Because I might be bored at work

[Surf]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe his understanding of poker theory is great.Not raising from SB with AQ to knock a bad playing BB out can't be a bigger mistake than making value raises on turn based on the fact that your opponent can't have a certain hand because he didn't reraise preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO not reraising AQ here in villain's shoes is a mistake because you let the BB correctly call with small PPs and non-dominated junk like 96 that has 6 live outs against your hand, and who will collect bets from you postflop when he hits. If villain flatcalled AA or KK that is a different story b/c the BB now doesn't have odds to chase those crappy hands b/c he is so severely dominated.

If we're not making value-raises b/c we narrowed our opponent's range down to logical hands using his actions as a guide, when are we value-raising, just with nuts and near-nuts?

If villain raises, there are 3 coldcalls and I 3bet, and he flatcalls i know 100% he doesn't have AA or KK, so if i flop a baby set and there is an A or K or both on the board i'm 100% confident my hand is best (vs him) so i'm going to try and take him to valuetown. If he reraises me and I start getting scared of AA/KK i'm not playing good poker, i'm playing MUBS poker.

[ QUOTE ]

And in any case I agree with what you're saying about the flop checkraise. If we think that him not raising preflop is a sign of weakness doesn't the fact that he is checkraising the flop mean more strength than it usually would?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've talked with Entity and thought about it and I agree that his flop c/r and lead is pretty strong, stronger than I gave him credit for initially - but I still feel that unless he did something bizarre like CC AQ(which, as i said would be a mistake) his most likely holdings are speculative suited stuff and Axs which are calling b/c the BB is fishy.

Surf

[surfdoc]

Interesting stuff. How exactly do you come up with all these equity percentages? Is that just form spending tons of time with pokerstove? It is all pretty impressive yet I am unsure how practical or accurate.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
Interesting stuff. How exactly do you come up with all these equity percentages? Is that just form spending tons of time with pokerstove? It is all pretty impressive yet I am unsure how practical or accurate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, the equity stuff was stove. It was giving him some slowplayed preflop hands of AA and KK and some hands he should 3bet but we don't know if he does, like AQ, as well as some suited broadway hands that he probably shouldn't play like this but does sometimes (KTs, QJs, QTs, KJs), and a range of suited Aces as well. Then I gave the monkey in the middle a range which included pairs and gutters, mostly. Lots of Kx and Qx hands hoping to hit 2pr. You were both around 45% equity and monkey was 10%, but it looked to me like even though you have 45% equity vs his bet you have so much less (but still enough to call) vs a turn raise. The only occasion where a turn raise is "easy" is when he won't 3bet KQ and AQ because then he only has 8 hands he can 3bet with (JTs, AA, KK). The doublesuitedness of the board and the fact that he coldcalled make this a pretty interesting hand because, like Surf said, he's got a narrow selection of a wide range of hands.

If you're positive you can't call a 3bet then raising is close, but again it depends on how the river gets played. You're clearly getting enough overlay to raise in this spot but the 3-bet should hurt badly enough that it makes the hand shift, in my mind.

The only way I think it becomes a clear raise is when we define SB's hand as narrowly as some people have done -- Axs and suited broadway -- but the problem with that is that it really negates a full range of hands that are very possible given how little we know about our opponent.

Rob

[Apanage]

Don't get me wrong. I'm not good enough to say that your turn value raise is wrong and obviously it was the right play when we know the results in this hand.
My point is that I think that deception and informationhiding is as important as pushing marginal value bets preflop.
My theory is that against thinking opponents we are making more money postflop than we can get by raising preflop if we still can make gutsy postflop plays.
In this case the villain takes a risk by giving BB better odds to call preflop and he is giving up a marginal valueraise against UTG+1 who certainly will have the best of him postflop because he has position on him (at least if we think of him as a good player). And villain has also helped UTG+1 to narrow down villains hand.

Giving BB worse odds is not free either. It costs money to do that. Sure he will have outs that can outdraw you, but he can also call you down with inferior hands making you money and he can make incorrect draws because that is what bad players do.And he is also still paying to see the initial raise so you arejust giving him a discount so not having BB in the hand can theoretically also cost you money not just gain you money ,especially when it is a bad player.

If I knew every player would hand read in the same manner as 2+2ers I would make more "incorrect" preflop plays when I'm OOP because I think I would get it back postflop because players putting me on the wrong hand.

[surfdoc]

[ QUOTE ]
Axs (keep in mind 1/2 of the Axs hands here have very good equity here given their combodraw+2pr outs+chop outs)

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually I think this is incorrect and probably plays a not insignificant role when looking at SBs hand range. The board has the AcKc and I hold As. The Ahxh (1/4 not 1/2) is therefore the only Ax hand with "very good equity".

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Axs (keep in mind 1/2 of the Axs hands here have very good equity here given their combodraw+2pr outs+chop outs)

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually I think this is incorrect and probably plays a not insignificant role when looking at SBs hand range. The board has the AcKc and I hold As. The Ahxh (1/4 not 1/2) is therefore the only Ax hand with "very good equity".

[/ QUOTE ]

Any Axs hand has 10 outs for a chop and 3 outs for a win. Axhh has 10 outs for a chop and 12 outs for a win. I'm not stating that their equity is great vs yours, just that there isn't much value specifically vs Axs if other better hands are included in the mix, which I've been arguing should be the case; it's not like you can have Axs absolutely crushed here because of the rather large possibility of a river chop. He's rarely got worse than an OESD here in terms of overall equity.

Note also that I said that 1/2 of the Axs combos (there are only 2 combo) have very good equity. The other one doesn't have bad equity, but it's not good. It's a technicality but I just wanted to make sure that you understood that I was pointing out that AXhh has very good equity, AXdd has "ok" equity (but is in far from bad shape). When combined you certainly aren't crushing them, though HU vs just Axs here you would definitely raise, if you knew there was no way your opponent could get away from 1pr on the river.

Rob

[surfdoc]

The SB mucked to my river bet and the BB called with KTo. His read got changed from "loose bad" to "horrible fishy retard" and my buddy list grew by one.