You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Sky Poker forums will be temporarily unavailable from 11pm Wednesday July 25th.
Sky Poker Forums is upgrading its look! Stay tuned for the big reveal!
should i have just checked the river and was it ok calling the turn?
having did a cbet which gets called on the flop the turn brings my hand back into play so I decide to do the double barrel and got a massive raise so I made the call and was thinking he will have something good.
I didn't know much about the villain so just went with the normal everyday story of big bets usually mean good hands.
so when the 4 came on the river I decided to make the bet myself knowing that their is always the risk that he will check the river but to my surprise he folded.
with the turn would shipping it have been better because what I am thinking is had the spade came on the river then he would definitely either have checked or folded unless he had one, recently I have been getting more and more belief that if a flush comes villians will fold the first time they see a bet.
I didn't know much about the villain so just went with the normal everyday story of big bets usually mean good hands.
so when the 4 came on the river I decided to make the bet myself knowing that their is always the risk that he will check the river but to my surprise he folded.
| shazzee | Big blind | £0.05 | £0.05 | £4.72 | |
| x | Big blind | £0.05 | £0.10 | £3.95 | |
| Your hole cards |
| ||||
| craigcu12 | Raise | £0.15 | £0.25 | £8.08 | |
| x | Call | £0.10 | £0.35 | £3.85 | |
| spursutd | Fold | ||||
| shazzee | Fold | ||||
| Flop | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||
| craigcu12 | Bet | £0.18 | £0.53 | £7.90 | |
| x | Call | £0.18 | £0.71 | £3.67 | |
| Turn | |||||
| |||||
| craigcu12 | Bet | £0.53 | £1.24 | £7.37 | |
| x | Raise | £2.30 | £3.54 | £1.37 | |
| craigcu12 | Call | £1.77 | £5.31 | £5.60 | |
| River | |||||
| |||||
| craigcu12 | Bet | £2.66 | £7.97 | £2.94 | |
| x | Fold | ||||
| craigcu12 | Muck | ||||
| craigcu12 | Win | £4.91 | £7.85 | ||
| craigcu12 | Return | £2.66 | £0.40 | £10.51 | |
Comments
1) Drawing to hands that are non nut
2) Out of position
As played the donk on the river is bad too.
Just play nit ABC at these levels.
Getting into marginal situations is totally unecessary.
If we assume that we have no fold equity for the shove:
We can either call £1.77 with pot odds of 33% or...
We can effectively call £3.14 with pot odds of 39%.
Our equity may be as low as about 15% or as high as 40% but most of the time is around 30-35% (I don't have Stove/Equilab). It's probably a marginal losing call on the turn, improved substantially if we get the rest on the river. Shoving the turn would seem to be certainly a losing play unless, for some reason, we think we have some fold equity.
you say just play ABC nit poker at this level but in all honesty as well as the MTT i think it was the amount of nittyness too that was causing the losses in july.
the signs were all over i even have noticed people encouraging me to get a villain who has just give that person a bad beat and talking about how good i usually am. so i can see myself that now some know me well.
even with this hand when he has did a fold on the river it's quite odd for the villains that are associated with these tables
what has got me playing these hands now is their is these tables are so weak with betting even when they have good hands so even if i miss the flop their is a good chance of seeing the turn card cheaply.
maybe i should i have just checked the turn.
" the signs were all over i even have noticed people encouraging me to get a villain who has just give that person a bad beat and talking about how good i usually am. so i can see myself that now some know me well"
I do hope you ignored them, A lot of newbies talk so much nonsense at 4nl its just unreal.
Im not saying your not good, Im just saying these people for the most part dont have a clue about poker.
Going after players that have dished out a bad beat to you or whoever is one of the worst things you can do.
I understand what you are saying about not thinking nit ABC is optimal, and yes I even agree to an extent. But if you are playing over 3 tables, I dont think you are going to be paying enough attention to the table dyanamic and player specfic reads to make are more loose aggr type game more profitable than NIT ABC at 4nl.
Also playing a good NIT ABC game is a hell of a lot easier than playing a looser aggrressive game. You really need to have the ability to read players and build up a good understanding of what is going on in a hand. I dont mean this in a harsh way, but I feel a duty to say that with the KQ example above, this was a very easy story to break down, the fact you didnt realise you were beat here means, imo, that you would struggle long term with using a game plan that requires deeper levels of thought.
And I am only saying that becase I really want you to succeed.
Would be interested in hearing Tintins thoughts on this debate.
ps. I have noticed this a few times, My username is calcalfold, not calcalford - that sounds like what I would do if I have a problem with my Focus LX.
However, playing this wide range, out of position is a much different prospect. We want to be sure that our opponents in late position are going to play face-up post-flop, so we're not guessing whether to double-barrel or not. We also don't want to be getting in the situation of raising pre-flop with these hands and playing out of position to multiple opponents.
So raising these sorts of hand in position is likely very good. Raising them out of position is much more dependent on the players behind.
I would encourage you not to play ABC poker at these levels. If you want to join all the other nits in making modest profits for the rest of your poker career, then that's fine. If you want to develop your game to perhaps become a bigger winning player, then you should be making your 'moves' and learning from your mistakes at these lower stakes, where it doesn't really hurt.
How about going for a check raise on the turn?
As played I think it's a fold on the turn as he has little behind.
Do you not consider your idea more advanced and difficult to implement successfully?
Would it not be better for somebody to be able put down a string of winning months (£200 + month in month out) using ABC to get a grasp of the bascis before adding more hands? I see a lot of people trying to make fancy moves with wide ranges at 4nl, like the pros on HSP, and it just cannot be done unless you really know what your doing. As I said, the KQ example was a worry, is it not to you?
I have follwed Craig for a his whole blog and dont think the numbers craig has been returning indicated that the strong starting hands are not being played well enough at this stage to justify a wider range being added.
Obviously to beat the bigger games required a wider range, basic nits will never crush 50nl and beyond.
But I do think we need to walk before we can run. And to reiterate I am only saying this to try and help (obv imo a I see it dyor etcetc) I would love Craig to be smashing £200+ month after month, because of the pure determination and contribution to the boards.
Seriously, all I'm talking about is raising in position and c-betting the flop when we know our opponents call too much pre-flop and check-fold the flop a lot. That's not really that complicated. Yes, we need to learn which board textures are good to bet and which one's we should give up on, but that's something we only learn through experience.
We have a choice of how to view the game, and to my mind there's one view which says i) "We get big hands and we bet with them", which is the standard ABC nit idea, or there's the view that ii) "We look for opportunities to exploit our opponents, and make our hand fit in with that".
Lots of players play the nitty style and you can't criticise. If they can make a bit of extra money consistently without too much deep thought about the game, that's good. If you want to be better than that, you should try to learn from day one that this game isn't really about your own hand.
All those ABC nits winning small amounts on the site at the moment miss so many opportunities because they think there is a "right" way to play particular hands. If you want to be better than that, you need to be viewing your own hand, only as it fits in with your opponent's range. Not merely "I've got AK/AA/KK, so I should raise big now".
It's not that sophisticated, though. It just takes thought and practice.
Do you have a blog of your own progression online or know any good sources for further reading in this area (ie finding opportunities for exploiting other players tendencies at microstakes)?
I don't think you need particularly different skills to exploit micro stakes players. The key is not to think of them as micro-stakes players. Once you view them as individuals playing 100BB, a calling station at NL4 is the same as a station at NL100. There might be more stations at NL4 but the ways in which you exploit them are the same.
take this hand for instance if it was calling stations then i would never expect them to fold. these villians look more like hit or fold type villians.
it probably just takes playing in a micro stakes MTT to realise just how small in numbers calling stations really are in micro cash games
I am looking a for more detailed articles.
Jac35, thanks for the PM - much appreciated.
call is ok
opening 76ss is fine, jesus what you gonna do fold all the time
raise to 20p pre though
Often the only bluffs I see are sometimes when people miss their draw.
As said earlier in the thread, we need equity of 39% if we get it all-in with no fold equity or 33% to just call.
I think it's optimistic to think we'll get villain to fold after he's put this much in. It might happen very occasionally (low single figure percentage, if that) but it's not something we should consider, in my opinion.
Just to talk about CraigSG1's post: I have seen players fold for this much more on the turn many times. If I said thirty or forty times, that would seem about right. However I've played tens of thousands of hands, so those occasions occur probably less than 1% of the time.
We don't need to care about the weird plays we've seen before. Even if you think unknown players fold to a shove here one in fifty times, it's still not a significant factor. The fact that he folded the river is neither here nor there as he may have simply been holding a missed draw himself, which would have been dominating us on the turn and would not have folded.
Even if the hero had shoved the turn and, on this occasion, the villain had folded, it still would not be a justification for shoving. We have to make our decision in view of long-term expected results and in the long-term we should not expect our opponents to fold here often enough.
Grantorino hits the nail on the head. This is all about which situation is more +EV (or which may be -EV).
The fact that our opponent has some money back doesn't mean we have to stick him in. We're not playing a tournament so we don't need to win all of the chips. We only have to make the decision that gives the best expected return and, if you agree that he's unlikely to fold for the rest, we have a choice of paying less money for 33% odds or paying more money for 39% odds. That makes the better decision clear, I think.
we can call, hit and still get paid because of SPR
we have no FE
raising turn is -EV