Hand from yesterday's home game #1

LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 642 ✭✭✭
€1-€1 homegame
5% rake, €10 cap
5-handed

Preflop
HJ (€200) raises to €4
CO (€150) calls
BU/Hero (€150) calls :Kh:Th
SB (€200) folds
BB (€100) calls

Flop (€17 - 4 players)
:Ts:8d:6c:
Checks to hero
Hero bets €15
Folds to CO who calls

Turn (€47 - heads-up)
:4h:
CO checks
Hero bets €26
CO calls

River (€99 - heads-up)
:6s:
CO checks
Hero bets €40

---

Main villain (CO) is a bad reg. He is very loose pre, calling raises with anything suited or somewhat connected. Postflop I have seen him make questionnable raises with single pairs (as a bluff??) and doesn't really like folding. Is aware of some concepts like pot odds, equity, sizing in relation to the pot, and I think I've heard him say something about blockers.

My main question here is about sizing. I think I missed value on turn and river. If he has the hand that I'm targeting (Tx, pair with straight draw) on the turn I think he could also call €30.
On the river I'm really targeting Tx where in retrospect I think he also pays €50 or even more.

On the riv I'm discounting straights as I expect him to raise those hands, as well as T8, T6s, 86, T4s, 84s, 64s. If he has a 6 it's probably only 76 and maybe 96s.

Comments

  • Wiki_LeaksWiki_Leaks Red Chipper Posts: 564 ✭✭✭
    Thank you for the clear formatting of the hand, well done.

    My main question concerns your preflop play. Please describe your thought process for electing to overcall vs a co open and a loose co cold call.

    You also state that co is the main villain in this hand. Please explain why the hj, who was the open raiser, was disregarded in your analysis?
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 2,396 ✭✭✭✭
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    My main question here is about sizing. I think I missed value on turn and river.
    This point to the question: why did you bet pot on flop against 3 players but sized down to half-ish pot on turn HU and even smaller on river ?
    Why not pot-pot-pot ? Or pot-2/3-2/3 ?
  • The_Juic3The_Juic3 Red Chipper Posts: 30 ✭✭
    Yeah the sizing I find a little questionable myself. I also like the idea of raising this hand pre from the button as opposed to an over call, but you may have decided against this perhaps because the initial raiser was the HJ (no background info given on his range or player type). However, as played I feel like a larger sizing on turn and river would be desirable in terms of targetting.
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 642 ✭✭✭
    Red wrote: »
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    My main question here is about sizing. I think I missed value on turn and river.
    This point to the question: why did you bet pot on flop against 3 players but sized down to half-ish pot on turn HU and even smaller on river ?
    Why not pot-pot-pot ? Or pot-2/3-2/3 ?

    Very glad you say that because that's exactly what I think went wrong. I tend to nit up a bit in these spots and don't wanna risk too much. Thanks!
    The_Juic3 wrote: »
    Yeah the sizing I find a little questionable myself. I also like the idea of raising this hand pre from the button as opposed to an over call, but you may have decided against this perhaps because the initial raiser was the HJ (no background info given on his range or player type). However, as played I feel like a larger sizing on turn and river would be desirable in terms of targetting.

    Thanks, agreed.
    Wiki_Leaks wrote: »
    Thank you for the clear formatting of the hand, well done.

    My main question concerns your preflop play. Please describe your thought process for electing to overcall vs a co open and a loose co cold call.

    You also state that co is the main villain in this hand. Please explain why the hj, who was the open raiser, was disregarded in your analysis?

    Hmm preflop, hadn't thought I would get comments on that but great.
    OK so HJ, who I left out of the analysis as you point out, is one of the better players at the table. One thing I have noticed though is that he tends to open smaller with weaker hands and open larger with stronger hands. Like if he had AA I think he would have gone €7 or higher. Given that, I think my hand is too strong to 3-bet bluff but it's not strong enough for value either. That was about it in terms of my thought process for calling. Does that make sense?
  • Wiki_LeaksWiki_Leaks Red Chipper Posts: 564 ✭✭✭
    Before I explain why I believe this is a slam dunk 3 bet squeeze spot, lets define the scenario.

    1. We are 5 handed and 150bb deep.
    2. We have the button.
    3. A better player opened the pot from the HJ. While this is a bit arbitrary, lets assume that when facing a 3bet squeeze OOP he will play relatively straightforward. He will 4bet with the top of his range, fold the bottom, and call the middle.
    4. lets also assume that HJ is positionally aware and understands in a 5 handed game his opening range should be relatively wide, especially if he is one of the better players at the table.
    5. the CO is a fun player, who likely calls 3bets OOP far too often.
    6. There was no information provided about the players in the blinds, but lets assume if we decide to overcall on the button, the blinds will defend a combined 50% of the time given the attractive price.

    If we 3bet, lets go back through the scenario outlined above if one or more opponents call:
    1. We have plenty of stack depth (150bb) to bet multiple streets with an uncapped range.
    2. we will play a bigger pot in position with an uncapped range.
    3-4. You stated HJ raises bigger with stronger hands. Even if we ignore this read in the analysis, HJ will have a relatively high fold frequency.
    5. If HJ folds, CO will continue with many inferior holdings vs our 3bet range. This means we have both top end range advantage and equity advantage on virtually all flops.
    6. If HJ folds, this is the dream scenario! We want to play against bad players, especially heads up, and ESPECIALLY IP. This is going to be the bread and butter of our win rate.
    7. If we 3 bet, we will almost always force the blinds to fold, which reduces our likelihood of sharing equity between more opponents (this could be a negative if the blinds are massive fish.)
    8. The field on average is terrible at playing 3bet pots, especially OOP.

    that about the cons of 3 betting?
    1. we might get 4 bet!
    2. He will still call with some hands that dominate us.

    These points are undeniably true. However, the field does not 4 bet nearly often enough in low stakes games. This means we get to realize a TOOON of equity. Think about this simple example. CO opens QQ, we 3 bet on the button, and CO calls. We are absolutely PRINTING EV here! When CO just calls, we realize an unfair share of equity. Sometimes we will be crushed, but this is quite infrequent. In the overall game tree, the small amount of EV we gain over and over again when CO declines to appropriately push his equity share outweighs the times he sets us up.

    If we flat call the button:
    5. We are now burdened with the task of connecting with the flop in some manner.
    6. our range is capped
    7. we are sharing equity between multiple players
    8. we are allowing opponents to realize equity cheaply
    9. we will sometimes be dominated by hands players will either open or cold call an open with, but will either fold to a 3 bet (KQo, KJo) or 4 bet (AK)
    10. we forfeit our fold equity and a chance to capture dead money.
    11. we lose our chance to play heads up vs the bad player.


    Now, consider one of the points you made in your last post:

    "I think my hand is too strong to 3-bet bluff but it's not strong enough for value either. That was about it in terms of my thought process for calling. Does that make sense?"

    1. When studying and playing poker, we must think about our RANGE, not our hand.
    2. Your idea of "my hands is too strong to 3bet bluff/too weak to 3 bet for value" is too black and white. Our main concern is the equity of our range vs our opponents calling range. lets examine what our equity looks like when a. we 3bet and HJ and co call, and b. when we flat.

    a.
    0mame2i7d7w1.png

    notice we have 35% equity when both players call. Obviously our equity share will be higher if we are heads up vs either opponent.

    b.
    1q6w8ulylh7v.png
    notice we now have about 28% equity.

    Since I do not know your preflop strategy, I can only perform a hand v range example with hot and cold equity. However it is still important to understand how equities of a flat call range fare vs an open range, and how a 3 bet range fares vs a bet/call range.
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 642 ✭✭✭
    edited November 2018
    dude... <3

    Gonna need more time to digest everything and comment on it, but this is incredibly valuable to me. Thanks for taking the time, I will definitely read through it a couple times this week and get back to you.

    This forum rules.
  • Jordan PowerJordan Power Red Chipper Posts: 530 ✭✭✭
    I thought the same thing, @Phil Ebbs I was that OP. This reinforced what I gained from that discussion.
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 642 ✭✭✭
    Wiki_Leaks wrote: »
    6. There was no information provided about the players in the blinds, but lets assume if we decide to overcall on the button, the blinds will defend a combined 50% of the time given the attractive price.

    How'd you get to 50%?
    Wiki_Leaks wrote: »
    Think about this simple example. CO opens QQ, we 3 bet on the button, and CO calls. We are absolutely PRINTING EV here! When CO just calls, we realize an unfair share of equity.

    I don't really understand this idea of "unfair share of equity". Is it because QQ is ahead of KT but KT has a lot of equity against it still?
    Wiki_Leaks wrote: »
    "I think my hand is too strong to 3-bet bluff but it's not strong enough for value either. That was about it in terms of my thought process for calling. Does that make sense?"

    1. When studying and playing poker, we must think about our RANGE, not our hand.
    2. Your idea of "my hands is too strong to 3bet bluff/too weak to 3 bet for value" is too black and white. Our main concern is the equity of our range vs our opponents calling range. lets examine what our equity looks like when a. we 3bet and HJ and co call, and b. when we flat.

    You're losing me here. Am I not actually thinking about my range when I categorized it as "too good to bluff 3bet" and "too bad to value 3bet"? Now this might not be correct -- as you've pointed out, but it's not like I'm ignoring where I stand in my range.

    As for your second point, I don't understand this idea of our range's equity vs our opponents'. If we consider a 3-betting range of KK+ and get called by TT-QQ and AK we are of course far ahead equity-wise. But we can include :7D::2D:, which would be a -EV 3bet lets say, in our 3-betting range and still be ahead. The fact that our entire range has good equity doesn't justify having hands in there which on its own don't make a +EV 3bet in my mind. I'm not saying it's not a +EV 3bet (you've convinced me of that) but I'm not following the argument that because our range's equity is good we should 3bet KTs.
  • Wiki_LeaksWiki_Leaks Red Chipper Posts: 564 ✭✭✭
    Glad the post was helpful, and sorry for the delayed response.

    The 50% is an estimate based on the COMBINED defense between the sb and the bb. These numbers will be rough but will lead us to a reasonable estimate of how equity will be shared if we overcall the button
    1. If the sb folds, the bb is getting a great price and only needs about 16% equity here to call after rake. Since he wont realize all of this equity (i.e. will not always see turns or rivers), lets assume he needs 20% equity to continue. Thus, he will defend approximately 40% of his hands.
    2. the sb will 3 bet or call 10% of the time.

    Now there are obviously other situations like when sb flats and bb 3 bets, but lets keep the analysis simple. The takeaway here should be when we over call, we give the blinds an opportunity to realize equity cheaply, which dilutes our equity.

    You asked, I don't really understand this idea of "unfair share of equity". Is it because QQ is ahead of KT but KT has a lot of equity against it still?'

    You're almost there. The point here I am trying to make is the field generally will 4 bet too infrequently, as Phil pointed out. All hands have some amount of equity pre flop vs any range. When our opponent elects to call our 3 bet with hands he should 4bet, we get to see a flop with hands we would fold to his 4 bet. When our opponent chooses to decline opportunities to properly 4bet, we accrue small amounts of EV through seeing a flop (or even turns/rivers!)

    " but I'm not following the argument that because our range's equity is good we should 3bet KTs."

    This is not exactly what I'm saying here.

    If we have constructed our 3 bet range properly, we will have an equity and nut advantage on most boards. This is because we 3 bet all of our strongest hands, and our opponent will 4 bet all of his strongest hands. Thus, when our opponent just calls our 3 bet, our range will have an equity advantage.

    "If we consider a 3-betting range of KK+ and get called by TT-QQ and AK we are of course far ahead equity-wise. But we can include :7D::2D:, which would be a -EV 3bet lets say, in our 3-betting range and still be ahead"

    We still need to intelligently select hands in our 3bet range to balance the nuts. How you choose to construct this range is up to you, but I prefer a linear 3betting range in this situation. A linear 3 betting range has many advantages (ill name a few here but consider pondering other pros and cons) :

    it gives us good board coverage and hands with at least good equity, which will allows us to simplify our flop strategies dramatically

    it contains hands which have good blocker properties and good play ability post flop.

    a linear range gives us the ability to bet multiple streets.

    it excludes trash hands which are difficult to play. these hands complicate our decision making and needlessly weaken our range

  • LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 642 ✭✭✭
    Incredible, thank you so much for taking the time to go through this. Literally every sentence you wrote are eye-openers.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file