LD1977 said:
Being against 2 players can sometimes be a positive though because people tend to give us a lot of credit as well. Plus yeah we have a ****ing awesome hand to do it with. I think if I checked this flop it would be to ch/r.
Being against 2 players can sometimes be a positive though because people tend to give us a lot of credit as well. Plus yeah we have a ****ing awesome hand to do it with. I think if I checked this flop it would be to ch/r.
Sure they might give us alot of credit for Cbetting into 2 on flop but when we post hands for analysis, we are looking for the most EV+ way to play the hand right.
So by default do we want to be C-betting flop unimproved versus 2 players?
I personally am not a fan of it although it does seem extremely strong and can get us alot of folds. The big question was do i check call turn or fire turn?
And what if i fire turn and river bricks? Do i Jam? or not?
@Hack. If im going to be checkraising flop, will i be getting enough folds for this line to be worth it?
So by default do we want to be C-betting flop unimproved versus 2 players?
I personally am not a fan of it although it does seem extremely strong and can get us alot of folds. The big question was do i check call turn or fire turn?
And what if i fire turn and river bricks? Do i Jam? or not?
@Hack. If im going to be checkraising flop, will i be getting enough folds for this line to be worth it?
vinylspiros said:
I'm not sure how you can say we are "unimproved" here. That kind of implies that this board is the same as like 765tt or A72r. Fundamentally different textures that give us different equities vs villain continuing ranges as well as different barreling opportunities.
It's not just "do I get folds?" but rather "do I get enough folds such that in addition to my pot equity, this line becomes better than x/f?" On 765tt this is obviously not true. On 974r where we have a GS+BDFD+2overs, it probably is.
Whether or not to fire turn is obv dependent on what the turn is, and their calling range OTT will warp depending on what the card is. So that's going to dictate whether you would triple, but off the top of my head I don't think I'd be tripling a ton of runouts.
And not to speak for hack, but he wouldn't have said x/r was a valid line unless he thought it was better than x/f. 🙂 I don't normally take that line in my games because people hate bet/folding in my games - the only benefit to me is that it sometimes checks through and I have more info and can play turns well. But in other games it's def a viable line and arguably reps significantly more strength than just doubling.
Wow you people think all that is good equity?
- Gutshot is 4 outs (8% chance to hit turn)
- Backdoor FD is 1-1,5 outs assuming FD is good and nobody turns 2P/set
- Overcards are questionable outs
This is pretty poor hand equity so we need massive fold equity to compensate and we don't have it. XR is "better" in a sense that at least it increases our fold equity somewhat but it is likely spew.
We are basically just bluffing in a bad situation for it.
- Gutshot is 4 outs (8% chance to hit turn)
- Backdoor FD is 1-1,5 outs assuming FD is good and nobody turns 2P/set
- Overcards are questionable outs
This is pretty poor hand equity so we need massive fold equity to compensate and we don't have it. XR is "better" in a sense that at least it increases our fold equity somewhat but it is likely spew.
We are basically just bluffing in a bad situation for it.
LD1977 said:
Have you never bet with K high on an A high board? It's not just about pot equity, but fold equity as well. I actually laughed at reading that "overcards are questionable outs." Do you know how many combos of sets and two pairs they can realistically have? Not very many relative to other hands they continue with, so I'm not sure what you're afraid of. Explain your thought process instead of just saying vague things that imply two other posters' statements are wrong, please.
And fwiw 4 outs = 9% chance to hit on the turn.
If you're not betting this hand on this flop, then you probably don't even have a bluff range here, which is probably bad given how much fold equity we should have. But given your tone in the bolded part it seems like this is going to turn into a pissing match if it continues so I'll stop there and let you do the backtracking.
You're also heavily underestimating how much FE we actually have. We opened UTG and then cbet oop 3-way. We're getting a TON of credit. And for pretty good reason, our range is pretty strong in general here, which is why I think this is a profitable cbet. Sure they're not folding sets (they don't really have any 2p combos) but do you think they're peeling 88? AQ?
Super standard cbet. Great card to barrel on the turn. Our combination of fold equity + pot equity is enough there to profitably fire another bet.
They might peel the flop there with such hands, but they'd be very hard pressed not to fold on the turn.
hackmeplz said:
They might peel the flop there with such hands, but they'd be very hard pressed not to fold on the turn.
Overcards are questionable because they can float with hands that dominate us if we hit a pair. What, those two players don't have better Js or Ts in their hands? Seriously, shitty TPMK in multiway pot is a poor hand.
As for "heavily" underestimating FE, well there is a thing called database where it is possible to look up cbet success on various boards OOP in multiway pots on all 3 streets. Look it up.
I already said he can fire turn on that K in the line he took if he wants, lets not go again into the whole misquoting thing, it is boring. He might get folds there but again we are talking about 2 players so meh. Hardly massively +EV if he needs around 40% FE to make the play breakeven.
Basically what happened in hand is LOLtypical scenario, all 3 players arrived to the river. Sure you CAN go for 3-barrel bluff but why do we have to fight for every single pot regardless of the situation?
As for "heavily" underestimating FE, well there is a thing called database where it is possible to look up cbet success on various boards OOP in multiway pots on all 3 streets. Look it up.
I already said he can fire turn on that K in the line he took if he wants, lets not go again into the whole misquoting thing, it is boring. He might get folds there but again we are talking about 2 players so meh. Hardly massively +EV if he needs around 40% FE to make the play breakeven.
Basically what happened in hand is LOLtypical scenario, all 3 players arrived to the river. Sure you CAN go for 3-barrel bluff but why do we have to fight for every single pot regardless of the situation?
LD1977 said:
And again your post is dripping with condescension. If you can't be some semblance of respectful on a forum that's known for being full of good people... Well, reconsider your tone at absolute minimum.
As for your arguments, you're still just providing vague and anecdotal evidence. First of all, IF players are floating AJ and AT and KJ and KT on this flop, such that hitting a pair is bad for us, that actually makes this a ridiculously PROFITABLE double barrel spot. Why? Because they make it to the turn with a much-too-wide range. If they aren't floating with those hands, then those outs are good for us.
Second, "there is this thing called database... look it up" -> yet you didn't to try to prove your point. Interesting. Either practice what you preach or don't try to sound high and mighty about it. But fwiw you don't really need to look through your database to know that this is a profitable spot. He definitely doesn't need 40% fold equity on this turn card (or any heart, or Q+) to make a bet profitable. Plus we didn't even double barrel, so using this hand as an example of how we shouldn't have double barreled is reaching at best.
Plus, you still haven't addressed a single range consideration here. Like the fact that if you're not bluffing with this hand on this flop then you literally don't have a bluff range in this spot from UTG (unless you open T8s or 86s??).
We're not "fighting for every single pot," either. We're betting in spots where our fold equity and pot equity = a spot where it's more +EV to bet than to check. Nice to know that when 4 people come in and agree on something that you still don't even remotely consider there being a small chance you're not quite right - so I guess that's my last attempt.
LD1977 said:
ha wow, how can they BOTH typically make it to the river, AND our over cards not be moderately clean, where do all their weak hands go?
you also really really need to drop the tone and the massive chip on your shoulder.
its hilarious that you twat quote phrases like typical but then use LOLtypical
Scourrge - When you say "I actually laughed at reading..." then you can't seriously complain about the tone of my response. That goes for the rest too.
As for the rest, I actually did do my work on the DB and in 10NL this is not a good spot to bluff in MW pot OOP with next to no equity.
Do we need a bluff range there that is so wide it includes this hand? What exactly are we trying to do with it?
Balancing 70% cbet range and 40% cbet range are two different things (hint: 70% cbet range that double barrels a lot is bad here, and 70% cbet range that DOESN'T barrel turns a lot is even worse).
duggs - I imagine you think your comments are smart but I view you as a childish asshole with limited intelligence. As for my advice to Draza that pains you so, if you are so concerned you could have coached him yourself - it really didn't take me a lot of time and effort to turn him into a winner. But just taking childish potshots is easier I guess. I suggest you take vinyl under your wing and make him a solid winner.
Anyway, I am not going to continue this since I don't want to pollute vinyl's thread since I know that duggs will never ever ever quit being a troll.
As for the rest, I actually did do my work on the DB and in 10NL this is not a good spot to bluff in MW pot OOP with next to no equity.
Do we need a bluff range there that is so wide it includes this hand? What exactly are we trying to do with it?
Balancing 70% cbet range and 40% cbet range are two different things (hint: 70% cbet range that double barrels a lot is bad here, and 70% cbet range that DOESN'T barrel turns a lot is even worse).
duggs - I imagine you think your comments are smart but I view you as a childish asshole with limited intelligence. As for my advice to Draza that pains you so, if you are so concerned you could have coached him yourself - it really didn't take me a lot of time and effort to turn him into a winner. But just taking childish potshots is easier I guess. I suggest you take vinyl under your wing and make him a solid winner.
Anyway, I am not going to continue this since I don't want to pollute vinyl's thread since I know that duggs will never ever ever quit being a troll.
opinions hand... JT suited and the double barrell
I have had a much better think about this hand and looked at it using an equity calc.here is my take on it...
As we don’t have stats for the hero or villains I assume for the analysis they are solid regs
Vinyl opens UTG JTs, most solid regs at 6 max open about 7-9% of hands. If we give V a typical 8% opening range we can include 66 to AA, AT s+ and AJ os+, (so 8 pairs and 7 high card combos).
In Modern small Stakes by Blackrain he recommends a 6 max MP calling range of 7.5% against an EP raise which includes pairs 22 to JJ, suited KQ KJ AQ AJ and off suited AQ KQ (10 pairs and 6 high card combos). It is assumed we will still be 3 bet by QQ KK AA most of the time.
This widens to a 9% calling range for the button against utg.
Here however with MP in the hand I think most button players will call much wider than that to include all pairs, most suited aces and quite a few suited connectors.
So the flop is 7 4 9 rainbow.. against a typical MP calling range there are only three sets in 16 hands that hit his range so we are up against a set just less that 1in 5 around 20%. Nothing else connects here although he could have an overpair 10s or Js about 12% but we have blockers to these so less than that in reality.
The button has a calling range that may hit this flop a bit better say 9 suited connectors plus the 3 sets but that is still only 12 hands of at least a possible 30 or so hands. Clearly the chances of hitting a set are now less than 10% and the chances of 2 pair are as was pointed out not really even in the button or MP range.
Against those ranges the equity between the all three hands is close all between 30-35%
Looking at this hand this way IMO the UTG cbet looks fine but once MP calls I think he tends more towards sets and/or the overpair, I can’t really see what else he can call with here with and he has to consider the button still to play. Having the button still in helps us here I think.
If MP has 88 1010 JJ he could consider a raise, all of the of the UTG high card combo’s in his normal opening range is missing this flop however, having the button behind complicates things for MP.
No surprise the button calls he can stay in with any pair gutshot combo.
The K hearts arrives on the turn, this gives UTG 5% more equity, see equity calc, it can’t help MP or the button much with their calling ranges. It hits the perceived range of UTG and is a strong scare card.
So do we double barrel on this board… IMO the answer has to be yes we have the initiative and fold equity… if it was a low card and didn’t give us any extra equity then I would reconsider.
If anyone has a set at this point we are now going to find out. MP likely folds 10s and may fold JJ, if the turn cbet is properly priced hopefully the button should let go of low pair/gutshot combos.
I have had a much better think about this hand and looked at it using an equity calc.here is my take on it...
As we don’t have stats for the hero or villains I assume for the analysis they are solid regs
Vinyl opens UTG JTs, most solid regs at 6 max open about 7-9% of hands. If we give V a typical 8% opening range we can include 66 to AA, AT s+ and AJ os+, (so 8 pairs and 7 high card combos).
In Modern small Stakes by Blackrain he recommends a 6 max MP calling range of 7.5% against an EP raise which includes pairs 22 to JJ, suited KQ KJ AQ AJ and off suited AQ KQ (10 pairs and 6 high card combos). It is assumed we will still be 3 bet by QQ KK AA most of the time.
This widens to a 9% calling range for the button against utg.
Here however with MP in the hand I think most button players will call much wider than that to include all pairs, most suited aces and quite a few suited connectors.
So the flop is 7 4 9 rainbow.. against a typical MP calling range there are only three sets in 16 hands that hit his range so we are up against a set just less that 1in 5 around 20%. Nothing else connects here although he could have an overpair 10s or Js about 12% but we have blockers to these so less than that in reality.
The button has a calling range that may hit this flop a bit better say 9 suited connectors plus the 3 sets but that is still only 12 hands of at least a possible 30 or so hands. Clearly the chances of hitting a set are now less than 10% and the chances of 2 pair are as was pointed out not really even in the button or MP range.
Against those ranges the equity between the all three hands is close all between 30-35%
Looking at this hand this way IMO the UTG cbet looks fine but once MP calls I think he tends more towards sets and/or the overpair, I can’t really see what else he can call with here with and he has to consider the button still to play. Having the button still in helps us here I think.
If MP has 88 1010 JJ he could consider a raise, all of the of the UTG high card combo’s in his normal opening range is missing this flop however, having the button behind complicates things for MP.
No surprise the button calls he can stay in with any pair gutshot combo.
The K hearts arrives on the turn, this gives UTG 5% more equity, see equity calc, it can’t help MP or the button much with their calling ranges. It hits the perceived range of UTG and is a strong scare card.
So do we double barrel on this board… IMO the answer has to be yes we have the initiative and fold equity… if it was a low card and didn’t give us any extra equity then I would reconsider.
If anyone has a set at this point we are now going to find out. MP likely folds 10s and may fold JJ, if the turn cbet is properly priced hopefully the button should let go of low pair/gutshot combos.
Attachments
Last edited:
I posted a hand to get some feedback and all of the sudden shit breaks loose in the thread. Guy's, we are all members of the same forum and we are here all day every day exchanging opinions so that we could help each other get better.
Obviously, we're not going to agree on everything due to the fact that everyone has their own playing style and a different approach to the game.
Sure some people would check this particular turn and others would be betting it.
It really fills me with sorrow when things get blown out of proportion and all of the sudden there is a huge fight going on.
Lets just agree to disagree and move on. I dont think it is in the best interest of anyone to be arguing about a particular hand to the point where we are calling people names, etc.etc....
I really appreciate and value everyones posts in the thread , as they are the only teason that i am any better than what i once was and im sure that at the end of the day everyone will benefit from this exchange of opinions.
Everything else is just unecessary. Why doesnt everyone just agree to disagree and life goes on.
Obviously, we're not going to agree on everything due to the fact that everyone has their own playing style and a different approach to the game.
Sure some people would check this particular turn and others would be betting it.
It really fills me with sorrow when things get blown out of proportion and all of the sudden there is a huge fight going on.
Lets just agree to disagree and move on. I dont think it is in the best interest of anyone to be arguing about a particular hand to the point where we are calling people names, etc.etc....
I really appreciate and value everyones posts in the thread , as they are the only teason that i am any better than what i once was and im sure that at the end of the day everyone will benefit from this exchange of opinions.
Everything else is just unecessary. Why doesnt everyone just agree to disagree and life goes on.
Meh people could stand to be a bit more polite, but disagreements like this are how people improve. They see something they thought was standard, other people disagree, and they start to consider other options they hadn't considered before.
As for the hand, LD can you do me a favor? I'm assuming you have a decent database of hands. Look at what your cbet success rate is with 3 players on the flop. I think you will be surprised with how successful you are. Remember we bet half pot so if it works 1/3 of the time it's immediately profitable, and even our nut outs give us a good amount extra (because remember we play the rest of the hand pretty perfect whereas our opponent is going to make mistakes for example when we hit our gutter so we can give ourselves more equity than just the direct equity in hitting). If you're really getting <20-25% cbet success in 3-way pots I guess we just play in different games and maybe you should be checking this, but for most people I think you just get way more folds than you actually realize in 3-way pots.
LD, fine I'll try to keep it polite if you do.
To the hand: This is literally the best hand in our range to bluff with. If you're going to say, verbatim "Do we need a bluff range there that is so wide it includes this hand?" Then you'd better be willing to cite some hands you'd bluff with here before this one.
And fwiw duggs doesn't troll. (In b4 you claim that I'm a troll now.) I'm not stirring things up, just stating fact.
To the hand: This is literally the best hand in our range to bluff with. If you're going to say, verbatim "Do we need a bluff range there that is so wide it includes this hand?" Then you'd better be willing to cite some hands you'd bluff with here before this one.
And fwiw duggs doesn't troll. (In b4 you claim that I'm a troll now.) I'm not stirring things up, just stating fact.
/Logan/ said:
yes Logan you are right. I quoted FR rather than 6 max (page 121 in modern small stakes, the MP flatting range is correct at 7-8%,)
Even more reason for MP to be raising our cbet as we miss that flop with a greater percentage of hands but it doesn't change the way I think about how it should be played by the EP player .
Last edited:
late but whatev, opinion time;
cbet that flop.
cbet the shit out of that turn.
not barrelling this flop sucks, and turn is like the best card in the history of turn cards. not to mention that everyone is going to pay us off every time we get there with this hand.
sidenote; i dont think c/r turn is any good, as imo opponents are only going to bet the turn with a pretty nutted hand. therefore, i think that cbet > c/c > c/r
cbet that flop.
cbet the shit out of that turn.
not barrelling this flop sucks, and turn is like the best card in the history of turn cards. not to mention that everyone is going to pay us off every time we get there with this hand.
sidenote; i dont think c/r turn is any good, as imo opponents are only going to bet the turn with a pretty nutted hand. therefore, i think that cbet > c/c > c/r
Last edited:
Figaroo2 said:
Thanks for the breakdown figaroo. Nice work and makes total sense.
^^^highlighted.= The problem i personally have with barreling this turn although the K of hearts is almost a Gin card for us to continue betting is that since there are two players in the pot and there is a high probability that we get floated/raised again and we dont have a made hand yet, i dont want to be in a really tough spot on the river if i miss with an overinflated pot and therefor have to jam into a set or someone unwilling to fold.
Since these are the micros that we are talking about and everyone knows that people dont like folding, i preffer playing ABC. Sure if there was only one villain i would fire this turn but versus two i preffer a more "pot controlling" line in order to minimize my losses when i dont hit.
If the river bricks, i essentially have to JAM after firing turn because i might feel somewhat commited. That, along with the fact that im first to act makes me believe that check calling turn is better than betting into 2 OOP.
Obviously im not going to be taking the same line everytime. It just feels that its much better to not fire turn into 2. Especially when they both called C-bet on a very very dry board.