1/2 facing 2 opponents with overcards

[wpr101]

Is there a hand converter for this forum? I tried using the STT converter but it didn't work.

Anyways do I have implied pot odds to call with overcards here? No reads on villian.

PokerStars Game #4991621392: Hold'em Limit ($1/$2) - 2006/05/20 - 00:57:44 (ET)
Table 'Myrrha' 10-max Seat #10 is the button
Seat 1: Robshev ($43.25 in chips)
Seat 2: TrojanRabbit ($43.75 in chips)
Seat 3: Pseudonym ($74.75 in chips)
Seat 4: JMGrant ($8.25 in chips)
Seat 5: wpr101 ($199.75 in chips)
Seat 6: metrofan2k ($14 in chips)
Seat 7: WICKEDWILD ($194.50 in chips)
Seat 8: uofmgrad ($48.50 in chips)
Seat 9: J_BUD_R_8 ($18.50 in chips)
Seat 10: TyZillian ($49.50 in chips)
Robshev: posts small blind $0.50
TrojanRabbit: posts big blind $1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to wpr101 [Qs Ah]
Pseudonym: folds
JMGrant: calls $1
wpr101: raises $1 to $2
metrofan2k: folds
WICKEDWILD: folds
uofmgrad: folds
J_BUD_R_8: folds
TyZillian: folds
Robshev: folds
wpr101 said, "yo u went to u of m?"
TrojanRabbit: calls $1
JMGrant: calls $1
*** FLOP *** [Jc 2s 6h]
TrojanRabbit: bets $1
JMGrant: folds
wpr101: folds
TrojanRabbit collected $6.25 from pot
TrojanRabbit: doesn't show hand
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $6.50 | Rake $0.25
Board [Jc 2s 6h]
Seat 1: Robshev (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 2: TrojanRabbit (big blind) collected ($6.25)
Seat 3: Pseudonym folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: JMGrant folded on the Flop
Seat 5: wpr101 folded on the Flop
Seat 6: metrofan2k folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: WICKEDWILD folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: uofmgrad folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: J_BUD_R_8 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 10: TyZillian (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)

[John Ryan]

I don't know about your hand converter issue, but as far as the hand stated goes, you must remember pot odds and implied odds are two different things, and this is not really a matter of implied odds. The first real issue is: is one of your 6 outs going to give you the best hand? Though not knowing the player makes the situation more difficult, I might be worried that he might have made a ragged two pair or possibly top pair w/ a good kicker by defending his blind w/ AJ, KJ, or QJ two of which pose a big problem. You must remember he bet into you after your show of aggression and with you being in position which shows some strength. In terms of pot odds, the break even point for 6 outer is 6.7 to 1 so you actually don't have sufficient odds for this hand even if spiking a pair will win it for you. The only implied odds you have to worry about in this hand are reverse implied odds, i.e. say you spike an ace on the turn and he has two pair, and now you are forced to pay off a better hand maybe even for multiple bets per street. Overall this situation, though I've made it complex is relatively simple. You raised with the better hand, probably got outflopped, the pot is small, the threat of being dominated is large, just save yourself trouble and muck it.


By the way, I'm a long time reader of two plus two publications, but new to this site, and it is truly a quality resource which lives up the solid reputation of the company.

[wpr101]

I agree with most of your points except that he may have two pair. It is unlikely he called with any hand that would give him two pair. A set would be more likely I think. Also, his raise into me could mean anything anything... maybe he hoping I missed the flop with overcards which I did. I am assuming most of the time if I hit my ace or queen it will be good considering the range of hands he is on. But your point is well taken that I may be drawing dead.

[Nick Royale]

PokerStars 1/2 Hold'em (10 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

Preflop: Hero is UTG+2 with Q[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG+1 calls, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#666666">6 folds</font>, BB calls, UTG+1 calls.

Flop: (6.50 SB) J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">BB bets</font>, UTG+1 folds, Hero folds.

Final Pot: 3.75 BB

[wpr101]

An example where the play works well and has implied odds I just had. Obviously this will not happen most of the time but when it does you get good odds.

PokerStars 1/2 Hold'em (10 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

Preflop: Hero is MP3 with A, Q.
[color=#CC3333]UTG raises</font>, [color=#666666]4 folds</font>, Hero calls, [color=#666666]4 folds</font>.

Flop: (5.50 SB) T, 8, 7 [color=#0000FF](2 players)</font>
[color=#CC3333]UTG bets</font>, Hero calls.

Turn: (3.75 BB) A [color=#0000FF](2 players)</font>
[color=#CC3333]UTG bets</font>, [color=#CC3333]Hero raises</font>, UTG calls.

River: (7.75 BB) 4 [color=#0000FF](2 players)</font>
UTG checks, [color=#CC3333]Hero bets</font>, UTG calls.

Final Pot: 9.75 BB

*Wow that color thing came out messed up. I'm not sure why.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow that color thing came out messed up. I'm not sure why.

[/ QUOTE ]
Change format to 2+2 forums.

Readless I think you should peel the flop in hand 1. Fold hand 2 preflop, if you decide to continue (maybe you have a laggy read?) you should 3-bet to isolate the preflop raiser. A hand like AQo shouldn't be cold called here because it's not a hand for multiway action and multiway action is what you're inducing by calling.

[John Ryan]

Not to nitpick, but I think discussion of the first hand has met with some flawed analysis. The specifics follow:

-he flopped a set - given the way he played the hand, i feel the chance of this being the case is tiny. even beginning players show a tendency to slowplay sets till the turn, no matter what the flop is. and with this flop being very ragged, and having a loose player and a raiser in the pot, a slowplay till the turn, or at least a check raise would seem the much more likely play for a set.

-betting as a bluff - rarely do players bet into a preflop raiser on the flop with a stone cold bluff. the overwhelming tendency of players is to check to them. let's assume you'd make this raise with AA, KK, QQ, JJ, TT, 99, 88, 77, AK, AQ, AJ, KQ, &amp; KJ. Those seem to me to be a possible spectrum of raising hands here considering the limit. That makes 112 combinations, 64 of which give you at least 2nd pair. I'm not saying he/she made this analysis, but when you raise, these are the types of hands he/she puts you on. Assuming you'll stay with everything 2nd pair and above, as well as AK b/c many players will not release AK on a ragged board for one bet, that means he/she can only push you out if you have one of 32 combinations, namely any AQ or KQ hand. This means, that the chance of a bluff succeeding is very small, translating into the concept that a bet here indicates real strength. Also, look to the other analysis given here that you should peel off a card, I think this also serves to prove why it's not a bluff b/c w/ most all of the hands I listed, most players will forgoe the odds and analysis and just take another card, hence reducing the possible success of a bluff.

-2 pair - you seem to have discredited my analysis, but i think that you should reevaluate. many players at this level will defend their blind with almost any two suited cards. he could easily have looked down at a 62s or J6s and called hoping to flop some sort of a straight or flush draw. however, those are both vulnerable holdings if you have a big hand. for example if you hold an overpair like aces or kings you still have 5 solid outs against a ragged two pair, not to mention a pair of the turn card. this in mind, the situation might leave a person inclined to start throwing money at this hand before it gets drawn out on.

-top pair solid kicker - i believe this is the most probable holding. either AJ KJ QJ or TJ are hands most all players would defend a big blind with. betting out is also a legitimate play for a player at this level. he might be afraid of trying for a check raise and watching you check behind him, or he might just not want to put in two bets with this hand if he can avoid it. either way, the flop bet indicates strength, more so than your hand can handle.

-calling and peeling off a card - this, in my opinion, would be an egregious error with this hand. you do not have the proper odds to just call and hope to get lucky, also given the analysis above, both of you have overlooked what i said about reverse implied odds. i never said you were drawing dead, but you could easily be dominated here, and the threat of that, with a lack of appropriate pot odds, combined with the possibility that you could have to pay off a strong two pair if you do hit one of your cards, makes this an easy fold. the pot is very small, there is no point in trying to win it with all of this risk. peeling off cards and playing passively all the way down with big unpaired hands is a bad habit of unschooled players. you should either stick with a read of weakness and raise, or take the logical and mathematical route and fold. remember, the pot is still very small, there's nothing to fight for.

- why i'm still discussing this - i believe that the question you've posed here is a very interesting one. learning to play overcards in situations where the flop is less than desirable is a hallmark of expert play. i believe this situation (not the betting pattern though) is very typical and is something that all players can learn to address better.

btw - i do also agree that hand 2 should be folded or 3 bet preflop.

[wpr101]

To be honest I disagree with almost everything you said...

- A set is more likely than two pair here because consider his range. In your analysis you are assuming that he is a weak player and is calling with any 2 suited. I really don't think those hands are in his range. But any pair is certainly in his range. J6s, J2s, and 62s are exteremly unlikely holdings and I don't even put them in his range.

- I am a mostly no limit high stakes sit and go player. If a player leads out into me after I was the preflop raiser I take this as a definite sign of weakness. He is expected me to bet to so it doesn't make sense for him to do that unlness he is trying to conceal the strength of his hand as would be the case with a set. Typically I see a lot of leading out when the flop comes low and the villian assumes the hero's range contains a lot of overcards. It is not called a stone cold bluff so much as a probe bet if you want to use Harrington terminology.

Calling and taking a card is not so bad here. I am drawing to six outs and getting about 6:1 on my money. We already discussed why it is very unlikely I am behind here given the texture of the board.

I do agree with you about 3 betting that other hand I posted.

Thanks for the analysis though... it is rare to get such a long and thoughtful post like this. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[John Ryan]

These will be my last words on the topic, but you're still not taking into account many issues.

set vs. two pair - Concerning his possible range of hands, you have not addressed the fact that you are playing 1/2 limit hold 'em against the big blind. You yourself said you have no read on him, so you cannot put him on a "range" of hands, so my assumption was game condition, and I assure you a regular loose passive 1/2 player possibly getting 4 or 5 to 1 preflop will defend his big blind with almost any two suited cards. And you also did not respond to my claim that even beginnig players will often slowplay or at least check raise a set. You say he probably puts you on two unpaired overs, and if that is the case, why would he bet a set, b/c you'll probably just fold. If he had a set a check raise or slowplay would be much more probable. This said, a vulnerable two pair is definitely worth a bet, precisely b/c it is vulnerable (see previous post).

- Bet: weakness or strength - You say you are a high stakes S&amp;G player, which is an entirely different ball game. Small stakes limit hold 'em is a game of value betting, not deception and psychology. You did not respond at all to my discussion of the possible combinations your opponent could perceive you as holding. If your opponent puts you on a "range" of hands, he'll see that bluff will not succeed anywhere near enough to show a profit (see previous post). If it was the habit of players to lead into a previous raiser as a bluff, things like buying a free card would not exist. Any theorist (Sklansky, Malmuth, Harman, even Harrington) will tell you it is the tendency of players to become passive against aggressive players. Page 74 of Harrington on Hold 'em Volume I (since you reference it) validates:

"Many players tighten their game when they find themselves in a pot with players who are known to push people around. It's a natural tendency, but you have to resist it and try play good, percentage poker."

- calling and taking a card - You do have 6:1 but there are two factors you failed to respond to. The first is that the BREAK EVEN pot odds for a 6 outer are 6.75:1 (see previous post), and you cannot just round up pot odds to justify a call. Your response will be that implied odds cover that, but you neglected my analysis that you actually have to fear reverse implied odds b/c your opponent could easily hold AJ KJ or QJ here, all legitimate defending hands, 2 of which leave you playing for 3 outs, which require odds you aren't going to get, actual or implied.

- Pot size - This is a critical factor that has been vastly underestimated, there are 3 big bets in this pot, hardly anything to fight for, and with all of the reasons stated above to get rid of your hand, why would you fight a potential losing battle over this pot?

- Your Harrington probe bet reference, though it provided a basis for your literacy, did nothing for this issue. A probe bet as defined by Harrington is "A small bet, between 1/4 and 1/3 of the pot, and it's usually an attempt to get some information cheaply, while holding out the possibility of winning the pot right there if no one wants to fight." Though this seems comparable, he was talking about no limit tournaments, not small stakes limit hold 'em cash games, where as I said prior, deception and psychology or not of such high value, but value betting is king.

again, sorry to nit pick, but I feel this is a very important issue.