$200 NLHE Full Ring: $200 NLHE : Live speculative hand Blind vs Blind

[mbrenneman0]

Completing the blind for $1 is meh, it'd be way better if you were fully stacked. But even then, you basically need to flop a miracle AND extract OOP so have fun with that. I get it, and I like putting the .5bb in here too, but realize this spot probably isn't nearly as profitable as you think it is.

Then BB raises and you definitely need to fold. You have a hand that's gonna flop some super weak pair, or a weird kind of "looks okay but is still really hard to play" draw, AND we're sitting on just 48bb. We just put 12.5% of our stack in hoping for that outcome that isn't really a good spot to be in.

Then, not so surprisingly, we flop a weak hand that's going to be tricky to play. Are we ahead of AK? Are we dead to Tx? Does villain have 77+? I don't know...

Turn bails us out and puts us ahead of everything except his Tx holdings. Without reads it's hard to say, but considering it's his bb, I don't think a lot of T's are in his range. Expecting more pp's, AT is in there but I think other 10's usually check the option and take a flop.

Your range definitely has way more 6's and T's in it. I think donk jam is fine. If villain is thinking player he should find a fold, but by the same token I don't see what he could possibly bet. He should be checking virtually his whole range behind, so I'm good with jamming it in at that point

I do agree that most flops will be very tricky, but I wonder if the difference between completing from the SB and folding here or limp-calling and limp-folding is how mistake prone the hero is postflop? like it definitely seems like a question of how much of our equity do we realize? and someone who is mistake prone will realize much less equity than someone who is not IMO... it could even depend on whether or not your are playing your A-game or your C-game?

I do disagree that this flop is tricky though... this is a very easy check-call on the flop to every sizing except for 2/3 pot or larger. JT6 would be a much more difficult flop IMO

 

[AlexTheOwl]

I do agree that most flops will be very tricky, but I wonder if the difference between completing from the SB and folding here or limp-calling and limp-folding is how mistake prone the hero is postflop? like it definitely seems like a question of how much of our equity do we realize? and someone who is mistake prone will realize much less equity than someone who is not IMO... it could even depend on whether or not your are playing your A-game or your C-game?

I do disagree that this flop is tricky though... this is a very easy check-call on the flop to every sizing except for 2/3 pot or larger. JT6 would be a much more difficult flop IMO

I agree. And I don't understand why there is so much concern in this thread about 64s being difficult to play post-flop in this situation.

At the flop there are 25BB in the pot and 43BB in our stack.

If we have less than two pair on the flop, we check / fold, unless we have a flush draw, or an open ended straight draw.

If we have an open ended straight draw or flush draw, we have too much equity to fold to any bet, and calling any significant bet effectively commits us.
So we are all in with draws, to utilize our fold equity (although we don't have much), and to give us two streets on which to complete our draw.

If we have two pair or better on an unpaired board, we are not folding. We bet, call, or 3-bet, depending on the texture and the opponents's tendencies and actions.

The chances of us having two pair with a paired board and facing a small bet - the actual situation in this hand - are small. I am sure we can think of other awkward situations too, but they will be rare.

It's unfortunate that the draws are low, but at this SPR (stack to pot ratio) that doesn't change our play. We wish we were deeper, but our stack size makes it easier for opponents to call us if we make our hand, and makes it easier for us to make decisions post-flop.

P.S. I don't know why there is a frowny face in the title of this post, I must have done it by accident. I can't seem to remove it. Life is good. Go away, frowny face.

 

[Mase31683]

In regards to good/bad flop
I guess it's villain dependent. I can tell you if you're peeling turns with 64s on this board against my own personal range in this spot you're donating to my cause.

Villain's bet of course makes things super straightforward.

For the take the odds and make a hand/draw argument:
The gapper makes it a bit worse, but for simplicity I'm going to use the numbers for a suited connector.

Odds of flopping...

Made Hands
Two Pair: 2%
Trips: 1.35%
Straight: 1.31%
Flush: 0.84%
Full House: 0.09%
Quads: 0.01%

Total: 5.6%

Big Combo Draws
20 outer (OESD + FD + Pair): 0.077%
17 outer (Gutshot + FD + Pair): 0.153%
15 outer (OESD + FD): 1.424%
14 outer (Pair + FD): 1.450%
13 outer (Pair + SD): 1.147%
12 outer (Gutshot + FD): 2.664%

Total: 6.9%

Big Made Hand Total: 12.5%


Regular Draws
9 outer (FD): 5.2% (Discounted for combo draws already included)
8 outer (SD): 8.0% (Discounted for combo draws)

Total: 13.2%


So 12.5% of the time we flop a hand we're happy to commit with (About the same % as a set) however the made hands you can make with SC's vs PP's are more susceptible to being beaten by overpair type holdings (the hand villain is likely to hold should we get stacks in). And half of these "made" hand are big draws that are relying on fold equity combined with real equity to be +EV.
Therefore, I would argue you need better odds offered to you than what you would require with a PP to make profitable calls.

13.2% of the time we flop a draw we're going to commit with, but as you said, the FE isn't great. SPR is < 2 so you're only folding out the absolute junk part of villain's range.

So we can call $12 getting 3:1 immediate (Max value if villain will commit his stack is $122:$12 or 10.17:1). We ARE flopping one of these "Well we're committed now hands" ~25% of the time, however our equity in these isn't a lock like it would be with a flopped set.

Edit: I was on mobile and did way too much work to try and get the figures you'd already threw up there in the picture...sigh

 

[mbrenneman0]

I dont believe in being "pot committed"

As alex said above, you call if you have the correct odds for the price youre getting, not because you have x% of your stack committed. We can call this flop and call a second barrel on 2 3 5 7 8 9 T and J turns and still fold to a tripple barrel on the river, because on all those turns he still barrels with AK and AQ often enough to make it a call but on the river he only tripple barrels with hands that beat us, so we go from having some 30% equity against his turn barreling range to 5% equity against his tripple barrel range on most run outs

Of course, on the 6 turn, his barreling range is much tighter than his barreling range on a single paired board, so its only on the 6 turn barrel that we can limit his range to Tx and PPs

 

[AlexTheOwl]

I dont believe in being "pot committed"

As alex said above, you call if you have the correct odds for the price youre getting, not because you have x% of your stack committed.

To be clear since you refer to my comments:

I agree that in a cash game you call when your equity and implied odds justify it, even if you are more likely than not to lose the hand and your stack.

We probably agree that implied odds are an estimate of how likely you are to be paid off if you make your hand, and things like position and the tendencies of your opponents can be factors.

I am sure that we agree that your pot odds and implied odds depend a lot on what % of your stack you have already put in the pot.

But I do use the term "pot committed", in the sense that if you make or call certain bets, the pot odds and stack sizes are probably going to demand that you call future bets. For example, I say above:

If we have an open ended straight draw or flush draw, we have too much equity to fold to any bet, and calling any significant bet effectively commits us.

Circumstances can make it almost clear that you are beat, and it's time to get a quickie divorce from that hand to which you were committed.

Nits make bets you know they would only make with the nuts.
Your two bottom pair gets counterfeited on the river, and you are confident your opponent has at least top pair.
etc.

If you are almost certain you have no chance to win, there is no sense in putting more chips in the pot, no matter how big the pot is. So commitment can change.
But none of that applies directly to this hand, just wanted to be clear!

Circling back to your hand, I still say WP, though calling after that pre-flop raise is a very borderline decision and I wouldn't criticize anyone for folding there.
You fold most flops, and on many flops you will have a draw and will not be ahead. That's fine as long as the risk is worth the reward, and I think it (barely) is.

 

[Beanfacekilla]

Folding the SB was one of the things I learned early on, like years ago. The whole idea is we avoid trouble spots, and we save money. Money saved is money earned.

You probably won the hand.


This isn't profitable. Most of the time, your going to get stacked if you're calling pre and you continue on 10-10-6r. This guy raised his option in the BB, and generally 1/2 is passive, and you would be making a mistake calling here.


I think if you have a read, then by all means you may be right.


If you continue to make preflop calls like this, and get involved with really bad hands OOP, your win rate will suffer. 9 time out of 10 you fold post flop and waste $12 here. The times you continue when you flop a weak hand, you will lose more.



All this talk about being priced in, and getting a good price. You guys are putting lipstick on a pig. This is a very bad hand, and we have 49 BB. Very bad decision to get involved here IMO.


I think raising the hand would be better than limping here. But it's 6 high, so yeah I just fold. But if we raised now we win 2 ways, by making opponents fold, and we can make them fold on the flop when they miss 2/3 of the time.


Agree/disagree. This is how I feel. I hope I don't sound rude.

 

[mbrenneman0]

I think we agree alex haha

Bean, totally respect it, and you have the results to back it up. Im not sure I agree though. I do wonder if the preflop spot may be dependant on our own tendencies postflop?

Anyway, villain tanked for about all of 3 seconds, called, and tabled 77

 

[Beanfacekilla]

I think we agree alex haha

Bean, totally respect it, and you have the results to back it up. Im not sure I agree though. I do wonder if the preflop spot may be dependant on our own tendencies postflop?

Anyway, villain tanked for about all of 3 seconds, called, and tabled 77

Ha ha ha, what a whale.

 

[mbrenneman0]

Ha ha ha, what a whale.

He paid for my new vacuum tube headphone amp xD