Yea well obviously barreling turn/river is stupid. Calling steals with 33 is also stupid though since "playing well postflop" (LOL did he really say that?) consists of check folding a shitton.
As for this guy, calling a 3bet with hand that flops poorly is not exactly a sign of competence. I see him as a winning player in my DB but he is losing money in BTN calling 3bets (presumably because he is stupid and is trying to bink with garbage)... probably he does some other things well or is just running well.
As for this guy, calling a 3bet with hand that flops poorly is not exactly a sign of competence. I see him as a winning player in my DB but he is losing money in BTN calling 3bets (presumably because he is stupid and is trying to bink with garbage)... probably he does some other things well or is just running well.
um either we have good implied odds post flop, and we should be check folding a ton, OR he has a wide stealing range and we shouldn't be folding as much, or he checks back a large portion which we are ahead of, it can't be incorrect to call pre AND correct to check fold a shitton. LOL did you really just say that.
that said I'm not flatting this here normally I'm just folding v any vaguely decent.
that said I'm not flatting this here normally I'm just folding v any vaguely decent.
equity:
- His stealing range is obviously too wide for implied odds to be good.
- Small pair flops like crap (idiot ends of straight draws are horrible vs BTN range which has lots of hands that hit top ends of these straights).
- We have zero info on his hand and a poor underpair while he is hitting every board potentially.
Most plays that have winning chances are basically pure bluffs:
- Our best chance to win the pot is probably trying to pull the check-call flop and donk turn line (reverse float or as John A likes to call it "stop and go") and pray he folds. Yeah, guess what, usually they don't so we end up at the river with inflated pot, zero info and a crappy situation. We can bluff river but in that case it is pretty similar to the 3bet line albeit cheaper. Is it more effective? Dunno, 3bets and cbets in 3bet pots do get folds more.
- If we want to bluff check raise some boards, why do we even need a hand for that? Might as well have 2 blank cards and guess what that shit doesn't work enough (yes I checked the DB) since when it fails it does so in a costly manner.
- Check calling and hoping for a cheap showdown where our 55% preflop equity vs. his hopefully unpaired starting hand held up doesn't belong in 25NL but I am willing to be proven otherwise.
I am willing to listen to some argumentation about lines etc. but maybe Thread of Shame is not the place for it.
P.S. Yeah we can fold but I am actually already folding too much in the BB so I am 3betting more and calling more lately and I think small pairs are decent for 3betting since when our cbet gets called sometimes we do bink that set and even though it might be an underset we probably win enough big pots. The mistake is barreling after the flop (ergo ToS 😀) + completely discounting flush draws for some exotic reason that probably looked logical at the time.
- His stealing range is obviously too wide for implied odds to be good.
- Small pair flops like crap (idiot ends of straight draws are horrible vs BTN range which has lots of hands that hit top ends of these straights).
- We have zero info on his hand and a poor underpair while he is hitting every board potentially.
Most plays that have winning chances are basically pure bluffs:
- Our best chance to win the pot is probably trying to pull the check-call flop and donk turn line (reverse float or as John A likes to call it "stop and go") and pray he folds. Yeah, guess what, usually they don't so we end up at the river with inflated pot, zero info and a crappy situation. We can bluff river but in that case it is pretty similar to the 3bet line albeit cheaper. Is it more effective? Dunno, 3bets and cbets in 3bet pots do get folds more.
- If we want to bluff check raise some boards, why do we even need a hand for that? Might as well have 2 blank cards and guess what that shit doesn't work enough (yes I checked the DB) since when it fails it does so in a costly manner.
- Check calling and hoping for a cheap showdown where our 55% preflop equity vs. his hopefully unpaired starting hand held up doesn't belong in 25NL but I am willing to be proven otherwise.
I am willing to listen to some argumentation about lines etc. but maybe Thread of Shame is not the place for it.
P.S. Yeah we can fold but I am actually already folding too much in the BB so I am 3betting more and calling more lately and I think small pairs are decent for 3betting since when our cbet gets called sometimes we do bink that set and even though it might be an underset we probably win enough big pots. The mistake is barreling after the flop (ergo ToS 😀) + completely discounting flush draws for some exotic reason that probably looked logical at the time.
Last edited:
so small pairs flop like crap so they make good bluffing candidates? you don't ever want back door draws or equity for your bluffs beyond 2 outs? every argument you make for it being a bad hand to defend applies to it being a 3bet candidate. people aren't going to fold nearly enough to a SB resteal so its laughable that you pick a decent reg to have an easily exploitable squeezing range against, since its such a poor hand to do it with i guess you are squeezing nearly 1/3 of the deck here?
and yes you do want certain hands to bluff check raise. our hand does matter.
and sick name drop
and yes you do want certain hands to bluff check raise. our hand does matter.
and sick name drop
There is a ton of value in his post. Stop taking it so personal and think about what he's saying. Try to understand WHY small pairs are terrible to use as bluff 3-bet candidates. I'm pretty sure that if you look at the situation honestly and set aside your ego you'll see why.LD1977 said:
LD1977 said:
WVHillbilly said:
@LD: You obviously didn't actually read his post for it's value if you see none there.
I think one thing that hasn't been mentioned here is that you really don't need to be adding small pairs to open up your 3b range. There are SO many better types of hands we can add to a 3bet range to increase its size. Yes, it depends on what types of hands the villain will flat, but suited connectors and suited Ax are basically always going to be better 3bet candidates than small PP's. Primarily b/c they flop better.
But the other factor is the hand having the ability to be a bluffing candidate postflop - as already described, small PP's don't have that ability because their equity is too static. If we don't flop a set, we usually have 2 outs to improve from a very marginal hand to a disguised semi-monster. On the other hand, suited connectors/many other types of hands can not only flop decently vs. continuing ranges, but will also tend to have a LOT of backdoor equity. If you don't flop a draw but hit a flop where 15 cards in the deck are good barrel cards for you, that's often almost as good.
Lastly, your statements about equity show that you're not really considering what makes a hand a strong bluff candidate. The adage, "I bluffed because I had no equity," doesn't actually make sense. Unless you have enough fold equity where you can be bluffing any two.
Our expected value comes from a combination of pot equity and fold equity. Unless villain is folding more than 67ish% to our 3bet, we're not outright profiting. This means we need to make money postflop, which means we either need insane flop fold equity, OR we need some pot equity. Pot equity always helps. There's no need to 3bet bluff the hands that flop the worst just for the sake of not folding them preflop. And the only reason folding pre should ever be considered "bad" is because we know we can make money with it by doing something else.
I have been trying out SCs as OOP 3betting hands and there are problems.
First I have to drop them to 4bets and I feel it is a waste. I can fold small pairs to 4bets due to stack sizes and normal 4bet ranges - usually steal is small, 2-2.5bb, so my commitment doesn't snowball until I can't fold anymore even vs. non-100bb stacks. SCs actually have decent equity vs overpairs and I hate folding but can't regularly stack off 87s and such and calling 4bets OOP is retarded.
Then there are situations where I found myself questioning how much equity I truly have (paired boards + possibility of bigger FDs/straights if I hold low end of a straight draw) while I am OOP in an inflated pot and the opponent is decent. Thing is, there is slightly more equity on average but often it is not "pure" equity since outs are potentially tainted vs. a calling range which can dominate me when I hit my "nutted" hands.
Advantage with small PPs is that decision making process is quite simple unless I spew like in the above hand ('cause I am an idiot sometimes).
Normally 3bet is slightly unprofitable by itself (rarely do you see 67% fold to resteal) and flop cbet is profitable in a vacuum. By the turn I am usually well behind unless I actually did bink the set and with that added chance (which is around 16% by now so not exactly minor) this line appears to be profitable (small sample though).
First I have to drop them to 4bets and I feel it is a waste. I can fold small pairs to 4bets due to stack sizes and normal 4bet ranges - usually steal is small, 2-2.5bb, so my commitment doesn't snowball until I can't fold anymore even vs. non-100bb stacks. SCs actually have decent equity vs overpairs and I hate folding but can't regularly stack off 87s and such and calling 4bets OOP is retarded.
Then there are situations where I found myself questioning how much equity I truly have (paired boards + possibility of bigger FDs/straights if I hold low end of a straight draw) while I am OOP in an inflated pot and the opponent is decent. Thing is, there is slightly more equity on average but often it is not "pure" equity since outs are potentially tainted vs. a calling range which can dominate me when I hit my "nutted" hands.
Advantage with small PPs is that decision making process is quite simple unless I spew like in the above hand ('cause I am an idiot sometimes).
Normally 3bet is slightly unprofitable by itself (rarely do you see 67% fold to resteal) and flop cbet is profitable in a vacuum. By the turn I am usually well behind unless I actually did bink the set and with that added chance (which is around 16% by now so not exactly minor) this line appears to be profitable (small sample though).
Last edited:
LD1977 said:
Kind of some conflicting statements going on here though.
Except that it's the exact SAME waste whether you have a small PP or a SC. Unless you want to suggest that SC have more value in single-raised pots than small PP's do, thus it's a waste to 3b/fold them. But since that's not what you said, I assume that's not what you were thinking. Also, whether or not you can profitably jam depends on whether your opponent has a 4b bluff range. And if he does, we can 5b jam sometimes. Plus, if you're that worried about being 4b, why are we 3betting that wide to begin with? Just 3b depolarized and stack off a value range imo.
Um, okay, but that's why I specified that we need to consider what kinds of hands villain is flatting. Beluga whale talked about this some. If villain is going to flat a bunch of suited connector type hands, we're usually better off 3betting depolarized for value. If he's flatting broadways and stuff then it's better to have suited connectors because we can cbet Ax boards (where we rep strong) as well as low boards (where we actually have pot equity). Point being, if you have no idea what your equity is in any spot, you should probably start considering your villain's range. Yes, even if he's a fish.
Also I'm confused, because now you seem to agree that we want some equity when bluffing, whereas before you seemed to want to 3bet things that don't flop much equity. I'm unsure if you're flip flopping or just don't know which you think.
Okay and here, I seriously am not trying to sound condescending - please don't take it that way. But decisions in poker should rarely if ever be made such that we make our life easier. If the EV is otherwise the same and we get to save some brainpower, sure. But that's not really that relevant typically. More relevant is the fact that we should be making the most +EV decisions, not marginally +EV or breakeven ones where we "know what to do." Even if we make mistakes sometimes that's how we get better anyway
Also, not sure where you're getting the 16% for a set? Are you counting flop and turn? Because those are two different scenarios and shouldn't really be considered together imo. If we do flop a set in a 3b pot, we're obviously just trying to put the money in. But if we bluff cbet a flop, I'd rather have 15-20% chance of hitting my hand OTT plus some backdoor equity, rather than a 5% chance of making a disguised hand.
Once again, maybe you can 3b and Cb small pairs OOP profitably vs. a steal range, and maybe you can't. But I'm almost positive that other hands will be MORE profitable. So if you need to add hands to 3b, pick blockers and hands that flop better.
LD1977 said:
Too much Daniel Negreanu.
Could this defense be considered an added spew? The point is to admit that we screwed up, so why get defensive at that point? If you were here trying to get better then the advice that has been tossed your way would've been appreciated instead of argued with. You're the one who posted a hand in a thread-o'-spews.
Thanks for the input guys.
Well yeah I want to make my decisions simple and as easy as possible.
I feel worse about folding SCs to 4bets because if he 4bets a very narrow value range then SCs actually have better equity and yeah they do play better OOP in single raised pots (I though I implied that?).
Also this is a depolarized range, 22-66 are definitely 3bet bluffs that fold to 4bets but if they do get called I can cbet flop and if called by the turn know pretty much exactly where I stand. If flop gets raised I fold easily unless I binked the set.
SCs and small PPs have pretty similar preflop equity but PPs have more of hot-cold equity (either they hit it or they don't) and they worry only about set-vs-set scenario. Therefore by the turn I have a pretty clear idea of where I stand if I don't spew like in the above hand 🙄
SCs have a tendency to pick up equity while not actually hitting anything and when they do hit there are domination problems.
I agree it would be ideal to know opponent's exact flatting ranges but I can't know it unless it is some kind of reg that plays the same time slot as I do and I took a few hours to analyze his game (I actually do this occasionally).
I still think we may be polluting the ToS with this 😛 we need more spewage here. Sorry Ducky 😱
Well yeah I want to make my decisions simple and as easy as possible.
I feel worse about folding SCs to 4bets because if he 4bets a very narrow value range then SCs actually have better equity and yeah they do play better OOP in single raised pots (I though I implied that?).
Also this is a depolarized range, 22-66 are definitely 3bet bluffs that fold to 4bets but if they do get called I can cbet flop and if called by the turn know pretty much exactly where I stand. If flop gets raised I fold easily unless I binked the set.
SCs and small PPs have pretty similar preflop equity but PPs have more of hot-cold equity (either they hit it or they don't) and they worry only about set-vs-set scenario. Therefore by the turn I have a pretty clear idea of where I stand if I don't spew like in the above hand 🙄
SCs have a tendency to pick up equity while not actually hitting anything and when they do hit there are domination problems.
I agree it would be ideal to know opponent's exact flatting ranges but I can't know it unless it is some kind of reg that plays the same time slot as I do and I took a few hours to analyze his game (I actually do this occasionally).
I still think we may be polluting the ToS with this 😛 we need more spewage here. Sorry Ducky 😱
id feel worse about folding small pairs to a narrow range than suited connectors, suited connectors have worse equity. hot/cold equity actually refers to pure equity in, what you are referring to is how much of our equity we can realise. you can profitably flats small suited connectors to button opens?
LD1977 said:
no they aren't. SCs flop a little equity often, but small pairs flop a lot of equity infrequently, the former we have to fold our equity or play its passively and hope to draw out, the latter we have dominant equity v a tight capped range.
LD1977 said:
Erm, a depolarized 3betting range means you are only 3betting value hands. Polarized is when you 3b some value, and 3b some bluffs.
And, once again your characterization of equity is too one-dimensional. Equity isn't JUST a number, it changes from street to street. As duggs points out, sets flop massive equity a small % of the time, whereas SC's flop medium equity fairly frequently. And since the whole point here is a combination of pot equity AND fold equity, it's not like we need to be flopping sets to win the pot anyway. If we DID, then we obviously shouldn't have 3bet in the first place. You say villain's range is wide, so we assume he's not stacking off when we flop a set in a single-raised pot. We can't really say that we don't care about having backdoor equity, but we also don't like continuing past the flop. I'm not gonna do a multi-street EV calc for you but having backdoor equity also matters.
It's not much of a thread to pollute and has been dead for a few months or so, so I don't think anyone has an issue with it.
Yep.LD1977 said:
This thread is for the celebration of the spewage mindset, and it was MUCH MORE FUN when it was.
Can we have our thread back? I mean, not that it wasn't fun. It's just that it's time to flush the toilet now.
-
JusSumguy said:
That was a necessary description.
Alright, here you go:
$1/$2 Home Game No Limit Holdem
PokerStars
7 Players
Hand Conversion Powered by weaktight.com
Stacks:
UTG ($263) 132bb
UTG+1 ($243) 122bb
MP ($836) 418bb
CO ($173) 87bb
scourrge (BTN) ($205) 103bb
SB ($733) 367bb
BB ($224) 112bb
Pre-Flop: ($3, 7 players) scourrge is BTN 5:club: 10:club:
2 folds, MP raises to $7, CO calls $7, scourrge calls $7, SB calls $6, BB calls $5
Flop: 2:heart: 5:heart: 6:diamond: ($35, 5 players)
SB checks, BB checks, MP checks, CO bets $20, scourrge calls $20, SB folds, BB folds, MP folds
Turn: 9:heart: ($75, 2 players)
CO checks, scourrge bets $48, CO calls $48
River: 3:spade: ($171, 2 players)
CO checks, scourrge bets $108, CO goes all-in $98
Final Pot: $367
CO shows a pair of Tens
10:spade: 10:heart:
scourrge shows a pair of Fives
5:club: 10:club:
CO wins $350 (net +$177)
scourrge collects $10 (net -$173)
BB lost $7
MP lost $7
SB lost $7
does it count when its vs me?
PokerStars - $0.50 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 5 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4
Hero (CO): $99.40
BTN: $124.13 (VPIP: 20.79, PFR: 11.88, 3Bet Preflop: 5.00, Hands: 103)
SB: $79.83 (VPIP: 79.37, PFR: 52.38, 3Bet Preflop: 34.38, Hands: 66)
BB: $50.00 (VPIP: 25.51, PFR: 17.35, 3Bet Preflop: 5.17, Hands: 98)
UTG: $50.00 (VPIP: 21.21, PFR: 12.12, 3Bet Preflop: 8.70, Hands: 33)
SB posts SB $0.25, BB posts BB $0.50
Pre Flop: (pot: $0.75) Hero has K:spade: A:club:
UTG raises to $1.25, Hero calls $1.25, BTN calls $1.25, SB raises to $6.75, fold, fold, Hero raises to $20.25, fold, SB calls $13.50
Flop: ($43.50, 2 players) Q:spade: J:spade: T:club:
SB bets $59.58 and is all-in, Hero calls $59.58
Turn: ($162.66, 2 players) Q:club:
River: ($162.66, 2 players) Q:heart:
PokerStars - $0.50 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 5 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4
Hero (CO): $99.40
BTN: $124.13 (VPIP: 20.79, PFR: 11.88, 3Bet Preflop: 5.00, Hands: 103)
SB: $79.83 (VPIP: 79.37, PFR: 52.38, 3Bet Preflop: 34.38, Hands: 66)
BB: $50.00 (VPIP: 25.51, PFR: 17.35, 3Bet Preflop: 5.17, Hands: 98)
UTG: $50.00 (VPIP: 21.21, PFR: 12.12, 3Bet Preflop: 8.70, Hands: 33)
SB posts SB $0.25, BB posts BB $0.50
Pre Flop: (pot: $0.75) Hero has K:spade: A:club:
UTG raises to $1.25, Hero calls $1.25, BTN calls $1.25, SB raises to $6.75, fold, fold, Hero raises to $20.25, fold, SB calls $13.50
Flop: ($43.50, 2 players) Q:spade: J:spade: T:club:
SB bets $59.58 and is all-in, Hero calls $59.58
Turn: ($162.66, 2 players) Q:club:
River: ($162.66, 2 players) Q:heart:
SB shows 7:heart: 4:diamond: (Three of a Kind, Queens) (Pre 36%, Flop 0.5%, Turn 0%)
Hero shows K:spade: A:club: (Straight, Ace High) (Pre 64%, Flop 99.6%, Turn 100%)
Hero wins $160.16
Hero shows K:spade: A:club: (Straight, Ace High) (Pre 64%, Flop 99.6%, Turn 100%)
Hero wins $160.16
berate me i suck
PokerStars - $1 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 5 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4
BTN: $100.00 (VPIP: 26.89, PFR: 23.02, 3Bet Preflop: 8.39, Hands: 1,138)
SB: $114.15 (VPIP: 17.73, PFR: 14.68, 3Bet Preflop: 7.31, Hands: 7,776)
BB: $274.34 (VPIP: 34.29, PFR: 20.00, 3Bet Preflop: 13.79, Hands: 70)
Hero (UTG): $112.99
CO: $100.00 (VPIP: 24.65, PFR: 15.63, 3Bet Preflop: 8.24, Hands: 591)
SB posts SB $0.50, BB posts BB $1.00
Pre Flop: (pot: $1.50) Hero has T:heart: Q:diamond:
Hero raises to $3.00, CO calls $3.00, BTN calls $3.00, fold, fold
Flop: ($10.50, 3 players) 6:club: J:heart: J:diamond:
Hero bets $5.00, fold, BTN calls $5.00
Turn: ($20.50, 2 players) 9:diamond:
Hero bets $11.00, BTN calls $11.00
River: ($42.50, 2 players) 9:club:
Hero bets $44.00, BTN raises to $81.00 and is all-in, fold
BTN wins $127.70
PokerStars - $1 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 5 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4
BTN: $100.00 (VPIP: 26.89, PFR: 23.02, 3Bet Preflop: 8.39, Hands: 1,138)
SB: $114.15 (VPIP: 17.73, PFR: 14.68, 3Bet Preflop: 7.31, Hands: 7,776)
BB: $274.34 (VPIP: 34.29, PFR: 20.00, 3Bet Preflop: 13.79, Hands: 70)
Hero (UTG): $112.99
CO: $100.00 (VPIP: 24.65, PFR: 15.63, 3Bet Preflop: 8.24, Hands: 591)
SB posts SB $0.50, BB posts BB $1.00
Pre Flop: (pot: $1.50) Hero has T:heart: Q:diamond:
Hero raises to $3.00, CO calls $3.00, BTN calls $3.00, fold, fold
Flop: ($10.50, 3 players) 6:club: J:heart: J:diamond:
Hero bets $5.00, fold, BTN calls $5.00
Turn: ($20.50, 2 players) 9:diamond:
Hero bets $11.00, BTN calls $11.00
River: ($42.50, 2 players) 9:club:
Hero bets $44.00, BTN raises to $81.00 and is all-in, fold
BTN wins $127.70