10nl line check vs nit
I have almost 1k hands on villian and he's pretty tight passive. Runs at 10/3 with a 1.1 three bet % .... Don't have fold to 3 bet or any 4 bet stats on HUD right now, so I wont mention that....What to do?
Is it okay to 3 bet him here? I think if I do, I have to plan on getting it in. Getting it in pre seems kinda spewy vs his tiny range though.
Poker Stars, $0.05/$0.10 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 9 Players
LeggoPoker.com - Hand History Converter
BTN: $11.03
SB: $9.90
BB: $6.59
UTG: $4.65
UTG+1: $5.49
UTG+2: $4.87
MP1: $3.89
MP2: $25.82
Hero (CO): $10.90
Pre-Flop: K
A dealt to Hero (CO)
UTG raises to $0.50, 4 folds, Hero raises to $1.40, 3 folds, UTG raises to $4.65 and is All-In, ????
Is it okay to 3 bet him here? I think if I do, I have to plan on getting it in. Getting it in pre seems kinda spewy vs his tiny range though.
Poker Stars, $0.05/$0.10 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 9 Players
LeggoPoker.com - Hand History Converter
BTN: $11.03
SB: $9.90
BB: $6.59
UTG: $4.65
UTG+1: $5.49
UTG+2: $4.87
MP1: $3.89
MP2: $25.82
Hero (CO): $10.90
Pre-Flop: K
A dealt to Hero (CO)UTG raises to $0.50, 4 folds, Hero raises to $1.40, 3 folds, UTG raises to $4.65 and is All-In, ????
Comments
im guessing 5x is a bet sizing tell for this player too
as for the conversion i just copy and paste from the picture part of lego poker, the html version or whatever never works for me...
almost 2:1
You can fold if you put him on exactly AA and KK.
If he's capable of doing this with JJ, TT or AQ then call.
Since buddy is a nit, and raises 5x I jsut flat here and hope to hit then ship.
By 3betting this guy you need him to call with worse here. I don't think he even has a worse hand than AK in his opening range. 3% is probably not opening AQ UTG. His range is mostly going to be JJ+ and AK here while open limping everything else.
The only reason I say flat pre is because you're suited. I like a fold here with AKo. And I know this comment is going to be flamed but you're really not going to like very many boards. You can't call 3 streets vs this range and expect to be better than a chop if the board is A or K high with any other broadway card on board.
As played, I'd call now cuz w/e you're getting decent odds and even if he's only shoving AK/QQ+ you're getting the price to call. But don't 3-bet a value hand in the first place if you're gonna puke when he shoves (or 4-bets), that's like the fundamental theory of 3-betting for value. What kind of sample is this hand over though reibs? To be honest I'm just 3-bet/calling AK vs. anyone at these stakes almost regardless, but ul that you got coolered.
Bowlboy could be right that folding is better than 3-betting or folding AKo is better than flatting under some assumptions, but no one plays a style such that folding AK to a single raise is theoretically optimal, although it could be practically optimal. What I mean by this is, perhaps playing AKo vs. a single raise from this guy is -EV, but if that is the case, it's because you have leaks as opposed to it being the optimal play.
i learned something from your comment on the 162's.... its -ev to fold when youre vekked
~1000 hands all at 10nl. Ive only played ~17k hands of 10nl, so I assume hes a multi-tabling reg.
I typically don't even blink at 3 bet/calling AK vs randoms. This one just stuck out as a complete spew though.
First, let me just look at 3betting. We cannot 3bet for value here because it is impossible for villain to call with worse. 3% over 1000 hand sample should be fairly accurate and that amounts to JJ+ and AK. I think this should be clear that by 3betting, we are never doing so for value. So what about 3betting as a bluff? After UTG's open to 5bb the pot is 6.5bb and hero 3bets to 14bb. To show how often this bluff has to work to be breakeven: Bet / (bet + pot) = how often villain has to fold to be breakeven. So 14bb / 14bb+ 6.5BB = 68%. Given that villain has like JJ+ and AK do you really think he is ever folding to this 3bet and he is only 46bb deep to begin with? I would guess that he is shoving somewhere close to 86% of the time. The other 14% is when he has AA and decides to flat to trap you
By 3betting however, you wind up pot committed. So by turning this hand into a bluff you are risking 46bb to try and win 6.5bb.
I hope that this illustrates how bad 3betting is whether you think its for value or as a bluff.
Now lets take a look at calling. When we call with AK pre it is usually going to be against an opponent that we know will not call a 3bet with worse which is the case here. When we call instead of 3betting it should also be to keep in the hands we dominate like AQ/AJ/KQ because we dominate these hands and can win nice sized pots from them often. That is not the case here because villain does not have any of these hands in his range. So why are we calling? Do we hope to flop an A or K and get JJ to pay us off? What happens when the flop comes AKQ? Can anybody describe a scenario in which all the money goes in on the flop and we are any better than a chop? On that flop we only beat on hand in his range and there's a good chance villain will just c/f the flop. What about Kxx boards? Is he going to stack QQ? Probably not. Most of the time the money goes in we're up against KK+ and AK. We chop at best.
Oh but wait, we can sometimes bluff if we miss right? Any bluff postflop will basically mean we have to shove. What kinds of flops can we bluff? If we bluff a low flop villain will stack off with JJ+ and only fold out the 9 possible combos of AK in his hand. Not good for us imo.
Vekked, you say you don't think folding is good but if you're going to advocate continuing in this hand, then you should be doing so with a plan for the flop. Can you show me how you continue profitably in this hand?
Also, sure we can assume that someone is playing completely rationally and their range is constructed as raising top 3%, and limping the next 10%, but I don't think it's too absurd to assume that he probably limps his big hands sometimes or doesn't raise 5x with his entire range or something. I mean if we have these dead reads that his 5x raise is exactly top 3% of hands and he always opens 5x, and he jams every time we 3-bet, then obviously optimal 3-bet strategy is going to be 3-bet/call QQ+. Under these same assumptions setmining 22 is probably optimal too. I'm guessing that you're not advocating setmining 22 here, and the reason is probably that you're not as confident in your reads as you think.
Another thing that your math is not taking into account is blocker effects, which is one of the main arguments for 3-betting. It decreases his combo's of AA and KK by 50%, and reduces his AK by 44%. Your math assumes he has all of these hands as often as if we had 32o. Blockers are extremely significant in 3-bet bluffing vs. tight ranges and ignoring the effects is a huge mistake. Under the assumptions that his opening range = top 3% of hands, and we jams over our raise 100%, this doesn't matter, but that's an assumption I don't want to make. If we have a 0% fold to 3-bet over a large sample, or 100% 4-bet, then maybe we can make this assumption, but we don't have that.
Cliffs: If his opening range = exactly the top 3% of hands no more or less, and he has 100% 4-bet, then yes, 3-bet bluffing will not be profitable, but absent of this information I'm going to assume that this is not the case, and he only needs to deviate from this a small amount to make 3-bet bluffing AK better in theoretically better than folding. You're operating with the assumption that he's some bot opening top 3% and jamming it over 3-bets and playing nothing else, I'm operating under the assumption that he's probably a really weak/bad nit who's nittiness can be exploited. So I agree with your analysis under those assumptions, but I disagree with those assumptions absent of that info. I don't think you can extrapolate so much based off of 1 hud number.
Calling:
I mean, we're just going to play poker post flop in position vs. someone who's range is face up and who is bad. Obv if they're raising 3% and they're playing perfectly post flop then yea we won't be able to flat, but this is fkin 10NL man, you're giving this guy way too much credit. If the only reason we flat is to keep in dominated hands, how come we can turn a profit flatting like AJs in position vs. some random's UTG open even if they're not that loose? Cuz they fkin suck post flop. If some guy's playing 22/8 I'm still flatting him w/ AJs in position cuz they're just gonna be playing bad. If it was the case that absurd nits played good post flop then it would be a different story, but someone isn't opening 3% because they play sick post, they're opening 3% cuz they're brutal and going to make a ton of mistakes post, lol.
Like without the hassle of going into every intricacy of the game theory aspects of playing against a player like this I think that it should be clear that continuing vs. this guy's open 1.2% of the time is not optimal strategy, agree? If he open shoved instead of raised then this would be the case, but I don't think it is too crazy to change our strategy slightly vs. an open raise as opposed to a shove.
Wug thoughts? I'm not saying that folding AK DEFINITELY IS NOT the best play for you, reibs, me, whoever, but I'm saying I think that if it is best to fold, it's probably because we're leaking somewhere and not because it's game theory optimal.
Okay ur just being dumb sorry. If somebody opens to 5bb with a 46bb stack and you raise to 12bb and they shove, you are pot committed. Period. If you would like a more detailed explanations of the maths I suggest you download a handy little free program called pokerstove and another called All-In Expert.
From what reibs has said about this villain, he is a 40bb stacker most likely playing 24 tables and following a hand chart he got off of some russian website. You see these guys all the time. Reibs said he played like 17k hands and already has 1k hands with this one player. He is mass tabling and following strict rules. Reibs said that he raised to 7bb or so with AA so that is an indication that he is probably not limping big hands but rather trying to build the pot as big as he can preflop. In this case he raises to 5bb utg so no previous limpers which is larger than average especially for a player with only a half stack and what he is doing is setting up a very favorable stack to pot ratio for the flop so he basically is not getting out played. He is not going to be making many mistakes post flop and will be correctly stacking off with top pair or an overpair given that the SPR will be about 3.5:1 on the flop if hero flats the initial raise. If you think that you are going to play an uber nits UTG open range with no room to maneuvre you're dillusional. Give me a example of a good flop to bluff him off of his hand. And know I do not advocate setmining 22 here because the preflop investment compared to the potential reward is too little when you take into account the times you flop your set and he has JJ, QQ or KK on an A high board as well as getting coolered by set over set on the flop as well as redraws. It would be close, but its pretty common practice to fold 22 here given the lack of implied odds even against this uber nitty range.
Nowhere in my post did I ignore the effect of blockers. I'm well aware of what a blocker is and how it removes the number possible combinations from your opponents range. Pokerstove and All-In Expert take blockers into account and no matter what you do, your preflop equity with AKs is still only going to be 43%.
You've accused me of not being confident in my post flop abilities in your last post. I am going to say that I disagree. While I have a lot to learn about the game I am extremely confident when it comes to playing against 40bb nits as they are the source of a lot of my winnings. I am willing to make an assumption that is going to be true the vast majority of the time. Its 10nl, people don't open JJ for 5bb with with only 40bb behind and then fold to a 3bet. They ship. Same goes for 25nl and same goes for 50nl. The reason they are are opening to 5bb instead of 3 is because they want to get the money in as quickly as possible so if you 3bet them you're doing them a favor because they just don't want to play flops and if they do they want an easy decision with a low SPR.
I've already established that 3bet bluffing is bad beacause you become pot committed. Get yourself a copy of All-In Expert. It will help you work through some of these situations a lot and has improved my 3bet/4bet game 10 fold and opened my eyes to a bunch of leaks. In your post you seem to think that 3bet bluffing to 12bb and the folding to a shove is okay but this is incorrect. Once you stick in 12bb calling is better than folding due to the dead money. Remember we have 42% equity. It don't have to put in much money to become pot committed. Infact, if you were to minraise him, you'd be pot committed with AKs.
Yes I am operating with that assumption and it is a good one. Hero has played 1k of hands with this guy over a 17k hand sample which from my experience means this guy is a 24 tabling nit bot. And not to sound arrogant but I have a lot to say on this subject because I have played millions of hands and have seen how long it typically takes to get 1k hands on one villain. In poker all you can really do when it comes to ranges is make assumptions. The bigger the sample you have the more accurate those ranges become. When it comes to the preflop raise stat, a 1k hand sample is going to be very accurate. All we have to go on is the info that reibs gave us to go on. Over a 1k hand sample that info is going to more often than not prove to be true.
I agree that this player is probably bad but I believe that the majority of the mistakes this type of player makes are not going to happen in this scenario when he has taken the initiative preflop. Judging by his vpip and pfr, he most likely limps a lot of pp's AQ/AJ and broadways as well as some suited connectors which is bad. That is where you are going to exploit him. By isolating his limps and taking the pot away from him on the flop like 80% of the time. That is where his leaks are. You don't try to exploit a half stack when he is playing the toppest part of his range and there is not sufficient implied odds to try and catch some kind of monster set/straight/flush or w/e. In this case when he raises, you either crush him with whatever you have preflop or you don't. AKs is not going to crush this guy. KK+ is.
Actually I am saying that. It seems bad I know. The first time I realized that in some cases folding AK or 22 to an open raise preflop was the best play it seemed dirty. But sometimes you have fold what seems like a big hand because in relation to your opponents range, your hand is actually junk. So ya I have to disagree with you. When a player like this raises, the best optimal strategy is to get out of his way unless you have good enough implied odds to see if you can hit a big hand. AK isn't a good candidate for seeing if you can hit a big hand because when you flop top pair it's usually pretty obvious, even against a russian or chinese hud bot. And given the effective stack sizes calling with pp's and suited connectors is going to bad too. Fortunately there are many ways in which to exploit this player. You can steal their blinds all day. They are essentially an empty seat and a joy to have to your immediate left. They're easy to play against post flop because they always play their hands face up.
Continuing here with AK just because its AK is the true leak. There is nothing weak about it. I've laid it out for you. Its just smart.
I'm not responding to all of that point by point, but we'll probs have to agree to disagree. Our range shouldn't be constructed of simply hands that are all in or fold in an all in or fold situation. The hands with the best equity that aren't good enough to be all in should not automatically be folds. If we need 49% equity to profitably be all in pre, then that doesn't mean we fold if we have 48% or 47%. Obv we fold if we have 33%. Do we fold when we have 40%? I'm not sure. Basically I don't accept that this person's PFR strategy is unexploitable, and I'm continuing w/ AKs here not b/c it's AKs, but because I think the person will be playing bad enough post that it will be fine. Like what are they doing with AK when they don't flop an A? What are they doing with JJ when the flop comes A high? I'd guess they're making some sort of mistakes that we can exploit, by virtue of them being at 10NL and not playing perfectly. Maybe I'm being optimistic but I feel like your assumptions are a bit pessimistic. Are you folding QQ as well?
So without thinking something through and doing the math, you said what I was advocating to be dumb. There are other things you have not thought through and done the math which is why you are choosing not to address the points I have made in my last post, which btw addressed every point you made thoroughly. By not responding and choosing the lets agree to disagree without any support for your own argument you it kinda makes your argument bad. Here I am saying fold pre because of reasons 1,2 and 3 etc, and you are saying don't fold because "I say so".
You make this statement as if it were fact but do not provide any reasoning for it. So why is it fact? I am sasying that you are quite wrong because of the stack sizes and the narrowness of villain's range here. You now seem to admit that our hand is too weak to 3bet for value and bluffing is bad. That was your first plan and you admit now that it wasn't a good one. But you don't want to admit that I'm right here. You have suggested that I might be right before - a couple of posts before - but now seem pretty sure that calling is best. You're advocating putting in more than 10% of effective stacks preflop but you aren't saying what the plan is postflop and providing any analysis on why you believe that plan to be a good one. You seem to be overestimating the amount of scenarios that can possibly go well for you on the flop. I am assuming that villain in most cases villain will be making a cbet here. If he cbets his entire range on a low flop what is your plan? The only hand you can bluff him off of will be AK but there are only 9 combos of AK out there while there are 6 combos of JJ and QQ and 3 of KK and AA for a total of 18 combos. Clearly this guy isn't folding an overpair postflop - hopefully you will agree with this- and clearly trying to bluff him off of a hand that we are chopping against that only represents 1/3 of his range is not going to work out in the long run either.
What about A high flops? Is villain going to stack off with JJ-KK here? Because given the stack sizes you pretty much need him too to make up for all the times the flop is low and you have to fold. My guess is you get a cbet out of him pretty much all the time and might get a bit more out of him some of the time, and the odd time he might even still stack off with KK cuz he's really bad. But some of the time you flop an Ace he has AA, or he also has AK or he makes a set. When the money goes in you'll be chopping or crushed more often than he shows up with JJ-KK.
On a K high flop it gets worse. Now you can only get value from JJ-QQ and he'll be less likely to stack off because these hands are easier to let go of than KK is on the A high flop - psychologically speaking. Now you chop with AK still but get owned by AA and KK. Not good.
I think that a Q high flop might be your best bet for a bluffing opportunity because you can fold out JJ and AK which is 15 combos almost half of his range but how often does the flop come Q high? Not that often.
The truth is you're going to miss the flop 2/3's of the time here and when your AK misses that means that 2/3's of his range likes the flop and will not think twice about putting you all in. There is no room to maneuvre here given the stack sizes. Consider the pot size on the turn if he cbets and you call. Preflop 11.5 bb goes into the pot - each of your 5bb + the blinds - so he probably fires out somewhere around 8bb. If you call the pot size on the turn is 11.5 + 16 = 27.5bb and he will have only 33bb left behind so your at the commitment threshold.
How do you figure we need 49% equity to get all in pre? After rake, getting all in with flips is going to be bad. It would obviously be much different if we open raised and villain shoved but we currently don't have sufficient pot odds to continue profitably with 49% equity.
ya it does. If you need 49% - which we actually need a bit more here then yes getting all in with less is -EV. How is this not elementary?
You should reread what you're posting and really think about it. You're saying that if we need 49% equity to continue profitably in a hand that you're not sure whether or not you should continue with 40% which is significantly less. There is a huge freaking difference between 49-51 and 60-40.
It is exploitable. You exploit him in this spot by not giving him action. If somebody only raised AA and always went all in, then you always fold. You are essentially exploiting somebody when you correctly fold. Good folds effect your bottom line the same way that good calls, good bluffs and good valuebets do. Like I already said, the path to exploiting this player is by stealing his blinds all day.
They're cbetting the flop for probably anywhere from 2/3 to full pot and you can't profitably do anything about it because 2/3's of their range has you crushed.
The flop is only going to come A high around 1/6th of the time and I would expect that you win a cbet and nothing more most of the time. If the guy is playing 10NL and mass tabling i'm sure he knows what it means when he raises pre and a tight regular whom he also has 1k hands on his hud flats an A high flop. Most of the time this guy probably shuts down and gives no further action. Some of the time the flop comes A high it also contains a J, Q or K which is bad for you because it just makes folding underpair easier for him and increases the chance that he flops a set.
You are being optimistic. Any skill or positional edge to be had in this hand is easily negated by the short effective stacks, the fact that we are an underdog vs villain's range preflop to begin with and the rake.
QQ is also a slight underdog vs this range so it is not worth it to go all in preflop because he is never folding and we only get value from JJ and are either getting chopping or getting valutowned by the rest. So ya I am advocating folding QQ here. If stacks were bigger I would say setmine with QQ and perhaps call one street if we flop an overpair. I'm am not being pessismistic. There is no need for optimism or pessimism here. The facts and probabilities are all there for us to see. It comes down to determining the best play and making that play.
Bowlboy....meet Vekked....he'll help you make profits from a wider range of hands.
Vekked meet Bowlboy, he's a ultra consitent winning nit from the micros....
good times boyz.....
lololololol awesome darb.:wink2:
I invite you to prove me wrong. I have been inviting you to do so throughout this thread by asking you to address the points I have made but you choose not to, probably because you are unable to.
Your reason for calling with AK is because villain is likely bad but haven't offered any examples of what sorts of mistakes villain is going to be making post flop. I've already illustrated how flatting with AK and turning your hand into a bluff when you miss is going to be bad. You haven't commented on this so I can only assume it is because you have no argument for it.
So basically you are advocating that calling with AK is okay even though you are forced to fold the flop 2/3's of the time because he is going to be stacking off with JJ on an Ace high flop. Its possible he might but it isn't likely that you get more than a cbet out of him. You claim this player can be outplayed but offer no example of how to go about doing this.
This in my opinion is garbage advice. Offering advice on what to do without a logical explanation of why is retarded.
Every argument I have made throughout this thread is supported by a very detailed 'why'.
I started taking this a little bit personally when you brought the word dumb into it - and i do believe that you are demonstrating that your close minded way of thinking about absolute hand strengths is particularly dumb.
I think you wrong! Reevalute your thinking>:D
The reason I'm not providing post flop math is b/c it's retardedly complex to do by hand and I'm not at home to use any software. I'm all for saying "we only hit the flop X% of the time, and an over card flops X% of the time, etc etc", but an opinion with a couple more probabilities thrown in is still an opinion. The only way to know for sure is to set assumptions and calculate EV.
So what odds are you laying?
Please give me a good reason for why I am wrong.
How did I ever say that 3betting as a bluff and 3betting for value are bad for the same reasons? It seems that your reading comprehension is what is bad. Its obviously bad to 3bet for value when no worse hands can call which is why I said it is bad to 3bet AK in the first place when this guy doesn't even have AQ in his range hence no worse hands can call. My reason for saying 3betting for a bluff is bad is because villain is never folding and 3betting to any amount would leave you pot comitted - something that took a few posts for you to actually understand. And btw your excuse was that you didn't think about that at the time - well obviously you have pretty big leaks if it takes you 3 big long posts over the course of a few days to realize this. Before this conversation your default action would have been to 3bet 'for value' and you would have either folded which is bad - or stacked off which is also bad because you shouldn't be 3betting in the first place.
So lets make this clear please - my reasons for not 3betting for value or as bluff are very different.
I'm not asking you for retardedly complex math on every possible scenario as I agree that would be rather mundane. However I gave several examples supported by theory of some common post flop scenarios and they're all pretty bad.
Please please please in your next post just concede that you are wrong, or that maybe I am right, or say something intelligent that supports your argument.
You think Im reading all that?
in other words, you have no idea how fast this man could have you crushing 50 or 100 nl.....because of your style.
i couldn't care...... less-ILL TAKE THEM!!!....
Not often but some of us do see him on occasion...:)
I suspect that with the nosebleed stakes he plays the lines might be a little different that at 10nl....
I think you actually demonstrated the opposite. Your answers seem to be well thought out and conveyed pretty well. Whether or not the points are correct is what we are still trying to figure out and why I have a lot to learn! There are many different ways to play this game, and not everyone will always agree. So lets not get personal here in pfc. The argument is great, but leave the personal attacks out guys. This aint 2+2.
We all know Vekked has the results to back up his strategy too, which is great! I wish I could crush like him ... Im not sure how much micro cash he's played though, and I know bowlboy lives there (and beats it pretty good long term), so his points definitely have merit. From what I gathered, Vekked plays mostly tournies, but maybe Im wrong.
Dont want to take anything away from either of you, since I can learn a lot from you both...
And as Reibs says, keep it non personal and this place will continue to be a great sounding board.