common, as there's an A and K sorry I missed that). Also, where did you get the 30% figure from? Perhaps after calling both the flop and the turn, this passive player will almost certainly have a pair and folds the river only 10% of the time. In that case it's not profitable.

[topspinner]

Oink,

That is interesting that you think they are the same....I just couldn't imagine a 1/2 loose passive playing nosebleed stakes, they would get killed....how could they afford it. But since I have no experience on this, I will take your word.

Do you think it is a profitable call? I read the links and looks like most people don't including Stox, but his answer confuses me....just wanted to get your take.

[Oink]

I dont play nosebleeds.

But up through 30/60 you do the exact same as you do on 1/2. You look for the fish and exploit them. 60/10 guys plays 30/60 as well.

How do they afford it? I guess they have good jobs or rich parents/husbands.

At partys 100/200 I sometimes notice 50/15 guys that I know from my games play.

They prolly have a lot of money IRL. Deposit once in a while and when they run good at 30/60 or whatever they take their money to nosebleeds.

[Absolution]

[ QUOTE ]
I dont play nosebleeds.

But up through 30/60 you do the exact same as you do on 1/2. You look for the fish and exploit them. 60/10 guys plays 30/60 as well.

How do they afford it? I guess they have good jobs or rich parents/husbands.

At partys 100/200 I sometimes notice 50/15 guys that I know from my games play.

They prolly have a lot of money IRL. Deposit once in a while and when they run good at 30/60 or whatever they take their money to nosebleeds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, don't forget that the long term is sometimes really the LONG TERM. The edges in limit poker are small and a losing player can keep playing for a long time before they realize they are losing. He could be the worst player at every table for 20K+ hands and still be a significant winner. That's what keeps them coming back. If they all went broke in a month there would be no limit poker.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
I dont play nosebleeds.

But up through 30/60 you do the exact same as you do on 1/2. You look for the fish and exploit them. 60/10 guys plays 30/60 as well.

How do they afford it? I guess they have good jobs or rich parents/husbands.

At partys 100/200 I sometimes notice 50/15 guys that I know from my games play.

They prolly have a lot of money IRL. Deposit once in a while and when they run good at 30/60 or whatever they take their money to nosebleeds.

[/ QUOTE ]
QFT. Once found two of my favorite fish (one a 60/10 type) at the same 100/200 stars game, and an empty seat singing to me.

[jt1]

You should know your opponents somewhat. Does it look like he's made a difficult fold in the past half hour? If so then it's a bet. If he's been calling with any pair...

There are metagame considerations here too. If fish has a large br in front of him then lean towards betting

Your position is important in 3rd level thinking which makes betting less attractive in this case. But if you were UTG with a Queen high hand then betting is a good idea.

And your hand is important. Having the nut high card on a draw heavy board is nice. If you had T9 instead of Q5 then betting is probably a must.


The quizzes and hand examples should get you thinking rather than teach you to play by rote.