9553 replies to this topic

[trystero]

First he's playing 21% of hands, not 15%, and our sample is over 35, so basically those figures are totally meaningless. We had some guy post a thread here the other day where he had called from the BB with 64o, and he supposedly had been playing straightforwardly. People defend lightly in BvB wars. I play 18/16 in 10nl and I'll call w/like Q6s and shit. Now I personally don't defend w/trash like 54o and 64o but that's just me...if a nit like me can open it up BvB then certainly the 10nl "reg" is going to do so. And that assumes the numbers are even representative of his actual style, which obviously they cannot possibly be after only 30 some odd hands.At 10nl I do not expect villains to bluff raise turns all that often. I'm not concerned with keeping his bluff range intact. I expect him to raise worse hands for value very often, an overplayed KJ/AJ and a "slowplayed" QQ/KK - basically your second point. That behavior is common at this limit. Being OOP I'm more inclined to re-raise because I do not want to risk misplaying the river. If I'm in position then I'm more inclined to flat but it's certainly not because I want to keep the pot small and get value only from bluffs; it's so that on safe rivers I can shove in over his inevitable bet.It sounds like you want to fold to be honest because you feel that he has to bluff for a call to be profitable, and I really doubt he's bluffing.

[fighter]

trystero, on Sunday, April 25th, 2010, 1:18 PM, said:

First he's playing 21% of hands, not 15%, and our sample is over 35, so basically those figures are totally meaningless. We had some guy post a thread here the other day where he had called from the BB with 64o, and he supposedly had been playing straightforwardly. People defend lightly in BvB wars. I play 18/16 in 10nl and I'll call w/like Q6s and shit. Now I personally don't defend w/trash like 54o and 64o but that's just me...if a nit like me can open it up BvB then certainly the 10nl "reg" is going to do so. And that assumes the numbers are even representative of his actual style, which obviously they cannot possibly be after only 30 some odd hands.At 10nl I do not expect villains to bluff raise turns all that often. I'm not concerned with keeping his bluff range intact. I expect him to raise worse hands for value very often, an overplayed KJ/AJ and a "slowplayed" QQ/KK - basically your second point. That behavior is common at this limit. Being OOP I'm more inclined to re-raise because I do not want to risk misplaying the river. If I'm in position then I'm more inclined to flat but it's certainly not because I want to keep the pot small and get value only from bluffs; it's so that on safe rivers I can shove in over his inevitable bet.It sounds like you want to fold to be honest because you feel that he has to bluff for a call to be profitable, and I really doubt he's bluffing.

your right my bad at the 15. bolded is kind of funny. Only way we can misplay this hand on river is if it comes a Jack and we call too often/ don't stack Q4s.

[babylondonks]

calling BB in BvB with Q6 is def a mistake trystero, try 3betting it!Also like, at 10nl I can see this being a raise/call or whatever, but optimally/in general this is def a call and a c/c and prob even at 10nl it's better in terms of exploitation. Like fighter said, however you skew his 21% of 35 hands, there are more combos that beat us than ones we beat. Secondly, when we call a bet we need to be ahead less often to show a profit, compared to raising. Now there's the random villain factor so idk how you can say with certainty that he doesn't do this for super value or whatever and he never is bluffing here. Some % of his hands are bluffs because of how small his relative hand strength range is. There are hands he thinks he's playing for value but is actually bluffing. Like a guy could definitely raise top pair and fold to a 3bet because he was seeing where he was at. I mean sometimes we call/call and they flip over AJ or whatever and we go "sigh we lost so much value fml". But there are no promises that he's calling a raise or a shove with those type hands. So I'm pretty combinatorically satisfied with a call and a c/c on the river

[babylondonks]

anyways I'm gonna go get drunk now, bye

[trystero]

imo too many players today 3-bet too widely when they should be using their position and keeping the pot small until they see community cards. There's a good difference between 54o and Q6s...Q6s can flop flushes/flush draws and can make a strong bluff catching pair. Since spewy regs love to barrel even when OOP flopping a queen can be profitable. Anyways I do 3-bet w/it when IP against someone w/a high F3B%...against someone I have a read on postflop I'll call. Many times I just fold. Point wasn't that I make a habit of being spewy BvB...just that even I'll open my game up. I mean my main point is that you cannot trust that sample size. I've run 40/35 or whatever over 60 hand samples...and clearly that's absurd. It's very conceivable that he's actually some spewy 30/20 or a fishy 26/12.

Quote

Like fighter said, however you skew his 21% of 35 hands, there are more combos that beat us than ones we beat. Secondly, when we call a bet we need to be ahead less often to show a profit, compared to raising.

Talking about combinations (wtf why is this "misspelled" in Firefox?), let's use Stove, and give villain a range of ONLY 34/JJ/33 and AJ. Even though we're blocking AJ we're STILL 52%. And of course this range is ridiculous because you cannot say he's too tight to play 54 but not 34. Add in what I consider his likely hands, KJ/QQ/KK, and it's very obvious that we're well, well ahead of his value range. For this to be incorrect you have to believe that he is NEVER raising a jack, an overpair, or a flush draw.Also, what I meant by saying he's not bluffing is that he is not raising as a perceived bluff. It doesn't matter if in reality his raise is actually a bluff because further action guarantees he's going behind. What matters is that (imo) very few 10nl players are going to raise this turn on what they perceive to be a bluff. So if this assumption is true then he has to be raising what he perceives to be for value, and for that see above Stoving.You and fighter have spent too much time at 100nl and on 4bb/2+2/wherever to have a clear picture of 10nl. I know you're railing James but that's not the same as playing the limits. This is the jbreslin syndrome. 10nl players are bad. 25nl are not so bad, but they're still awful. One complaint I have about training videos and forums is that they cause you to lose value at your actual limits because you're trying to imitate better players at higher limits. This is an obvious case of it where so many assumptions in your and fighter's argument depend upon villain being competent and understanding relative hand strength. That may be the case at 100nl, where many regs would have a polarized range when they raise this turn - not so at 10nl. At 25nl you could probably even say that's true; in my time there this year I've seen way more competence/nittiness than at 10nl.

[babylondonks]

I',m durnk so I'll keep this short. But like....I think it's more improtant to have the correct view than to add .5bb/.100 to your winrate at 10mnl. ya know? like I don't think raising is terrible and as long as you can keep in mind itts a raise here and a flat at 100nl, w/e it's fine. BNut yeah,. 52% isn't hreat, better to reduce variance sometimes

[fighter]

trystero, on Sunday, April 25th, 2010, 11:25 PM, said:

imo too many players today 3-bet too widely when they should be using their position and keeping the pot small until they see community cards. There's a good difference between 54o and Q6s...Q6s can flop flushes/flush draws and can make a strong bluff catching pair. Since spewy regs love to barrel even when OOP flopping a queen can be profitable. Anyways I do 3-bet w/it when IP against someone w/a high F3B%...against someone I have a read on postflop I'll call. Many times I just fold. Point wasn't that I make a habit of being spewy BvB...just that even I'll open my game up. I mean my main point is that you cannot trust that sample size. I've run 40/35 or whatever over 60 hand samples...and clearly that's absurd. It's very conceivable that he's actually some spewy 30/20 or a fishy 26/12. Talking about combinations (wtf why is this "misspelled" in Firefox?), let's use Stove, and give villain a range of ONLY 34/JJ/33 and AJ. Even though we're blocking AJ we're STILL 52%. And of course this range is ridiculous because you cannot say he's too tight to play 54 but not 34. Add in what I consider his likely hands, KJ/QQ/KK, and it's very obvious that we're well, well ahead of his value range. For this to be incorrect you have to believe that he is NEVER raising a jack, an overpair, or a flush draw.Also, what I meant by saying he's not bluffing is that he is not raising as a perceived bluff. It doesn't matter if in reality his raise is actually a bluff because further action guarantees he's going behind. What matters is that (imo) very few 10nl players are going to raise this turn on what they perceive to be a bluff. So if this assumption is true then he has to be raising what he perceives to be for value, and for that see above Stoving.You and fighter have spent too much time at 100nl and on 4bb/2+2/wherever to have a clear picture of 10nl. I know you're railing James but that's not the same as playing the limits. This is the jbreslin syndrome. 10nl players are bad. 25nl are not so bad, but they're still awful. One complaint I have about training videos and forums is that they cause you to lose value at your actual limits because you're trying to imitate better players at higher limits. This is an obvious case of it where so many assumptions in your and fighter's argument depend upon villain being competent and understanding relative hand strength. That may be the case at 100nl, where many regs would have a polarized range when they raise this turn - not so at 10nl. At 25nl you could probably even say that's true; in my time there this year I've seen way more competence/nittiness than at 10nl.

When I see hands on a forum, for the most part I am just giving you what I think is the optimal line. The move that will leave you being exploited the least when you assume perfect play from opponents. In a vaccuum I think the best line the majority of the time is....xxxProblem with this compared to taking exploitative lines is that you can leave money on the table if the other person is making certain mistakes. The trade off is that the advice is solid and is less likely to leave you with a hole in your game you don't know about. Your advice might be best for 10nl, I don't know it has been a while since I was in the trenches. Just as long as you are aware that you are deviating from the norm for a reason then I have no problem.

[KingJames]

babylondonks, on Sunday, April 25th, 2010, 8:13 AM, said:

I',m durnk so I'll keep this short. But like....I think it's more improtant to have the correct view than to add .5bb/.100 to your winrate at 10mnl. ya know? like I don't think raising is terrible and as long as you can keep in mind itts a raise here and a flat at 100nl, w/e it's fine. BNut yeah,. 52% isn't hreat, better to reduce variance sometimes

Good discussion, fellas. I think in general it is hard for a "taggish" player to raise worse on the turn, but even guys who play 21/15 are sillybeware the feral cow packs. they hunger.Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em $0.05/$0.10 - 6 playersUTG Reaper009: $5.83 UTG+1 bizuodalao: $10.82 CO dr-doronr: $3.52 Button notallowed: $10.00 SB Hero: $14.62 BB DarkyCash: $9.56 Preflop: ($0.15) Hero is SB with (6 players)4 folds, Hero raises to $0.35, DarkyCash calls $0.25Flop: ($0.70) (2 players)Hero bets $0.40, DarkyCash calls $0.40Turn: ($1.50) (2 players)Hero bets $0.80, DarkyCash raises to $2, Hero calls $1.20River: ($5.50) (2 players)Hero checks, DarkyCash bets $3.10, Hero calls $3.10Hero showed , and won ($10.92) with three of a kind, FoursDarkyCash showed , and lost with two pair, Queens and FoursHero won $10.92(Rake: $0.78)So yeah vs his hand I prob left something on the table, but I think vs his range the call, c/c river is pretty good.

[Nashtak]

Is the preflop call fine for set value?Feral Cow PokerPokerStars No-Limit Hold'em $0.02/$0.05 - 5 playersCO: $12.50 (Hero)Button: $5.47 SB: $22.64 BB: $17.47 UTG: $6.00 Preflop: ($0.07) Hero is CO with (5 players)UTG folds, Hero raises to $0.20, Button raises to $0.50, SB calls $0.48, BB folds, Hero calls $0.30Flop: ($1.55) (3 players)SB checks, Hero checks, Button checksTurn: ($1.55) (3 players)SB bets $1, Hero folds, Button foldsSB collected $1.50(Rake: $0.05)

[trystero]

called QQ ittNashtak yea a call is fine

[trystero]

Quote

So yeah vs his hand I prob left something on the table, but I think vs his range the call, c/c river is pretty good.

But here's the thing. If he's raising QQ then he's raising other worse hands (than A4), so against his entire range you're better off raising the turn. The 52% that I stoved including only AJ as a worse hand. Let's add villain QQ/KK/AA, leaving out KJ/QJ/whatever, and now our equity's 71%...so, crushed. Raise, win a stack, move on.

Quote

Problem with this compared to taking exploitative lines is that you can leave money on the table if the other person is making certain mistakes.The trade off is that the advice is solid and is less likely to leave you with a hole in your game you don't know about.Your advice might be best for 10nl, I don't know it has been a while since I was in the trenches. Just as long as you are aware that you are deviating from the norm for a reason then I have no problem.

What's interesting about poker today is the influence of training sites and forums. Traditionally you would learn to beat the stakes you're in by experience: capitalizing on your opponents' mistakes. When you moved up you'd begin to be exploited in your own right because those mistakes you're looking for no longer exist. For example it's very profitable at 10nl to felt strong one pair hands OTF, like KK on a J84r board because you get so much action from worse pairs. So you learn the value in pounding big pairs, and you maximize value when you do so. Now as you move up the number of players who'll stack off or even raise with KJ/QJ begins to drop. You now find that when you're getting getting stacks in, it's almost always by a set or some slowplayed AA. So you begin to learn about polarization, etc etc, all stuff that allows you to beat up your current limit - or at least not be exploited so readily - but which, if you translate to 10nl, will cost you profit.Anyway we don't actually disagree about anything. Against a competent reg I see more merit in c/cing just because when villain does raise it'll so often be a bluff..but of course there's always a counterbalance. A competent reg is 3-betting JJ pf, and he's also calling us lighter in position which adds more 4s to his range. We can also manipulate our perceived range by reraising the turn given sufficient dynamic/history, e.g. he knows we wouldn't play most of our hands like that, even holdings as strong as AA, so we ourselves must be bluffing...etcetc

[babylondonks]

fighter, on Monday, April 26th, 2010, 2:10 AM, said:

When I see hands on a forum, for the most part I am just giving you what I think is the optimal line. The move that will leave you being exploited the least when you assume perfect play from opponents. In a vaccuum I think the best line the majority of the time is....xxxProblem with this compared to taking exploitative lines is that you can leave money on the table if the other person is making certain mistakes. The trade off is that the advice is solid and is less likely to leave you with a hole in your game you don't know about. Your advice might be best for 10nl, I don't know it has been a while since I was in the trenches. Just as long as you are aware that you are deviating from the norm for a reason then I have no problem.

This post is a sober version of this

babylondonks, on Monday, April 26th, 2010, 1:13 AM, said:

I',m durnk so I'll keep this short. But like....I think it's more improtant to have the correct view than to add .5bb/.100 to your winrate at 10mnl. ya know? like I don't think raising is terrible and as long as you can keep in mind itts a raise here and a flat at 100nl, w/e it's fine. BNut yeah,. 52% isn't hreat, better to reduce variance sometimes

[trystero]

Villain is 23/19ish and seems to be competent over ~150 hands. On PTR he's a respectable winner at 25nl (overall marginal).River is interesting once he c/cs the turn, as we have no history together.Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $0.25 BB (6 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.comSB ($29.93)BB ($25)UTG ($11.75)MP ($31.13)CO ($29.42)Hero (Button) ($25)Preflop: Hero is Button with 10 , Q 1 fold, MP bets $0.75, 1 fold, Hero calls $0.75, 2 foldsFlop: ($1.85) 4 , 7 , 2 (2 players)MP bets $1.25, Hero calls $1.25Turn: ($4.35) Q (2 players)MP checks, Hero bets $3, MP calls $3River: ($10.35) 7 (2 players)MP checks, Hero bets $6

[fighter]

trystero, on Monday, April 26th, 2010, 8:20 AM, said:

What's interesting about poker today is the influence of training sites and forums. Traditionally you would learn to beat the stakes you're in by experience: capitalizing on your opponents' mistakes. When you moved up you'd begin to be exploited in your own right because those mistakes you're looking for no longer exist. For example it's very profitable at 10nl to felt strong one pair hands OTF, like KK on a J84r board because you get so much action from worse pairs. So you learn the value in pounding big pairs, and you maximize value when you do so. Now as you move up the number of players who'll stack off or even raise with KJ/QJ begins to drop. You now find that when you're getting getting stacks in, it's almost always by a set or some slowplayed AA. So you begin to learn about polarization, etc etc, all stuff that allows you to beat up your current limit - or at least not be exploited so readily - but which, if you translate to 10nl, will cost you profit.Anyway we don't actually disagree about anything. Against a competent reg I see more merit in c/cing just because when villain does raise it'll so often be a bluff..but of course there's always a counterbalance. A competent reg is 3-betting JJ pf, and he's also calling us lighter in position which adds more 4s to his range. We can also manipulate our perceived range by reraising the turn given sufficient dynamic/history, e.g. he knows we wouldn't play most of our hands like that, even holdings as strong as AA, so we ourselves must be bluffing...etcetc

It is still profitable to felt KK on most none A flops verse most players. Just not as profitable because you get less random punts and not a blanket statement because some people are unbalanced. On boards like J84r, you find competent people start to stack off with AJ, KJ again due the dry nature of the board and aggressive nature of the games.

trystero, on Monday, April 26th, 2010, 12:04 PM, said:

Villain is 23/19ish and seems to be competent over ~150 hands. On PTR he's a respectable winner at 25nl (overall marginal).River is interesting once he c/cs the turn, as we have no history together.Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $0.25 BB (6 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.comSB ($29.93)BB ($25)UTG ($11.75)MP ($31.13)CO ($29.42)Hero (Button) ($25)Preflop: Hero is Button with 10 , Q 1 fold, MP bets $0.75, 1 fold, Hero calls $0.75, 2 foldsFlop: ($1.85) 4 , 7 , 2 (2 players)MP bets $1.25, Hero calls $1.25Turn: ($4.35) Q (2 players)MP checks, Hero bets $3, MP calls $3River: ($10.35) 7 (2 players)MP checks, Hero bets $6

I like it, he most likely holdings here are 88-JJ. I might even bet smaller on the river since those hands have essentially become bluff catchers. Not that he would be thinking that all too often at 25nl.

[trystero]

I was prepared to bet/call $4 on the river, since I thought a smaller bet might induce spazziness, but I chickened out and bet an amount to make him play more "honestly."I think that's a great spot for us to bluff, because once he c/cs the turn then yea you're right he's got some SD value <Q...but will he call us often enough on the river w/a worse hand when we have a ten kicker? I wouldn't rule out a decent player deciding to pot control a better queen there, and it's very hard for him to have a worse one when he's coming in from MP.I like the smaller bet tbh...probably just overthinking it. It's 25nl; just bet for value.

[babylondonks]

fighter, on Monday, April 26th, 2010, 2:04 PM, said:

It is still profitable to felt KK on most none A flops verse most players. Just not as profitable because you get less random punts and not a blanket statement because some people are unbalanced. On boards like J84r, you find competent people start to stack off with AJ, KJ again due the dry nature of the board and aggressive nature of the games. I like it, he most likely holdings here are 88-JJ. I might even bet larger on the river since those hands have essentially become bluff catchers. Not that he would be thinking that all too often at 25nl.

FYP

trystero, on Monday, April 26th, 2010, 2:14 PM, said:

I was prepared to bet/call $4 on the river, since I thought a smaller bet might induce spazziness, but I chickened out and bet an amount to make him play more "honestly."I think that's a great spot for us to bluff, because once he c/cs the turn then yea you're right he's got some SD value <Q...but will he call us often enough on the river w/a worse hand when we have a ten kicker? I wouldn't rule out a decent player deciding to pot control a better queen there, and it's very hard for him to have a worse one when he's coming in from MP.I like the smaller bet tbh...probably just overthinking it. It's 25nl; just bet for value.

Meh, $4 isn't really gonna induce any spazzes, it's not small enough. And if he's going to bluff he's normally going to bet, rather than seeing a bet and deciding to c/r, but if you want to it would have to be like $1. But like you said, QT isn't the nuts here at all and you're going to value cut yourself a lot trying to induce a spazz. Like when most of his range is JJ-88 and then better queens, he's going to call a smaller bet with the hands we beat and raise the hands we lose to. This is also why I don't think flatting QTs pre is greatttt here unless there are fish in the blinds. I'd prefer a 3b or fold I think.

[fighter]

babylondonks, on Monday, April 26th, 2010, 2:03 PM, said:

FYPMeh, $4 isn't really gonna induce any spazzes, it's not small enough. And if he's going to bluff he's normally going to bet, rather than seeing a bet and deciding to c/r, but if you want to it would have to be like $1. But like you said, QT isn't the nuts here at all and you're going to value cut yourself a lot trying to induce a spazz. Like when most of his range is JJ-88 and then better queens, he's going to call a smaller bet with the hands we beat and raise the hands we lose to. This is also why I don't think flatting QTs pre is greatttt here unless there are fish in the blinds. I'd prefer a 3b or fold I think.

Bigger, smaller , something that is more polarizing.

[babylondonks]

smaller is generally depolarising, j/s

[fighter]

babylondonks, on Monday, April 26th, 2010, 4:43 PM, said:

smaller is generally depolarising, j/s

I have a poker word wheel and I just spin it than type sentences. Works surprising well , If it wasn't for the grammar I doubt I would get caught out. I made a 2+2 version of it, It only contains the phrases, "depends" and "Standard"I should of said, take an action that encourages calls from weaker holdings, which is smaller or bigger.

[babylondonks]

Haha Makes sensealso, *should have