first off, let's establish the legality of this tournament. where is the AGCO/OLG approved license?
wait for a second while i get down off my high horse.
as played, this should be an easy fold. i would not be surprised to see villain turn over A6s or JTs. maybe even 66. i doubt he plays a set or other PP in a similar fashion. if he is bluffing you then kudos to him for outplaying you. i figure you blew off at least 2000 more chips than necessary.
to settle the check/bet flop, bet/check/fold turn or river question, answer these first:
how should the villain interpret dingleberry's check on a draw heavy flop? then what should he think about a weak bet on an even heavier drawing turn? what sort of range would he put dingleberry on?
how should dingleberry interpret villain's check behind and call? then what about the min-raise? what sort of range can dingleberry put villain on?
should dingleberry be happy to add 20+% to his stack by folding out a speculative hand on the flop or potentially risk disaster by trying to get some value from weaker hands? how much extra value can dingleberry realistically get?
if a flop bet gets raised, what should dingleberry do?
if dingleberry gets smooth called or checked behind, how many scare cards can come on the turn or river?
can dingleberry pull off the money shot?
i believe these lead to the preferred (perhaps NOT perfect) action.
Nice post. Way to put it into perspective.
However, I have one question about this line...
i doubt he plays a set or other PP in a similar fashion.
Why wouldn't he have another PP or a set?
If he's thinking about what dingleberry could be on, he might assume he has mid pair, but not an A, cause he didn't bet the flop. Why wouldn't he want to take down the pot if he has a set?
I guess maybe if he's thinking dingleberry hit a straight.
I like the straight though. I bet this guy has a straight. So, yeah, maybe you're right, but I could see a lot of players re-raising a set in the same situation. Especially because so many books and things say 'when you hit a set, bet bet bet!!!'.
I think you book the win in the missed-the-bus-off..by a landslide.
I don't know if this is in response to my statement about books and thing... sometimes I can't understand you, Kristy!
Either way, if it is, I'm not saying I always bet bet bet when I hit a set set set. I have just read that you need to always bet a set when you hit it. Sometimes I feel it's not the best idea.
I have a post in here somewhere where I comment on betting for information. Here is an excerpt, "This is why betting for information is a ridiculous statement uttered by morans who don’t understand the game. Don't be a moran."
Don't take that personally because it is not intended personally. It is intended to create an emotional response so that you can give your head a shake and come to a realization that you need to make.
Your bets need to have a purpose. You bet to get calls from weaker hands. You bet to get better hands to fold. You bet to build pots. You bet to take control of the hand.
No. We are trying to get him to put money in the pot with a worse hand. Do you think he checks the flop behind with an Ace when there is a flush draw on board?
I feel after this thread, I would probably bet the flop, bet the turn, like I said, then bet the river if he doesn't push back. If he calls, I either lose or win. If he goes over top of me, I fold, depending on the player and the amount. He may just have pocket T's and is hoping to take the pot.
If I start this hand with roughly 20BB how am I ever firing a bet on the flop, again on the turn, again on the river and folding to raise?
I'm truly sorry that you aren't clever enough to come up with great clarifying questions, so we could learn and become better players together. What a loss for, well mostly you.;)
I have a post in here somewhere where I comment on betting for information. Here is an excerpt, "This is why betting for information is a ridiculous statement uttered by morans who don’t understand the game. Don't be a moran."
Don't take that personally because it is not intended personally. It is intended to create an emotional response so that you can give your head a shake and come to a realization that you need to make.
Your bets need to have a purpose. You bet to get calls from weaker hands. You bet to get better hands to fold. You bet to build pots. You bet to take control of the hand.
So, betting to see how strong a persons hand is is wrong? That's interesting. I have never heard that before.
Given this, would you then suggest not betting pre-flop to narrow the playing field down, thus knowning what types of hands you are up against?
When you get called, you gain information. You may want to build a pot or take control of the hand, but the end result is you gaining information about what types of hands the player could be on. If you have a hand and you bet and the player doesn't fold, you know he is on a draw or something. This is information gathering.
How many poker books have you read? I have read a few. Not nearly as many as a lot of people here, but I would be willing to bet that most, if not all, of them talk about gaining information through betting.
If you bet and he raises you with this flop, what can you assume? Isn't that information gathering? Wouldn't you like to know that information so you can fold and lose less money?
Here is an example from a book by Matthew Hilger, who must be a moron for mentioning betting to gain information, even though he is a professional poker player.
"Try to avoid just checking and calling your borderline hands to the river since this can be much more expensive than gaining information early in the hand that might allow you to safely fold. For example, you hold A♣ 4♣ with a flop of A♦ T♥ 2♠. If you bet out and an opponent raises, you can safely fold against most opponents. This is less expensive than simply checking and calling all the way to the river. If you are against many opponents, you might just check to see what your opponents do behind you before committing chips."
I realize this is with a 'borderline' hand, but you can also gain information about a player with strong hands that could be beat as well.
Why is gaining information by betting moronic? Can you explain further? i know that you bet for other reasons, but betting to gain information will help you make better decisions and save money in the long run. With you just checking this hand on the flop, you are simply letting him trap you. Bet and see where you stand.
If I start this hand with roughly 20BB how am I ever firing a bet on the flop, again on the turn, again on the river and folding to raise?
I guess the best thing to do is ease off on the river and cut your losses, especially with such a draw heavy board that he probably hit.
I'm thinking he has Ah-6h. Very possible. On the turn he has the A, he's on a straight and a flush draw.
Either way, you're right, there are two possible flush draws on the turn, a straight draw, and he has called your turn raise, which suggests he might have an A or be on one of those draws - the raise wasn't enough to push him out of the draw.
River hits. Now you're scared. If you bet on the flop, you would have been able to know more about the guys hand. Hopefully he's only on a flush draw and felt like he could take the pot down.
I would bet, find information, bet again on the turn, then ease off and cut my losses from OOP if he called, especially with that river card. I still think the pre-flop raise is the best thing to gather more information about the opponents hand. With this board, it will save you more chips in the long run. Now you're thinking "does he have something? Is he bluffing?" and you have a possible and likely straight out there, and the possibility that he has an A.
Again, this goes back to my moronic ways that betting to gather information about a player is a bad thing to do.
"This is why betting for information is a ridiculous statement uttered by morans who don’t understand the game. Don't be a moran."
Your bets need to have a purpose. You bet to get calls from weaker hands. You bet to get better hands to fold. You bet to build pots. You bet to take control of the hand.
So, 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.
Are you a pro poker player? I've read a few poker books and most, if not all, talk about betting for information. Are you calling all of these top named poker pro's morons?
If I start this hand with roughly 20BB how am I ever firing a bet on the flop, again on the turn, again on the river and folding to raise?
I would honestly back off on the turn or the river in this situation and I likely wouldn't bet the river. Again, this is because of the information gathering I did by betting. I would see how much he bet on the river, if anything, and make my decision from there.
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?
So, 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.
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.
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?
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?
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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?
Comments
Nice post. Way to put it into perspective.
However, I have one question about this line...
Why wouldn't he have another PP or a set?
If he's thinking about what dingleberry could be on, he might assume he has mid pair, but not an A, cause he didn't bet the flop. Why wouldn't he want to take down the pot if he has a set?
I guess maybe if he's thinking dingleberry hit a straight.
I like the straight though. I bet this guy has a straight. So, yeah, maybe you're right, but I could see a lot of players re-raising a set in the same situation. Especially because so many books and things say 'when you hit a set, bet bet bet!!!'.
I think you book the win in the missed-the-bus-off..by a landslide.
I don't know if this is in response to my statement about books and thing... sometimes I can't understand you, Kristy!
Either way, if it is, I'm not saying I always bet bet bet when I hit a set set set. I have just read that you need to always bet a set when you hit it. Sometimes I feel it's not the best idea.
I have a post in here somewhere where I comment on betting for information. Here is an excerpt, "This is why betting for information is a ridiculous statement uttered by morans who don’t understand the game. Don't be a moran."
Don't take that personally because it is not intended personally. It is intended to create an emotional response so that you can give your head a shake and come to a realization that you need to make.
Your bets need to have a purpose. You bet to get calls from weaker hands. You bet to get better hands to fold. You bet to build pots. You bet to take control of the hand.
No. We are trying to get him to put money in the pot with a worse hand. Do you think he checks the flop behind with an Ace when there is a flush draw on board?
If I start this hand with roughly 20BB how am I ever firing a bet on the flop, again on the turn, again on the river and folding to raise?
Trust me bra. You aren't the only one.
I'm truly sorry that you aren't clever enough to come up with great clarifying questions, so we could learn and become better players together. What a loss for, well mostly you.;)
adpro..my post was directed at Caddy.
So, betting to see how strong a persons hand is is wrong? That's interesting. I have never heard that before.
Given this, would you then suggest not betting pre-flop to narrow the playing field down, thus knowning what types of hands you are up against?
When you get called, you gain information. You may want to build a pot or take control of the hand, but the end result is you gaining information about what types of hands the player could be on. If you have a hand and you bet and the player doesn't fold, you know he is on a draw or something. This is information gathering.
How many poker books have you read? I have read a few. Not nearly as many as a lot of people here, but I would be willing to bet that most, if not all, of them talk about gaining information through betting.
If you bet and he raises you with this flop, what can you assume? Isn't that information gathering? Wouldn't you like to know that information so you can fold and lose less money?
Here is an example from a book by Matthew Hilger, who must be a moron for mentioning betting to gain information, even though he is a professional poker player.
"Try to avoid just checking and calling your borderline hands to the river since this can be much more expensive than gaining information early in the hand that might allow you to safely fold.
For example, you hold A♣ 4♣ with a flop of A♦ T♥ 2♠. If you bet out and an opponent raises, you can safely fold against most opponents. This is less expensive than simply checking and calling all the way to the river. If you are against many opponents, you might just check to see what your opponents do behind you before committing chips."
I realize this is with a 'borderline' hand, but you can also gain information about a player with strong hands that could be beat as well.
Why is gaining information by betting moronic? Can you explain further? i know that you bet for other reasons, but betting to gain information will help you make better decisions and save money in the long run. With you just checking this hand on the flop, you are simply letting him trap you. Bet and see where you stand.
I guess the best thing to do is ease off on the river and cut your losses, especially with such a draw heavy board that he probably hit.
I'm thinking he has Ah-6h. Very possible. On the turn he has the A, he's on a straight and a flush draw.
Either way, you're right, there are two possible flush draws on the turn, a straight draw, and he has called your turn raise, which suggests he might have an A or be on one of those draws - the raise wasn't enough to push him out of the draw.
River hits. Now you're scared. If you bet on the flop, you would have been able to know more about the guys hand. Hopefully he's only on a flush draw and felt like he could take the pot down.
I would bet, find information, bet again on the turn, then ease off and cut my losses from OOP if he called, especially with that river card. I still think the pre-flop raise is the best thing to gather more information about the opponents hand. With this board, it will save you more chips in the long run. Now you're thinking "does he have something? Is he bluffing?" and you have a possible and likely straight out there, and the possibility that he has an A.
Again, this goes back to my moronic ways that betting to gather information about a player is a bad thing to do.
As a suggestion, you might think about breaking your posts down differently?
eg:
- Bolded Questions, use of bullets or fonts
- distinct areas of thought..like flop/ turn/ river choices clearly sectioned off...
- work on one specific area..resolve your questions and then move on to the next to keep post size manageable.
Anything that will make them more reader-friendly would be awesome for both the us AND you. (as you'll get more feedback!)Thanks, Kristy, I'll take your advice and re-post my last post, but edit it first.
You are kind with your criticism. That's rare! Thanks!
So, 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.
Are you a pro poker player? I've read a few poker books and most, if not all, talk about betting for information. Are you calling all of these top named poker pro's morons?
I would honestly back off on the turn or the river in this situation and I likely wouldn't bet the river. Again, this is because of the information gathering I did by betting. I would see how much he bet on the river, if anything, and make my decision from there.
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?
Better, Kristy?
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.
flips his cards over early 'if you know'?
realistically if you are betting the flop/turn/river as you said- you are already all in..no tough decision on the river.
Much!
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?
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?
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.
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.....
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.
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?
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.
No. This thread seems to have evolved a bit.
unfortunately you haven't =D
No. It doesn't work that way.
I thought you peaked at Rumsfeld.
Seriously Graham...Cribs, Caddy's 'my pic' file...get on that.