Razz $11 SNG: Middle stage hand confusion

[Jack Daniels]

Villian is good player imo / rarely out of line.

WT$WS4thS: 78%
WTSD%: 8.24%
WT$SD: 43%
6th Str AF: 4.00
Overall AF: 2.57

Tournament - Razz (150/300), Ante 25, Bring-In 50 (converter)
Seat 1: 2,764
Villian: 3,059
Hero: 2,826
Seat 6: 2,223
Seat 7: 38
Seat 8: 1,090
3rd Street - (1.00 SB)
Seat 1: xx xx 3♥___calls
Villian: xx xx 6♠___brings-in
Hero: 4♦ 6♥ 5♣___calls
I wasn't looking to build the pot on 3rd (and was 99% sure I could limp here as the unwritten rule at this point seemed to be if the first action after the bring in was a flat call, then everyone playing followed along without completing). Plus while my high card was near dead, so were several of my outs.
Seat 6: xx xx 2♥___folds
Seat 7: xx xx 2♣___folds
Seat 8: xx xx 6♣___folds
4th Street - (2.00 SB)
Seat 1: xx xx 3♥ 7♠___checks
Villian: xx xx 6♠ 2♠___checks
Hero: 4♦ 6♥ 5♣ 3♠___checks
Also, I'm still not looking to build on 4th street here I don't think. Villian is plenty capable of trapping here or C/R. Any reasoning here differently?

5th Street - (1.00 BB)
Seat 1: xx xx 3♥ 7♠ K♣___folds
Villian: xx xx 6♠ 2♠ 8♥___bets
Hero: 4♦ 6♥ 5♣ 3♠ J♠___calls
Should I have raised here maybe? I don't think so since I'm in a bad spot if he reraises.

6th Street - (3.00 BB)
Villian: xx xx 6♠ 2♠ 8♥ A♠___bets
Hero: 4♦ 6♥ 5♣ 3♠ J♠ T♥ Fold or call here? (I have some thoughts on this based on the PTS stats I edited in above, but I'll post those thoughts later.)

I'm 99.9% sure he has an 8 low (as he wouldn't be here without at least one small card in the hole). I'm drawing to my 65 low, but three of my 2s are gone and at least one ace. And while he may not have a 6 low now, he's drawing to a better 6 than I am. Thoughts?

 

[skoldpadda]

You have 9 big bets, so plenty of chips and are among the leaders.

You have a strong enough hand that I would be completing here 100% -- need to thin the field and charge anyone trying to play a 9 or two card hand.
You have a 4 card 6 on 4th and need to bet! If someone paired, they will fold likely and won't have a chance to outdraw you or bluff you out later.

Since the villain limped, you likely have good outs and a chance to hit on 7th and get in 2 bets. In a cash game I call, but in a tourney with your stack, this is an easy fold to me.

Plus with his limp on 3rd, there is a great chance he paired his 8.

 

[Jillychemung]

I think you've got it right JD, fold on 6th and no bets/raises on 4th or 5th. Villain can easily eliminate a 2 from your hand and so both of you are really playing to see who bricks worse and Villain could already have the best 6-low on 6th, potentially 6432A or 6532A vs 6543A.

 

[Jack Daniels]

You have a strong enough hand that I would be completing here 100% -- need to thin the field and charge anyone trying to play a 9 or two card hand.

I was probably too subtle in my comment, but at this stage we were still seeing a lot of flat calls of completes (which is why I didn't want to build here).

Since the villain limped, you likely have good outs and a chance to hit on 7th and get in 2 bets.

Not that it really changes anything on 6th str, but villian was bring-in not just a limp-a-long.

In a cash game I call, but in a tourney with your stack, this is an easy fold to me.

Wow, I feel good that this thought (almost verbatim) crossed my mind while I was in the hand.

Villain can easily eliminate a 2 from your hand and so both of you are really playing to see who bricks worse and Villain could already have the best 6-low on 6th,

Or even the 8 low. My equity here is about 28% here overall (assuming villian has one hole card 9 or lower) but I could easily be drawing thin or dead.

You have a 4 card 6 on 4th and need to bet!

Maybe you're right. If I bet behind two checks, I may win outright or at least thin the field to one. In all honesty, the primary driver for not betting 4th was simply because I credit the villian with know what he's doing (which is pretty rare in razz and for me to admit it).

 

[skoldpadda]

Wow since he was the bring-in (sorry I missed that before) assign him an average random two hole cards (use 95). He is playing your weakness and trying to take the pot on 6th in most instances. In this case I'm calling down (or raising if improved). This is a heavy read based decision, though and I think folding 6th is still reasonable.

 

[Jack Daniels]

Not that it matters really (and believe me I'm one that doesn't put a ton of faith in these things), but looking at villian's OPR it seems that he's not a complete noob. But on the flip side, digging through his stats, he shows a small positive ROI over 871 games. My only real point here being that I think my read (which was surprisingly correct for once ) did play a bit into my decision making in this hand (as you just noted).

Cliff Notes: As played, both calling and folding are arguablely okay here based on "poker gut" er, I mean read on villian.

BTW, I did fold the hand there but I went on to beat him in HU play to win the SNG.

 

[OzExorcist]

I'm betting fourth street here. I'm not especially worried if we get raised because a lot of villains will think we're purely betting the strength of our upcards and raise us with a brick (or two) in the hole.

Good chance villains will put in money when they're behind = good reason to bet and maybe even three-bet if we get raised, IMO. We caught a great card too: we've got 12 outs to an eight or better.

That would very much change the character of the hand though. As played, I think we have to fold sixth street almost all of the time. We're almost certainly behind and we're drawing very thin - four outs to a 6-5, unless I'm mistaken.

This will likely get me called a nit, but I might consider folding fifth as played, simply because there's so little money in the pot that it's probably not worth getting in a fight with the chip leader over it. I don't mind peeling because we're getting about the right odds... but I wouldn't hate folding either. Different situation in a cash game, obv.

 

[Dorkus Malorkus]

not sure if i like completing on 3rd given all the strong boards (and consequently the number of dead 2s and 3s) and the fact that everyone is still to act. i think 3rd is good as played.

definitely bet 4th for value, i suck at razz but even i know that checking there is horrible.

caling 5th seems fine. raising would be spewtastic.

6th is really close - on one hand villain only bets once we and the other guy catch paint which may lead us to believe he's making a play but on the other the 2 he caught on 4th has most likely helped him as there is only one other 2 in the deck (so it's not likely to have paired him). i don't see how you can be "99% sure he has an 8-low", but if you are then it's obviously a fold, but there's no way he has an 8-low or better anywhere near 99% of the time here.

 

[Jack Daniels]

i don't see how you can be "99% sure he has an 8-low", but if you are then it's obviously a fold, but there's no way he has an 8-low or better anywhere near 99% of the time here.

Well true that I can't "know" he has an 8 low here, I'm giving him credit based on play in the game thus far. He seems to be an experienced player and observant (as best as I can tell) of the table. That being the case, I'd not expect him to keep firing bullets at me without some kind of a hand here (e.g. I can't believe he is on total air here very often at all). I can't give him credit for perfect hole cards, but I do give him one low card here (even hole cards of K and 9 or lower leave me 1.6 to 1 which is the best I think I can hope for here). It's also why I'd agree with playing this street differently in ring vs tourney. I'm close enough that I'd call in ring, but in this point in the hand in a SNG at this stage I guess I err on the side of nitty and fold.

I still think my read on him played a lot more into my decision. If I had him pegged in the "90% percentile" as I like to call them, I'd likely have called 6th with less concern.

 

[SGspecial]

I was probably too subtle in my comment, but at this stage we were still seeing a lot of flat calls of completes (which is why I didn't want to build here).

I think you may be confused as to the definition of "building a pot" vs. charging other players to draw. Building a pot is something that u do in hopes of either making a big bet later to steal it (impossible in this game), or to tie others on to a pot so when you complete a draw you get paid off. You may want to build a pot sometimes in a cash game, but here you should be focused on taking down pots or charging players with worse hands to draw out on you. You really should be completing on 3rd because you have a very strong hand, and your outs to a great hand and to a pair are almost equally dead. Even if you get a couple of callers, you still get a better idea of what they may have and are making +EV at the same time!

Here, given your stats on the villain and the fact that he brought it in (not limped), I'd give him credit for ** in the hole.

 

[Jack Daniels]

You really should be completing on 3rd because you have a very strong hand, and your outs to a great hand and to a pair are almost equally dead. Even if you get a couple of callers, you still get a better idea of what they may have and are making +EV at the same time!

Well, looking back I have to say I didn't really consider this perspective (a couple replies supported completing here). It's clear back in my OP that I fell into the rut of playing along with the nature of the table at the time (e.g. calling the BI "knowing" I likely wouldn't be raised since I open called).

I think one of the things I'm still working out in my game is pressing the aggression in spots like this when the table is still mostly full and the board cards are borderline or dangerous. I know that not everyone can have a good hand every time and I'd say I don't have this issue nearly as bad or at all as we get short handed. But something about this stage is where my problem lies. Maybe it has to do with seeing so many donks still around and playing quite loose overcalling too much with bad hands that make me a bit gun shy.

 

[SGspecial]

Maybe it has to do with seeing so many donks still around and playing quite loose overcalling too much with bad hands that make me a bit gun shy.

It's natural to be gunshy, especially when playing a game where you can't start with a made hand. But what kinds of hands are your opponents overcalling with that scare you? You are just as likely to be shown 973 or J52 as A23 if they are playing a ton of hands. The difference is that while your 456 may be a small underdog to A23, it's miles ahead of the other junk they may have and you should be charging them to try to improve it. In a tournament setting, you don't want to get too crazy with a small edge tho since keeping the chips you have is more valuable than squeezing out a few extra from your opponents.

 

[Jack Daniels]

In a tournament setting, you don't want to get too crazy with a small edge tho since keeping the chips you have is more valuable than squeezing out a few extra from your opponents.

I think the "too" part of that statement is important. I have been pushing my edges, but it's coming more clear to me that I'm not pushing my large edges far enough. So basically I've been working on the right concept but have been a bit too nitty in applying it. I'm starting to loosen up on this now slowly so as not to get stupid with it.

Thanks all.

 

[Jack Daniels]

Actually here is a good example of why you need to bet and make the drawing hands pay...

Tournament - Razz (50/100), Ante 10, Bring-In 15
(converter)
Seat 1: 745
Seat 2: 855
Seat 3: 835
Hero: 1,435
Seat 5: 2,567
Seat 6: 1,541
Seat 7: 2,601
Seat 8: 1,421
3rd Street - (1.60 SB)
Seat 1: xx xx 5___calls
Seat 2: xx xx J___folds
Seat 3: xx xx 5___folds
Hero: 8 7 K___brings-in
Seat 5: xx xx 2___folds
Seat 6: xx xx 9___calls
Seat 7: xx xx 3___calls
Seat 8: xx xx 8___calls
4th Street - (3.10 SB)
Seat 1: xx xx 5 T___checks
Hero: 8 7 K 4___checks
Seat 6: xx xx 9 3___checks
Seat 7: xx xx 3 6___checks
Seat 8: xx xx 8 7___checks
5th Street - (1.55 BB)
Seat 1: xx xx 5 T A___calls
Hero: 8 7 K 4 A___calls
Seat 6: xx xx 9 3 A___bets
Seat 7: xx xx 3 6 6___folds
Seat 8: xx xx 8 7 Q___folds
6th Street - (4.55 BB)
Seat 1: xx xx 5 T A 2___checks___calls
Hero: 8 7 K 4 A 3___bets
Seat 6: xx xx 9 3 A J___calls
River - (7.55 BB)
Seat 1: xx xx 5 T A 2 xx___checks___calls
Hero: 8 7 K 4 A 3 2___bets
Seat 6: xx xx 9 3 A J xx___folds
Total pot: (9.55 BB - 955)

Hero wins pot with 7432A!

I was the bring-in with [78]K and likely way behind to start off. Thanks to all the limpers I get to see 4th str for free and hit good. The rest is standard imo. Point being, had one of those hands completed I would have folded on 3rd str.



EDIT: On a side note, what do you think of the HH without suits? I used the standard HH converter than put it in MSWord where I wrote a short macro to strip out the suits. Since suits are irrelevant, I think the above looks cleaner and is easier to read imo.

 

[SGspecial]

Actually here is a good example of why you need to bet and make the drawing hands pay...

excellent example. I can't say I'm thrilled with your call on 5th st since the pot is so small, but I'm glad it worked out for you and clearly your opponents played it a lot worse. Personally, I'm so used to the converted HH's having suits that I prefer it that way, but I can see how it would clutter things up a little for razz players just starting to read this kind of thread.

 

[Jack Daniels]

5th Street - (1.55 BB)
Seat 1: xx xx 5 T A___calls
Hero: 8 7 K 4 A___calls
Seat 6: xx xx 9 3 A___bets
Seat 7: xx xx 3 6 6___folds
Seat 8: xx xx 8 7 Q___folds

I can't say I'm thrilled with your call on 5th st since the pot is so small

Is it really bad or just borderline because of pot size? I figured at 3.5 to 1 pot odds I was okay with flatting here since I they likely both don't have super strongs hands and I'd be drawing to a better hand than they made thus far. I know they could improve as well, so maybe that makes it a bit weaker but I was closing the action so I knew it was just one bet to see 6th.

Taking a quick look at this simulation it seems I'm actually pretty well ahead of their hands with random hole cards. And I can't really give too much credit for great hole cards based on the passivity of the play and neither being much of a tricky player. Even if I give both a decent hole card, I only fall a bit behind seat 6 and stay ahead of seat 1.