What to do?

Kristy

adpro;170087 wroteSo, betting to see how strong a persons hand is is wrong? That's interesting. I have never heard that before. These bets do have purpose, by the way. They also may have more than one purpose. Ex. Take control, find information, get better hand to fold if he has an A.

What I think you're missing here is that

a: you already HAVE control of the hand,
b: our opponent may just call which gives you relatively little information for the significant-to-our-stack 2500-3500 chip c-bet
c: our opponent called a preflop raise and has us significantly out stacked, he's not folding an ace now. (though maybe, depending on how we play, he should..)

So while I think that you CAN c-bet here a decent amount of the time ..I think that if called you MUST check/fold the turn.

adpro wrote Question for you. If you know you're beat, would you still put the rest of your money in because you have already bet the flop, the turn and the river?

flips his cards over early 'if you know'? ;) I don't donate without tax receipts...however if I think....

realistically if you are betting the flop/turn/river as you said- you are already all in..no tough decision on the river.

adpro wrote Better, Kristy?

Much!

adpro

Kristy_Sea;170101 wroteWhat I think you're missing here is that...

Yeah, I agree with what to do in this situation. In my opinion, I'm still betting the flop to see what happens.

Aside from that, my comment was directed toward betting for information. I read 'throw a bet in to see where you stand' all the time, which is betting for information. The other poster mentioned that you must be a moron if you even utter such things.

How do you feel about betting for information in general?

Kristy_Sea;170101 wrote flips his cards over early 'if you know'? ;) I don't donate without tax receipts...however if I think....

realistically if you are betting the flop/turn/river as you said- you are already all in..no tough decision on the river.

I was also talking in general. I have folded pocket A's cause I knew I was beat. I've only done it once, but I was proud of it. You obviously never know 100%, but you can have a pretty good idea.

I don't think I would bet all three on second thought. I think most of my decisions would happen pre-flop or on the flop. To be honest about the whole hand, I would probably bet a lot more pre-flop.

Lets talk about a flop bet, though

You bet, he raises - What's the correct move?

You know he might have an A, and probably does. Chances are his kicker wouldn't be the K, cause you have two, and he might put you on AK if you push back. I feel he might fold a decent amount of time, in a lot of circumstances. However, given stack sizes, maybe not.

I feel like I might push sometimes.

The push probably wouldn't be the correct play, but that's probably how I would play it.

What do you think about pushing if he raises a flop bet?

Kristy_Sea;170101 wrote
Much!

Good! I'll just have to spend more time on editing before posting. I'm a blabber mouth.

Verbal diarrhea is the correct term, I believe.

cadillac

Ad pro. The following is not written by me. It is the introductory 2 paragraphs on the basic theory of NLHE. It illustrates my point very well.

When it comes to NLHE, this is the fundamental theory: You're opponent has a range of hands, some are better and some are worse. Your goal is to maximize your profit from the worst hands whilst minimizing your losses from better hands and so, make the most money against their range. As the hand goes on and more betting decisions have been made, your opponents range is narrowed so at no point in the hand do you have to "find out where you are". This is a common misconception.

Consider a hand where you have 99 oop in a 3bet pot on an 8 high board (without the lead). If you c/r the flop to find out where you are, your average opponent will fold all the range you beat (over cards, small pairs) and stack off against the opponents range of QQ-AA. The fundamental theorem has been violated by trying to "find out where you are" on the flop. Instead if you check called and check/raised the turn all in this would allow an opponent to double barrel a hand such as AK, over commit with pairs or check behind giving us free information to narrow the opponents range and profit more. This is how you should be thinking during your hands. Do not allow your opponent to make easy and perfect decisions against your hand by playing it poorly.

adpro

cadillac;170107 wroteAd pro. The following is not written by me. It is the introductory 2 paragraphs on the basic theory of NLHE. It illustrates my point very well.

When it comes to NLHE, this is the fundamental theory: You're opponent has a range of hands, some are better and some are worse. Your goal is to maximize your profit from the worst hands whilst minimizing your losses from better hands and so, make the most money against their range. As the hand goes on and more betting decisions have been made, your opponents range is narrowed so at no point in the hand do you have to "find out where you are". This is a common misconception.

Consider a hand where you have 99 oop in a 3bet pot on an 8 high board (without the lead). If you c/r the flop to find out where you are, your average opponent will fold all the range you beat (over cards, small pairs) and stack off against the opponents range of QQ-AA. The fundamental theorem has been violated by trying to "find out where you are" on the flop. Instead if you check called and check/raised the turn all in this would allow an opponent to double barrel a hand such as AK, over commit with pairs or check behind giving us free information to narrow the opponents range and profit more. This is how you should be thinking during your hands. Do not allow your opponent to make easy and perfect decisions against your hand by playing it poorly.

I keep typing and re-typing. So many thoughts!!!

Nice post. I'll get back to this. I have a lot to think about. I like this way of thinking though. It's interesting and I can see the logic behind it. I just feel it leaves the door open to be pushed around and bluffed easily. Wouldn't it?

Just a quick insight into what is going through my brain.....

I always try to look at both sides of the situation and how I would react to protect myself.

I'm taking the hand above and saying I have 78 suited. I hit top pair, assuming no other draws. What should I do next and why?

Sooo many thoughts...... I'll be back.....

cadillac

adpro;170161 wrote
Nice post. I'll get back to this. I have a lot to think about. I like this way of thinking though. It's interesting and I can see the logic behind it. I just feel it leaves the door open to be pushed around and bluffed easily. Wouldn't it?

I'm taking the hand above and saying I have 78 suited. I hit top pair, assuming no other draws. What should I do next and why?

You will need to have reads and be seriously considering your opponents range in these situations. There is absolutely nothing wrong with playing passive in certain spots. You just have to have the balls to stick with your reads and go for it.

I'm hoping that you are not calling 3 bets OOP with 7-8 suited. That hand will play much better in position. =D

Edit: If my wife was playing for me while I took a pee break and I came back to find her in that predicament I am playing the hand exactly the same as 99 because there is almost 0% chance that I am dominated in this spot. 88 = 99 in this spot.

Edit #2: Think about the combinations here in our assigned range on villain. Say our range for him is AK AQ and JJ+,
That is 16 combos of AK,
16 of AQ,
6 of JJ, 6 of QQ, 6 of KK and 6 of AA

We are ahead of 32 combos and behind 24. Voila. we are ahead of his range.

adpro

cadillac;170173 wroteI'm hoping that you are not calling 3 bets OOP with 7-8 suited. That hand will play much better in position. =D

I would fold this hand for sure. I like your comment about why you would be playing this hand, though.

Wouldn't you be able to put your player on that hand though, since they are in position?

Also, with a made hand (a pair), should you be calculating or thinking about how much you should be able to call?

Like, lets say in your example you have a total of 56 hands, right?

43% of them you are behind
57% of them you are ahead

So, with this info can you use that to figure out what you can call?

Lets assume you aren't on much as far as draws. You're drawing to maybe 2 other cards to improve your hand.

If he bets the turn, would you say it's safe to call up to 57% of the pot, but not more?

Kristy

cadillac;170173 wroteEdit #2: Think about the combinations here in our assigned range on villain. Say our range for him is AK AQ and JJ+,
That is 16 combos of AK,
16 of AQ,
6 of JJ, 6 of QQ, 6 of KK and 6 of AA

We are ahead of 32 combos and behind 24. Voila. we are ahead of his range.

I just skimmed the novels that you two have added...but if we're talking about the original hand...

...This is your range for a big stack that calls a pf raise in a $400 gtd?

Fail.

cadillac

Kristy_Sea;170236 wrotejust skimmed the novels that you two have added...but if we're talking about the original hand...

...This is your range for a big stack that calls a pf raise in a $400 gtd?

No. This thread seems to have evolved a bit.

Kristy_Sea;170236 wroteFail.

unfortunately you haven't =D

cadillac

adpro;170234 wrote
So, with this info can you use that to figure out what you can call?

No. It doesn't work that way.

The_Awesome

cadillac;170240 wroteNo. It doesn't work that way.

cadillac

Kristy

lol, that's pure gold...as if you rat-holed that picture through "stuff I've squirreled away'

I thought you peaked at Rumsfeld.

Seriously Graham...Cribs, Caddy's 'my pic' file...get on that.

« Previous Page