32 replies to this topic

[akishore]

player A has 8 8 in a non-blind position.player B has 9 7 in the big blind.some game, whatever limit, doesn't matter.player A opens, only player B calls.(4 SB) 8 K 2 player B checks, player A checks.(2 BB) 6 player B checks, player A bets, player B calls.(4 BB) 5 player B checks, player A bets, player B raises, player A calls.player B says, "i would have folded to a bet on the flop" as he drags the pot.given this information, did player A make a mistake?aseem

[BDPoolie]

akishore said:

given this information, did player A make a mistake?aseem

There are your key words...."Given this information", Yes.But, I would have probably played this the same way. Sometimes the trapper gets trapped. That's the way it goes.

[akishore]

BDPoolie said:

akishore said:

given this information, did player A make a mistake?aseem

There are your key words...."Given this information", Yes.But, I would have probably played this the same way. Sometimes the trapper gets trapped. That's the way it goes.

just to be clear, you say that given the information that player B would have folded to a flop bet, player A made a mistake in checking the flop?aseem

[KappaKid83]

Yes, preflop aggression should always be followed by post flop aggression when you are heads up in a pot. I think it is wrong to check because you need to pick up all of the money you can in any game, the goal is to optimize your winnings and that play is not optimal. I understand that having a guy drawing to runner runner perfect str8 cards you are a HUGE favorite and will win more than 90% of the time, but still I think the OPTIMAL play is to bet the flop and take down a small pot rather than lose a bigger pot.JEFF

[akishore]

KappaKid83 said:

Yes, preflop aggression should always be followed by post flop aggression when you are heads up in a pot.

i'm not going to address the rest of your post yet, but your first sentence is absolutely wrong.if you missed the pun, stop using absolutes in poker. there are plenty of sitautions where preflop aggression should not be followed by postflop aggression, even when heads-up.anytime someone says "always" or "never", i put less weight on their advice, since they clearly lack some understanding of poker.aseem

[BDPoolie]

akishore said:

BDPoolie said:

akishore said:

given this information, did player A make a mistake?aseem

There are your key words...."Given this information", Yes.But, I would have probably played this the same way. Sometimes the trapper gets trapped. That's the way it goes.

just to be clear, you say that given the information that player B would have folded to a flop bet, player A made a mistake in checking the flop?aseem

Yes, because Player A lost the pot. Had he bet, he would have won the pot. But this is hindsight. You would never really have that information. But if Player A knew the future and knew he'd lose the pot if he checked, but win if he bet, then yes, Player A made a mistake.But, like you said. It's all hypothetical.

[speedz99]

I think it was played fine. If there are 3 or more to the flop I say the set needs to be bet on the flop, but heads up I think it is +EV to slowplay and try to let your opponent hit a mediocre hand or draw on the turn.

[KappaKid83]

I understand about the always and never part, just in this situation I thought it was appropriate, probably not though, eh well we all make mistakes.JEFF

[BeanGW]

No. Player A did not make a mistake.In fact, Player B made a mistake by calling the turn that will earn Player A much more money in the long run then he missed by not betting the flop.

[screech]

From a mathematical standpoint - no. His EV is 4sb if he bets this flop.In this hand, the bd straight will come in 4.85% of the time. The EV of calling and letting him hit pick up a straight draw is > 4sb.(0.9515 x 6sb) - (0.00485 x 6sb) = 5.4sbFor a profit of 1.4sb each time.From a theoretical standpoint - yes. Since A raised the flop, he is expected to bet the flop regardless of what he holds. A check behind will induce a lot of suspicion, especially if B has a low pair. If however, A bets like he's supposed to, B will probably play back at him with just about anything that hit the board. A gives up a lot of expectation by checking the flop in these situations.

[sirliej]

If I may, I think what I liked the least about this hand was calling the check raise on the river with a straight showing on the board.I may be biased though, because I had a set of aces cracked last night when the river brought the third straight card and everthing played out the same way. The sraight card came, he checked, I bet, he raised, I called, I lost.Plus, hypothetically, Player B might have said that in an effort to get you, ahem, I mean, Player A to throw more money at the pot in later hands. Feigning weakness and all.

[Actuary]

BeanGW said:

No. Player A did not make a mistake.In fact, Player B made a mistake by calling the turn that will earn Player A much more money in the long run then he missed by not betting the flop.

bingo.In fact: Player B is a liar. If Player B calls a Raise with 970ff preflop and HU..then calls a turn bet getting 3:1 with an oesd and 9 high..he would not have folded to a flop bet.Player A still should have bet the flop for value.I think you get more $$$ getting a drawing/made hand to call here, than you do waiting for the turn. But that may be inexperience talking.

[LPY2005]

If you don't slow play this hand with a flop that harmless I don't know when you would. If you bet you take down the pot, but you'll be kicking yourself wondering how many chips that bet cost you. You want the villian to catch up a little so that you can get more profit than just 1bb. I play this the exact same way as player A, no matter the outcome this one time. That may be my NL side talking though.

[rog]

double-post

[rog]

screech said:

Since A raised the flop, he is expected to bet the flop regardless of what he holds. A check behind will induce a lot of suspicion, especially if B has a low pair. If however, A bets like he's supposed to, B will probably play back at him with just about anything that hit the board. A gives up a lot of expectation by checking the flop in these situations.

You didn't read the question. The question is, if you know he folds to a flop bet, is the check a mistake? There's no playing back. You bet, and he folds with 100% certainty. That's the whole point of the post.I ran an EV calculation, and in this situation, if he check/folds the turn without a straight draw, and check-folds the river without a straight, checking this flop is actually -EV, but it's close. It's +3.9 if you check behind on the river, and about 3.85 if you bet/fold the river. This ignores the possibility that he might hit a pair he likes on the turn, or he might even bluff at the turn. I think it's close but the check is probably +EV.

[akishore]

ok, this is pretty cut and dry. the people who are talking about metagame and whatnot are looking too deep into it.if player A bets the flop and player B folds, player B played perfect poker according to the fundamental theorem. by checking, player A allows player B to make mistakes on future streets, including hitting a pair and betting it or calling a bet with it, taking an unprofitable bet by calling with a straight draw like he did (although this is dependent on implied odds), etc.i'll address some quick points:1. kappakid - the goal is to optimize your winnings, or maximize your EV. yes, betting and picking up the pot right away wins money, but it doesn't win the most money. see screech's post for the math.2. kappakid - the optimal play is to check the flop and take down a bigger pot than to bet the flop and take down a smaller pot. in the long run, this will happen. sometimes you will lose a pot by checking and losing to runner-runner, but when your opponent takes unprofitable bets on future streets when you check the flop, you clearly make more money.3. BDPoolie - winning pots isn't the goal of poker, winning money is. there is a big difference. this one time, player A lost the pot, but that's irrelevant when you realize that in the long run, player A made money in this hand, and he will make more money in the long run by checking than by betting and certainly picking up the pot on the flop.4. screech - this is a hypothetical. i'm not saying you should check the flop when you flop a set every time. so from a theoretical standpoint, the answer is still "no", according to the fundamental theorem. from a *practical* standpoint, player A *may* have made a mistake, but that's way dependent on player B, etc.5. sirliej - this is a game of incomplete information. if you're folding the river to a checkraise, you have a huge leak in your game. this is no joke. also, as i said, you're looking way too deep into the question if you're considering metagame issues.6. actuary - again, i'm talking about a theoretical question, not a practical one. not saying that player A played correct poker, i'm saying he played correct poker according to the fundamental theorem. for example, let's say i have a royal flush and you have a king high flush. i bet and you put in 17 raises against me before you finally just call. according to the fundamental theorem of poker, you made a mistake every time you raised, but obviously you didn't make a mistake when you consider that you don't have all the information.aseem

[screech]

Does A know what B has?If so, checking is obviously better. If not, betting is.

[akishore]

again, i'm not talking about a practical viewpoint.i'll reiterate this example.you have a king-high straight flush. i have a royal flush.we put in 16 raises each before you just call.did you make a mistake?according to the fundamental theorem, yes.practically, hell fucking no.same idea. this question was a theoretical hypothetical one.given the information that player B folds to a bet on the flop, did player A make a mistake by checking?no.aseem

[BDPoolie]

akishore said:

3. BDPoolie - winning pots isn't the goal of poker, winning money is. there is a big difference. this one time, player A lost the pot, but that's irrelevant when you realize that in the long run, player A made money in this hand, and he will make more money in the long run by checking than by betting and certainly picking up the pot on the flop.

I understand this completely. That's why I said that I would have played it the same way. But that wasn't the question.The question was "Given this information, did Player A make a mistake?". My answer was very literal, if not a little sarcastic.Information now known: 1. If Player A bets, then Player B folds. 2. Player B draws out and wins the pot.Based on those 2 pieces of information, then Yes, Player A made a mistake.If you were basing it just on piece of information #1, then no, a mistake was not made.Like I said, my post was partial sarcasm and purely taking the question in the LITERAL sense. I'm sorry if it was confusing, and I'll try to be more careful in my wording from now on.

[Actuary]

pointless threadsorry.to continue the pointlessness...player A made an error betting the river.players B made an error pre-flop and on the turn