PokerStars Zoom, Hold'em No Limit - $0.01/$0.02 - 6 players
Replay this hand on Upswing Poker

UTG: $6.02 (301 bb)
MP: $2.00 (100 bb)
CO: $1.77 (89 bb)
BU: $1.77 (89 bb)
SB (Hero): $2.30 (115 bb)
BB: $2.00 (100 bb)

Pre-Flop: ($0.03) Hero is SB with 6♠ 6♦
UTG raises to $0.07, 3 players fold, Hero calls $0.06, BB calls $0.05

Flop: ($0.21) 2♥ 8♦ 6♥ (3 players)
Hero bets $0.06, BB raises to $0.28, UTG folds, Hero raises to $0.66, BB raises to $1.93 (all-in), Hero calls $1.27

Turn: ($4.07) Q♦ (2 players, 1 all-in)

River: ($4.07) J♣ (2 players, 1 all-in)

Total pot: $4.07 (Rake: $0.14)

Showdown:
BB shows A♥ 3♥ (high card, Ace)
(http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/unrolled?g=he&s=generic&b=2h8d6hQdJc&h1=Ah3h&h2=6s6d - Pre-Flop: 34%, Flop: 26%, Turn: 16%, River: 0%)

SB (Hero) shows 6♠ 6♦ (three of a kind, Sixes)
(http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/unrolled?g=he&s=generic&b=2h8d6hQdJc&h1=Ah3h&h2=6s6d - Pre-Flop: 66%, Flop: 74%, Turn: 84%, River: 100%)

SB (Hero) wins $3.93

Setmining out of position from the SB against a large open raise is a little marginal, and you might actually be better off in the long run by just folding 22-66 or even 22-77. Calling is not like a huge mistake though, so I dont hate it.

On the flop I am not a big fan of your small donk bet. It worked in the sense, that it induced BB to raise with his draw, but it also allowed UTG to get out of the pot without investing the traditional C-bet.

I think, this is a good spot to go for a check-raise, and if you are going to donk bet, I want to make it much larger like 14-18c. I like, that you 3-bet and got it in on the flop. No point in slowplaying, when you have the second nuts on a wet board. Always nice to get your hold as well

Originally Posted by Bluebottle88

PokerStars Zoom, Hold'em No Limit - $0.01/$0.02 - 6 players
https://upswingpoker.com/replayer/224vRU2nr

UTG: $6.02 (301 bb)
MP: $2.00 (100 bb)
CO: $1.77 (89 bb)
BU: $1.77 (89 bb)
SB (Hero): $2.30 (115 bb)
BB: $2.00 (100 bb)

Pre-Flop: ($0.03) Hero is SB with 6♠ 6♦
UTG raises to $0.07, 3 players fold, Hero calls $0.06, BB calls $0.05

Flop: ($0.21) 2♥ 8♦ 6♥ (3 players)
Hero bets $0.06, BB raises to $0.28, UTG folds, Hero raises to $0.66, BB raises to $1.93 (all-in), Hero calls $1.27

Turn: ($4.07) Q♦ (2 players, 1 all-in)

River: ($4.07) J♣ (2 players, 1 all-in)

Total pot: $4.07 (Rake: $0.14)

Showdown:
BB shows A♥ 3♥ (high card, Ace)
(http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/unrolled?g=he&s=generic&b=2h8d6hQdJc&h1=Ah3h&h2=6s6d - Pre-Flop: 34%, Flop: 26%, Turn: 16%, River: 0%)

SB (Hero) shows 6♠ 6♦ (three of a kind, Sixes)
(http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/unrolled?g=he&s=generic&b=2h8d6hQdJc&h1=Ah3h&h2=6s6d - Pre-Flop: 66%, Flop: 74%, Turn: 84%, River: 100%)

SB (Hero) wins $3.93

Hi there Bluebottle88, thanks a lot for sharing your hand with us!

Preflop:

When UTG raises to 3.5 blinds I am more inclined to fold hands such as 22-77. The reason is because our odds/implied odds are a little bit worst for setmining. We are paying a higher price in the long run to hit our set in the same ratio (1/7 or 1/8 times).
Unless you are very sure that BB calls too much and BB is a weak player, I see no reason for calling 22-77 from the SB.
When we call preflop from the SB our range is almost always capped: we have a range that is not so good for 3-betting because we are out of position, but this range is also not very good for folding, so we flat preflop.
When we do it, we will have on our range 22-88 sometimes (although we can 3-bet 88+ from SB, I don't know if versus UTG is a great ideia), and a couple of broadways, sometimes high suited connectors as T9s, 98s, but those are minimal.
Let it be clear: this is not a bad call at all, it is simply not optimal.
You call and the player in the BB enters the pot too and we go to a 3 way flop:

The Flop:

I like your donk bet here because the board is way too connected and UTG still can have some AA, KK, QQ, JJ, TT, 99 that will never fold easily to this flop, specially if UTG has one hearts in its combos.
Now a very strange move is when the BB decides to re-raise you here, lol:
Because BB has no Pocket 6's that we are blocking. BB doesn't have Two pair with 86, cause we block it as well.
It lasts sets of 8's and 2's, that could raise here for protection and the bluffs, some straight draws and flush draws. (Or BB called preflop with 99+? )
Theoretically, BB should not be shoving its flush draws combos here, because it would be dominated both by UTG's and SB's. However players at the micros love to nervously click buttons and are not thinking about ranges and position enough.

Abstract:

I've been through this situation at the micros a thousand of times and it is very "ikky", not to say another word. We will have 60%, 70% equity in the flop and we must go, however, Villains will hit their Flush Draws in a very good ratio, 40% or 30%, so when you decide to go all-in here, do not cry when it completes a hearts in the turn or the river.
I don't love going all-in in the flop, neither with top set when the flop is connected to flushes, however sometimes we have no options, we cannot fold our hand because the BB is clearly a recreational one.
Overall the hand was well played. The call preflop is good but it is not awesome.
Have a nice day!

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

Originally Posted by fundiver199

Setmining out of position from the SB against a large open raise is a little marginal, and you might actually be better off in the long run by just folding 22-66 or even 22-77. Calling is not like a huge mistake though, so I dont hate it.

On the flop I am not a big fan of your small donk bet. It worked in the sense, that it induced BB to raise with his draw, but it also allowed UTG to get out of the pot without investing the traditional C-bet.

I think, this is a good spot to go for a check-raise, and if you are going to donk bet, I want to make it much larger like 14-18c. I like, that you 3-bet and got it in on the flop. No point in slowplaying, when you have the second nuts on a wet board. Always nice to get your hold as well

Hi there fundiver199, I am really impressed that we are almost everytime in the same page when analysing hands : we are thinking very much alike, and I promise that I don't read your comments before making mine.
I find it awesome, that there is someone with a thought so close of the way I use to read hands and ranges.

I totally agree with you now that I read your text that the check/check-raise is a little more EV for this spot because UTG has a strong range and most likely is going to c-bet a lot a lower flops like this (although it is not good for UTG's range).
But given that BB is our famous recreational one, I believe the EV becomes if not equal to checking, very close, I don't know sometimes I am lazy to plug PioSolver.
Thank you very much fundiver199, your comments and analysis are awesome!

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

Ok, I'm going to analyze my online DB this weekend to see how 77- in EP are doing in set mining situations. I dont have many hands with just over 18k at the moment but hopefully it's enough to see a trend. In live poker where most of my experience is I am convinced by experience that set mining with 66 with a 33:1 bet to stack ratio is a slam dunk 100% call. Maybe I'm wrong since live is so much slower and I'm just estimating wrong or ending up on the right side of variance but I doubt it. Have you guys done this analysis already fundiver and Carlos?

As for the hand I love the call pre flop. I could go either way on the flop donk. If we have a donk range sets should be in it. Unfortunately we don't have reads on anyone. This flop does not hit a raising range much at all so if UTG has the correct amount of check backs (33% ish according to my HUD) the donk will be best. We really want to get 3 streets of value with our sets otherwise what are we set mining for? If the flop texture was different had an A, K, or Q then I would check more often expecting a c-bet and then raise. So I tend to like the donk lead with no reads on this texture. Sizing isn't terrible but I think at least 1/3 is warranted here. I'd probably go 8c. At 6c we are giving the flush draw almost direct odds to hit as his 6c will represent 18% of the pot and the turn is about that likely to be a heart plus he would probably be able to count on UTG to call behind if he flatted. After he raises and UTG folds I like the 3 bet but again it's a bit small. This time his call is 25% of pot so it's a bit better for just one card but I'd rather go 80c to extract more value and set up a trivial turn jam for all the times he flats. Nice hand.

Originally Posted by c0rnBr34d

Ok, I'm going to analyze my online DB this weekend to see how 77- in EP are doing in set mining situations. I dont have many hands with just over 18k at the moment but hopefully it's enough to see a trend. In live poker where most of my experience is I am convinced by experience that set mining with 66 with a 33:1 bet to stack ratio is a slam dunk 100% call. Maybe I'm wrong since live is so much slower and I'm just estimating wrong or ending up on the right side of variance but I doubt it. Have you guys done this analysis already fundiver and Carlos?

As for the hand I love the call pre flop. I could go either way on the flop donk. If we have a donk range sets should be in it. Unfortunately we don't have reads on anyone. This flop does not hit a raising range much at all so if UTG has the correct amount of check backs (33% ish according to my HUD) the donk will be best. We really want to get 3 streets of value with our sets otherwise what are we set mining for? If the flop texture was different had an A, K, or Q then I would check more often expecting a c-bet and then raise. So I tend to like the donk lead with no reads on this texture. Sizing isn't terrible but I think at least 1/3 is warranted here. I'd probably go 8c. At 6c we are giving the flush draw almost direct odds to hit as his 6c will represent 18% of the pot and the turn is about that likely to be a heart plus he would probably be able to count on UTG to call behind if he flatted. After he raises and UTG folds I like the 3 bet but again it's a bit small. This time his call is 25% of pot so it's a bit better for just one card but I'd rather go 80c to extract more value and set up a trivial turn jam for all the times he flats. Nice hand.

Hey bro thank you very much for your attention here. I don't know if I got your question very well my friend, sorry for it. If what you are asking is if we should be calling from SB x UTG with 77- when it comes a 3.5x or 3x raise is a question that will rely on:

A) How Deep Stacked are UTG, SB/Hero and BB?
B) BB is a recreational player or has postflop flaws?
C) UTG is opening more than 15% of its combos? Or less than 10% ?

If A, B, C are yes, we could be calling here even for a 4x raise, only to setmine with 77-

Now, if we are in the SB, 100 blinds deep, we are more inclined to call with 77- when it comes a 2x raise or a 2.5x simply because the odds are better for setmining than 3x or 3.5x.
I don't know if I get your point. Anyways, I don't play Live Cash, so what could be standard for a Live poker could not be for Online.

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

Originally Posted by Aballinamion

Hey bro thank you very much for your attention here. I don't know if I got your question very well my friend, sorry for it. If what you are asking is if we should be calling from SB x UTG with 77- when it comes a 3.5x or 3x raise is a question that will rely on:

A) How Deep Stacked are UTG, SB/Hero and BB?
B) BB is a recreational player or has postflop flaws?
C) UTG is opening more than 15% of its combos? Or less than 10% ?

If A, B, C are yes, we could be calling here even for a 4x raise, only to setmine with 77-

Now, if we are in the SB, 100 blinds deep, we are more inclined to call with 77- when it comes a 2x raise or a 2.5x simply because the odds are better for setmining than 3x or 3.5x.
I don't know if I get your point. Anyways, I don't play Live Cash, so what could be standard for a Live poker could not be for Online.

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

My question is, if we mine our online data. For each hand and for the group of hands of 77- where we called a raise from the blinds or limp called from EP. Did those group of hands show a profit over our sample or not? We should be able to show this quantitatively in our HUDs.

As for your other points:

A - What's considered deep here? What's your threshold? My threshold is based less on open size in isolation. It's more stack to bet ratio (even though we know we aren't getting the whole stack every time we flop a set).
B - No reads were provided here so I'm assuming no reads in general. If Vs are fish we have additional incentive to play more pots with them though, I agree.
C - I don't think this matters as much for me as we really only have RIO vs set over set scenarios. And they are so rare that it's not that substantial. I would argue that the more narrow the PFR the more likely we are get more of their stack when we flop a set. If someone is opening very wide and we x/r the flop or turn they are more likely to have air and fold so it's harder to get a huge return. If we apply pressure against an over pair or top pair good kicker we are more likely to get a huge return or the whole stack.

I think you maybe lost value from UTG by leading the flop, i would want him to make a c-bet with most of his range and then consider check raising,

Originally Posted by c0rnBr34d

My question is, if we mine our online data. For each hand and for the group of hands of 77- where we called a raise from the blinds or limp called from EP. Did those group of hands show a profit over our sample or not? We should be able to show this quantitatively in our HUDs.

As for your other points:

A - What's considered deep here? What's your threshold? My threshold is based less on open size in isolation. It's more stack to bet ratio (even though we know we aren't getting the whole stack every time we flop a set).
B - No reads were provided here so I'm assuming no reads in general. If Vs are fish we have additional incentive to play more pots with them though, I agree.
C - I don't think this matters as much for me as we really only have RIO vs set over set scenarios. And they are so rare that it's not that substantial. I would argue that the more narrow the PFR the more likely we are get more of their stack when we flop a set. If someone is opening very wide and we x/r the flop or turn they are more likely to have air and fold so it's harder to get a huge return. If we apply pressure against an over pair or top pair good kicker we are more likely to get a huge return or the whole stack.

Thanks again. Well, I actually do not have a good data for setmining from the SB because I am calling very, very rare, even with pocket pairs: my strategy is straightforward from the SB:

1) IF BTN limps, and I raise 15% range no matter who the BB is. If the BB is a decent player I narrow to 10% raising.
2) IF BTN raises, I am more inclined to 3-bet for bluff with a hand that has a good flobability than calling, unless there is a really weak player from the BB, even so the 3-bet will work +EV in the long run plus the Raise Vs IP Limpers (CO and BTN).
3) If it comes in gap to the SB, I raise simply 100% range at any limit from 2 NLHE to 100 NLHE, players simply do not defend their Big Blinds enough. I am 4-betting with the top of my range, because I hate to be playing 3-bet pots calling from the SB even with AQ, AJ, AT, and similar strong broadways. I will call some strong broaways sometimes when I know that BB is a weakish playa.

When do I freakin' call from the SB? lol:

Only when I have the proper odds and I don't want to 3-bet for some particular reason: So I am much more inclined to enter 2x and 2.5x raises by calling, and the result can be shown by the HUD. Sometimes I fold to a 2.5x when the player has 40 BB stack or less and it is too much aggressive postflop, so I see no reason to try to setmine here, even for such a small raise.
I believe one of the arts in poker is really know how to play and defend the SB. Playing decently from the SB is very hard, at the micros when we raise some limper from the MP, 4 players enter into the pot? So, we are eager to find good implied odds scenarios and run away from reverse implied odds scenarios.
I am not saying that "I am the master of the SB", but I believe my game became real much better when I adopted a more straightforward approach from the SB (3-bet or fold) and that the HUD can show very positively: some sessions I am +EV from the SB and the BB which is godlike for me, I am basically playing to defend my blinds effectively.
I am learning step by steps the tricks of how to play from the hardest position on the table. Everybody loves playing from the BTN right? Even a fish can play good in position, but the hard spots and most profitable ones is when we learn how to play and extract out of position, mostly by using our "capped range" image.
I don't have too much statistics calling versus 3x or 3.5x because I never call from the SB, at the micros when the price is that high, unless, of course, I could get the 3 elements, A, B and C, that I quoted before.
I use the same strategy for lower limits only, this means 2 NLHE to 100 NLHE.
200 NLHE and higher we must use a much more complex theory from the SB optimal playing.


Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

I think you guys are right lol. I don't really have enough data to prove it though. I'm going to cut down on my set mining with 55-. Here's the data from my HUD. I only have about 20k hands of 2NL-10NL.

((Called Preflop Any Call) OR (Limped Any Limp)) AND (Hands: 77, 66, 55, 44, 33, 22)
Position - My C Won - Hands
SB - $11.27 - 100
EP - $9.85 - 34
BB - $5.39 - 54
BTN - $3.65 - 44
CO - $1.87 - 47
MP - ($6.45) -51
Total - $25.58 - 330

As I start taking out 77 and 66 and 55 the money won from EP and the blinds quickly goes deeper and deeper into the red. I'll check back again at 50k hands, although I'll have much less 55-22 for comparison by then. These hands currently represent 1.6% of total hands played so it can't be a huge leak but it may be bigger than I thought. Thanks for making me finally look into this.

Originally Posted by c0rnBr34d

I think you guys are right lol. I don't really have enough data to prove it though. I'm going to cut down on my set mining with 55-. Here's the data from my HUD. I only have about 20k hands of 2NL-10NL.

((Called Preflop Any Call) OR (Limped Any Limp)) AND (Hands: 77, 66, 55, 44, 33, 22)
Position - My C Won - Hands
SB - $11.27 - 100
EP - $9.85 - 34
BB - $5.39 - 54
BTN - $3.65 - 44
CO - $1.87 - 47
MP - ($6.45) -51
Total - $25.58 - 330

As I start taking out 77 and 66 and 55 the money won from EP and the blinds quickly goes deeper and deeper into the red. I'll check back again at 50k hands, although I'll have much less 55-22 for comparison by then. These hands currently represent 1.6% of total hands played so it can't be a huge leak but it may be bigger than I thought. Thanks for making me finally look into this.

Oh, this is LeakBuster right? Or similar, whatever it is awesome! Hey, contratulations for such a good EV from the BB and the SB.
But it is very clear tha calling those pairs from MP are not a good ideia, in a high frequency.
This is why I advocate that there is nothing wrong calling 22-77 from the MP, but when we have better implied odds and this means when we are slightly deep stacked (120 bb or more) and there are calling stations at the blinds that would increase our implied odds even more, even if they decided to squeeze.
I also can see that you are picking the right spots for calling for setmining, which shows that you have the power to observe the table and make the best decisions possible, and not play and ABC Tight game, overfolding pocket pairs which will always have good odds and sometimes good implied odds, either for setmining or either for making straights, flushes, and being tight aggressive we are creative and represent a lot using proper sizings that many times we would have a situation like this:

Example

100 NLHE

We are in the CO with 134 BB ES, and with 6h6s and we raise to 3x and the SB 3-bets to 3.1x. SB has 150 BB ES, and we decide to call for mining.
The flop comes 2s3s4h and SB c-bets oop to 1/3 pot. Our hand here is very strong to be folding at 100 NLHE, because our 6's could easily be the best hand here many times versus AK, AQ, AJ, KQ, KJ, etc, we are only losing to 77+, plus we are drawing to flush draws and straights.
We should call this 1/3 pot bet here and we call, so the turn is a Kc, which is better for SB's range than's our Co's range, and SB goes for 1/2 pot and given that this is very cheap, and when it comes another spades on the river, because we have the 6 of Spades, we can represent the flushes of spades so bad, we should continue calling: any 6x would be good, any 5x, any spade because we called flop/turn, etc. We still have a decent piece of equity and should be calling here.
Besides, when it comes a 5x on the river and we complete a straight (in the case of SB 3-bet with AK), we are going to take SB's soul, because SB would never fold a Straight A2345, by the same token SB would not put us into many 6x on our range, because when we call flop and call turn our range is capped more for flushes.
SO, it happens that the river is a 5d and SB goes for 3/4 pot and we JAM and SB snap calls with KQo, because it is a very close spot at 100 NLHE and we still could be bluffing the flush draws of spades here, so this is why SB's called, because it is also calling with AK, KK, etc.

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

Originally Posted by c0rnBr34d

I think you guys are right lol. I don't really have enough data to prove it though. I'm going to cut down on my set mining with 55-. Here's the data from my HUD. I only have about 20k hands of 2NL-10NL.

((Called Preflop Any Call) OR (Limped Any Limp)) AND (Hands: 77, 66, 55, 44, 33, 22)
Position - My C Won - Hands
SB - $11.27 - 100
EP - $9.85 - 34
BB - $5.39 - 54
BTN - $3.65 - 44
CO - $1.87 - 47
MP - ($6.45) -51
Total - $25.58 - 330

As I start taking out 77 and 66 and 55 the money won from EP and the blinds quickly goes deeper and deeper into the red. I'll check back again at 50k hands, although I'll have much less 55-22 for comparison by then. These hands currently represent 1.6% of total hands played so it can't be a huge leak but it may be bigger than I thought. Thanks for making me finally look into this.

Sorry, I misread your table. I didn't see the minus - in front of the numers, I thought they were all positive and you were the master of setmining, lol, sorry.

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

Originally Posted by Aballinamion

Sorry, I misread your table. I didn't see the minus - in front of the numers, I thought they were all positive and you were the master of setmining, lol, sorry.

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

They are all positive except MP. The negative is in parentheses. I’m still not the master of set mining but this analysis will help me improve. If I remove 77 from the hand sample more positions go negative.

If this covid-19 spreads aggressively in my area I may be spending a lot more time playing online. Will be an interesting experiment either way.

Oh and to your earlier question I was able to use built in reports in PT4 to generate the tables.