Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Poker > Heads Up Poker

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 10-30-2007, 04:04 PM
daveT daveT is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: disproving SAGE
Posts: 2,458
Default Re: Pooh-Bah post: Level 0 exploitation

[ QUOTE ]
I think calling a 3bet w/ 97s and those stacks is a big mistake. If you knew he had QQ you would probably never call. And you're losing your whole stack if the flop is 9 or 7 high.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that how much you can out-play your opponent after the flop is vital to how loose you can play before the flop. I did say that if we do not hit at least two pair, we are done with the hand.

I, of coarse, do not know my opponent's exact hand. Many times, in this situation, he could have a large range of hands, including as little as A8. I wanted to show that once this villain checks after re-raising pf, he will more often than not have a large pair. It is exploiting this mistake that I wanted to focus on.

I really hope we aren't losing all of our chips with a pair of 7s or 9s, especially after seeing this check.

vs AK on a 745 flop we would have a 74% equity, sure.



[ QUOTE ]
The villain was the stupidest ever on the A7 vs 9T hand. If he wants you to raise the turn, why don't you?

[/ QUOTE ]

This could be a problem. I sometimes get a little trappy. I figured that I have one more street to tie this villain tighter to the pot. If he doesn't actually have an Ace, but something like 77, then I don't want to encourage a fold. But, yes, with the thinking that I am stating, it would be better to raise on the turn.

[ QUOTE ]
Calling a 3bet w/ A8 is bad. In fact, I would rather call later in the game than earlier, because later in the game when stacks are 10BB deep you're not even playing poker anymore and A8 is good enough to get it in.

[/ QUOTE ]

This hand goes with the thinking that it is better to press small equities earlier than it is to press large equities later.

I think that if you were willing to play these kind of hands strongly earlier in the match, you would be surprised to see how they end up. People tend to think you play terrible like everyone else, so they will press all sorts of crazy holdings and attempt horrible bluffs, and yes, even shove with middling pair hands on the rivers, call all-in shoves with second pair etc.

I knew many things I was writing would get a ton of heat. The reason why I wrote this stuff is because I want people to question the foundations of their games. Sometimes poker is counter-intuitive until you learn to think of it mathematically. I do believe that if you are a slightly winning, slightly losing, or break even at these stakes, learning to apply these will boost you nearer to a 60% wr.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-30-2007, 04:16 PM
ChicagoRy ChicagoRy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: husng training site
Posts: 2,083
Default Re: Pooh-Bah post: Level 0 exploitation

I don't think a villain 3-betting preflop and then checking the flop means he's automatically super strong "overpair."

Especially at the lower levels, I think it would be a big mistake to assume that.

And I think it is -EV against most players to call a 3-bet with A8.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-30-2007, 04:33 PM
daveT daveT is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: disproving SAGE
Posts: 2,458
Default Re: Pooh-Bah post: Level 0 exploitation

[ QUOTE ]
Glad to see someone else was puzzled by these examples. The points made are reasonable, but I was left thinking wtf on most of the hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

All of these hands are derived from actual examples. Many of them are modified for two reasons:

1- I did not want to include elements that could change the focus of what I was getting at. I am sure that if I threw the actual bets, calls and checks, I would be spending the next three weeks explaining the meta-game. However, in all of these examples, I was left with no real idea how to complete the hand. I am simply stating some thoughts that could be used when critical decisions need to be made.

2- I didn't look at the HHs and my memory sucks.

[ QUOTE ]
We call a large three bet with 97s. Villian doesn't bet his over pair on this EXTREMELY WET BOARD....?

[/ QUOTE ]

It does happen. I used this example to show when you should check or bet. The key is not falling for this trap.

[ QUOTE ]
I search for the villian that shoves A7 on a paired board to a huge river raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

We all do. But you don't need to search very far.

[ QUOTE ]
I can't follow how we get to that river call with 99 when there are two overs and we can't see the action. WTF was villian doing in this hand with 43 for all his chips when he needs to double up and is short, trying to flop a wheel?

[/ QUOTE ]

I mentioned that he re-raised me before the flop. I had second pair + a gut shot on the flop. J87, the turn brought a 6, and the river brought a Q. I explained the thought process on the river and why I feel the call is correct.

The title of this is "Level 0 exploitation"

Level 0 being the Sklansky (red underline on 2+2?) of the different levels of thinking:

0- what do I have?
1- What does my opponent have?
2- What does my opponent think I have, etc.

I had a hand that was worth a call with the pot odds.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand why suits don't matter in these examples.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rainbow boards. If I am missing on an important concept about suits on rainbow boards, I would be pleased to know.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't undertand why villian stacks off with second pair on the first hand. There isn't much you are calling that flop bet with besides an ace after calling a large 3 bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Explained one post above.

If you think that your typical small stakes SNG player thinks like this, you are handing away credit. Like a credit card company that gives easy credit, they are not maximizing there earn rate.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, Some times a 1/4 pot or weak bet after a 3bet pf is sometimes a trap (or a draw). (call and get thurr ???) [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Call all of your chips and get there often, yes. I showed how to think of each hand on different boards and what plays have the larges equities on each play.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes there is a point of desperation. But understand the primary method for villian to double up and for you to swap to the short stack is for you to make that light/marginal call while behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

This would be a great addition if you explained this.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-30-2007, 04:50 PM
daveT daveT is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: disproving SAGE
Posts: 2,458
Default Re: Pooh-Bah post: Level 0 exploitation

Glad to see you joined in ChicagoRY.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think a villain 3-betting preflop and then checking the flop means he's automatically super strong "overpair."

[/ QUOTE ]

It may not always mean that. If the board did come up different, say 743, wouldn't you be willing to check behind and keep the pot small? This would allow us to lose the least from a large pair and induce bluffs from missed hands like KT, etc.

[ QUOTE ]
Especially at the lower levels, I think it would be a big mistake to assume that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see this play all the time. I do believe it is a huge mistake to auto-bluff when they check to you. It is a trap that I think we could often fall into. Obviously, with meta-game considerations, we need to deviate.

[ QUOTE ]
And I think it is -EV against most players to call a 3-bet with A8.

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh, you probably are right, especially in the later levels, but on the first hand, I am trying to think how they would play better hands. Over-all, it seems that I will often face a shove here, which I would be retarded to call.

This is one of those things of what ranges we are facing versus a typical opponent. It may be very thin, but when we consider that hands like AK, AQ, KK, etc would straight out open shove, or raise an inhibiting amount, the balance is shifted.

I can't stand the thought of arguing with someone I know plays better than me. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-30-2007, 05:36 PM
ChicagoRy ChicagoRy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: husng training site
Posts: 2,083
Default Re: Pooh-Bah post: Level 0 exploitation

You're confusing how we think when coming up with a hand range to call an open shove with and how we should think of somebody who 3-bets first hand.

These are not the same types of players. The player that 3-bets you is not likely any of the players that shove over it.

I'm kind of confusing myself, but basically I'm saying that it can easily and is often AK, AQ, etc. Just because he's not one of the shoving donks doesn't mean he has a weaker hand, in fact often times the players that shove over the raise first hand have weaker hands than the players that 3-bet you to a normal amount first hand. That is why (though it changes at different buyin levels) the calling range is a little wider than most players expect for first hand shoves from villains.

And I probably haven't played (or maybe ran I don't really know anymore) much better than you the last month or two.

Edited for clarity.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-30-2007, 05:52 PM
daveT daveT is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: disproving SAGE
Posts: 2,458
Default Re: Pooh-Bah post: Level 0 exploitation

When I have time, I will look through my data-base and check how many of my first few hands go. From my experience, players at these stakes tend to over-play the first 3 hands. That is the central thesis of my argument.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-30-2007, 05:56 PM
Landonfan Landonfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: scrombieville
Posts: 648
Default Re: Pooh-Bah post: Level 0 exploitation

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think calling a 3bet w/ 97s and those stacks is a big mistake. If you knew he had QQ you would probably never call. And you're losing your whole stack if the flop is 9 or 7 high.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that how much you can out-play your opponent after the flop is vital to how loose you can play before the flop. I did say that if we do not hit at least two pair, we are done with the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
Once we call the 3bet, we don't have much room for outplaying anyone. Say he checks a dry flop and we decide to bluff. The pot's 480, so we're betting around 300-350. That means we're bluffing over a third of our stack on the first hand with no reads on the villain.

Another scenario: the flop comes something like T72 and he hits the bet pot button (pretty damn common at this level). What are we doing now? If we're not going broke with TP we certainly shouldn't go broke with MP, but calling 3bets then folding a flopped pair will get you run over at this level.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think you're saying is that we're not continuing past the flop unless we have a monster or villain checks. If villain does check, we make a big bluff if we missed, or try to check it down if we hit something.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-31-2007, 11:38 AM
bbbushu bbbushu is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: it\'s [censored] or walk
Posts: 1,673
Default Re: Pooh-Bah post: Level 0 exploitation

i'll just chime in to defend davet's hypothesis that the three-bet/check line is nearly always a trap. in limited games, i think it's very rarely villain giving up on UI overs.

nice post [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
bbbushu
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-31-2007, 02:13 PM
daveT daveT is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: disproving SAGE
Posts: 2,458
Default Re: Pooh-Bah post: Level 0 exploitation

Here are some hands that have surprising results. I posted three in LC yesterday.

All of these happened within the first three hands:

Full Tilt Poker, $10 + $0.50 NL Hold'em Sit n' Go, 10/20 Blinds, 2 Players
LegoPoker Hand History Converter

SB: 1,750
Hero (BB): 1,250

Pre-Flop: (30) T Q dealt to Hero (BB)
<font color="red">SB raises to 120</font>, Hero calls 100

Flop: (240) 7 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 Players)
Hero checks, <font color="red">SB bets 140</font>, <font color="red">Hero raises to 660</font>, <font color="red">SB raises to 1,630 and is All-In</font>, Hero calls 470 and is All-In

Turn: (2,500) 3 (2 Players - 1 is All-In)

River: (2,500) 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 Players - 1 is All-In)

Results: 2,500 Pot
SB showed 9 Q (a pair of Queens) and LOST (-1,250 NET)
Hero showed T Q (a pair of Queens) and WON 2,500 (+1,250 NET)

Poker Stars, $5 + $0.25 NL Hold'em Tournament, 10/20 Blinds, 2 Players
LegoPoker Hand History Converter

SB: 1,500
Hero (BB): 1,500

Pre-Flop: (30) 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] A dealt to Hero (BB)
SB calls 10, Hero checks

Flop: (40) 8 3 A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 Players)
<font color="red">Hero bets 60</font>, SB calls 60

Turn: (160) 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 Players)
<font color="red">Hero bets 160</font>, SB calls 160

River: (480) 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 Players)
<font color="red">Hero bets 400</font>, <font color="red">SB raises to 1,260 and is All-In</font>, Hero calls 860 and is All-In

Results: 3,000 Pot
SB showed T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (a pair of Eights) and LOST (-1,500 NET)
Hero showed 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] A (a pair of Aces) and WON 3,000 (+1,500 NET)

Poker Stars, $5 + $0.25 NL Hold'em Tournament, 10/20 Blinds, 2 Players
LegoPoker Hand History Converter

BB: 1,520
Hero (SB): 1,480

Pre-Flop: (30) 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] dealt to Hero (SB)
<font color="red">Hero raises to 60</font>, BB calls 40

Flop: (120) A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 2 4 (2 Players)
BB checks, <font color="red">Hero bets 80</font>, <font color="red">BB raises to 160</font>, Hero calls 80

Turn: (440) T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 Players)
<font color="red">BB bets 300</font>, Hero calls 300

River: (1,040) K (2 Players)
<font color="red">BB bets 300</font>, <font color="red">Hero raises to 960 and is All-In</font>, BB calls 660

Results: 2,960 Pot
BB showed K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6 (a pair of Kings) and LOST (-1,480 NET)
Hero showed 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (a pair of Aces) and WON 2,960 (+1,480 NET)

I could probably pull up a hundred more of these. I am suggesting that the typical bad opponent that you face will not know how to play against a seemingly random hand. Let's face it, it is no point waiting for proof that you are against a moron when there is a strong probability that you are against one when you playing at the 5s and 10s. If you can learn how to play against a random hand, you will have a huge edge against your opposition, and you taking advantage of these edges early is a powerful tool.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-31-2007, 02:30 PM
HokieGreg HokieGreg is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: zomg i got my taco
Posts: 811
Default Re: Pooh-Bah post: Level 0 exploitation

Dave,

I'm sure you also have hundreds of hands that you were on the bad end of these situations. The key to beating low stakes is playing abc poker. This is not abc poker imo.

Flat calling 6 x bb preflop raises???

Overbet-leading the flop???

Flating a 4 x 3-bet with 97o???

It all seems extremely results-oriented to me.

-HokieGreg
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.