ChuckTs
Legend
Silver Level
TT at 6:45 you should be raising out of the blinds. I was a little surprised how quickly you checked there. With two limpers and the sb tagging along we should be raising it to around 5BB and c-betting most flops. You have lots of equity and should value raise.
88 at 9:40 you raise pf then check a 962 flop - why? You're putting yourself in a really ugly spot if one of your opponents starts betting at the flop. Something I try to make a habit of is betting marginal hands more frequently earlier on in a hand to get my information for cheaper, as well as to protect my hand. Anyways that should be a bet there.
33 at 13:00 you raised OTB, got a call from the sb who min-donked an 862 flop. This is something I've realized is usually weakness and I'll often just pot it to take it down. By calling we give our opponent the impression we're not on a monster, and thus more incentive to keep betting at us (when we can't call).
Q6o at 24:40 you open limp the sb. I still haven't made sense of the stats but against most opponents this should be a raise/fold spot. If this is a rare thing then I think it's fine as a mix-up but if you're regularly limping with trash hands like that it'll eat away at your stack.
A9s at 37:30 you call a raise from EP when you're in the BB. This is a standard fold vs an ep raise - occasionally I might call a raise like this based on implied odds, but even then you don't have those as villain is only on like $1.50
88 at 9:40 you raise pf then check a 962 flop - why? You're putting yourself in a really ugly spot if one of your opponents starts betting at the flop. Something I try to make a habit of is betting marginal hands more frequently earlier on in a hand to get my information for cheaper, as well as to protect my hand. Anyways that should be a bet there.
33 at 13:00 you raised OTB, got a call from the sb who min-donked an 862 flop. This is something I've realized is usually weakness and I'll often just pot it to take it down. By calling we give our opponent the impression we're not on a monster, and thus more incentive to keep betting at us (when we can't call).
Q6o at 24:40 you open limp the sb. I still haven't made sense of the stats but against most opponents this should be a raise/fold spot. If this is a rare thing then I think it's fine as a mix-up but if you're regularly limping with trash hands like that it'll eat away at your stack.
A9s at 37:30 you call a raise from EP when you're in the BB. This is a standard fold vs an ep raise - occasionally I might call a raise like this based on implied odds, but even then you don't have those as villain is only on like $1.50
zachvac
Legend
Silver Level
This is where I have a tough time, middle pairs with lots of limpers. If I raise and all these limpers also call the raise, then without a set there's no way I'm winning the pot, but as you mention, they're too good of pairs to play purely for set value. I agree though the larger raise will hopefully fold out a few of the limpers.
The guy to my left had called 100% of cbets I think was my logic. I figure most likely an overcard comes, the call from my cbet tells me nothing because of the fact he's done it every time so far, and I just wanted to keep the pot small. I guess the other guy though throws in a problem, and I probably should have raised simply because of that guy as well. Of course now that I think about it a bet into a calling station isn't that bad anyway, because most of the time I'm ahead and getting value out of a call.ChuckTs said:
These are the 2 things I haven't been able to figure out, the meaning of min bets and overbets at low stakes. There seems not to be a thought process. A lot of the times I'll come over the top and they'll re-raise, which I obviously have to fold to. So I guess I was thinking the 10 cents gave me implied odds if I turned a set, which probably wasn't even right, unless of course he did have a monster.ChuckTs said:
There was a thread on this play recently actually, and I use it pretty regularly. If I'm in the SB and it's folded all around to me, and the BB is not an aggressive or loose player (won't be raising the flop if he misses), I'll flat call the blinds, and bet out 20 on the flop. This only has to succeed half the time to be profitable, only costs me 5 rather than 25 if he has a hand preflop, and people are less likely to call J5o after the flop when no J or 5 comes than they are to a PFR which they may see as a steal attempt.ChuckTs said:
As I see it, the possible plays are
1. fold
2. play it like I did
3. raise 3x preflop
1. no matter what, I win no more, lose no more. ev=0
2. When I run into monsters, I lose 5 cents, as when I call, they're likely not checking a premium hand. No matter what the flop, I bet 20. So if I run into a hand that raises or calls (in which case I C/F the turn and river unless I hit a hand like 2-pair or trips), I lose 25 cents overall. If I win the pot, I make 15 cents overall
3. If he has a hand worth calling, I lose 25 cents unless I flop a hand. If he doesn't, I win 15.
EV calculations:
For these calculations, I'm going to assume that I never hit a hand, and that for #2 if I get a flop call and for #3 that I get a preflop call, that I lose the money. This is obviously not always true, but calculating cbet percentages, and further actions are all but impossible, and they should cancel out for #2 and #3, I'm assuming they'll both be above 0 so although I may be underestimating both #2 and #3, I'm not underestimating one more than the other I don't think. Tell me if my logic's off somewhere.
1. 0 - if only all calculations were this easy
3. He calls 15% of preflop raises, so this is an easy calculation. I win 15 85% of the time and lose 25 the other 15%. 15*.85 - 25*.15 =9 cents ev
2. For this, let's use the calculations on the PAHUD for this particular player. He raises PF with 4% of hands, and calls 15% of preflop raises. Only the first one is relevant here. 4% of the time I lose the 5 cents right here without seeing a flop, the other 96% of the time I see a flop.
Now because I don't know how to calculate the odds of "hitting" a flop (knowing that a low pocket pair still may call), I'm just going to use the calculation that I already did. The ev for #3 is 9, so for #2 to be better, the ev would have to be better than 9. Call x the percentage of flops villain will hit (defined as good enough to call the flop bet of 20) with a hand in the bottom 96% (times he doesn't raise) range. Let's set the equal percentage.
9 = -5*.04-25*.96*x+15*.96*(1-x)
9 = -.2-24x+14.4*(1 - x)
9 = -.2-24x+14.4-14.4x
9 = 14.2 - 38.4x
38.4x = 5.2
x = .135 = 13.5%
Apparently I was wrong. Although I think the way I played that is +ev, villain will hit far more than 13.5% of flops (and since he plays so tight, high cards are definitely in his range PF, so it's not like most of the time he pairs it'll be bottom pair crap kicker), thus I should raise more pf to just steal the blinds. Obviously this ignored the fact that he may call more from the BB feeling "committed", but I think this may counter the fact that when we hit in #3 we have a bigger pot and will win more than the pot in #2, even in future bets. Overall, I guess against a weak passive opponent like this, the PFR is the better option.
ChuckTs said:
You're right, not sure exactly what I was thinking there.
Thanks for the input.
ChuckTs
Legend
Silver Level
This is where I have a tough time, middle pairs with lots of limpers. If I raise and all these limpers also call the raise, then without a set there's no way I'm winning the pot, but as you mention, they're too good of pairs to play purely for set value. I agree though the larger raise will hopefully fold out a few of the limpers.
Yeah, it's just a matter of wasting valueable equity here. The key is raising to a significant amount. A good example: https://www.cardschat.com/forum/cash-game-hand-analysis-50/50nl-tt-oop-multiway-pot-100201/
The guy to my left had called 100% of cbets I think was my logic. I figure most likely an overcard comes, the call from my cbet tells me nothing because of the fact he's done it every time so far, and I just wanted to keep the pot small. I guess the other guy though throws in a problem, and I probably should have raised simply because of that guy as well. Of course now that I think about it a bet into a calling station isn't that bad anyway, because most of the time I'm ahead and getting value out of a call.
Exactly - if he's calling lots, it gives us more reason to bet.
These are the 2 things I haven't been able to figure out, the meaning of min bets and overbets at low stakes. There seems not to be a thought process. A lot of the times I'll come over the top and they'll re-raise, which I obviously have to fold to. So I guess I was thinking the 10 cents gave me implied odds if I turned a set, which probably wasn't even right, unless of course he did have a monster.
imo that's the two scenarios when minbet into - it's mostly either nothing, just a blocking bet to test your strength (not that they think that deep, but just a subconscious thing), or it's a monster that's trying to induce a raise. The former is much more likely than the latter imo.
There was a thread on this play recently actually, and I use it pretty regularly. If I'm in the SB and it's folded all around to me, and the BB is not an aggressive or loose player (won't be raising the flop if he misses), I'll flat call the blinds, and bet out 20 on the flop. This only has to succeed half the time to be profitable, only costs me 5 rather than 25 if he has a hand preflop, and people are less likely to call J5o after the flop when no J or 5 comes than they are to a PFR which they may see as a steal attempt.
As I see it, the possible plays are
1. fold
2. play it like I did
3. raise 3x preflop
1. no matter what, I win no more, lose no more. ev=0
2. When I run into monsters, I lose 5 cents, as when I call, they're likely not checking a premium hand. No matter what the flop, I bet 20. So if I run into a hand that raises or calls (in which case I C/F the turn and river unless I hit a hand like 2-pair or trips), I lose 25 cents overall. If I win the pot, I make 15 cents overall
3. If he has a hand worth calling, I lose 25 cents unless I flop a hand. If he doesn't, I win 15.
EV calculations:
For these calculations, I'm going to assume that I never hit a hand, and that for #2 if I get a flop call and for #3 that I get a preflop call, that I lose the money. This is obviously not always true, but calculating cbet percentages, and further actions are all but impossible, and they should cancel out for #2 and #3, I'm assuming they'll both be above 0 so although I may be underestimating both #2 and #3, I'm not underestimating one more than the other I don't think. Tell me if my logic's off somewhere.
1. 0 - if only all calculations were this easy
3. He calls 15% of preflop raises, so this is an easy calculation. I win 15 85% of the time and lose 25 the other 15%. 15*.85 - 25*.15 =9 cents ev
Well you don't lose .25 every time you get called since you can always outdraw your opponent.
Put very generally in EV terms, we have 3 scenarios:
1) we get reraised by some % smaller than %4 since his 3-betting % will be smaller than his pfr%. That EV would = -.25
2) we get called by the (%15 - the 3-betting %), in which case we can still outflop our opponent. I'm not sure how to calculate this since I don't know his 3-betting percentage, nor do I know how often we outflop a hand rather than straight pf-river equities if you get my drift.
3) we get folds which simply = +.15 EV.
^^^bold; give me 2 mins to answer to the rest
ChuckTs
Legend
Silver Level
2. For this, let's use the calculations on the PAHUD for this particular player. He raises PF with 4% of hands, and calls 15% of preflop raises. Only the first one is relevant here. 4% of the time I lose the 5 cents right here without seeing a flop, the other 96% of the time I see a flop.
Now because I don't know how to calculate the odds of "hitting" a flop (knowing that a low pocket pair still may call), I'm just going to use the calculation that I already did. The ev for #3 is 9, so for #2 to be better, the ev would have to be better than 9. Call x the percentage of flops villain will hit (defined as good enough to call the flop bet of 20) with a hand in the bottom 96% (times he doesn't raise) range. Let's set the equal percentage.
9 = -5*.04-25*.96*x+15*.96*(1-x)
9 = -.2-24x+14.4*(1 - x)
9 = -.2-24x+14.4-14.4x
9 = 14.2 - 38.4x
38.4x = 5.2
x = .135 = 13.5%
To be %100 honest I'm lost with what you're doing here
Couldn't we just say:
EV of limp:
%4 of the time he raises, we fold: .04*-.05 = -0.002
vs the other %96 of his range that checks, we have %32 equity, but that's going right to the river. Not sure what type of equity we have to the flop (ie what % of the time we outflop him) but I guesstimate it's somewhere around 3/5ths of our entire equity since we're talking about 3 of the 5 cards as opposed to 5/5 of them (is this thinking flawed?).
Aww christ it's getting complicated
Anyways the gyst of what I'm trying to get across is that this is an incredibly weak play. Even at 25nl you're not going to get away with this often enough to make it worth your while. As you move up to 50nl and higher I'd say it's just spew. It's fine if it's working for you now, but just don't get in the habit imo.
Anyways aside from those hands I think you played pretty well. fwiw your c-bets and even your value bets are a little on the small side. I noticed several times you double barrelled (either for value or c-bet) for like 1/3 the pot.
zachvac
Legend
Silver Level
Basically I'm saying that with total crap in the SB with all folds to you, I would flat call preflop and bet the flop. My logic was that if you find out PF if he has a hand worth raising with, without having to pay the money to find out, you can then bet the flop on hands not worth it for him to raise with, knowing that the majority of the time he misses.
The math I did depended on this though: If you get called on a preflop raise or if you flat call PF and get called on the flop, you will not win the hand. I stated that this is false, but for the sake of our ev calculation we ignore this for both, knowing that the actual ev will be higher than our calculated ev, because we will sometimes hit a flop. But I'm talking about hands where you basically want 2-pair or better to show the hand down, as with Q6o. Even if the flop comes Q73, I'm wanting to see a cheap SD with Q6. If the flop comes Q63 though, I'm assuming I'm ahead either way. So most of the time we don't hit the flop, we're relying on stealing the hand and our hand is virtually meaningless in this calculation. Our calculation simply relies on villain's hand, and given the PFR numbers as well as calls PFR% we can make the calculation, although another small factor is the fact that many especially $10NL players will loosen their starting requirements from the BB. I've seen people call a PFR from the BB with as little as something like J6. So my logic was that they would call with hands like J6, but if the flop comes Q52 they could lay it down. I didn't factor that in to my ev equation, so if people loosen up sufficiently from the BB, the flat call to bet the flop becomes a better play.
The math I did depended on this though: If you get called on a preflop raise or if you flat call PF and get called on the flop, you will not win the hand. I stated that this is false, but for the sake of our ev calculation we ignore this for both, knowing that the actual ev will be higher than our calculated ev, because we will sometimes hit a flop. But I'm talking about hands where you basically want 2-pair or better to show the hand down, as with Q6o. Even if the flop comes Q73, I'm wanting to see a cheap SD with Q6. If the flop comes Q63 though, I'm assuming I'm ahead either way. So most of the time we don't hit the flop, we're relying on stealing the hand and our hand is virtually meaningless in this calculation. Our calculation simply relies on villain's hand, and given the PFR numbers as well as calls PFR% we can make the calculation, although another small factor is the fact that many especially $10NL players will loosen their starting requirements from the BB. I've seen people call a PFR from the BB with as little as something like J6. So my logic was that they would call with hands like J6, but if the flop comes Q52 they could lay it down. I didn't factor that in to my ev equation, so if people loosen up sufficiently from the BB, the flat call to bet the flop becomes a better play.
Either play again and again will begin to not work if I develop a pattern, but I don't understand how it is in and of itself a weak play. It will work against a player in the BB who will not call a bet on the flop without getting at least a piece of it, and saves the extra 2 BBs when they pick up a hand and raise PF.chuckTs said:
zachvac
Legend
Silver Level
Thank you for watching and commenting on the video, in terms of size of turn and river bets, should I be leaning more towards the 1/2 pot bets? I don't remember specifically hands from the video where I bet like 1/3 pot, but most of my cbets and value bets will be 1/2 pot on the flop, and just under 1/2 pot afterwards. Once in a while in multi-way pots I'll make a big underbet, just to see if someone hit the flop or else as a value bet. In the next few sessions I'll keep an eye on this though.