1/2 limit HE, KQo on a suited flop

F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
Button is 41/12/3.

full tilt poker
Limit Holdem Ring game
Limit: $1/$2
8 players
Converter

Pre-flop: (8 players) Hero is MP2 with [Qh] [Kd]
2 folds, MP1 calls, Hero raises, CO folds, Button calls, SB folds, BB calls, MP1 calls.

Flop: [6s] [Js] [3s] (8.5SB, 4 players)
BB checks, MP1 checks, Hero checks, Button bets, 2 folds, Hero calls.

What am I likely up against, how many outs do I have, and what should my plan be for the next two streets?

Is peeling a card on this flop okay, or am I stupid for even playing this hand any further?
 
joosebuck

joosebuck

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Total posts
4,193
Chips
0
AJo, prolly 1 spade i would imagine. Could possibly be KJ or J10..
 
ChuckTs

ChuckTs

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Total posts
13,642
Chips
0
well he could have anything really
maybe betting on flush draw or if he's lucky he's already hit it
or he might have hit top pair on the flop

edit: he also cold called 2 bets so i would imagine he's probably got a pretty strong hand unless hes a loose player
 
F

Fish

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 5, 2006
Total posts
367
Chips
0
Most likely he's playing Ace-Anything... I'd figure there's a spade in there...
Technically, you have 4 clean outs assuming he's has only 1 or no spades, and quite honestly, this was a pretty poor flop for you....


On the flop if you decide you want to continue with this hand, You might try and take control of the hand by betting the flop. You were going to call one anyways, so might as well be the one betting it... You could take it down right there, or more than likely, he'll call your bet and check through the turn with you giving you a look at the turn and river for the prixe of a small bet.

All-in all this was a crappy flop for you... Chances are good you weren't winning this one.
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
Button stats: 41/12/3. This means that he pays to see 41% of all flops (a very high number), he raises preflop 12% of the time, and he is more than three times as likely to bet or raise after the flop, than he is to call.

This is a quintessential maniac, in other words. Here's something worth pointing out, now that we're getting started in analysing this hand: I was completely certain that he would bet if he was checked to. The only reason I called was because the other two folded. If even one of them had continued, I would have been out really fast.

I don't believe this guy has to even have a spade to bet here, or even ace-high. I think he would bet a spadeless T9o at this point (and I'm pretty sure he could have called two cold with such a hand preflop).

But that's only taking into account that he's incredibly loose. How is my call or not-call decision on this flop affected by the fact that he's very aggressive?
 
ChuckTs

ChuckTs

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Total posts
13,642
Chips
0
well, you could call based on the value of just your king-high
now that we see how loose he really is, i think its a smart play
 
twizzybop

twizzybop

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Total posts
2,380
Chips
0
Even no matter what the guy has on the button, he is still in position. Everyone has checked to him so why not bet. He bet is based apon position more than what he has for cards. At that point it really isn't going to matter what he has for cards and what type of player he is.

For all we know he has k,6.. k,3.. a,6.. or a,3.. possibbly even j,2...Yet again position is giving him more then enough power to make a bet.
 
S

shwingzilla

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 28, 2006
Total posts
82
Chips
0
If he has ANY spade, you're behind. If he has any pair, you're behind. If he has an ace, you're behind. Assuming his play is completely random, he has a 38% chance of possessing a spade, A better than 32% chance of having a pair, and a 9% percent chance of having an ace. Your odds of being ahead, assuming completely random play: less than 38%. It'll cost you 3 dollars to see your outs, for a pot of 14.50. There's a 62% chance that you have 6 outs, a 34% chance you have 4 outs, and a 4% chance you have no outs. (ignoring two pair, trips, KK, QQ, AK, K6, KJ, K3 AQ, and AA; cuz this is already complicated enough). (.62 x 24) + (.34 x 16) + (.4 x 0) = 20.32% chance of catching your outs, contributing 21% of pot. Not worth it to see your outs (yes, yes, there's the runner runner straight, but that's only a 3% chance of hitting, and there's a 38% chance that it's 1.4% chance. So against a random hand it's a good call by a sliver. Not worth it.). As for paying all the way to the river, well that math is kinda complicated. Here's my shortcut: You're contributing 27% of the pot, here are the hands that are 63% or better to beat you: A-x (8% chance), Qs-x suited or otherwise, Ks-x suited or otherwise, any pair (better than 32% chance), J-x (6% chance), 6-x (6% chance), 3-x (6% chance), and any two spades. So against a completely random hand it's a bad call. (less than 50% chance of being a good call)

Ok, I have no idea why I spent so much time analysing this. But it confirms my suspicion: fold. Anyone wanna check my math? :D

At least I learned something from this: if the river is suited, and you don't possess that suit or a pair, you need to get out of dodge, no matter how bad your opponent is.
 
Last edited:
Dorkus Malorkus

Dorkus Malorkus

HELLO INTERNET
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Total posts
12,422
Chips
0
Button's range is huge here.

You say he's a maniac, so why bother playing with him in this spot? If he continues playing in the same way eventually you'll find yourself in a situation when you can take his chips because you actually have a hand, and not because you're calling hoping to hit a few outs that may not even be clean.

Calling is probably the worst move you can make here. If you're determined to be stubborn and really think he's playing with air, check-raise the flop and lead any turn if called, but by far the most sensible option here is to just fold the flop and move on, waiting for him to bet into you when you actually have something worth playing with.
 
F

Fish

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 5, 2006
Total posts
367
Chips
0
F Paulsson said:
Button stats: 41/12/3.
This is the type of thing that should be included in your hand history write up.
It is quite hard to give an opinion when you have more information than you are sharing with us.
Anyways, assuming these stats, your hole cards, your position, and the flop.
This is a fold on the flop. Any other play is simply incorrect.




(Try filtering your pokertracker to show players with a 50-55+ VPIP with greater than 100 hands, You will be very surprised at how many names come up) Voila, New buddy list ;):cool:
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
Fish said:
This is the type of thing that should be included in your hand history write up.
Yeah, and it's right there at the top of the opening post. ;)

I reposted it, since the hands you were putting button on were quite a more narrow range than I was willing to give him credit for.
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
Dorkus Malorkus said:
Calling is probably the worst move you can make here. If you're determined to be stubborn and really think he's playing with air, check-raise the flop and lead any turn if called, but by far the most sensible option here is to just fold the flop and move on, waiting for him to bet into you when you actually have something worth playing with.
I agree that folding > calling, but I'm not so sure that raising > calling. I'm willing to peel a card on the flop based on the size of the pot, but I'm not willing to spew chips into a pair that's not going to fold. Ace-rag still has me beat, and might even call down, thinking that I'm semibluffing and missed.

shwingzilla, that's an awesome analysis. The monster hands that you ignored for simplicity can also be ignored based on the fact that he didn't 3-bet preflop. He doesn't have AK or better, etc. (this was a very aggressive player). I ran some ranges through PokerStove myself, and came up with similar numbers.

Your math is good, with only one difference with mine: I was not planning on calling down. If I did not hit any of my outs (or opened up an open ended straight) on the turn, I wasn't going to continue, paying only one small bet on the flop to try to win a 9.5 SB pot.
 
F

Fish

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 5, 2006
Total posts
367
Chips
0
F Paulsson said:
Yeah, and it's right there at the top of the opening post. ;)

Geeze.
Not only at the top, but the first line too.
That's why they call me a Fish. :eek:
 
JAMILE1

JAMILE1

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 26, 2005
Total posts
2,531
Chips
0
F Paulsson said:
Button is 41/12/3.

Full Tilt Poker
Limit Holdem Ring game
Limit: $1/$2
8 players
Converter

Pre-flop: (8 players) Hero is MP2 with Q♥ K♦
2 folds, MP1 calls, Hero raises, CO folds, Button calls, SB folds, BB calls, MP1 calls.

Flop: 6♠ J♠ 3♠ (8.5SB, 4 players)
BB checks, MP1 checks, Hero checks, Button bets, 2 folds, Hero calls.

What am I likely up against, how many outs do I have, and what should my plan be for the next two streets?

Is peeling a card on this flop okay, or am I stupid for even playing this hand any further?


Hey FP this is concerning the outs. Is there 18 outs in this hand?
4 aces, 4 10's, 4 9's, 3 kings, 3 queens

Is this correct, if not can you please explain.
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
JAMILE1 said:
Hey FP this is concerning the outs. Is there 18 outs in this hand?
4 aces, 4 10's, 4 9's, 3 kings, 3 queens

Is this correct, if not can you please explain.
You're asking the right question!

As always, "it depends." In the best possible scenario, my opponent has absolutely nothing, and a worse nothing than myself (and no spade). But let's say that he has something that I can beat with a little luck, something like J9 or ace-high.

I would then need to hit either a queen or a king on the turn to have the best hand. There are 6 of those that we have not yet accounted for.

Another possibility is me hitting a 10 on the turn, giving me an open-ended straight draw, which in turn would net me another 8 outs. But although there are four 10s in the deck, I cannot count these as four outs; I will only make the straight around 20% of the time when I make it. Given that I also have the possibility of getting a 9 and then a 10, or an ace and then a 10, these possibilities together sum up to about a 3% chance of getting a runner-runner straight (I can show you the calculations if you want). A 3% chance is roughly the same as 1.5 outs, so let's assign that value to the straight.

My best case scenario, if I'm currently behind, is that I have 7.5 outs on this flop to win. With this way of counting, I have more than enough outs to peel a card on the flop.

But what if my opponent has a spade? Uh-oh.

Suddenly, the queen of spades and the king of spades are no longer outs. Also, the 10 of spades, the 9 of spades and the ace of spades are no longer available for making my runner-runner straight, bringing the straight potential down to about 1.5% (or less than one complete out). This brings me to below 5 outs - but even then, my decision is actually close! I have 9.5-to-1 to call, and my outs seemingly give me odds for it.

This is a highly risky play, no doubt about it. What finally made the difference between calling and folding when he bet was only that he would bet with anything at this point - and that I was absolutely certain that I could smack him with a checkraise if I hit a non-spade queen or a king on the turn - a checkraise that he would call with any pair, any draw and ace-high.

My real problem is if I'm drawing dead on the flop (if he has two spades). How often will that happen, and how much should that affect my decision?

/FP

PS.
I'm also in big trouble if my opponent has a hand like QJ or KJ, because then I've just lost almost half of my outs. I'm still far from convinced that my decision to play this flop was +EV (and I'm leaning more and more towards a fold should I happen in a similar situation again) but I think it's decently close - maybe only losing a few cents.
 
T

Threesixes

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 17, 2005
Total posts
631
Chips
0
I would have folded this hand immediately as soon as the maniac bet the flop. What if you hit your Ko? How far are you going to take this? What if you bet and and he raises? I personally would save my bet(s) for a time when I thought I had more of an advantage. I think it would help with variance if nothing else.

If I was going to play it, I would have bet the flop because I always want control. Even a maniac folds sometimes right? He doesnt know you dont have a flush or a flush draw. If he raises I throw it away and kick myself for not folding it like I should have. Why choose a time when 3 spades flop to go after a maniac when you have nothing?
 
nateofdeath

nateofdeath

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Total posts
1,161
Chips
0
i have to be honest, this one doesn't make a lot of sense to me, playing overcards with three spades on the board. it would have been one thing if you had any kind of a hand or draw. quite honestly it suprises me. seems like if i would have posted this hand people would have been critical of me for calling here. I'll believe you when you say the math might justify it, but loose opponent or not, you could be drawing absolutly dead here, and if your oppenent even has one spade, he's drawing for the nuts. it just seems like if nothing else you could find a better edge to exploit. i don't care how much is in the pot, it just seems awfully risky, and really, no amount of a read that you could have on your oppenent (unless you're a mind reader or god were to come down and tell you) can really justify playing this hand post flop. i'm sorry, but that's my opinion. just seems like a bad play and i was suprised to see who made it. i mean, you were talking about catching runner runner for a straight for goodness sake, or a non spade pair, just seems like a reach

and i agree with three sixes, if you are determined to play this hand, at least bet it to get some idea where you really stand.


-n
 
Last edited:
S

shwingzilla

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 28, 2006
Total posts
82
Chips
0
If this call is good, like you said it's good by a sliver (since you can never really know what a maniac is playing). Your outs might end up costing you money though, so I would say fold.
 
JAMILE1

JAMILE1

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 26, 2005
Total posts
2,531
Chips
0
Hey FP thanks for that response, and I see where I made the mistake concerning the outs. Now the math part I'll leave that to you LOL but I am learning the math side a little with a friend who is um a brainyack LOL thanks again.

BTW if it was me in this hand, and being the loose cannon that I am in limit, I would call to see turn, if nothing then fold and this is just me, "Da Lolo in Hawaii"
 
Last edited:
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
nateofdeath said:
i have to be honest, this one doesn't make a lot of sense to me, playing overcards with three spades on the board. it would have been one thing if you had any kind of a hand or draw. quite honestly it suprises me. seems like if i would have posted this hand people would have been critical of me for calling here. I'll believe you when you say the math might justify it, but loose opponent or not, you could be drawing absolutly dead here, and if your oppenent even has one spade, he's drawing for the nuts. it just seems like if nothing else you could find a better edge to exploit. i don't care how much is in the pot, it just seems awfully risky, and really, no amount of a read that you could have on your oppenent (unless you're a mind reader or god were to come down and tell you) can really justify playing this hand post flop. i'm sorry, but that's my opinion. just seems like a bad play and i was suprised to see who made it. i mean, you were talking about catching runner runner for a straight for goodness sake, or a non spade pair, just seems like a reach

and i agree with three sixes, if you are determined to play this hand, at least bet it to get some idea where you really stand.


-n
I want you to be honest. :)

You're right in that it was a questionable play, and I'm glad you're not afraid to say so (I'm telling you guys that you're giving me way too much credit, and it's even the more apparent when you feel you have to apologize for telling me I'm making mistakes, heh)! But I didn't post this hand as an example of how to play - I would not encourage anyone to play this way, especially in light of the fact that it almost certainly was a -EV play, albeit a fairly close one.

No, the reason I post this hand is as a prelude to a thing I'm planning regarding flop play in limit hold'em. For the next week or so, I want to focus on hands that should NOT be folded on the flop. I think many of you may be caught in the "fit or fold" mentality that many books and articles teach, and miss out on a lot of profit from potentially +EV situations. Again, the one above wasn't +EV, but I wanted to find a situation that was close to 0, to demonstrate the thinking, and given the discussion that ensued, I think I hit the nail on the head. :)

Yes, I bring up a runner-runner, and I do it for a good reason - it gives me an effective extra out. The runner-runner in itself is not a reason to stay in, but when added to overcard outs, it may tip the decision.

And a final word regarding the hand I posted - it's rarely profitable for me to call here (if ever). I'm at risk of reverse domination, my opponent may have me drawing dead already, if I hit an out on the turn, he may have a powerful redraw, etc. These are all good reasons to fold. But there are two good reasons to stay in as well:

1. My opponent is loose, aggressive and an awful player, and
2. The pot is big.

What specifically matters is the second reason. Clearly I didn't have time to do the math at the table, but I thought for a few seconds and decided it was a close decision. I looked at the pot size, deemed it "big", and called. Remember: When the decision is close, tend to call when the pot is big. When the pot is small, tend to fold.

What about raising? I thought about that, too - but I don't think raising would give me any benefit:

1. He's not going to fold anything that he bet with. If I bet, he will call with anything, and I will have learned nothing.
2. He's not going to 3-bet with almost anything either. If he does have a strong hand, he's going to wait for the turn to raise me.
3. He has position on me, and raising will not buy the button or give me the chance for a free card on the turn.

Cheers,
FP
 
nateofdeath

nateofdeath

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Total posts
1,161
Chips
0
F Paulsson said:
I want you to be honest. :)

You're right in that it was a questionable play, and I'm glad you're not afraid to say so (I'm telling you guys that you're giving me way too much credit, and it's even the more apparent when you feel you have to apologize for telling me I'm making mistakes, heh)! But I didn't post this hand as an example of how to play - I would not encourage anyone to play this way, especially in light of the fact that it almost certainly was a -EV play, albeit a fairly close one

well, in my case i just don't like to be critical of anyone (especially people who i know have a fair amount of knowledge about the game) which is why i generally don't post in threads like this. so that's why i might have appeared a tad appoligetic. I just couldn't make sense of this hand, so i couldn't resist posting here. i sometimes forget you have ulterior motives;)

-n
 
Top