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!
Too tight? What would you do?
All in the title really, did I fold too easily here? I feared he had the 5.
It was a DYM and 5/6 players remained. I had a middle chip stack, 3rd or 4th probably.
It was a DYM and 5/6 players remained. I had a middle chip stack, 3rd or 4th probably.
| Player | Action | Cards | Amount | Pot | Balance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Temple17 | Small blind | 100.00 | 100.00 | 1860.00 | |
| peter27 | Big blind | 200.00 | 300.00 | 1900.00 | |
| Your hole cards |
| ||||
| snap196521 | Fold | ||||
| chivano | Fold | ||||
| dog8dog | Fold | ||||
| Temple17 | Call | 100.00 | 400.00 | 1760.00 | |
| peter27 | Check | ||||
| Flop | |||||
| |||||
| Temple17 | Bet | 200.00 | 600.00 | 1560.00 | |
| peter27 | Call | 200.00 | 800.00 | 1700.00 | |
| Turn | |||||
| |||||
| Temple17 | All-in | 1560.00 | 2360.00 | 0.00 | |
| peter27 | Fold | ||||
| Temple17 | Muck | ||||
| Temple17 | Win | 800.00 | 800.00 | ||
| Temple17 | Return | 1560.00 | 0.00 | 2360.00 | |
Comments
At the moment you have JJ556 as your best hand, you're not even using your own kicker, so it means you literally cannot beat a single Jx hand (you're only gonne be chopping rarely), so to call here with J3 is basically the same as calling with TT cos you need to be doing it because you think he's unlikely to have Jx or 5x (or QQ+ obv)
Given this is villains 2nd street of betting and that they are willing to put their own tournament on the line then you are almost certainly behind.
Out of the tournament far too often to overpairs bigger J's and any hand with a 5 in that makes up the small blind 55,A5,56 and now 66. If villain is the sort to limp with any picture card or any 2 suited cards then even bigger chance you are behind.
It is probably least likely that they have a 5 though - there are only 2 of them to have and there would not be much for them to worry about with the 6 so they should be trying to keep you in the hand.
For longer term value in this situation you should consider reraising the flop bet - with top pair to an underpair on board and weak kicker you are vulnerable to a lot of turn cards and should reasonably expect to be ahead at this point.
Calling gives villains the chance to overtake you, or bluff you down the streets.
"Calling gives villains the chance to overtake you, or bluff you down the streets."
If J3 is the best hand on this flop, then there isn't a single hand he can have that has many outs to catch up, and if he bluffs thats cool
With the flop bet - villain is still on a pretty wide range, could be betting with anything from total air, overcards, mid pair, to a made hand.
sure calling keeps weaker hands in - many of which can overtake us on flop
My reasoning is that on balance we are ahead on flop - do you agree?
We are also vulnerable to being overtaken on turn by any overcard to J.
Is our villain likely to bluff a 2nd street if they are indeed bluffing?
Given that we are thin, we may be folding best hand if they do bluff anyway on next street so why give them another card?
A,K, or Q come on turn and villain bets - bluff, overtaken us, or had a made hand already?
If we raise, we fold out all hands we are beating and are just paying someone off on a better hand.
6 outs = 12% of hitting the turn
Are we really scared and trying to make people fold hands that will catch up nearly 1 time in every 10 when the bad side to raising is that we just donate chips when we're behind?
My point is that we WILL be scared of any AKQ on turn whatever they hold now. That's coming anywhere between 21-25% of the time depending on how many overcards villain actually has. That's on a par with a flush draw plus there are hidden outs if our villain has an underpair to the J.
My way...
1. We are ahead now and raise - opponent folds we take pot down risk free - Personally I'm chuffed to bits and not worried about possible lost value*.
2. We are behind now and raise - opponent calls/then bets turn or reraises - we lose pot but not another chip
Your way...
3. We call. Brick comes on turn and Villain shoves - we all agree this is a fold - and you have probably saved some chips v my way +1 to you
4. We call. Brick comes on turn and villain bets
5. We call. A,K or Q come on turn and villain bets
6. We call A,K, or Q come on turn and villain checks
7. We call, brick comes on turn and villain checks
Presumably you continue putting chips in options 4 and 7 it's why we only called - to get more value/take advantage of a bluff?
What about 5 and 6? Putting more chips in now is surely worse than my flop raise as there is more danger on the board?
*I am not saying you are wrong - in cash you would be right, in STT's I don't think it is as clear cut.
(was the "lol" necessary by the way - I haven't insulted anyone just expressed an opinion)
I am favouring the lower risk option of taking the pot when I think I am ahead (but not far) - tournament life is too important to me especially in a DYM.
as for the rr the flop - I don't like it. With blinds at 200 we still have a very good shoving stack of 1700. Re-raising and then folding leaves us at 1500 (assuming a min raise?!) and our table image is pretty much in tatters which isn't good as we're getting to the shoving stage of a dym. The flat on the flop more often than not will get the villain to give up on turn if they have nothing.
I'm playing the hand exactly as you did Peter.
If we bet turn after a flop raise and then find a fold we have 700 chips left. And thats finding a fold to a pot of 2100. Not exactly ideal in a dym.
We have J3 in bb.
SB limps into our BB.
Flop is 55J rainbow.
He bets 200.
Options:
We raise to 500- we take down the pot if he has nothing. Even 22-1010 fold (not 55). +400 for hand
We raise to 500 - We get called by all 5s and all Jacks that are beating us. We check turn. He bets river and we fold. -700 for the hand
We raise to 500 - Same again but we feel obliged to call/bet on later streets and we go out of the DYM. Stacked
We raise to 500 - he shoves and we find a fold -700
We raise to 500 - he shoves and we call - stacked.
We flat - He gives up on turn. +400 for the hand
We flat - He barrels the turn 400. If we have reads he can bluff two streets we can call again. He gives up river. +800 for the hand.
We flat - He barrels the turn 400. We call but he doesnt give up river. We fold -800 for the hand.
We flat - He barrels 3 streets with air. +1600 for the hand.
We flat - Call down 3 streets but he has it - 1600/stacked.
We flat - He barrels the turn 400 (or in this case shoves). Nope... he probably has it. -400 for the hand.
We flat - He hits overcard on turn and bets again. We see overcard and fold -400 for the hand.
We flat - Overcard comes and it gets checked down - either +400 or -400.
Of course all of this is assuming 1/2 pot bets but you get the gist.
Raising folds out all the hands we are beating and we are donating chips to a better hand. J3 isnt exactly the nuts. You say its vunerable... precisely - we could easily be outkicked for one. Its not just over cards on the turn we need to worry about. We need to worry if we are beat now.
IMO if we raise on a flop this dry its poker suicide... you are turning your hand into a bluff as you are only getting called by better. You have showdown value. Try to get to the river as cheap as possible. If it gets too expensive and op looks like he has it then we can get away cheap. This is particularly important in a DYM imo.
You say its a lower risk option to raise the flop. Youve committed much more of your stack. Youl feel obliged to bet the turn and if you are beat... your game is over. The lower risk option is to always call on such a dry board. Being scared of an overcard coming shouldnt really factor into our thought process at this time.
Ahhhh i just read this too. Youve said it. We dont know we are ahead... why are we shovelling money in?
"I can't believe I'm agreeing with Gazza again. lol"
...and indeed, who would ever agree with Gazza?
Anyway, raising the flop is not the low risk option. We need to be forgetting about this idea of "the gamble" in the game and focus on just making the most +EV decisions. That's all that matters.
We can say "I'm going to call this shove with 30% equity because I fancy a gamble to double up." but if we don't have 30% pot odds, then it's just a -EV, losing play. If we have better than 30% pot odds, it's a +EV decision and a winning play.
There is no gamble, only long-term expected value.
In actual fact raising here is worse in a tournament than a cash game. The value of one our chips is the same as the value of any other chip in a cash game: 10p = 10p, regardless of where it is on the table and we can just top up if we lose a hand. In tournament play, the value of our chips will always be greater than the value of other chips, though, since we can't top-up if we lose them. That's Independent Chip Modelling (ICM).
That means that a play that may be marginally +cEV (Expected Chip Value) in a tournament, may well be a very -EV play in real terms. In a DYM or satellite, this effect can be dramatically exaggerated.
So if we raise the flop to 600 here to take down the pot:
We raise to 600 and villain folds: +600
We raise to 600 and villain calls or shoves. We give up here or on later streets: -600
If we just leave it there, we see that the cEV is neutral but we know that the chips we lose are more valuable than the chips we win. So the overall play is -EV.
Of course, in reality things aren't that simple because we also have the options to call or fold to the flop bet.
Do we think that villain continues an airball bluff on the turn? We don't know but we do know that he didn't raise pre-flop and that usually indicates a player that isn't particularly aggressive. He may be taking a stab on the flop but we have to think he's unlikely to continue having been called on such a dry board. So if he bets the turn we should be concerned that we're beat.
If we're making those assumptions, which would be reasonable, we actually shouldn't worry about the turn being an overcard to our Jack. Any of those cards actually improve our hand to JJ55A, JJ55K, etc. and pull us level with some better Jacks. If villain keeps betting, we think the best situation is that we're chopping against another Jack. If the turn is not a high card and the villain keeps betting, we think we're behind and can fold.
That means that all the profit of the raise on the flop is also contained in the call.
So the true cEV of the raise on the flop is relative to the call:
Raise the flop and villain folds: Neutral
Raise the flop and villain calls or shoves: -400
So raising the flop is -cEV.
The only problem is if we think that the villain can be betting the flop, then continuing on the turn with a bluff. Ultimately, we just have to go with our read on that and most of the time we're going to say we're not beating enough of his range, even if there can be bluffs in there, to call the turn. Again, ICM would exaggerate this.
By the way, there are some really good arguments for just folding to the initial flop bet. If we think villain is raising all PP's lower than the J pre-flop, then why is he taking off on this flop? We have to give him credit for coming out betting having missed 25% of the time just to make this a break even call in cEV terms. If he's the type to lead the flop when he's missed, he's probably going to have raised pre-flop.
So we only beat air on the flop and we need him to be bluffing considerably more than a quarter of the time to make this a good ICM call.
(I know you know some of the things I'm explaining but others viewing the thread might not. Don't think I'm treating you like a dunce)
You just made it sound a lot more clever than me.
Raise flop = bad would have sufficed.
Although on a side note i think that villain is bluffing on this board more often than not so I think we have to call the flop bet. Its such a dry board and any villain who was struggling for chips would realise that you're missing this flop the vast majority of the time too. Although yes. After you call you are most likely behind when they fire again.
An interesting point would be that, in a cash game, I would consider it to be an easy raise pre-flop, readless.
I'm not going to go to great lengths on this, but what do people think the effects of ICM are on the EV of the raise in the Big Blind with ATC, versus a Small Blind limp? Clearly, marginal +cEV spots are made -EV spots by ICM, but do we think this spot is marginal enough to be -EV due to ICM?
...Well, some of the time, at least. lol
Anyway, it is a matter of what we think of the villain whether we think he's bluffing enough to make the call on the flop. I was just suggesting that it's something we need to consider. I agree there's a good chance that it's a bluff but I just wonder if it's enough to be a good call in the long run. I can't work out the exact numbers on it, because I hardly use ICM in practice and can't remember how to do these things.
I just know we need him to be bluffing quite a bit more than 25% of the time and, if we think he continues on the turn a lot of the time, we can definitely find the fold on the flop to avoid that situation.
Very player dependent, of course.
erm.
yes*
*may be a complete guess, as i dont really understand anything you just said.
Thanks also to Borin for the read on the lol - makes more sense
on reflection flop raise is bad - I wouldn't be putting 600 in though I was thinking min here. Plus any further resistence and I am shutting down completely. bet + call to reraise is stronger that x2 lead outs.
I guess the "player dependency" factor is also highly relevant and we should have some sort of feel for villain from any previous Blind v Blind hands.
The shove is almost certainly not a bluff
The flop bet could be anything - blind v blind.
With a limp+lead out, Villain could have low connectors or A5 and hit trips, could be on AA,KK, and didn't want to just nick the blinds but play a hand for value which would depend on hero's actions to previous SB raises. Equally could be betting a dry board to take pot down.
Calling does put us in an uncomfortable position if the villain bets out again - what if they make it 300/400. If we call there on a brick card isn't that worse than a reraise to flop?
That's what I was trying to say really - I don't want to give villain chance to bluff me off pot if they are bluffing - and that depends on whether we think they are capable of double-barrelling or will tighten up with some resistence. So the raise was not just to avoid scare card it was to avoid being bluffed off the pot.
If we are in a situation when we think every bet means they have something then folding to flop bet is possible.
Depending on my feel for the table and the villain I could justify a fold, call and even a reraise. Cold cards and maths/gaming theory seem to rule out the latter so thank you.
These blind v blind marginal hands are tricky - at least give me that?
Cheers
You're suggestion sounds an awful lot like raising to 'find out where we are' which is just bad.
Generally we should either be raising for value because we'll get called by worse (we are never getting called by worse)
OR
Raising as a bluff and so trying to make hands better than ours fold (we are never gonna make better hands fold).
The only other reason really is to protect our equity but as I said, because there's no draws on the flop, there just isn't a single hand that has even close to a half decent chance of catching up if we're ahead.
But yeah these BvB limped spots can be really awkward.
To those who said I shouldn't have gone into the hand with J3 off-suit, I was the BB so just checked when SB called :-)
1. It certainly wasn't meant to be that - one of my pet hates is the term "raising for information" challenged Gazza on that point myself in another thread recently
2. Meant to be this in my thinking - vs outdraw or bluff and bluffs can come on turn with or without overcard so I am not just worrying about a 12% chance. 25% chance of an overcard + whatever chance of villain bluffing flop and turn. I have conceded defeat on the overall good/bad decision though so no need to continue.
Poker thinking can definitely be affected by mood and my decisions probably are not great at the moment because I am thinking too negatively. Hence losing value by not wanting to be outdrawn.
Apologies to Peter didn't mean to hijack your thread hope you learned as much as I have.
On reflection I should have asked the question instead of making the statement. Something like "would a raise be justified to block overcard draws or another bluff on turn". Answer still no - I just might not have felt so berated!
gl on the tables - may be on later this evening.
Theres a difference between raising to isolate limpers and define villains range preflop, and raising for information on a dry flop.
I still don't like "define villains range". You either call and set mine or raise to isolate/take initiative if a limper calls you. You are either slightly ahead or massively behind to a limp caller so you don't have much more info. You have bought yourself the opportunity to take a huge pot if you hit trips or to c-bet and take a pot down if you both miss flop or villain sees overcards to their middle pair/connectors.
In this hand I never attempted to justify the raise to "find out where I am" it's just not in my vocabulary or line of thought - ever. Have seen a few analysts rant about the phrase and it always sticks in my mind not to use "finding out where I am" as en excuse to put more chips in pot.
In all truth I would have played this hand exactly the way Peter did.
The raise suggestion should have been asked as a question. When reviewing a hand one key question I always ask myself is should I have raised / reraised anywhere in the hand for a better outcome long term.
Like most people learning the game I don't raise/reraise enough.