$50 NLHE Full Ring: Call off stack with open straight draw and correct odds?

$50 NL HE Full Ring: Call off stack with open straight draw and correct odds?

What would you do here on the flop? I was getting the correct odds to call and hit my straight (had 2.4:1, needed 2.18:1), but wondered if one of the other two players who had already committed substantial chips to the pot already had the nut straight. There are also lots of hands they could both have that don't give me a lot of equity in the pot. How would you factor that in?

I had just joined the table so no reads/stats on the players at that point.


$0.25/$0.50 No Limit Hold'em Cash, 7 Players
Poker Tools by CardRunners

BOXMAKER777: $10.50 (21 bb)
ROOM812: $15.25 (30.5 bb)
Hero: $25 (50 bb)
LOSERTOO: $109.85 (219.7 bb)
SAM_R_I: $46.70 (93.4 bb)
DAVIDTIGER74: $24.95 (49.9 bb)
BS026: $58.10 (116.2 bb)

Preflop: Hero is BB with T T
BS026 posts BB OOP, LOSERTOO folds, SAM_R_I calls $0.50, DAVIDTIGER74 calls $0.50, BS026 raises to $3, 2 folds, Hero calls $2.25, SAM_R_I folds, DAVIDTIGER74 calls $2.25

Flop: ($9.25) 8 9 J (3 players)
Hero checks, DAVIDTIGER74 bets $22.20 and is all-in, BS026 calls $22.20, Hero ?

I'd probably 3-bet preflop, so much dead limper money. That said...

Players have a range. Against that range, your hand isn't so great.

Against a range of hands I quickly conjured up, you have 26% equity, or 2.84:1.

Or if you don't like math, your draw isn't clean enough to assume you have a 2.18:1 draw. If anyone has another ten, or a made straight, or a full house re-draw, you don't have a clean 8 outs.

c9h13no3 said:

Players have a range. Against that range, your hand isn't so great.

Against a range of hands I quickly conjured up, you have 26% equity, or 2.84:1.

Or if you don't like math, your draw isn't clean enough to assume you have a 2.18:1 draw. If anyone has another ten, or a made straight, or a full house re-draw, you don't have a clean 8 outs.

Click to expand...

Thanks c9. That's what I was thinking too. I won't post the results of the hand yet in case anyone else wants to chime in, but my equity against their hands turned out to be 25%, very close to what you came up with.

Yeah, you're outs are very unlikely to be clean so I don't think you're ever getting the right odds to call here. I fold and take some notes on what DAVIDTIGER74 limp/calls preflop then overbet shoves that flop with.

WVHillbilly said:

Yeah, you're outs are very unlikely to be clean so I don't think you're ever getting the right odds to call here. I fold and take some notes on what DAVIDTIGER74 limp/calls preflop then overbet shoves that flop with.

Click to expand...

That's what I did -- folded and took notes! He had overbet shoved with 95s, and ended up hitting a straight and beating the other guy's QQ. Of course I was sick that I would have won a big pot, but thanks for the reassurance that I made the right decision.

why do you only have 50bb?

rssurfer54 said:

why do you only have 50bb?

Click to expand...

This is a great question!

Having a guess that its a loose action filled 50bb MAX table on stars.

rssurfer54 said:

why do you only have 50bb?

Click to expand...

I know this is probably a personal issue of mine , but I'm more comfortable buying in for 50BB rather than 100BB at 50NL and above. Maybe it's the pain factor -- it's too painful to stack off with 100BB, but less so with 50BB so I'm not afraid to get it in with that amount. I realize this is not considered optimal strategy, and if there's a known spewy player with a bigger stack I'll often buy in for enough to cover him. I typically look for tables with at least a few other half stacks and below. Please feel free to tell me how terrible this is. Seriously.

This is at Absolute Poker. I play there when the bad beat jackpot is high and so hitting a piece of it is a primary goal (and yes, it's worthwhile because I've won over $2,500 in jackpot money in the last two weeks).

That is terrible stop that scumbag shorty bs, etc... Its been said, moving on.

The flat by the BS026 guy also SCREAMS that he either has us smoked, or is on a draw, both of which kill us since his draw pretty much has to eat some of our outs, and is more than likely a draw with a pair. Sucks, but without specific reads notes and biding your time are the best approach.

Late into this thread, but I fold and take notes as well. Open limp/call shove this flop is usually a donkey play but the nice thing is that you've seen the preflop raiser call already. If he folds I call, even though the pot odds would be worse but his range is stronger than the flop shove.

And, 50bbs is a weird stack size, imho. It's nearly impossible to get set mining odds. Mind you, I often move up in levels by starting with 60bbs but I buy in full when I get comfortable. I also let my autobuyin drop to 90% in order to look less like a reg but I don't go lower than 90%.

roundcat said:

I know this is probably a personal issue of mine , but I'm more comfortable buying in for 50BB rather than 100BB at 50NL and above. Maybe it's the pain factor -- it's too painful to stack off with 100BB, but less so with 50BB so I'm not afraid to get it in with that amount. I realize this is not considered optimal strategy, and if there's a known spewy player with a bigger stack I'll often buy in for enough to cover him. I typically look for tables with at least a few other half stacks and below. Please feel free to tell me how terrible this is. Seriously.

This is at Absolute Poker. I play there when the bad beat jackpot is high and so hitting a piece of it is a primary goal (and yes, it's worthwhile because I've won over $2,500 in jackpot money in the last two weeks).

Click to expand...

My friend does this, and it annoys me to all hell because he does it in our home game and he always chips up because he's shoving on any draws because he has no stack to play after the flop. I don't like giving short stackers action because a lot of the time they are just looking to double and leave, and usually some idiot is there to call there all in with AT or QJ or 44. To me, I don't like short stacking, but if it works for you, more power to you. Maybe you should drop to 25NL and get more comfortable playing 100BBs.

I also find it interesting that your a pro jackpot player, never heard of one.

Do you guys consider 50BBs to be short stacking? I don't. As NineLions said, it is a bit of a weird stack size, but I consider the short stacks to be 20BBs -- and there are a few who buy in for that. I typically like to play with them because they're usually either poor players or their range is very narrow. And again, there's the comfort factor that I never fear calling a short stack's all in if I think there's a good chance I'm ahead.

Pro jackpot player, heh... I haven't thought about it that way, though I suppose it could be possible if the results were consistent. I only started putting effort into it fairly recently and am at loose ends a bit when the jackpot money isn't high enough to play for.

roundcat said:

Do you guys consider 50BBs to be short stacking? I don't. As NineLions said, it is a bit of a weird stack size, but I consider the short stacks to be 20BBs -- and there are a few who buy in for that. I typically like to play with them because they're usually either poor players or their range is very narrow. And again, there's the comfort factor that I never fear calling a short stack's all in if I think there's a good chance I'm ahead.

Pro jackpot player, heh... I haven't thought about it that way, though I suppose it could be possible if the results were consistent. I only started putting effort into it fairly recently and am at loose ends a bit when the jackpot money isn't high enough to play for.

Click to expand...

LOL sorry man...pro jackpot player. That's like saying it's rigged b/c your AA got cracked once. You got lucky last 2 weeks, great, but come on...playing to hit the BBJ is very suboptimal.

Your mistake was calling pre flop. Losing play with 100BB stack, much more so with 50BBs.

Also, when you double up do you quit the table so you won't have 100BBs? Even if it's a juicy table?

Dunno why I'm giving advice, I really have no sympathy for you - paying off the one proven cheating network out there....

ComplexPlaya said:

LOL sorry man...pro jackpot player. That's like saying it's rigged b/c your AA got cracked once. You got lucky last 2 weeks, great, but come on...playing to hit the BBJ is very suboptimal.

Your mistake was calling pre flop. Losing play with 100BB stack, much more so with 50BBs.

Also, when you double up do you quit the table so you won't have 100BBs? Even if it's a juicy table?

Dunno why I'm giving advice, I really have no sympathy for you - paying off the one proven cheating network out there....

Click to expand...

You don't have to be so harsh, I made a joke about him hitting the jackpot twice, calling him a pro jackpot player, he's just going along with it.

And to be fair, if he was playing on 2 networks where they both have a bad beat jackpot (say, Merge & Cereus) then it would be optimal to play on the one with the higher jackpot. I don't think playing when the jackpot is high is a bad thing. I just think its silly to play half stacked when a lot of your edge comes against fish in deep stacked situations.

Herbish1 said:

You don't have to be so harsh, I made a joke about him hitting the jackpot twice, calling him a pro jackpot player, he's just going along with it.

Click to expand...

Thanks. No worries, I can take a little verbal beating online without crying my eyes out.

To address ComplexPlaya's points:

ComplexPlaya said:

LOL sorry man...pro jackpot player. That's like saying it's rigged b/c your AA got cracked once. You got lucky last 2 weeks, great, but come on...playing to hit the BBJ is very suboptimal.

Click to expand...

See above; it's a joke. I think you get that because of your LOL. I do believe, however, that there's a point at which paying jackpot rake in exchange for a chance to win part of the payout is +EV. For me it makes sense to draw that line when the JP is above average. If, when playing for jackpot money, my results are breakeven or better, there's really no downside but there is a big upside. A big jackpot also draws in lots of players wanting to hit, many who usually play lower and/or aren't highly skilled.

ComplexPlaya said:

Your mistake was calling pre flop. Losing play with 100BB stack, much more so with 50BBs.

Click to expand...

Granted. I realize since I'm out of position I'm supposed to 3-bet that preflop. However, with one limper and the raiser already in, I don't want to raise, get called and face high cards on the flop while being first to act. I especially don't want to be shoved on or 4-bet out of the pot. So, I'd rather flat and see what develops. Sure, it's the weaker play, but lacking stats on anyone, I chose the safer route that time.

ComplexPlaya said:

Also, when you double up do you quit the table so you won't have 100BBs? Even if it's a juicy table?

Click to expand...

No. Regardless of stack size, I leave a table and find a new one when it's no longer a good table, all the loose players have busted or gone to bed and it's down to nits and regs.

ComplexPlaya said:

Dunno why I'm giving advice, I really have no sympathy for you - paying off the one proven cheating network out there....

Click to expand...

That's OK - I don't need your sympathy, but I do appreciate the advice. Not sure why people won't put the cheating scandal in the past where it belongs (though I'll admit I was a little miffed that during my one shot at the wsop this summer I was stuck at a table facing a giant picture of Russ Hamilton.) Recent security problems, sure, but now Cake has had them too, and Cereus fixed theirs rather quickly. I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt, and I really like playing on the site. It's also the only place where I've been able to get rakeback, which is a huge factor. I can't help it that so many people hate my favorite site.

And stop referring to roundcat as "he"!

c9h13no3 said:

And to be fair, if she was playing on 2 networks where they both have a bad beat jackpot (say, Merge & Cereus) then it would be optimal to play on the one with the higher jackpot. I don't think playing when the jackpot is high is a bad thing. I just think its silly to play half stacked when a lot of your edge comes against fish in deep stacked situations.

Click to expand...

Hey c9, fixed your post.

I'm going to have to reassess the half stack thing, but like I said, it's a comfort level issue. I just friggen' hate to lose a full stack, and maybe there's a discipline issue there with my own play. I know there has been in the past, when I've been too willing to stack off lightly, and I now have a post-it stuck to my monitor to remind me to take more time to assess a situation, wait for good spots, and give my opponents credit when it's likely due.

I also feel like there are some situations in which I've been able to get all the money in and double up when it wouldn't have played out the same way if I'd had a full stack. Opponents are more willing to pay me off if I can't do as much damage to them, and I know I feel the same way when faced with stacks shorter than mine -- I'm more likely to call a large bet or raise, or put a shorter stack all in, when I think I may have the best of it and won't be risking as much to find out. It's basically a stack to pot ratio thing, and smaller SPR = less risk.

However, I've never claimed not to be silly. :hahaha::hello:

It's true; less than full stack on a site that allows auto-topup creates some assumption of a weaker player, which is why I set my topup level below 100 bbs.

And I did ask leatherass because I watched him one time playing multiple 6 max tables and one, higher buyin, of full ring with 50bbs. His answer was that the fish that he was after was only playing with 50bbs. I'm still not sure that's the best strategy at a full ring table where you've got more than just the fish, but if the entire table is playing short, then the extra is pointless.

NineLions said:

And stop referring to roundcat as "he"!

Click to expand...

Heh, thanks. I usually prefer to be gender-neutral on the Internet, but I thought c9 already knew and don't want to mislead him.

Maybe I should write what could possibly be the worst-received article CardsChat has ever seen: "Why I Half-Stack on Absolute Poker Pursuing the Bad Beat Jackpot."

roundcat said:

Thanks. No worries, I can take a little verbal beating online without crying my eyes out.

To address ComplexPlaya's points:

See above; it's a joke. I think you get that because of your LOL. I do believe, however, that there's a point at which paying jackpot rake in exchange for a chance to win part of the payout is +EV. For me it makes sense to draw that line when the JP is above average. If, when playing for jackpot money, my results are breakeven or better, there's really no downside but there is a big upside. A big jackpot also draws in lots of players wanting to hit, many who usually play lower and/or aren't highly skilled.

Click to expand...

I felt you were only half joking. There's no problem in playing bbj tables of course, unless you're overplaying pocket pairs trying to hit it - you can lose money that way

roundcat said:

Granted. I realize since I'm out of position I'm supposed to 3-bet that preflop. However, with one limper and the raiser already in, I don't want to raise, get called and face high cards on the flop while being first to act. I especially don't want to be shoved on or 4-bet out of the pot. So, I'd rather flat and see what develops. Sure, it's the weaker play, but lacking stats on anyone, I chose the safer route that time.

Click to expand...

You chose the riskier / money losing route trying to play it safe
Are you getting a $30 pot every time you hit a set with those 10's ? If not you're losing money calling. If you 3-bet and get called fine, you stand to win more cbetting almost every flop. Especially high cards board, people tend to flat 3bets with low-mid pp's (or SC's sometime), much less AK AQ KQ etc.

Plus you'll make a lot of mine winning the pot right there, especially since it's a squeeze play. The original raiser will be in the middle and worried about the next guy as well. If he shoves you can safely fold, and you only lost a 3bet.

Besides, when you flat you can get in even more trouble because of situations like this, where you don't know where you're at

If you were IP it would be different, but you need something to compensate the lack of position, so you need to lower that SPR ratio[/quote]

roundcat said:

No. Regardless of stack size, I leave a table and find a new one when it's no longer a good table, all the loose players have busted or gone to bed and it's down to nits and regs.

Click to expand...

So you're comfortable playing 100BBs as long as you sit with 50 first and then double up? What's the difference in starting with 100BBs to begin with then

The thing is, playing scared is never good, why would losing a 100BB stack matter? It's part of your bankroll, the bankroll is there to be wagered

roundcat said:

That's OK - I don't need your sympathy, but I do appreciate the advice. Not sure why people won't put the cheating scandal in the past where it belongs (though I'll admit I was a little miffed that during my one shot at the WSOP this summer I was stuck at a table facing a giant picture of Russ Hamilton.) Recent security problems, sure, but now Cake has had them too, and Cereus fixed theirs rather quickly. I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt, and I really like playing on the site. It's also the only place where I've been able to get rakeback, which is a huge factor. I can't help it that so many people hate my favorite site.

Click to expand...

I don't know why you wouldn't be able to get rakeback anywhere else, don't see how that's possible but about Cereus - it's not in the past, that's the problem.

Apparently the ownership hasn't really changed hands, and people were not compensated close to fullness to this day. And they keep lying about things to this day

ComplexPlaya said:

I felt you were only half joking. There's no problem in playing bbj tables of course, unless you're overplaying pocket pairs trying to hit it - you can lose money that way

Click to expand...

You're probably right about half joking. July's results were so good I'd love to repeat them, and they were good because 1) I got lucky and 2) I put a lot of effort into getting lucky. I try very hard not to overplay potential jackpot hands because I know it's a huge long shot to hit the actual BBJ, but rather I play to get a "playing at the same level" share, which only entails sitting in on any table at the same level where it hits (often $50 NL). And it's multiplied by the number of tables I'm playing at that level.

ComplexPlaya said:

You chose the riskier / money losing route trying to play it safe
Are you getting a $30 pot every time you hit a set with those 10's ? If not you're losing money calling. If you 3-bet and get called fine, you stand to win more cbetting almost every flop. Especially high cards board, people tend to flat 3bets with low-mid pp's (or SC's sometime), much less AK AQ KQ etc.

Click to expand...

Things like this are probably why I have a downward-leaning red line. In this particular case I would have lost much more by raising since the initial raiser had QQ, but I realize I can't be results-oriented and apply that to every situation.

ComplexPlaya said:

So you're comfortable playing 100BBs as long as you sit with 50 first and then double up? What's the difference in starting with 100BBs to begin with then

The thing is, playing scared is never good, why would losing a 100BB stack matter? It's part of your bankroll, the bankroll is there to be wagered

Click to expand...

I can't say I'm always comfortable with a bigger stack, but if table conditions are favorable I'm not going to leave unless I'm tired, or tilting, or it's time for dinner. Besides, if I'm playing 12 or more tables that's a really large chunk of my bankroll on the line at once. (When the jackpot is high I try to play at least 6 tables of NL and 6 limit. That probably brings up a whole new issue. )

ComplexPlaya said:

I don't know why you wouldn't be able to get rakeback anywhere else, don't see how that's possible

Click to expand...

I've tried to get rakeback at Full Tilt without success -- plus I'm not particularly fond of playing there, and my HUD covers up too much stuff on their tables (yes, I probably have too many stats on my HUD). I could sign up with Carbon and see if I could transfer my old Poker.com BR, but why play there without being able to use a HUD? Or Cake, but is the traffic really adequate? Their web site says there are currently 2,934 players online, while Absolute has 13,357. There's no rakeback at bodog, where I play occasionally. I do play at Stars -- also no rakeback but a good VIP program if I were to put in more volume there. Victory Poker offers rakeback, but it's so new I'm not sure about it. As a US player, that's about it for options.

roundcat said:

There's no rakeback at Bodog, where I play occasionally.

Click to expand...

No real comment on the rest but just wanted to point out that this is incorrect. Bodog offers 25% contributed rb but does not allow it to be advertised to the public (my rb provider doesn't show it until you sign on to their site). I have rb through Bodog but it is impossible to get it on an existing account so no real help for you but maybe for someone else reading this.