Villian is solid regular who can be tricky at times. I haven't seen him show down anything crazy though.

Foxwoods 5/10NL.
4 limpers, Villian on button makes it $100. (Isolating with a weakish hand here is definitely in his arsenal)
sb folds
I raise KK in the bb to $300. Folds to villian who calls. He has about $2400 and I cover.

Flop QT8 rainbow (pot $650)
I lead out $400, villian tanks for a while, and raises to $1400.

Thoughts?

Also thoughts on a check/call flop, check/fold turn line if he bets turn after betting flop.

Mark

I would have made that PF raise to $400.

Even though you didn't, I can't see him calling your 3 bet with AQ.

So, you're either up against AA, KK, or QQ and possibly 10,10.

I'd save it for another hand and tip your cap.

edit: what is your image before this hand?

Normal for me. somewhat laggy, but not donkish. I've been big stack at the table for a while. Villian knows I called a large pf raise with J8s and led into 5 players on a 443 flop with it, and he knows I have been squeezing the laggy player to his right a lot. But he knows I'm not crazy and for sure gives me credit for a hand here. The only other time I 3bet him pf, we got it all in and we both had AA.

Mark

So AA is probably out since he didn't 4 bet it, but i guess not completely if he's tricky.
That leaves KK and QQ still out there.

Well, since you both are so deep, I'd just dump it since he looks committed to the pot. But then again, i'm a weak/tight pussy at times.

would villain call off more than 10% of his stack, albeit in position, with less than a set-mining hand and/or premium pockets?

His range might include AK and some suited connectors but I'm really not sure about that.

Mark

8% equity v. AA/QQ/TT/88,J9
60% equity v. JT,T9,T8,89

37% equity needed in this pot with the dead money of ~1K (just assume the 1400 is a shove)

60x + 8(1-x) = 37
60x + 8 - 8x = 37
52x = 29
x = 56%
He needs to be calling our 3-bet preflop, more than 10% of his stack, with the nectars more than half the time. Doesn't sound like you're confident that happens, so I fold.

As for c-c flop, c-f turn to another bet - depends on 2 things
1) You slowplay the nuts here sometimes and he knows it (I take it as a given you 3bet an OTB raise with J9)
2) He's not going to get out of line in a 3bet pot by trying to float anything more than 1 street


EDIT - by the way, you did say villain was sort of tricky. I'd wager that if he was being tricky here, the reason he tanked is because he thought about shoving a pair+draw hand, but decided a more normal raise would send the same "I'm committed to this pot - you have to raise/fold" message without looking so much like a draw.

the pair plus draw hands are pretty big dogs on this board since it's rainbow. Hands like qj 10j are pretty well behind.

This is my least favorite spot for a kk 3 bet hand. The flop's q high, meaning if villian sat on aa in position you're beat, and if he had qq you're beat now.

It's painful I'm always annoyed.

Is 300 your normal re raise in this spot?

It does seem a little small and could villian be discounting your hand b/c of it or does he know that's your norm?

No advice yet..... mulling

You know its a cash game right, not a tournament. I dont see how any of you can say that its a weak re-raise especially since we're certain this will be HU.

its 20x the bb of a re-raise.

put that in 1/2 situation, and villain raise to 20, hero re-raise to 60. pretty standard IMO

This seems right to me. It's a value raise to build the pot if I understand correctly.

I reraise more preflop. This is also a very standard fold on this flop I think. He shows up with a set here A LOT and sometimes will have 2 pair or a pair/gutter. Making this play with AQ is akin to suicide, so unless he's got bandages on his wrist, I'd be dumping this hand here without a ton of thought.

rr more pre.

b/f is fine/standard. I would prefer to c/c flop with these stack sizes, then do some soul reading on later streets depending on cards/action.

So yeah, I think I misplayed this hand badly. Pretty much everyone has told me to raise more preflop this deep, especially oop. I also hate my flop line now. I think check/calling is the better play, and check/folding if he fires on the turn again.

Villian didn't show, but we discussed this hand for a long time and he says he had 88. I am about 90% sure he's telling the truth.

Mark

can someone explain where re-raising more preflop gets us in this spot?

villain raise 100. hero re-raise to 450. villain call

flop....

now what?

as it was played, villain is geting roughly 2.2-1 to call. we know what he claimed to have, so he is getting 2.2-1 with 8,8 to hit his set. obviously he has to be playing this for set value if he thinks mark's re-raise OOP only occurs with a big Pair.

then there is 640 in the pot on the flop with stacks @ around 2100 now, which Mark can get away from when he thinks he is beat. (as played)

if we raise more to say 450. and villain calls getting around 1.7-1, his pf pot odds are cut down, but doesnt his implied odds go way up?
now there is 900 in the pot with his stack sitting at 2k, and marks c-bet increases to say 600 instead of 400,
pot is now 1500. and villain shoves for 2k, making it 3500 and Marks needs to call 1400 more, he is getting 2.5-1

How is this applied to hero's hand, vs villains range and the EV of all that.. can someone pokerstove it?

I'm just a 1-2 NL donk, so take the following as just my honest opinion:

If Mark makes a larger bet preflop, i think it shows much more strength, and it doesn't give the villian any reason to set mine or think that he has the ability to "outplay" Mark postflop because he's going to have a real good idea how strong Mark really is.

Second thing is that personally this is the exact reason why i don't talk strategy, discuss hands, show my knowledge of the game, etc, etc, with knowledgeable players that i either play with at the table or know there's a good chance i'll see them again at the table. It just gives them an edge over you that I believe will make it harder for you to interpret what hands they are repping when you're involved in pots with them. In this case, If i was the villian, and i saw that raise preflop, i would put you on an AK, AQ type of hand, and play accordingly. I get the sense that you are pretty friendly with this guy Mark which is great because you seem like a great person to talk to, but you're just giving information that he can use against you in the future. I don't know, i could be wrong, and i dont care but i thought i would throw that out there as just my two cents.

Anyways, great fold on the flop Mark. I hope my comments don't come across as too critical or something.....just giving you perspective on how i approach a table game.

Raising more pf accomplishes 2 things imo:

One, he's 'paying' more to set mine. So if you get that extra $100/$150 from each person you reraise this way, then it helps pay for the times the one guy flops a set on you.

Two, it makes the pot much harder to bluff/semibluff raise on villian's part if I do lead out, as now my lead is bigger, thus if he raises me he's committing significantly more of his stack.

Mark

Three, we KNOW we have the best hand right now and we'd optimally like as much money going into the pot as humanly possible.

isnt this a bit results orientated?

I mean, you said villain has been a bit tricky, but what does that mean exactly when it comes to his pf calling range?

is $140 pot a decent pot to take down at 5-10NL? i have no idea, i played 5-10 once for like 10 mins.

because if we're re-raising to "charge" any set mining, wouldnt a good player fold preflop when its folded to him, giving us the pot uncontested pf?

is that an ok thing with everyone, to just take the pot pf?

also wth the 2nd part, about him committing more of his stack, when he does raise the flop, how easy is it for you to get away from when ur being offered almost 3-1?

No.

I'm not really sure how to answer all this. I'm not really trying to win the $140 here, but if I do so be it. A good player will fold if he isn't getting odds to set mine, and if he is he will call if he knows we have AA or KK and he will be able to stack us. If people fold to our 3bets a lot pf, thats fine too, because we're 3betting with 87d also.

If I'm getting 3 to 1 on my money, I doubt I fold KK to a flop shove. But in this situation, we're essentially playing for 300bbs or something.

If we're 100bbs deep and I 3bet KK and bet flop, I'm not folding to a shove.

Mark

If we repop to $450 PF, don't his set-mining odds kind of go to shit?

I'm not looking for a lot of money to go in post-flop against a good player with an unimproved KK in this spot... Seems kind of counter-intuitive, but this really isn't the best spot for us. I just get a lot of money in preflop to minimize his positional advantage and -- like everyone else said -- reduce his set-mining odds. Off the top of my head, I think I make it 400+, probably closer to 500. Honestly, getting the 140 + is a solid result here against a semi-good, semi-tricky player.

his set mining odds were also shit even with the re-pop to 300.

Assuming we're playing for stacks and he's got $2400 after he makes the call, he's looking at like 14-1 implied (calling the $200 into the $450)...which I wouldn't call "shit" for set-mining purposes.

However, if we go to $450, he's calling $350 into $600...with $2250 behind. That's 8-1 implied...which is much more marginal.

Exactly. Exactly.

I re-raise PF very stiff here, even though the raise was 10xBB. $500 is not out of line in my mind.
KK is a great hand PF, but it shrinks the hell up on a ton of flops unimproved.

And btw, I believe villain. Everything about his line suggests this is the truth.

You can dodge bullets, baby.

if you've posted results, i haven't seen it

I think it's a fold.

He's not raising one pair here unless possibly QJ but when ti's deep like this, I think he prefers pot control


so at best we're up against KJ or AJ, otherwise it's 2pair (hands like QTs etc) or flopped nutsors, or TT/QQ which is def. realistic. Villain has to be pretty sure you have a big hand here. I don't think he'd raise bluff here.

looking at how I would play it from villain's perspective. We're deep and the last thing I want to see is a J, 9, or even Q roll off. Those cards kill my action so despite it being rainbow, I'd play my hand fast given how it's strong and how we've got so much money behind. Also, the last thign I'd want is to be put AI on the turn if either of those cards roll off.

Again, I agree. Villain is playing hard here because he's strong but vulnerable to peeling. Bottom set and two pair do this.

Just curious, for everyone ... does our hero's play change if he holds AA?

As it stands, the implied odds are higher because the preflop raise is smaller. 2400>2250... straight forward, but implied odds in NL are only good if you're certain you will get paid off, or have the ability to committ a lot of your chips and get called when you hit your hand.

i understand exactly how everything is being calculated, So dont think i'm not following, I'm just trying to play the player/situation.

in this hand, the 1st example villain is getting 2.2-1 pot odds on his 7.5-1 draw.
in example 2 (the larger pf re-raise) villain is getting 1.7-1 on his 7.5-1 draw.

in example 1, his implied odds of 14-1 only exist if he can successfully get marks stack to double his.
In exmple 2, he is losing a tiny bit in pot odds, and has lost implied odds because a larger portion of his stack is already in the middle, But thats where my issue is, The lost implied odds are already In the pot, and any future betting is going to be larger

I'm not sure what to call that, except for implied odds? Its not implied as a Number or factor, since implied odds arent as straight forward as pot odds.

The villain has to put the preflop amount to call in the pot every time, not just when he hits. It's a cost that he has to amortize across his wins.

Pot odds are largely irrelevant in this choice. The villain isn't getting anything close to pot odds to call for a set.

Unless AA beats a set, then no. If we had AA here, then him making this play with KK is the same as us holding KK and him making it with AQ: it just won't happen enough for us to show a profit.

If your implied odds are like 8:1 and want to call, you have to be pretty sure to stack him like every time because the odds of flopping your set are about 8:1. Really, you need to be almost 100% sure you are going to stack him when making the preflop call otherwise this will not be profitable. However, if he has a much larger stack and you're seeing 16:1 or something, then you only need to average half a stack from him when you hit to show a profit. This allows for a lot more wiggle room.

Implied odds aren't an exact science or anything, but when you're set-mining, it's pretty easy to see what you're getting. You really want to have possible implied odds of something much higher than the actual % that you'll hit your hand so that you can make up for the inaccuracies of your reads.

Here's a thought experiment:

If you can get all-in with an underpair preflop, you're guaranteed to get paid off when you hit your set.

open-shoving pocket 2s UTG FTW!!!!

There's a random luckbox who plays locally ... who apparently fully believes in this theory AND makes it work for himself. It's the most amazing thing. He shoves and catches. Shoves and catches. Variance is his bitch.

Set Mining

Chances of flopping a set: 1 in 8.5
Chances of losing with that set: 18%




Suppose we need to call "1" preflop and we need to win "Z" to break even:

0 = 1/8.5 x (.82 x Z - .18 x Z) - 7.5/8.5

7.5 = 0.64 x Z

11.7 = Z

We need to get back 11.7x our preflop call if we get all of villain's money in every time we hit, and that is just to break even. (There is money in pot already, so that drops the Z value slightly)

How often can he stack us if he flops a set? It's not 100%. Also, he may win the pot without hitting a set on the flop (bluffs an A high flop/gets a free card and hits a set on the turn/etc.). Then again, he might get stacked if he doesn't flop a set. If he has 99 on an 832 flop he could potentially stack off.

I'd estimate he needs at least 17/1 implied to hit a set in general.

Good post Mr. Simo.

Interesting post, simo. I think that I might call a little light on odds for set-mining sometimes...like I'll very frequently call getting 9-1 or better.

Another thing that most people don't really think about is that you have less implied odds against a LAG. The phrase "if I flop a set I'm going to bust him" isn't often used in reference to a tight player. It's usually a response to someone who has been running the table over.

If villain's range in a situation is AA and AA alone, then you have pretty awesome implied odds. If villain can have JJ+, AQ+ then you aren't often stacking him. In order for you to stack him when he has AK/AQ you have to flop a set on a board where he's hit, and if he has JJ/QQ/KK you need no overcards to flop.

If villain can have suited connectors as well, then you're very rarely stacking him so your implied odds drop off very quickly.

Another point worth mentioning is that against a TAG you are playing pure 'no set no bet', whereas against a LAG you can often play the small pairs postflop profitably, adding to your equity.

People get caught up in the idea of calling a small amount preflop to win a huge pot when it doesn't happen as often as they think.