AA facing flop check/shove - 1/2 Live

CubanBCubanB Red Chipper Posts: 104 ✭✭
edited January 2017 in Live Poker Hands
1/2 Live at Parx
Effective stacks are about $180

Villain is in his early 50's or so, playing extremely loose. Limp/calls a great deal preflop and is entirely too loose, but does occasionally raise preflop and stab at pots postflop more often than most other players at this table. I've seen Villain 3bet a small PP preflop, I've seen him not raise KK preflop from the BB in a multiway pot, and I've seen him overbet the flop by shoving with a flopped straight on a 468 board.

I get :Ac:Ah in the Hijack. Two limpers from EP/MP, and I raise to $17. BTN calls; Villain in BB calls. Pot is approximately $50 going to the flop.

I think Villain will defend here with any Ace, any two broadway, any PP, any suited connector, any suited one gapper, and any suited king. BTN's calling range is even wider than this and I think I have a clear Cbet for value on this board vs. her/Villain combined.

Flop is :Ks:Td:2d

I Cbet $35 thinking I can get value from Kings, T's, and any SDs. BTN folds. Villain puts me all in, so I need to put in about $145 into a pot of $230. I agonize for like 2 minutes and make the crying call. He turns over T2s for bottom two pair; No help on turn and river, and my afternoon is done.

In general, I think my call was completely terrible and I could not stop thinking about how stupid this play was on the drive home. I am still kicking myself.

First, I completely forgot about Villain's overshove on the flop with the straight in the earlier hand. The only other time I'd seen him make this move was with the nuts, so that's red flag #1. Red flag #2 is that what's Ed Miller's first rule of small stakes live no limit? Don't pay people off. People don't. This is a clear situation where AA just isn't good enough. Should have folded. AA preflop doesn't mean you're entitled to win the pot. I didn't acknowledge that reality.

I'm not even sure why I am posting this since I know this is a freaking embarrassment. But, maybe doing so will hold me accountable in the future. If I know I'm going to have to share these ridiculous plays with my peers, maybe subconsciously I'll play better because I'll want to avoid the shame.
Tagged:

Comments

  • MailmanMailman Red Chipper Posts: 44 ✭✭
    I think you played it fine, don't beat yourself up over it.
  • BustDaNutsBustDaNuts Red Chipper Posts: 38 ✭✭
    Well, first of all I get the idea that you're very result-orientated. Yes, sometimes you lose a pot, but how would you do in the same situation on a longer time frame? Is his range only consisting out of hands that beat you?

    Second, if you think that these pre-flop calling ranges are so loose, why not raise bigger pre-flop? Are you expecting that these calling ranges suddenly would be way tighter? If not, I would even raise bigger pre-flop and let them pay for drawing out on you. There is no rule when it comes to raise sizes, it just depends on your estimation of their calling ranges.
    This is a clear situation where AA just isn't good enough.

    I'm not so sure. You say that the only time you saw villain overshove the flop was with the nuts, on the other hand you mentioned that he took a stab at the pot multiple times. How did he do this? Also overshoving or betting a % of the pot? If he only shoves with the nuts you could make a crying fold, but when you suspect he would also do this with top pair hands, flush draws etc, the situation is is not so clear anymore.

    So the question is really: With which hands do you think villain could be shoving here? Answer that question and you can figure out if your call was correct or not.

    With regards to "Don't pay people off": If I remember correctly Ed Miller mentioned that you should'nt pay off when it is OBVIOUS that you are beat. So first I would answer this question for yourself: Is it obvious that you are beat?
  • CubanBCubanB Red Chipper Posts: 104 ✭✭
    THanks for the replies, @Mailman and @BustDaNuts.
    BustDaNuts wrote: »
    Well, first of all I get the idea that you're very result-orientated. Yes, sometimes you lose a pot, but how would you do in the same situation on a longer time frame? Is his range only consisting out of hands that beat you?

    Ha. I try not to be results-oriented! But I was definitely very bummed that my first live session wasn't a successful one and that may have come through in my posts. But on this AA hand, I really do think that his overbet shove range is only hands that beat me. Never anything I'm ahead of.
    BustDaNuts wrote: »
    Second, if you think that these pre-flop calling ranges are so loose, why not raise bigger pre-flop? Are you expecting that these calling ranges suddenly would be way tighter? If not, I would even raise bigger pre-flop and let them pay for drawing out on you. There is no rule when it comes to raise sizes, it just depends on your estimation of their calling ranges.

    I felt that $17 would be enough to get it to one or two people heads up. I'd bombed to $20 preflop previously after several limpers and got no callers; $15 got a couple; I was still trying to find the sweet spot for this particular game, and I'm comfortable with a $17 raise as played, but going higher might certainly not be bad.
    This is a clear situation where AA just isn't good enough.

    I'm not so sure. You say that the only time you saw villain overshove the flop was with the nuts, on the other hand you mentioned that he took a stab at the pot multiple times. How did he do this? Also overshoving or betting a % of the pot? If he only shoves with the nuts you could make a crying fold, but when you suspect he would also do this with top pair hands, flush draws etc, the situation is is not so clear anymore.

    And therein lies the rub. The stabs I've seen him take at pots have mostly been half to 2/3 pot sized bets on the flop while in position in a multiway pot after nobody showed any interest on the flop. The only hand he really let rip before was the overbet shove with the flopped straight. I don't see him doing this with anything less than two pair.
    With regards to "Don't pay people off": If I remember correctly Ed Miller mentioned that you should'nt pay off when it is OBVIOUS that you are beat. So first I would answer this question for yourself: Is it obvious that you are beat?

    Unfortunately, I still think yes, it was obvious I was beat. I am still not happy with the call, because I just don't see this particular player doing this with anything less than two pair.

    Live and learn...

    Thank you again for the input!

  • kageykagey Red Chipper, KINGOFTAGS Posts: 2,241 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hey @CubanB

    This hand's been bugging me - so I'm gonna take a shot at looking at it from a math perspective:

    To do so, we should look at, what I'm going to call, "likelihoods"

    So lemme digress...
    First, if V is going to show up with T2s - then there's a likelihood that he's calling us uber wide. And he's playing a game of "Bingo"... trying to hit flops perfectly.
    So to know if our shove-call is good, we've got to take that into consideration.

    Next, if he's check/shoving 2-pair of better - there's a likelihood that he's shoving with all monster equity hands.... meaning all :KD::XD: hand, :QD::JD: and possibly all :AD::XD: hands. Right?

    Math...
    if he's got :KD::XD: or :QD::JD: ... he's like 50/50 against our Aces
    if he's got :AD::XD: ... he's like 40/60 against our Aces
    if he's got 2-pair.... he's like 73/27 against our aces
    if he's got a set... we're toast

    So let's go to the dinosaur and see what he says:
    9qc1usen64z3.jpg


    doesn't look good, does it?

    back to the math:
    we start with 180, we raise 17 and get two callers
    pot is 51... we've got 163 left
    for those of you following at home - that give us a SPR of 3-ish

    we bet 35 on flop (a good and reasonable bet)
    BB shoves... he's got us covered

    after we bet, we've got 128 left
    pot is now: 51 + 70 + 128 = 249
    so we're getting nearly 2:1 on our money
    so to make this a "correct" call - we've got to have at least 33% equity
    (meaning even IF we're behind, we can still catch up)

    Now Zilla give us 48% equity against V's range.
    So it's an insta-call!

    But wait!
    What if I ranged him too wide...
    what if he never shoves with hands like :AD::9D: - :AD::3D: ...
    well if you ask zilla (or PokerCruncher)....
    keeping AKs, AQs, AJs & QJs... which all have monster equity
    AND keeping all the 2-pair hands
    AND keeping all the sets (except KK) in his range

    We land at us having 35% vs V's 65%
    It's still a call

    (if we take out AQs & AJs.... still 33/66 equity)

    Now what you're trying to do is range V with 2-pair+ hands ONLY
    And like others, I think it's a mistake
    It doesn't take long to place you in the OMC catagory if you fold to all shoves without the nuts. It would make me become uber-aggressive on all my draws when you're in the hand.

    So what did we learn here?
    1.) we played the hand fine. we made the right mathematical decision. we landed on the ugly side of variance.
    2.) we're too short stacked to "play poker". Once we start the ball rolling, it's nearly impossible to stop. And probably is 100% wrong to do so. We would have to know with certainty what V had to put on brakes hard.
    3.) math is our friend. But he's not a psychic. While he knows possible outcomes, he has no knowledge of what IS going to happen.

    As much as you study here, as much time you put away from the table, as much time as you play... this is a great example of a perfect storm.
    the board is somewhat range "neutral"
    you still have range advantage: you're most likely to have the best hand
    you're betting because a LOT of worse hands can call you
    you've put in nearly ⅓ of your stack by the time V shoves
    shit happens.

    if you never lose - then you're going to be like poor Doug Polk who's got nobody to play with because he's just too good... and then you'll be resigned to making long-winded videos where you talk about how great you are... under the guise of "coaching" small stakes players.

    be happy you lost.
    it wasn't much.
    you've now got some great info about V - so the next time you play, you'll be able to adjust your strategy to exploit him better.

    hope this helps...
  • BustDaNutsBustDaNuts Red Chipper Posts: 38 ✭✭
    I felt that $17 would be enough to get it to one or two people heads up. I'd bombed to $20 preflop previously after several limpers and got no callers; $15 got a couple

    Then I actually think you got the correct bet size. :-) You know exactly WHY you didn't used a smaller or bigger bet size.
    I don't see him doing this with anything less than two pair.
    Unfortunately, I still think yes, it was obvious I was beat. I am still not happy with the call, because I just don't see this particular player doing this with anything less than two pair.

    If that's your read then folding would absolutely be the best option.

    It's sad that your first session wasn't a succes, but with your reasoning I can't imagine that your next sessions will be way better. I wouldn't doubt yourself and just go on like this.

    GL next time!
  • YoshYosh Red Chipper Posts: 580 ✭✭✭
    @kagey I think you're being too assumptive about a trait that may or may not exist in the villain. Shoving all those draws seems counter to how this opponent was described. This is a good example of a spot that may have been very -EV but is taken and chalked up to variance or justified in an attempt to avoid phantom exploitation. When you internalize the price being offered and your gut tells you that you are beat then the correct decision is to fold.
  • kageykagey Red Chipper, KINGOFTAGS Posts: 2,241 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Yosh wrote: »
    @kagey I think you're being too assumptive about a trait that may or may not exist in the villain. Shoving all those draws seems counter to how this opponent was described. This is a good example of a spot that may have been very -EV but is taken and chalked up to variance or justified in an attempt to avoid phantom exploitation. When you internalize the price being offered and your gut tells you that you are beat then the correct decision is to fold.

    @Yosh - you may be correct.

    I thought I was being conservative by not including all AKos, KQos, KTos, QJs and all FDs that are QXdd, JXdd, etc. But maybe, just maybe, this is a V that ONLY check/shoves or shoves with 2-pair+. If so, then this is an exploitative fold.
  • PondyPondy Red Chipper Posts: 150 ✭✭
    This is one of those spots I tend to think too much about as well, but it is not worth it. Against most opponents, this is a call. If you have reads that make you believe that he would only do this with 2pair+, then it's obviously a fold. You will never be 100% right with these - and it doesn't matter. I have had the opposite example where I folded KK to an old man's flop shove on a draw-heavy board just a few days after I had called a shove with AA when villain had trips. I still don't know if I folded the best hand or not when I had KK. Truth is the EV of calling and folding are close together than you think.

    If you can't do any sophisticated math at the table (like kagey showed), then just think about pot odds. You have to be good here 40%, so try to think what the percentage could be that he does this with something else than a made nuttish hand.

    And the most IMPORTANT bit: Don't forget that you have equity yourself, no matter what he has. In your example, you have 27% equity. So even if he had turned his hand face up, you would still only have made a fairly small mistake to call (you needed 40% and you only had 27%. In $, your mistake cost you 13% of $145, which is $18.85 ). And if he has a set, then you still have around 8% equity.
  • CubanBCubanB Red Chipper Posts: 104 ✭✭
    kagey wrote: »
    I thought I was being conservative by not including all AKos, KQos, KTos, QJs and all FDs that are QXdd, JXdd, etc. But maybe, just maybe, this is a V that ONLY check/shoves or shoves with 2-pair+. If so, then this is an exploitative fold.

    @kagey, thanks a ton for the thoughtful analysis you performed on this hand. That's great work and I hope that one day soon I can break down individual hands so comprehensively and effectively.

    My only comment would be that I don't think he'd shove the draws. Maybe pairs+flush draws, but my sense is that this guy wouldn't make this move without a "made" hand. And thinking through it today, again, I really think that T2s is the bottom of his range here, so I still think it is a bad call.

    Thank you for looking through this in such detail, though!

  • kageykagey Red Chipper, KINGOFTAGS Posts: 2,241 ✭✭✭✭✭
    CubanB wrote: »
    @kagey, thanks a ton for the thoughtful analysis you performed on this hand. That's great work and I hope that one day soon I can break down individual hands so comprehensively and effectively.

    My only comment would be that I don't think he'd shove the draws. Maybe pairs+flush draws, but my sense is that this guy wouldn't make this move without a "made" hand. And thinking through it today, again, I really think that T2s is the bottom of his range here, so I still think it is a bad call.

    Thank you for looking through this in such detail, though!
    Cuban - we fight the same battles.
    we face the same enemies.
    and sometimes, the toughest enemy we battle is ourselves.

    it's often pointless to review such hands that should basically have inevitable outcome
    unless it wounds our sense of confidence

    V got lucky.
    or Hero got unlucky.

    tap the table
    tell V "nice hand"
    and prepare yourself for the next round

    you were given a gift
    it only cost you $128
    but when you analyize it, relive it and internalize it
    it will pay you thou$ands in dividend.

    if it's any consolation:
    you're not the first (check out hands tagged as "Overpairs")
    greater poker players than you have been stacked
    and it will happen again.

  • bigburge10bigburge10 Red Chipper Posts: 1,311 ✭✭✭✭
    Good analysis @kagey !

    I think we should be sleeping okay by making this call. Once we CB the flop with our stack size, we just aren't folding. I know it's difficult to predict the shove, but you should be thinking ahead to what you're going to do if you get shoved on--especially since you're playing fairly shallow, and the likelihood of being shoved on is certainly a possibility. The only option Villain has is to min raise to $70, leaving him with $95 to bet into the $190 pot on the turn--at least if he's going to leave enough chips to make a meaningful turn bet. So, really, if he's going to play, he's either calling or shoving. And shoving sounds a heck of a lot better--especially if you're considering laying down AA!

    @BustDaNuts makes a great point regarding your raise sizing--$20 may have been the sweetspot. Plus, to any player, what's the difference between $17 and $20? It's doubtful that the $3 is going to make a significant impact on the hands that players are willing to call with, not to mention $20 would speed up the game--less change to be made, etc. I'd expect Villain to still end up calling with T2. So, against a player that is calling too much, let's charge him more to play. Also, if you keep raising to an amount like 20-25, sooner or later players will start to see that as the standard, and just play along with it.

  • porterporter Red Chipper Posts: 313 ✭✭✭
    CubanB wrote: »
    1/2 Live at Parx
    Effective stacks are about $180

    Villain is in his early 50's or so, playing extremely loose. Limp/calls a great deal preflop and is entirely too loose, but does occasionally raise preflop and stab at pots postflop more often than most other players at this table. I've seen Villain 3bet a small PP preflop, I've seen him not raise KK preflop from the BB in a multiway pot, and I've seen him overbet the flop by shoving with a flopped straight on a 468 board.

    I get :Ac:Ah in the Hijack. Two limpers from EP/MP, and I raise to $17. BTN calls; Villain in BB calls. Pot is approximately $50 going to the flop.

    I think Villain will defend here with any Ace, any two broadway, any PP, any suited connector, any suited one gapper, and any suited king. BTN's calling range is even wider than this and I think I have a clear Cbet for value on this board vs. her/Villain combined.

    Flop is :Ks:Td:2d

    I Cbet $35 thinking I can get value from Kings, T's, and any SDs. BTN folds. Villain puts me all in, so I need to put in about $145 into a pot of $230. I agonize for like 2 minutes and make the crying call. He turns over T2s for bottom two pair; No help on turn and river, and my afternoon is done.

    In general, I think my call was completely terrible and I could not stop thinking about how stupid this play was on the drive home. I am still kicking myself.

    First, I completely forgot about Villain's overshove on the flop with the straight in the earlier hand. The only other time I'd seen him make this move was with the nuts, so that's red flag #1. Red flag #2 is that what's Ed Miller's first rule of small stakes live no limit? Don't pay people off. People don't. This is a clear situation where AA just isn't good enough. Should have folded. AA preflop doesn't mean you're entitled to win the pot. I didn't acknowledge that reality.

    I'm not even sure why I am posting this since I know this is a freaking embarrassment. But, maybe doing so will hold me accountable in the future. If I know I'm going to have to share these ridiculous plays with my peers, maybe subconsciously I'll play better because I'll want to avoid the shame.

    As others have mentioned at greater length than I will, you have to call and get it in on the flop at this stack depth. The problem, as I see it, lies in your logic and the inferences you are trying to make from your observations. They simply do not follow.

    You observed that he shoved with the nuts. Now you seem to infer that a shove means he has the nuts. But it does not follow. (It tells us that he doesn't like to slowplay but says nothing about the way he plays draws.) Have you seen him passively call down with a very good draw and then fail to bluff river and sheepishly say "I missed"? That would be telling and useful here.

    But nothing you mention about villain suggests that he never has a draw here. Even if he only shows up with sets, two pair, the best combo draws, and a few combos of AK, you have enough equity to call.
  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,942 ✭✭✭✭✭
    As pondy said, you made an $18 mistake, big deal.

    The hand really comes down to reads. In general this is a pretty easy call. You said you've "seen him" do certain things, but it's not really clear to us what that represents statistically. Only you have the read. The way you described it doesn't give us enough confidence to make the same decision you made. But maybe he really is as straightforward as you say.
  • Wiki_LeaksWiki_Leaks Red Chipper Posts: 564 ✭✭✭
    At live 1-2 you have to get used to this story: loose fishy villain calls off an absurd amount of his stack because the 1 caller "priced him in" and he smashes a rando 2p on you.

    The price of admission to play against bad players is that they make plays that dont have logical basing which will be rewarded from time to time at your expense. Pay your dues, take your licks, and run it up. Nice hand.
  • YoshYosh Red Chipper Posts: 580 ✭✭✭
    edited January 2017
    To the OP:

    The tone here is that you must call this and I think that only you can make that decision based on your judgement of his range for making this play and your equity against that range. Folding is certainly no crime against humanity. The crowd sourced margin of error is hovering around what appears to be a neutral EV call.

    Always trust your gut at the table. Always. Stay in sync. If you're wrong, learn from it. Improve your instincts by studying off table and never second guess them in-game.

Leave a Comment

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