Hero posts and gets Ac 3d

Folds... Hero (CO) checks, Button calls, SB completes, BB checks

Flop: [7s][As][8d]

SB checks, BB bets, Hero?

No reads.

Not to be rude...

But how is this not a bet 100,000,000% of the time?

First of all why are you playing A3 offsuit? Secondly, what is the point of being in this hand if you are not going to bet top pair? Bet :!:

Because when facing a bet, 0.0000 of the time can You bet. You can raise, You can call, You can even fold (although ridiculous), but You can't bet.

If it was checked to me, I would bet.

Because I just posted on the table, which means I didn't want to wait until the blinds came around to post. And I can't bet. It WAS bet.

You two need to drink some coffee.

:wink:

i would say raise preflop. any semi decent hand in a CO blind is good enough to raise, since it only costs you 1 more SB. that really changes the whole perspective of the hand.
i say raise the flop.

Sorry.

The color code confused me. I'm used to black being check/call and red being raise, and you made red just be highlighting your action.

I officially change my answer to "this is a no-brainer raise" then.

The blinds can be betting anything or nothing here. If he 3-bets you, THEN it's time to think about folding. And calling is catastrophically bad.

i raise this PF (you should be raising almost any two cards if you post in the CO and it folds over to you... the pot odds are astronomical).

since you didn't, we have a small pot on the flop, and i actually fold to this bet.

if it was raised pre-flop, and someone bet out, then you should be raising.

pot's small, reverse implied odds are decent here, not a big deal to fold.

aseem

open checking pf from the CO is death

Ok I'll consider raising CO after a post. But Aseem, pot odds astronomical? At the most, its 6:1 equit if button, SB and BB ALL call after I raise. Is that what You mean?

I also take back an earlier statement about folding being ridiculous, its fine, I just don't like it. I think top pair bad kicker is most of the time the best hand at the moment on the flop.

That gets to the flop decision. I think calling 1 bet on the flop is ok in this situation, can Y'all see why?

This is an easy raise.

Eeeasy.

Calling's horrible. Folding's not bad but is much worse than raising.

Eh, not if You know how to fold to a turn raise.

But the size of the pot? It's small...

But the size of the pot? It's small...


This is a good reason to fold a flush draw or middle pair here. It's a terrible reason to fold top pair three handed. Terrible.

Your hand is better than KK here.

Yeah Aseem said folding, not me... I don't like folding like I said earlier. But I was thinking that a call isn't bad. I thought calling could be 2nd best, but not bad.

easy raise preflop. even easier raise on the flop.

Isn't it worth a raise to get the "button".
We don't have to worry about much about raising behind us, and we get it HU 80% of the time.

uhhh, do you see how your statements contradict each other? Because of the small unraised pot, it is unlikely that we have reversed implied odds. Stop playing vaginal poker. This flop needs to be raised BTW

i don't understand how it's unlikely that we have reverse implied odds here because the pot is smaller.

right out of SSHE:

1. the pot is small.

2. you are still on the preflop or flop betting rounds. that is, there are still several big bets to go before the showdown.

3. you have a weak made hand that may be best now, but is easy to draw out on.

i think it's close between raising and folding, and i just prefer folding since this pot is small and i'd rather not be put to the test of whether my marginal hand is best. if i raise, i'll be obligated to bet the turn most times, for example.

while the fact that we have a pair of aces (no overcards can come to beat us) leans it toward playing/raising, we still have no redraws, and when we're behind, we're drawing to three outs at best (assuming our opponent doesn't/won't have two pair by the turn).



can you explain exactly how you came to the conclusion that we have less reverse implied odds when the pot is small? that seems a little illogical when a key part of RIO is a small pot.



aseem

*shrug*

it's close, to me.

i'm not worried about position or getting the button or raising behind us, i'm just worried about reverse implied odds a little bit, and the fact that if we're behind, we're way behind, but when we're ahead, we're not as far ahead as we are behind when we're behind.

aseem

wrong.

this is an easy raise.

yeah, that's the part i was hazy on.

what i was thinking is that we have no redraws at all, so when we're behind, we're drawing to our 3 kicker at best, and sometimes not even.

when we're ahead, are we really going to get much action from hands that we beat? even if we do, they're usually not that far behind, especially a flush draw, or a pair, etc.

aseem

You crack me up, KDawg.

That was the only thing I had to add to this post. wrto4556 beat me to the 'weak made hand' bit, so I'd say raising would be the 'duh' play.
akishore, I'd say raising is trying to win the small pot right there, not really trying to get any action. If you find out the SB or BB doesn't have garbage, then you have to think about your hand.

we can't get beaten by an overpair, this is a major. You are seeing monsters in the closet. How onearth can you even think ofg folding this here and then advocate it. The BB could very well be betting into us with very little, so why would we want to fold what could be the best hand. Just becasue we are bet into doesn't mean they have an ace, two of them are already accounted for. My god, you are so afraid to play hands that are even semi marginal. YOu are losing out on so many money making opportunities its really not funny. THis is one of them, and yet you are advocating folding, I just don't get it. You can't play this way outside of .5/1 and 1/2, you just won't make enough money to justify playing.

I'm gonna ask an honest question, what are your PT stats, mainly VPIP, PFR, and AG factor

uh, any PP will give us action, any pair on the board will give us action, any striaght draw will give us action, and any flush draw will give us action, and guess what, we are ahead of all of those hands, and pretty well ahead of most of those hands too

listen, i'm not completely advocating folding, i'm just saying it's not that far apart between raising and folding.

why would i want to fold what could possibly be the best hand? because the pot is really small, and i don't mind losing it when i believe we have decent RIO.

what i'm asking YOU is why you say this:

uhhh, do you see how your statements contradict each other? Because of the small unraised pot, it is unlikely that we have reversed implied odds.

that's just blatantly false, and i showed you why.

really, it's a close decision, and i tend to err on the side of folding when the decision is close and the pot is small, and calling down when the decision is close and the pot is big. that's standard, isn't it?

here, the decision is relatively close to me, and i really have no problem folding.

my PT stats...

total hands at party .50/1: 4,355

VP$IP: 20.48%
PFR: 10.82%
Total AF: 3.17

not a big sample size to estimate BB/100 accurately, but big enough to estimate those stats accurately.

aseem

if we get to showdown, do you think it's more or less likely that we'll have the best hand?

a lot of worse hands will release their hand on the turn most likely, whereas every better hand will get way aggressive with us.

when we're behind, we're way behind. you agree, right?
when we're ahead, we're not as far ahead as we are behind when we're behind. you agree?

to me, those times that we're way behind far outweigh the times that we're less ahead, since this is a small pot.

aseem

lemme try another perspective.

this is a marginal situation, right? we agree on that, right?

that means that even if raising here is +EV (if raising is better than folding, and folding is 0 EV, you're arguing that raising is +EV), raising is just _barely_ +EV since the situation is, by definition, marginal.

can you consider it, literally, a waste of time to chase that marginal +EV?

i.e. assuming you earn on average 0.02 BB/hand for every hand that you play, it's a waste of time if chasing this marginal edge is worth less than that 0.02 BB.

make sense?

aseem

no, you reguritated a bunch of ed miller that isn't really that applicalble to this situation. Like I said before, we have two of the aces accounted for, which means that it is less likely that we are being bet into with another ace. YOu didn't really show why at all, since we can be outdrawn, but only someone with a oesfd is a favorite over out hand. So we oush our edge now. YOu arfe basically giving me the lee jones line of always looking for a fold, which is complete crap. I'm not folding TP here, I'm certainly not calling it, and I'm always raising it. pretty simple





really, its not and its already been explained why its not

no, its really not that marginal, but whatever. I live on playing in these types of situations, and don't avoid them as as you progress up the limits you need to exploit these edges to be a winning player, so you might as well start dealing with them early on and getting used to them. Avoiding marginal decisions is a weakness IMO as they add up over time, and if you can handle them and work with them, then you will be a much bigger winner over a person who doesn't expolit them

i'm not "regurgitating a bunch of ed miller that isn't really applicable."

i'm simply pointing out that you were... wrong.

a key part of reverse implied odds is that the pot is small.

you stated, and this is a quote:

Because of the small unraised pot, it is unlikely that we have reversed implied odds.

see how that statement was wrong?



i never said that it's likely that we're beat! yes, i know that we have two aces accounted for so it's less likely that the villian has an ace!

i just said that the times we're beat far outweigh the times we're ahead! (since the pot is small and we're _way_ behind when we're beat but NOT _way_ ahead when we're not beat.)



i didn't show why what??

yes, i know that no hand that we beat right now is a favorite over us except an oesfd, that's _again_ not my point.

my point is: RIO, small pot, times we're beat far outweigh times we're not. see above.



if i'm erring on the side of folding in a _small pot_, and that's weak/tight, whatever. fine.

if you're "always raising" TP here, regardless of pot size, style of villian, style of those to act behind us, etc., then i think you need to take your own advice about poker not being black/white and absolutes.


aseem

just realized i never answered this question, sorry.

when you post in the CO, the pot is 2.5 SB.

if you put in one more SB to go on a steal raise, you're getting great pot odds to steal, specifically, 2.5-to-1. so, your steal only needs to work 29% of the time to be profitable.

compare this to... folds to you on the button, pot is 1.5 SB, and you put in 2 SB to raise! now your pot odds are 2-to-1.5, so you need to win it 58% of the time to show a profit.

because of that huge change, any two cards become raisable when it folds to you in the CO after you posted.

aseem

that's just bad advice.

at higher limits, you need to be making a LOT of adjustments to your play, especially with blind stealing, blind defending, tricky turn raise/folds, etc.

to say that you should start dealing with them early on to get used to them is just wrong. table textures and looseness of players and other factors clearly factor into how you should be playing.

some things are correct in tougher games, but just aren't right in small stakes games. you shouldn't do them just to get used to it when it doesn't maximize your profit.


that's not always true.

one big reason that pot size is so important is because marginal edges in small stakes games are often a waste of time (usually in small pots). an edge might be +EV, but forefeiting it when you have a bigger edge in other hands (bigger pots) can be correct.


aseem

I dont understand what your trying to say. You should never pass up on a +ev situation(unless your doing it to take advantage of a much higher +ev situation later in the hand). What does it have to do with other hands unlss your playing too many tables to play small +ev situations( which would mean you should play less tables till you can get the hang of it).

if folding and passing up a tiny edge allows you to take bigger edges by playing the next hand, you should do that.

if you make an average of X BB every hand, and this edge is worth less than X, it's a waste of time, literally.

aseem

I haven't read any replies yet. That will take 15 minutes. Here's my initial advice:

Raise preflop. You may win the blinds, you may currently have the best hand right now.

Raise the flop. This is a really easy raise. BB could have anything, including nothing.

to add to my previous post,

this is the same concept that comes into play in situations like these:

1. you're in a really weak game which is full of loose players. one hand, though, a strong player open-raises in MP and it folds to you in the BB. you have 44. i used to think this was a defend, but i always fold now. it's literally a waste of time getting involved with a strong player when you can better use your time getting involved with weak players. again, it'll be a small pot, whereas the other pots in the game can be big, etc.

2. game selection. you sit down at a table which you can marginally beat. it's still +EV for you to play on it, but it's a waste of time if you can find better tables that are _more_ +EV.

etc.

i gotta run to dinner, more on this later.

aseem

No, Keith's advice is dead-on. You're looking to exploit as many +EV decisions as you can. The small ones DO add up. This may only be slightly +EV, but it's still +EV. You should be looking to steal blinds at any level, not just the higher limits.

Aseem, you're advocating a really weak line here. As I said earlier, BB can be betting a ton of hands here, including absolutely nothing. He could be betting 7-3. I'm making this raise every day of the week and you should be too.

I read first page, that's all.

My thoughts.

Since you didn't raise from CO with Ace high, he prob doesn't put you on the ace and is betting his weak 2nd or bottom pair hoping to take it there. So since you checked your option, you should have been checking with the intent to raise the flop if you hit your ace, which you did.

Screw the math, or whatever ppl been babbling about. This is just something that should be obvious. If duder had a stronger ace he'd most likely have raised preflop, and if not, he probably is the type then who'd check/raise when he did hit it.

blah. basically, just raise. simple.

- Jordan

I disagree with this. First your getting 3.5-1 to call, and id play this hand either raising or calling. Saying its a waiste of time means your scared to play post flop against a good player so you pass up a +ev(even if its marginal) situation.

I really don't understand how this thread turned into such a big debate.

It's an easy raise on the flop, and he shouldve raised preflop, too...

I don't know many good players that would disagree w/ this.

....
Akishore wrote:

if you make an average of X BB every hand, and this edge is worth less than X, it's a waste of time, literally.


Aseem,
Your Ave X BB / hand is comprised of some hands you make less that X and some you make more. But any situation you can expect to make more than 0 on, is better than making 0.

Where is that wrong?

It's as if you are saying that it's best to move on to the next deal..where you can expect to make X


good debate..hang tough Aseem...it's good to hear both sides.

i'm not arguing that we shouldn't take marginal +EV decisions necessarily.

i'm arguing that using the reasoning "you need to do this in tougher games, so get used to it now" is just flat out wrong.

that's all.

aseem

p.s. BB could be betting 7-3, sure. so could every other opponent every time they bet. we give a certain estimate to the amount of times they're bet has us beat and the amount of times it doesn't. then, we estimate how far ahead or behind we are for each scenario. then, we take pot size / pot odds into account, and we come up with the best EV play.

to say that we should raise because BB could be betting 7-3 is being a little narrow-minded. he could also be betting A-8, which leaves us drawing to two running outs out of three total in a small pot... does this mean we should fold? again, not in itself. take everything and combine it.

to ME, the times that we are way behind far outweigh the times we're way ahead, specifically because this pot is small and because i believe we have semi-clear reverse implied odds (though not huge, i feel that they are there). i've said that many times.

i'm not wasting my time getting into a big debate about this.

read (or skim) "getting the best of it" by sklansky, 2+2.

the most important decision you can make as a gambler is to find the best edges. you often should sacrifice +EV edges if doing so allows you to exploit bigger +EV edges.

think about hands where you just call on the flop to induce the bettor to bet again on the turn where you can raise when the bet doubles. you're sacrificing the small edge of raising the flop for a bigger edge of raising the turn.

there are many similar situations, and the example i presented is one of them. you can defend and be put to the test on every street against a tough player out of position with a hand that has no visibility post-flop. OR, you can sacrifice your big blind and know that almost every other hand is much juicier with bigger pots and worse players.

it's not about ego or being "scared" to play postflop against good players. it's about making money.

really, it's a simple concept and i'm not going to argue about this any further.

aseem

you're misusing this.

you pass up small edges to exploit larger edges (eg call the flop to raise the turn).

the most relevant/important number as a gambler is your winrate. how much money do you make per hour? per minute? per second?

you can chase a marginal edge that has a value of $X. take the time it takes you to chase that edge, in T, and your winrate by taking that edge is $X/T.

if you reject that edge, knowing that a bigger edge exists, you have saved yourself time, so your winrate will now go up.

i'm not saying this is necessarily the case in this hand here (i don't think we have any way of measuring at all), but i'm just throwing this out there:

assuming raising is +EV.... if the edge we chase by playing this hand (raising) is LESS than the edge we have playing the next hand against worse players (our average BB/hand), chasing this edge is, literally, a waste of time.

just throwing it out there.

aseem





that's exactly what i'm saying, if X is higher than the EV of raising.





thanks. i'm trying...

really, i'm not doing this out of spite, or because i dislike kdawg or whatever. i'm really asking questions and sticking with my viewpoint. i'm not going to blindly accept that raising is correct just because we may have the best hand.

that's how i used to think, and i don't think like that anymore.



aseem

why am i misusing it?

if the edge we chase by raising here is smaller than the edge we have in other hands (average BB/hand), we should pass up on this edge so we can get to the next deal and exploit that bigger edge.

aseem

wrong.

if you ever have an edge in a hand, you should push it. If the edge is smaller on the flop rather than the turn/river you should wait because its in the same hand. Know what i mean?

by your logic, we should fold all be the largest edges...which is obviously wrong.

edited completely.

let's say we make, on average, $0.10 every hand.

if taking up this +EV edge is worth only $0.05, taking it up is a waste of time. by folding, we sacrifice this +EV edge to go onto the next hand, which is a bigger +EV edge.

it saves us time, and gambling is all about winrate over time.

it CAN be a waste of time to take this edge. again, i'm not saying that it necessarily is.

aseem