Jump to content


Rogerwilco Hand 3


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 Zach6668

Zach6668

    2009 Stanley Cup Champions

  • Moderators
  • 43,356 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 03 August 2007 - 03:15 AM

Hero = rogerwilcoPokerStars 1/2 Hold'em (10 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)Preflop: Hero is BB with Q :club:, A :) UTG calls, 4 folds, MP3 calls, 2 folds, SB completes, Hero checks.Flop: (4 SB) Q :D, 9 :), 4 :D (4 players)SB checks, Hero bets, UTG calls, MP3 calls, SB folds.Turn: (3.50 BB) 9 :D (3 players)Hero bets, UTG folds, MP3 raises, Hero calls.River: (7.50 BB) 6 :D (2 players)Hero checks, MP3 bets, Hero calls.Final Pot: 9.50 BB
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#2 Zach6668

Zach6668

    2009 Stanley Cup Champions

  • Moderators
  • 43,356 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 03 August 2007 - 03:20 AM

Raise preflop.Flop bet is good.I call down after turn (especially if we raised preflop so the pot would be huge).
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#3 rogerwilco

rogerwilco

    poker sucks

  • Members
  • 1,974 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vienna

Posted 03 August 2007 - 03:34 AM

Yeah, i can see why I should raise pre, I usually do, sometimes I don't in multiway pots - but that may be due to running bad and never hitting a flop so obviously a mistake. :club:

#4 Frez

Frez

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,042 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sherwood Park, Alberta
  • Favorite Poker Game:HORSE. Home game donkaments

Posted 03 August 2007 - 09:25 AM

Raise preflop. At best one of the others has a middle pair. You're not dominated by anything here.Otherwise good. I call down after the turn raise also, unless PT can tell me the playing is SO passive he never raises without something huge. Well, even then I call down then curse myself for not knowing better :club:
Progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things. (Robert Heinlein).

#5 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,026 posts

Posted 03 August 2007 - 03:00 PM

If we are calling the river, we should lead, yes?At some point we should probably stop going to the I have TPTK I call down line, regardless of the boards.I'm not sure we are ahead of normal players enoughto call down, and if we do, we have to consider some rivers foldable.

#6 Zach6668

Zach6668

    2009 Stanley Cup Champions

  • Moderators
  • 43,356 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 03 August 2007 - 05:22 PM

View PostActuary, on Friday, August 3rd, 2007, 7:00 PM, said:

If we are calling the river, we should lead, yes?At some point we should probably stop going to the I have TPTK I call down line, regardless of the boards.I'm not sure we are ahead of normal players enoughto call down, and if we do, we have to consider some rivers foldable.
Of course we are.QJ, QT, KQ.All sorts of crap that waited for the turn cuz that's the cool thing to do.This is a super easy call down.Also, leading the river sucks. Sure, he prolly won't raise with something we beat (but he might), but he'd fold anything that was bluffing here (no matter how unlikely that is). I can't see how leading is better than c/c'ing. If he's bluffing the turn, he'll surely fire again.
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#7 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,026 posts

Posted 03 August 2007 - 06:15 PM

View PostZach6668, on Friday, August 3rd, 2007, 5:22 PM, said:

Of course we are.QJ, QT, KQ.All sorts of crap that waited for the turn cuz that's the cool thing to do.This is a super easy call down.Also, leading the river sucks. Sure, he prolly won't raise with something we beat (but he might), but he'd fold anything that was bluffing here (no matter how unlikely that is). I can't see how leading is better than c/c'ing. If he's bluffing the turn, he'll surely fire again.
so, apparently the risk of getting bluff raised is stronger than the need to get value? TOP tells me we should bet when more of his losing hands call, than bet.You think he bluffs twice at this? more often than he has a hand that calls?You are not consistent.Your whole argument seems to be "Villains play horribly"So, I guess you are consistent actually.

#8 Zach6668

Zach6668

    2009 Stanley Cup Champions

  • Moderators
  • 43,356 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 03 August 2007 - 06:20 PM

I doubt he'd bluff raise. He may raise a worse queen, rarely.I would c/c because if the turn was a bluff, he'll fire again 99% of the time.At that point, I call because I think I'm ahead more than 1/9.5 times. Or, theoretically, I call down from the turn because I think I'm ahead more than 1/4.75 times (odds on calling down from turn).I couldn't imagine trying to get get extra value here. We'd need to be ahead, and have him call with a worse hands 50% of the time for it to be worth it, right? Assuming we fold to a raise.
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#9 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,026 posts

Posted 03 August 2007 - 06:56 PM

to be clear, we are getting 3.75:1 not 4.75 to one to see SD from the turn raise.and if the turn is not a bluff, I'd think he checks behind some of those weaker Q hands, sometimes and always calls a betAnd that river means a flush semi-bluff is betting and winning anyway.I don't think he's as likely to continue bluffing with worse hands now - but I give you that villains like to bet a lot.It's tough (I know it seems easier when I'm in the game and realize what villains do) to think we are good often enough to call down but not good enough to say...3-bet the turn to charge the weaker hands and semi-bluffs?Say we were getting 6:1 to call down with TPTK, and felt we were just ahead enough to do so on a KQ97r board. Raisng the turn would make less sense (I think, as I rush this) because we already *know* we are behind too often but the pot is big too.Here the pot is not that big and we are "presumedly by your own desire to call down" ahead a decent amount - but probably rarely blufed off the best hand,So for sake of discussion....3-bet/fold turn, and c/c river.

#10 Zach6668

Zach6668

    2009 Stanley Cup Champions

  • Moderators
  • 43,356 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 03 August 2007 - 07:10 PM

View PostActuary, on Friday, August 3rd, 2007, 10:56 PM, said:

to be clear, we are getting 3.75:1 not 4.75 to one to see SD from the turn raise.
To be clear, getting 3.75:1 is the same as saying 1/4.75, is it not?Or am I losing my mind?
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#11 Zach6668

Zach6668

    2009 Stanley Cup Champions

  • Moderators
  • 43,356 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 03 August 2007 - 07:11 PM

Meh, this is awfully funny coming from a SLAP...It seems like we've reversed rolls or something, lol.
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#12 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,026 posts

Posted 03 August 2007 - 07:11 PM

View PostZach6668, on Friday, August 3rd, 2007, 7:10 PM, said:

To be clear, getting 3.75:1 is the same as saying 1/4.75, is it not?Or am I losing my mind?
to be clear, I misread and presumed you were using the standard poker : not / i.e. odds, not proportions.Carry on.:club:

#13 simo_8ball

simo_8ball

    Multipass

  • Members
  • 9,277 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Searching for a purpose
  • Favorite Poker Game:PLO/NLHE

Posted 04 August 2007 - 02:11 AM

Definite raise preflop. I find it strange how differently AQ is valued. Some people treat it exactly like AK and others see it purely as a trouble hand. I guess the discrepancy is maybe more obvious in NL than in limit though.Anyway, I despise that turn card. I don't really see that you're going to be facing a worse queen or a bluff very often. I would probably call down (I'm a POW), but I honestly think folding is better.

#14 RISEorFall

RISEorFall

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,984 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:I'm bad, I'm nationwide
  • Favorite Poker Game:HU freezeout 4 souls

Posted 04 August 2007 - 09:14 AM

View Postsimo_8ball, on Saturday, August 4th, 2007, 2:11 AM, said:

Definite raise preflop. I find it strange how differently AQ is valued. Some people treat it exactly like AK and others see it purely as a trouble hand. I guess the discrepancy is maybe more obvious in NL than in limit though.Anyway, I despise that turn card. I don't really see that you're going to be facing a worse queen or a bluff very often. I would probably call down (I'm a POW), but I honestly think folding is better.
folding is ewwwi see this play from much worse hands a lot - raising when the board pairs the turn - i guess bluffing or something, i dont know whysmaller pocket pairs, even a pair of 4s.
Rise,

I like the whole hand. You should play drunk more often. :)
-Screech

#15 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,026 posts

Posted 04 August 2007 - 07:08 PM

View PostRISEorFall, on Saturday, August 4th, 2007, 9:14 AM, said:

folding is ewwwi see this play from much worse hands a lot - raising when the board pairs the turn - i guess bluffing or something, i dont know whysmaller pocket pairs, even a pair of 4s.
So we should 3-bet, yes?No?

#16 Zach6668

Zach6668

    2009 Stanley Cup Champions

  • Moderators
  • 43,356 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 04 August 2007 - 07:26 PM

View PostActuary, on Saturday, August 4th, 2007, 11:08 PM, said:

So we should 3-bet, yes?No?
I prefer to let them bluff the river.If they bluff the turn, I'd say they fire the river > 80% of the time.
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#17 Actuary

Actuary

    .

  • Members
  • 19,026 posts

Posted 04 August 2007 - 07:38 PM

View PostZach6668, on Saturday, August 4th, 2007, 7:26 PM, said:

I prefer to let them bluff the river.If they bluff the turn, I'd say they fire the river > 80% of the time.
But we can charge them on the turn and don't need to let them bluff

#18 Zach6668

Zach6668

    2009 Stanley Cup Champions

  • Moderators
  • 43,356 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 04 August 2007 - 08:56 PM

What if they just fold to your 3-bet?If they're just bluffing the scare card, which happens a lot, they'll just fold.
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users