Playing second match against this guy.
Supernova status (if that means anything?)
First game he 3b NAI to 90 chips and call a 4b jam w Q8o @ 25BB vs my 66.
So I accepted rematch.
Notes on player:
expands 3b jamming range end game
willing to contest postflop on boards where no one has anything
[P] 3b NAI to 90 and call jam Q8o @ 25BB
[P] jam Q4s @ 10BB
[P] call jam A2o @ 8BB
[P] jam 75o @ 8BB
[P] raise fold @ 12BB
[P] call jam A2o @ 11BB
[F] c/r NAI T55 tt, 2barrel 8 turn
[F] check back K99, bet 7 turn, check back T river w T8s
He's opening about 80% on the button in the 20-25 BB region and as he gets shorter he he's been open jamming more hands.
Later in the game he showed competence vs a wide min raising range and so I had to adjust my opening range to stop being exploited by his wide 3b range.
1. Close spot between 3b jamming and flatting pre @ 14BB vs wide opener who is aggressive postflop ?
2. Villain cbets > 0.5P on flop then 2barrels turn for slightly more than pot. I think this is straightforward fold even though I turned additional equity?
No Limit Holdem Tournament • 2 Players
$14.69+$0.31
Hand converted by the official HUSNG.com hand converter
| BB | Hero | 430 | |
| SB | Dr G Homer | 570 |
Effective Stacks: 14bb
Blinds 15/30
Pre-Flop (45, 2 players)
Hero is BB
Dr G Homer raises to 60, Hero calls 30
Flop (120, 2 players)
Hero checks, Dr G Homer bets 75, Hero calls 75
Turn (270, 2 players)
Hero checks, Dr G Homer bets 285, Hero folds
Final Pot: 270
Dr G Homer wins 555 ( won +135 )
Hero lost -135
Hi Cdon,
I know this player to be of a good standard and usually plays higher than $15s I think,
Im prefering a 3 bet shove here against a decent aggro villian, With 65s we are going to find it diffiuclt to get 1 pair hands to showdown vs this guy as was the case is this particular hand.
What % of hands was he opening at this stack depth?
Even if he has a call 3bs % of say 25-27% still think the shove here is plus ev??
Regards
Phish
He had only folded 1 hand from the button over 8 hands 11-17BB deep.
7/8 ~ 88%
But its a very small sample. Let's assume he's opening 80% to be a bit conservative.
If we assume villain is opening with range [R] and calling a 3b jam with range [C].
When he min raises, we can 3b jam and will have EV compared to folding of:
EV(3b jam) = f * 3.0 + (1 - f) * [ 2*S*e - (S - 1.0)]
or
EV(3b jam) = { ( [R] - [C] ) / [R] } * 3.0 + {([C] / [R]) * (2 * S * e - (S-1.0))}
where e is the equity vs villain's calling range vs a 3b jam which is a function of [C] which can be calculated using a poker equity calculator.
I solved EV(3b jam) of 6x5x for various {[R] , [C] } values @ S = 14.0BB and found:
[R]
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
[C]
10%
-3.66
-0.33
0.78
1.33
1.67
1.89
2.05
2.17
2.26
2.33
20%
-
-2.90
-0.93
0.05
0.64
1.03
1.31
1.53
1.69
1.82
30%
-
-
-2.46
-1.10
-0.28
0.27
0.66
0.95
1.18
1.36
40%
-
-
-
-2.21
-1.17
-0.48
0.02
0.39
0.68
0.91
50%
-
-
-
-
-2.17
-1.31
-0.69
-0.23
0.13
0.41
60%
-
-
-
-
-
-1.95
-1.24
-0.71
-0.30
0.03
70%
-
-
-
-
-
-
-1.87
-1.26
-0.79
-0.41
80%
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-1.76
-1.23
-0.81
90%
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-1.50
-1.05
100%
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-1.18
The top % of hands as defined in ProPokerTools such that:
10% = AA-77,AxKx-Ax9x,AxKy-AxJy,KxQx-KxTx,KxQy,QxJx
20% = AA-55,AxKx-Ax2x,AxKy-Ax9y,KxQx-Kx7x,KxQy-KxTy,QxJx-Qx9x,QxJy,JxTx,Jx9x,Tx9x
30% = AA-33,AxKx-Ax2x,AxKy-Ax7y,Ax5y,Ax4y,KxQx-Kx3x,KxQy-Kx9y,QxJx-Qx8x,QxJy,QxTy,JxTx-Jx8x,JxTy,Tx9x,Tx8x,9x8x
etc
This is obviously a crude approximation given that villain can be open jamming low PPs or limping some hands.
But this villain has not been limping and the equity vs the parts of his calling range which are on the border probably have about the same equity anyway.
I think the critical factor is how many folds we get. There are also some card removal effects which don't affect the 6x5x case too much but could be considered in a more precise analysis.
I think villain is opening about 80% and probably calling a 3b jam with a range with a few less hands in the 20% range.
For the [R] = 80%, [C] = 20%, we find 6x5x is +1.53 BB better 3b jammed than folded.
And I think you're right, we are going to struggle to realise our postflop show down value with our marginal holdings vs a competently aggressive player out of position.
And we don't hit enough monsters to flat and play for implied value.
Pretty sure this should have been a 3b jam pre vs this guy.
Hi,
Well, I must say, I'd exclude myself from those in the fold-on-the turn corner. When you're behind here, the river is, the very decent amount of the time offering up 14 outs, which is pretty much pot odds. So he doesn't need to be a prolific bluffer to warrant a call.
I would say if you can be so certain as to fold this hand on the turn, which you might, then you should be calling, not jamming against a player like this - since he is that straightforward. However, if he is aggressive, a bit tricky and you fold in this scenario, then I'm not sure I'd want to call on the flop in the first place and be pushed around; as such I sense reraising would be a better option than calling.
Your hand isn't losing to that many more hands than, say, Q9, here the way the action has gone, unless you figure him to never slow down with any 9, or medium pair. But against an aggressive player, I'd prefer calling your hand to Q9 and, in fact, to even better hands.
On the turn villain bets 285 into a pot of 270.
There was (430 - 60 - 75 - 285) = 15 chips left behind if I call
So I basically have to jam or fold.
But he's never bet folding because it's only another 15 chips to call.
He has essentially jammed (430 - 60 - 75) = 295
I'm being layed 295 / (430*2) ~ 34% pot odds on the turn 2barrel jam.
Conceivably I could be ahead vs villain's bluffs and if behind I have outs:
6 = 2 outs
5 = 3 outs
clubs = 9 outs- (5c already counted)= 8 outs
Gross outs = 2+3+8 = 13 outs
Gross estimated equity vs single paired hands (eg overpairs betting big for protection when the board gets more drawy) = 13*2 = 26%
I have close to the amount of equity needed to put the rest of chips in on the turn if all my outs are clean and villain has a a lot of bluffs in his range.
Villain had been very aggressive, but my going read based on the boards he was being aggressive on that he was a thinking player rather than a spewtard.
I hadn't seen villain make cbet and turn bet sizes this big before so not sure what it means.
I think his bet sizes here unbalance his range => he's doing it either with bluffs or for value but not neccessarily both.
In the absence of reads to suggest otherwise, I'm generally assuming that a thinking aggressive player tends to bet bigger when they have it.
As you say, I'm getting about the correct odds to put the rest of the money in with my bluff catcher + redraw vs an aggressive player who likely has a lot of bluffs in his range => but does he really when he makes such large bet sizes on the flop and then pushes on the turn on this board?
Naturally we can't be sure how many outs you have, but best case scenario, assuming you are behind is definitely 14. Two sixes, three fives and 9 clubs - there is no double counting since you are holding the 5 and 6 of clubs. 14 outs in 46 = 30.4 %; you're effective pot-odds are around 34% (as you say its a done deal for the extra 15).
An aggressive player who perceives himself to be against a thinking opponent capable of laying down 3rd and some second pairs (I would infer) here should and most likely will certainly push a lot of hands, especially draws. If he perecevies you to fold say 98 or worse then to push with say QJ would absolutely be a productive play - he doesn't need much fold equity. If he's called loosely, by say any of the top two pairs, then he will probably average more than 10 outs - the odds aren't disastrous. If he is getting called only by hands which realise him far less outs then he clearly will have a great deal of fold equity by shoving - thus compensating for the poor odds he has delivered to himself when pushing and subsequently called.
It would be interesting analysis for you to disclose which hands you fold the turn and then determine which hands he could successfully push. My suspicion is, given your fold here, that he would attain sufficient fold equity to justify pushing a range of hands as bluffs (or semi bluffs). The question is whether he realises it or not.
I can't comment on the jamming with 65s, it is really a number crunching exercise and not something that lends itself easily to my intuition. I would say if it is a tough game and you're image is right then I can imagine making the play.
regards.
Hey thanks for pointing out my mistake of removing the 5c.
Because it's already in our hand, it's already excluded from the set of 5s and clubs.
I'm sure if villain is bluffing to this size, he can exploit the hell out of me by jamming the turn with basically his entire preflop + cbetting range.
But as I said, I have no information to suggest that his bets to this size are with a bluff-heavy range.
Well I tend to be biassed towards over-counting - much more of a schoolboy error ;) Doubtless our respective counting tendencies betray out attitudes of conservative and liberal folds!
Certainly the lack of information is problematic; however, for me, in this instance, it is innocence rather than guilt which must be proven. Since an awful lot of the time when we are behind we have close to the odds to call, I'd need to be very confident our opponent is in front the vast majority of time: there is little informtaion to support this or any view. As such my default would be to call rather than fold. Whilst we might rightly consider it unlikely our opponent is a rather liberal bluffer, if he is our advantage is huge as he is typically drawing to a handful of outs. So the likelihood of our opponent being a heavy bluffer might be low, but the impact, on EV, if he is, is naturally very high. Thus overall the weight should contribute materially to our decision. Also the more likely sceanrio of our opponent, sensng weakness, pushes a range of draws is less of an impact but since it is of higher frequency it should also gain an EV contribution.
So we ask ourselves: what are the chances our opponent is a heavy bluffer? If he is how much EV would a call gain? Likewise, what is the likelihood our opponent (at this stage) is a semi-bluffer? And again what is the impact on Ev if true? Although we may not have much information to go on explicity, for this person, we can't assume the likelihoods to be zero and construct our decision on that assumption. In this case it wouldn't take much to lean the scales over to a call. Also, a bluffing turn push will more will tend to correlate with the aggressive traits( I believe you assigned to your adversary), I would have thought. In addition, there is useful information to be had through calling (if there are future games).
There rests the case for the call!
As an aside, while I play quite a few turbos I'm not up to speed on literature, videos or heads-up tools. Some steer on where to start trawling would be greatly appreciated!
Many thanks and good luck.
I'm still very hesitant to assign many bluffs to a thinking aggressive player's range when he cbets bigger on this flop.
If he's not bluffing, we don't have the equity to get it in on the turn and have to fold.
Suggest checking out Mersenneary's ebook.
At a cost of free it's infinitely good value (pun intended for the math nerd readers).
The most comprehensive discussion/exploration of head up holdem strategising is Will Tipton's book Expert Heads Up Holdem.
With respect to videos, it really depends on what you want to achive in poker.
And more importantly, how hard you're prepared to work to achieve what you want.
I bought the premium pack and probably learned the most out of videos by:
- Mersenneary
- Coffeeyay
But different producers appeal to different types of people.
I think videos can be good value if you put in the required effort, but its a pretty big investment for new players, most of which are trying to build a roll from the microstakes.
Software:
Tracker: Pokertracker 4 is awesome
Poker calcs: Personally I think ProPokerTools (PPT) Odds Oracle is the nuts for calculations.
But if you don't have any spreadsheet or programming skills to get full value out of the software, I understand ICMIZER is a pretty good out of the box product for exploring common spots in SNGs.
Again, these products come with a pretty hefty up front investment for new players. But if you want to take poker seriously I think a tracker is mandatory. There are free equity calculators available and you can run simulations on PPT's website, as well as run PQL queries. You can always buy more powerful software later if you decide to pursue poker as a serious hobby.
Forums:
There are a lot of people who are passionate about poker who actively participate in forums. If you have a question, just ask. The worst that can happen is you cop some narcissistic spew :P
^^ Not really sure what level you are? Or if this advice was too generic / basic?
The advice was perfect thank you.
context: I'm pretty experienced in heads-up sngs over the last couple of years and have been playing poker and internet poker for a long time. I used to be pretty enthusiastic around a decade a go, posting on forums, using software reading poker material etc. But it has probably been 6 or 7 years since I kept track of software, literature etc In essence I wanted to play catch-up, apply myself a little more and was somewhat unsure where to begin. Now I have dtarting point, that's great, thanks.
i think i would be inclined to xraise flop and shove turns or fold...turn is tricky once we check call and we get barrelled so often vs a thinking villian who has barrelling tendancies when we just check call a flop like this as it looks weak... isn't an easy spot!
hi,
I've noticed in myself at times the tendency to take a route in a hand which avoids a tough decision - certainly if we checkraise the flop and push the turn we won't feel too uncomfortable since there are a lot of outs and hopefully some fold equity: our opponent may well have the tough choice. I can certainly see myself doing this - it feels an easier path than putting a difficult decision on ourself. In this instance it might be right be the right course of action, but I'm sure at times that consciously or unconsiously avoiding the regret-decision has, for me, not been the best route.
regards.
Well said. It is enlightening . Good reminder for myself.