most important part of this hand is that villain is a nitty winning reg, plays about 11/7. i'm sure he recognizes my name and thinks of me as a reg, but a lot of my stats on him are datamined so we don't have a bunch of history

i flop gin and decide to lead out the same way i would with a 7, 56, 45, figuring that c/r-ing looks way too strong and it'll get checked around too much. i get raised by this guy, which is super strong. if he has a slowplayed overpair (incredibly unlikely) i'm virtually positive he'll fold to a raise

i'm 95% sure he has a set and is never folding to a raise. most people would think that's reason to 3bet. i think it's better reason to just call. thoughts?

Full Tilt, $1/$2 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 8 Players
Hand History Converter by http://www.stoxpoker.com/

CO: $183.70 (91.9 bb)
BTN: $100 (50 bb)
SB: $283.10 (141.6 bb)
Hero (BB): $203 (101.5 bb)
UTG+2: $131.55 (65.8 bb)
MP1: $200 (100 bb)
MP2: $245.15 (122.6 bb)
MP3: $216.25 (108.1 bb)

Pre-Flop: Hero is BB with 6 4
UTG+2 folds, MP1 calls $2, MP2 calls $2, 2 folds, BTN calls $2, SB folds, Hero checks

Flop: ($9) 5 3 7 (4 players)
Hero bets $6, MP1 raises to $18, MP2 folds, BTN folds, Hero calls $12

I like it. I mean why would you want all the $$ to go in when you're way ahead????

because it's +EV but i don't think it's the most +EV way of playing the hand!

I don't get it...you 'know' he has a set, 'know' he won't fold to a flop 3bet, yet you just flat?

edit: that doesn't make sense - the highest ev line, assuming he stacks a set here 'always', is to just bet and get it in before an action killer/hand killer comes...

Build that pot

first of all, can we all agree that he virtually always has a set here? a multi-tabling nit raises this coordinated flop 4way with two players after him. openlimping 64s, 75s, 89s, etc. aren't in an 11/7s range or their VPIP would be much higher (and even if they were in his preflop range, he's not semibluffing a weak draw here). and if he somehow had less than a set, we can agree he wouldn't stack off, right?

i don't think i'm making some huge read by saying i know he has a set here, so i'd like to establish that others agree with that part

Yeah, basically. Funny how FR works like that, but yeah I guess aside from the very occasional 67s or slowplayed AA or whatever, this is mostly sets.

really didn't think 67s or AA was in his range at all though. limp-raise % is 0 over 5k for one thing, so i don't have him as a guy who openlimps big pairs at all. and if he ever openlimps 67s in EP, i'm sure he's flatting flop. guy is really unaggro set-mining type. although tbh, if either of those were in his range, it probably adds more EV to calling since he's not stacking off with them on the flop

but again, virtual certainty that he had a set was the only reason i played it this way. will see if anyone stumbles upon the way i thought about the hand or if everyone just keeps saying i suck (probably the second one )

I'll agree with you on the set thing... vast majority of the time that's what this is

An 11/7 will sometimes surprise you with something else but not often and he's not stacking anything else anyway

However..i'm sorta with the others going "wtf"? If you are 95% sure he has a set and 95% sure he'll stack off right here with it then... why aren't we stacking off so he can pair the 3 and make quads on the river?

Interested to see where you are going with this though...

Originally Posted by combuboom

because it's +EV but i don't think it's the most +EV way of playing the hand!

If he always has a set and he always calls a raise, how can something other than raising possibly be more +EV when each card you see only decreases the likelihood of him stacking or of you having the best hand. If there was the threat of him folding to a 3-bet, then calling becomes a viable option.

Seriously, you're way over thinking this, imo. 3-bet to like $50ish, and do your best to get it in as quickly as possible.

yeah I agree with your reasoning combu, it's just I'm in the 6max mindset and find it weird to pin someone on just a set based on such limited action. Just saying there is (very rarely) other stuff in his range.

I honestly can't see where you're going with this though :/

edit: what dsvw said...

I think we're getting kinda leveled?

Is this going to end in "fold the straight because he will outdraw me, the way I'm running"?

okay, i'll give a leading question into what went through my mind:

if you were a superuser (you can see your opponent's hole cards), do you think it'd be more +EV to knowingly get the $ in as a 65/35, or to play out the hand and fold every single time he hits, and get his stack almost every time he misses?

egh, I'm way too lazy to figure out how often an action killer comes/how much he pays off or how often he folds to action when it does/how often he improves, all on the turn/river and calculate which line is higher EV, but that's an interesting point.

yeah, i mean i definitely wouldn't do it with a flush draw on the board or even 567r holding 89 cause there are way more action killers. on this board there are only 6 cards that can hurt my action on the turn, 4s and 6s. if a 4 or 6 came, i was leading big. he'll always at least call because he thinks he has implied odds to hit his boat. i was going to instantly check/fold if the board paired at any point in the hand, i was that sure

I guess that depends - will villain still definitely stack off if the board ends up looking 5376x or similar?

There are about as many "scare" cards left in the deck as there are outs to the villain's boat. If he still stacks off when they come then I can see what you're getting at. But if he doesn't, then we're saving money when the board pairs but losing action when the board scares - it pretty much comes out even.

(Edit - posted before I saw the above two)

but even if he doesn't completely stack off on a 4 or 6, it doesn't make that situation stop being +EV. we get some of his $, possibly a lot still, but at least some

I'm going to bed so I'm not going to try to work it all out right now, but intuitively I think you could make this more profitable. Getting in now + dead money is going to be close to $70 avg expectation, right. Whats your move on a blank turn. Are you going to check/call to leave a pot+ bet on river or get allin with 77% equity?

You're thinking about this WAY too much combuboom and the way you've been running has got you scared to get outdrawn. You're a solid favorite. Get your money in good and let the cards fall.

Besides if you shove here and he hits his FH/quads on the river you can always come here and whine about it.*

i agree with wvhillbilly
u flop the absoulte nuts. even if hes got a set dont be afraid of ur bad luck.
just re raise him and thats all u can do if all the money goes in the middle.
u did the right thing and most of the time ull walk away with that pot

has nothing to do with the way i was running, WV. just think about the question. i'm not saying my way is definitely better, but open your mind a bit

Originally Posted by combuboom

if you were a superuser (you can see your opponent's hole cards), do you think it'd be more +EV to knowingly get the $ in as a 65/35, or to play out the hand and fold every single time he hits, and get his stack almost every time he misses?

Put the f%&#*%^Q@#%&king $$$ in the middle!

sigh, you guys are ridiculously close-minded

thanks for the insightful posts, skold. you've really contributed a lot

ok, so let's do some math and assume your read is 100% correct, which i think is a bit unsure. Could have small overpairs and things like that in his range, imo. Anyway, let's trust you.

you play for stacks on flop. you have 65% equity vs. a set and that means your EV is $260

you wait turn to play for stacks. You check-fold when the board pairs, i.e. 7 times out of 45, which keeps $180 in your stack. 34 times a blank comes and you stack with 77% equity, which has an EV of $308, and 4 times out of 45 a scare card (4 or 6) comes and villain flats your $30 bet on turn, you check fold river when it pairs (24%), and he hero calls another $80 bet on river when he wiffs (76%).

you EV there is (7*180+34*308+4*(0.24*150+0.76*330))/45 = $286

if he fold river when he board does not pair after the scare card hits, that's only (7*180+34*308+4*(0.24*150+0.76*250))/45 = $280, which is still +EV compared to stacking on flop.

Would you actually rather wait till river to play for stacks? Probably even more +EV, tbh

Caveat: i'm not sure we are correct to assume we can always play for stacks on blanks when we choose not to raise flop. Even with a set, villain has position and it's hard for us to take a line that does not look super strong, which could make him want to play pot control. In his eyes, if he considers we're solid, once we wait enough to remove draws from our range, it becomes really polarized between crazy bluffs and monsters, and he could easily be unhappy about a bottom set, for instance. Not enough to fold, but enough to keep the pot from building up to full stack size.

yay, belgo to the rescue

well the plan was to c/r all-in on blanks so building the pot wouldn't really be an issue. i figure he'll always bet because, well he has a set, and there are too many pair + gutshots in my range on the flop. and i don't think he ever gets away from even bottom set, or at least not more than 1% of the time. we're only 100 BBs deep and i just don't see multi-tabling reg tags fold sets on a board like that ever. plus most of the turns will bring some sort of backdoor flush draw, so it'd be easy to put me on a big combo draw

the math is interesting, thanks for that. obviously i didn't do any of that math at the table. it just intuitively made sense to me (and still does) that there could be merit to playing more streets when i'm in a unique situation where i virtually know his hole cards while he doesn't know mine, i.e. i'll play perfectly against him (or close to it) while his errors will be compounded

Originally Posted by combuboom

the math is interesting, thanks for that. obviously i didn't do any of that math at the table. it just intuitively made sense to me (and still does) that there could be merit to playing more streets when i'm in a unique situation where i virtually know his hole cards while he doesn't know mine, i.e. i'll play perfectly against him (or close to it) while his errors will be compounded

I agree, provided your read is 100% correct.

I don't see why you would dismiss 88-TT in his range entirely. I don't say he would often play those that way, but he might, and since there are twice as many combos of those as there are sets, i don't think you can rule them out of his range. Now if villain has TT, and you check-fold on a paired turn, that's

Originally Posted by BelgoSuisse

I agree, provided your read is 100% correct.

I don't see why you would dismiss 88-TT in his range entirely. I don't say he would often play those that way, but he might, and since there are twice as many combos of those as there are sets, i don't think you can rule them out of his range. Now if villain has TT, and you check-fold on a paired turn, that's

a) i simply know the villain's type well enough to know that those are rarely in his preflop range for openlimping that position (he'd raise), and almost never in his flop range for raising (he'd just call). seriously the guy is the quintessential TAGfish set-miner who is super exploitable and wins a marginal amount because other people play badly

b) even if he CAN have those hands, he's 100% never ever continuing vs. a flop 3bet anyway. so since i'd get him to continue with hands that i'm crushing, there's no argument that it'd be +EV on all turns that don't pair the board (even 4s and 6s)

c) if i call and the board does pair, he's not betting those hands again, he'd check it back for pot control. i'm in the BB and any board pair would look pretty bad to him

so basically even if he could have those hands, it probably adds more EV to the play. the very very slight chance that i incorrectly check/fold a paired board to 88-TT (that i still don't think he'd bet, or play this way period) is probably outweighed by all the times i get more value on every other turn card

I've calculated a similar problem before, and I came to the same conclusion that with perfect knowledge of the opponent's hand, it was better to peel a card off than to get it in on the flop. That time it was my two pair versus an inside straight flush draw. That one was an even better scenario for peeling off a card because I don't think he would have just dropped his hand if I turned a full house, so there were essentially no scare cards.

This hand is a little more ambiguous, because we don't know what he'll do if he hits certain scare cards. I would say that the best approach on a turn that brings a four straight would be to bet too much for him to call with pot odds, but for which he might incorrectly expect to have some implied odds.

Anyhow, I'm going to post separately about the math.

Originally Posted by BelgoSuisse

ok, so let's do some math and assume your read is 100% correct, which i think is a bit unsure. Could have small overpairs and things like that in his range, imo. Anyway, let's trust you.

you play for stacks on flop. you have 65% equity vs. a set and that means your EV is $260

you wait turn to play for stacks. You check-fold when the board pairs, i.e. 7 times out of 45, which keeps $180 in your stack. 34 times a blank comes and you stack with 77% equity, which has an EV of $308, and 4 times out of 45 a scare card (4 or 6) comes and villain flats your $30 bet on turn, you check fold river when it pairs (24%), and he hero calls another $80 bet on river when he wiffs (76%).

you EV there is (7*180+34*308+4*(0.24*150+0.76*330))/45 = $286

if he fold river when he board does not pair after the scare card hits, that's only (7*180+34*308+4*(0.24*150+0.76*250))/45 = $280, which is still +EV compared to stacking on flop.

Would you actually rather wait till river to play for stacks? Probably even more +EV, tbh

Belgo, I'm not sure where that math came from, but I'm preeeety sure you can't have an EV that is larger than your opponent's stack. That may be a working relative measure of value, but it's not the expected value in dollars.

For the shove decision I'm getting the following:

EV = 0.65 * ($213) - 0.35 * ($192)
EV = 138.45 - 67.20
EV = $71.25

For the delayed approach, there are 32 safe cards, 6 scare cards for him (3 each of 6 and 4), and 7 cards where you lose and fold.

EV = 0.71 * (0.80 * $213 - 0.20 * $192) - 0.16 * ($12) + 0.13 * (0.80 * $122 - 0.20 * $42)
EV = $93.72 - $1.92 + $11.60
EV = $103.40

So it is clear that at least with the assumptions Belgo made, the delayed approach is far more profitable than getting it all in on the flop. Although the upside is less ($93.72 is less than $138.45), there is almost no downside. That is because you get to bail on the hand at little cost if the board pairs.

I think the deepness of the relative stacks is very important in this decision. Here's looking at what would happen with relative stacks of only $50 (assuming a turn shove, not a bet of $30):

EV(shove) = 0.65 * $63 - 0.35 * $42
EV(shove) = $40.95 - $14.70
EV(shove) = $26.25

EV(delay) = 0.71 * (0.80 * $63 - 0.20 * $42) - 0.16 * ($12) + 0.13 * (0.80 * $63 - 0.20 * $42)
EV(delay) = $23.86 - $1.92 + $4.37
EV(delay) = $26.31

So when you reduce the amount of money you have behind, you can reduce the benefit of this approach down to a negligible amount.

Im quite amazed at all the nits who are just super eager to get the chips in right here right now when we have a 65-35 edge or whatever.

There is a substantial swing EV wise between getting it in now as 65-35, and getting it in on safe turns, 80-20 fav, or check/folded if board pairs. That is a lot of money to be made im the long run.

Whether we wait to get it in on the river is questionable as id much rather get it in on the turn incase the river somehow goes c/c or something.

(I take all of this back if the maths, which i cant even begin to understand, proves that taking the 65/35 is more +EV than taking an 80-20, although i don't see how it can be)


*I also believe a lot of people are blinded by the fact they play poker so abc and are willing to get the money in as any kind of favourite instead of really analysing a situation and getting it in with the maximum potential profit

Also, for the times where our read is wrong and villain doesn't have a set here, but is semi bluffing or something, we give him an extra chance to throw money into the pot on the turn



Just realised, that we are 95% sure what villain has, villain has no clue what we have, why waste that unbelievably massive edge by getting the money in now, instead of maximize our potential with our knowledge of the hands

So if you're the villain and you're too tight to ever have raised anything other than a set here, what's you're thoughts on hero's hand after we flat?

What is hero's action on a non-pairing turn? Leading shows a ton of strength after we call villain's raise and super-nitty-villain may decide he's being trapped by a bigger set / straight and call down or god-forbid fold. Check-raising the turn shows even more strength, though villain may commit himself because of pot-size. So what's your turn action?

he doesn't know much about me, just that i play somewhat regularly. like i said, most of my stats on him are datamined and from observing tables. i definitely know more about him than he knows about me. and i don't think he's much of an ambitious, thinking player. it's not that i just think i'm way awesomer than him. the fact that preflop defines his range a ton and defines my range hardly at all (since i'm BB) is a fundamental advantage that isn't really his fault. it's just the situation

as far as he knows i could have any two pair, 56, 76, 66, 44, A7, 24, 68, etc etc. i'd imagine he's mostly thinking about his own hand because it's a set and sets are amazing

i already said that i'm check/raising bricks and he's not folding a set because he can always put draws and two pairs in my range

Originally Posted by WVHillbilly

So if you're the villain and you're too tight to ever have raised anything other than a set here, what's you're thoughts on hero's hand after we flat?

Combu's basically said it above.

If I were the villain, I'd read it as most likely being one pair and a gutshot - which is perfect for the player holding the made straight. I wouldn't be worried about set over set (assuming we don't already have top set) because Phil Gordon told me not to worry about those spots, you're supposed to go broke on them. And I wouldn't be thinking made straight at this point because... WTF - why would a made straight lead into me and then just flat when I raise?

Bottom line, I'd be feeling pretty good about my hand. I'm almost certainly ahead, and my only real concern is extracting further value from the hand.

We're assuming that you're assuming the villain's thinking. I like the line. Why telegraph your hand and play it face up if the guy's rubbing more than two brain cells together?

You could have used a club and just checked the flop. If he pulls a boat out of that board texture, well it happens.