This hand tilts me so hard cuz this guy is such a DONK!

idiot is 44/17 donk.......

PokerStars Game #20754864630: Hold'em No Limit ($0.25/$0.50) - 2008/09/28 4:03:24 ET
Table 'Caprera V' 9-max Seat #8 is the button
Seat 2: PAMBOS.L ($29 in chips)
Seat 3: LittleMac325 ($52.25 in chips)
Seat 4: julesdAA ($58.45 in chips)
Seat 5: checkitout12 ($10.85 in chips)
Seat 6: RIVERRATNUTZ ($27.75 in chips)
Seat 8: shanevas ($29.45 in chips)
Seat 9: BlackMamba10 ($55.45 in chips)
BlackMamba10: posts small blind $0.25
PAMBOS.L: posts big blind $0.50
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to julesdAA [As Ah]
LittleMac325: raises $2 to $2.50
julesdAA: raises $5 to $7.50
checkitout12: folds
RIVERRATNUTZ: folds
shanevas: folds
BlackMamba10: calls $7.25
PAMBOS.L: folds
LittleMac325: calls $5
*** FLOP *** [8c 2c 3d]
BlackMamba10: checks
LittleMac325: bets $6
julesdAA: raises $12 to $18
BlackMamba10: folds
LittleMac325: raises $26.75 to $44.75 and is all-in
julesdAA: calls $26.75
*** TURN *** [8c 2c 3d] [9s]
*** RIVER *** [8c 2c 3d 9s] [9d]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
LittleMac325: shows [8h 8d] (a full house, Eights full of Nines)
julesdAA: mucks hand
BlackMamba10 said, "lmfao"
LittleMac325 collected $109.50 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $112.50 | Rake $3
Board [8c 2c 3d 9s 9d]
Seat 2: PAMBOS.L (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 3: LittleMac325 showed [8h 8d] and won ($109.50) with a full house, Eights full of Nines
Seat 4: julesdAA mucked [As Ah]
Seat 5: checkitout12 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: RIVERRATNUTZ folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: shanevas (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: BlackMamba10 (small blind) folded on the Flop

Comments

  • I am trying to see where he really played it that badly aside from being maybe a little hyper with a mid pair utg, but as you said he is aggressive. You did price him in to make the call for implied odds flopping a set even if he saw your hand, and as a bonus he had a tag along guy who cold called a raise and reraise of 15 BBs as well (what are those guys stats, I am guessing a 75/2 type of guy).

    Tables like that happen on the cryptos now and then at the $25/50 buy in level, and when they do what I re-raise in your seat is to $22 or so. Yeah it seems insane, but some people need to see every flop and this way you are making them make a mistake by calling even when you are going to shove any flop.

    Against more sane people I would still re-raise a bit higher, to $9-12 or so.
  • He went set mining and you got outplayed. His re-raise on the flop screams "I flopped a set!!"

    Stop marrying over-pairs.
  • 88 is not actually priced in.

    I wish I knew how to give pacific hand histories..I have this awesome one from the other day with AA at 2/4..

    The punch line is:

    Raise to $20, two callers, fourth player raises to $60ish, one caller..
    $56 to me in the BB with AA
    I raise to $240
    Three to the flop:
    4-4-7

    Small blind shoves remaining $200, I call to see a very sexy q-4o

    Coles Notes: Put money on Pacific, do it now.
  • Kristy_Sea wrote: »
    88 is not actually priced in.


    I realized belatedly that this isn't clear.

    let me rephrase:

    Set-miners are not priced in.

    Johnnie, you call this all day and then throw something when he tables 88
  • he had to call $5 more in a pot that already had over $20 and was the last to act with the opponents having $40+ more each if he hits a set. Think hitting a set is 7-1, so even if you up that a bit to factor in set vs set flops it seems that in the OPs hand the utg guy was priced in easily with implied odds to make a call there.

    I have not played on Pacific in years but at the time no rules based on common sense applied.
  • Monteroy wrote: »
    so even if you up that a bit

    You're not upping it 'a bit' just to negate MUBS scenarios like set over set...you're upping the implied significantly to offset folds. Reef correct me if I'm wrong, but Harrington on cash games says 20x raise...Chuckieland from the forum says 14x..either way we're not deep enough to make this call profitable long term.


    You're playing this like you know that the hero has AA and will never fold.
  • I am just looking at the break even point if you flop a set. You have 2 opponents at the flop, the pot is $20-25ish you need to call 5 more. You need the pot to grow by $10 or so post flop to make it a 0 EV play, any more and it is a +EV play.

    Seems to me there is a very good chance the pot will grow by that amount even without any player reads, especially with a player who cold called a raise and reraise of $7 preflop.

    Am I missing something here, are you suggesting the utg should fold this hand after the reraise/call before him?
  • I'm not sure how to say it better than I did? Try thinking about it in story version?

    Opponent: I raise utg to $2.5 "I've got mid p r. +, aq+"

    Hero: I've got you beat.

    Opponent: I see that I am now strictly set mining because the flop is likely to bring overcards and I am oop, I will not be in a position to suss out ak. I further note that my opponent is not deep enough for me to profitably call to set mine when I factor in the possibility that even IF I hit my set he may fold or, rarely have me beat.

    This decision is easy. If villian had limped his 88 utg then we have a decent call of a 3x raise- as played the villian *should* usually fold.
  • Kristy_Sea wrote: »
    I'm not sure how to say it better than I did? Try thinking about it in story version?

    Opponent: I raise utg to $2.5 "I've got mid p r. +, aq+"

    Hero: I've got you beat.

    Opponent: I see that I am now strictly set mining because the flop is likely to bring overcards and I am oop, I will not be in a position to suss out ak. I further note that my opponent is not deep enough for me to profitably call to set mine when I factor in the possibility that even IF I hit my set he may fold or, rarely have me beat.

    This decision is easy. If villian had limped his 88 utg then we have a decent call of a 3x raise- as played the villian *should* usually fold.

    Thank you Kristy! Plus I had previously seen the villain bet out with TPGK or on draws, plus with his stats it's pretty difficult to put him on a set
  • 1 in 8 chances to hit trips and it cost him $5 more to see the flop with two other callers with equal stacks. They all have more than $50 so its an easy call. Even heads-up, this is an easy call. If they hit, you have to be able to get away from the hand. Not calling the $26 would be difficult.
  • pokerJAH wrote: »
    1 in 8 chances to hit trips and it cost him $5 more to see the flop with two other callers with equal stacks. They all have more than $50 so its an easy call. Even heads-up, this is an easy call. If they hit, you have to be able to get away from the hand. Not calling the $26 would be difficult.
    ___________________
    I love that smell, that napalm smell...smells like victory!

    Two things:
    1) If I lose tonight I'm going to cry myself to sleep
    2) As best I recall: "I love the smell of Napalm in the morning...smells like...victory"
  • Kristy_Sea wrote: »
    Two things:
    1) If I lose tonight I'm going to cry myself to sleep
    2) As best I recall: "I love the smell of Napalm in the morning...smells like...victory"

    better get the kleenex ready
  • maybe..88 took'er down right ;)

    edit: or I could win it in two hands
  • I was there to witness, I wonder if anyone will beat or even tie 2 hands HU game over.

    2nd hand was unfortunate for jAH.

    gg
  • schabs wrote: »
    2nd hand was unfortunate for jAH.

    fuck that..he was ahead on ONE street only and he min-raised my nearly min-bet. he put 54 chips in good and 1300+ bad.

    I will not tolerate this being remembered as a suck out.

    Edit: I acknowledged my bitchiness in the other thread..but facts are facts
  • Congrats on your win Kristy, but I agree with the others on the set mining.... And I'm the old tight guy... With these relatively equal stacks I call on implied odds every day, especially closing out the action against 2 players... Now if he had raised to $20. , different story altogether...
    respectfully yours... The old Rock...
  • you're just as able to be wrong as they are.

    Villian made the choice not to set mine with this hand when he raised 5x UTG.

    what is the hero's range for re-raising an UTG raiser?
    I think 99+ ako, aks-ish. I believe that this is fair since Villian will know that we've at worst got him on 77-qq, aqo+, aks for a 5x

    with the pot at $18 he's calling $5 with about $45 back,

    step 1: hit a set 12.5%

    step 2: make an absolute minimum of $21ish when you're a douche who blows his load and leads out into the preflop aggressor... JUST TO BREAK EVEN!

    step 3: Pray to god that your set-birthing flop doesn't bring an over or two that one of our potential pocket pairs just folds to

    step 4: if it is ak pray that he hits tptk on one of the two remaining cards when you hit your set.

    step 5 mubs scenarios


    All that is WITHOUT a read...never mind timing, sensing excitement, betting patterns etc. that when present only make things worse for 88....

    But I'm not debating this anymore, what's being said is stupid..and the reasoning (and more often complete lack thereof) doesn't negate my points.



    The 88 is a fucking moron and anyone who actually sits down and seriously considers his play and thinks it is all right; well that person isn't actually capable of seriously considering..and therefore is a filthy, filthy liar for pretending that they have done so.

    Dead to me. xoxoxox
  • oh yeah...add rake onto the $21 as well...just breaking even is getting tougher and tougher
  • Kristy_Sea wrote: »
    Villian made the choice not to set mine with this hand when he raised 5x UTG.

    This.

    The basis of set mining is to see a flop as cheap as possible. This is clearly not the intention of villain. Had he limped and called a standard raise I change my opinion.
  • Sheesh, who cares if it is technically set mining by the formal definition, it is $5 more for a $20+ pot with not one but TWO opponents including one who called a $7.50 raise and reraise with the initial raiser still to act after him.

    Even if the OP has AK and mucks to the $5 flop bet, is this second guy who seems to be very, very loose and passive going to do the same?

    I really am not sure why this hand is even being debated much. The 88 guy was probably a bit too aggressive utg with 88, but his stats show he is a loose aggro guy. Maybe the table was very wimpy, who knows. Maybe he was trying to isolate that loose guy who called both raises preflop who likely plays any 2 cards.

    The problem happened when the OP did not re-raise enough. When I play NL cash games on rare occasion I am a nitty guy and if I get transported into the utgs hand after his raise I call the $5 more without even giving it a second thought because it is not heads up it is against TWO opponents.

    The fact that the OP probably has 99+ makes the call easier because then if I hit a set great cha ching, if I miss then it is easy to let go. Even if the OP folds there is a good chance my set will get paid off if the loose guy hits top pair or any draw.

    If the action preflop went utg raise to $2.50, OP reraises to 7.50 and all else fold then yeah it's is a fairly marginal situation to call the $5 more, but even then I still do not think a call is that utterly horrible, though I would not be opposed to a fold either. With a loose passive tag along for $7.50 more though preflop, how is this not an easy call?



    Dealt to julesdAA [As Ah]
    LittleMac325: raises $2 to $2.50
    julesdAA: raises $5 to $7.50
    checkitout12: folds
    RIVERRATNUTZ: folds
    shanevas: folds
    BlackMamba10: calls $7.25
    PAMBOS.L: folds
    LittleMac325: calls $5
  • Kristy_Sea wrote: »
    I will not tolerate this being remembered as a suck out.

    you got lucky face it; me getting dealt the nuts on the flop and you hitting a four outer on the turn. Too bad its not a best of five.
  • Technically if you had the 3, it was a 3 outer...
  • pokerJAH wrote: »
    you got lucky face it; me getting dealt the nuts on the flop and you hitting a four outer on the turn. Too bad its not a best of five.

    You know what Jah, you're right...

    let's play that best of 5 at your leisure, you pick the stakes but I won't play for less than $20, ok?
  • Kristy_Sea wrote: »
    I realized belatedly that this isn't clear.

    let me rephrase:

    Set-miners are not priced in.

    Johnnie, you call this all day and then throw something when he tables 88

    You are getting about ten to 1 implied odds. This is more than the 8 to 1 needed to to hit your set. But I like to have 25-30 to 1 implied odds when I set mine. ... in good position and good control over the villain I'd lower it to 20 to 1 implied odds. With multiple opponents I might lower that to 15-20 each... If the player is more likely to stack off and marry a big pair then you can play with that and lower it to about 20-25 to 1... But I wouldn't set mine with only ten to 1 implied odds very often... Do you know why?
  • But I wouldn't set mine with only ten to 1 implied odds very often... Do you know why?

    Because you LIKE money?





    (edit: all the reasons I have already stated?)
  • Calling a $5 bet against a $60.00 win with the intention of set mining is bad business.

    Scenario A:
    Hero has an overpair, Villan flops set, Hero+pot Pay $60.

    Scenario B:
    Hero has over cards, Villian flops set, Hero flops a pair, pays $60.

    Scenario C:
    Hero has over cards, Villian flops set, Hero does not pay, pot pays $9.5.

    Scenario D:
    Hero Has overpair, Villian Flops Set, Hero also hits set, Villian is stacked.

    Scenario E:
    Villian misses flop, folds.

    We can agree these are the 5 most likely scenarios, so let's assign chances to each of them, and EV to each of them.

    Assumptions:
    10% chance hero has AK, 5% chance AQ, 85% overpair (notice how generous i am?)
    17% of the time Villian hits set, Hero will also.
    Villian flops set 13% of the time

    Scenario A occurs 8.5% of the time. (-3% Hero also flops set, -1.5% hero does not have Overpair)
    Value $60 * .085
    EV = $5.1

    Scenario B occurs 0.5% of the time (15% chance has overcards * 24% hitting overcard * 13% of villian hitting set)
    $60*.005
    EV= $0.30

    Scenario C occurs 1% of the time:
    $9.5 * .01
    EV = $0.10

    Scenario D occurs 3% of the time:
    -$50 * .03
    EV = -$1.5

    Scenario E occurs: 87% of the time
    -$5 * .87
    EV=-$4.35


    TOTAL EXPECTED VALUE =
    $5.1 +$0.30+$0.10-$1.5-$4.35 = $-0.35

    You will notice I didn't even include the chance that BOTH players flop overpair.

    The play has a negative expected Value.
Sign In or Register to comment.