stormswa
Legend
Silver Level
ok I can accept my fold on the turn isnt the best play and can concede my argument there.
but dont think check/fold if we dont make draw like was origionaly suggested is weak.
ok I can accept my fold on the turn isnt the best play and can concede my argument there.
but dont think check/fold if we dont make draw like was origionaly suggested is weak.
dbitel
Rock Star
Silver Level
storm,
I don't want a flame war or any bad vibes. I'm not trying to insult you or brag or anything like that. I'm here to help and offer my advice/views.
I know you said you understood everything I said, but you obviously didnt quite grasp everything. When people bluff. They don't just bet every single street. When they get called on the flop, they won't always bluff on the turn. When they bluff and get called on the flop and the turn, they won't always bluff on the river (this is what I was saying about 1/2/3 barrelling frequencies). So by c/f the river when we miss, we MAKE MONEY the time he gives up on his 2 barrel bluffs and just checks the river behind. Of cource there will be some times he 3barrel bluffs and we fold the best hand. But thats OK, b/c we still make money on the turn call from 1) when we hit the flush and 2) when hye gives up on his 2barrel bluffs.
So thats what I was trying to explain earlier
I don't want a flame war or any bad vibes. I'm not trying to insult you or brag or anything like that. I'm here to help and offer my advice/views.
I know you said you understood everything I said, but you obviously didnt quite grasp everything. When people bluff. They don't just bet every single street. When they get called on the flop, they won't always bluff on the turn. When they bluff and get called on the flop and the turn, they won't always bluff on the river (this is what I was saying about 1/2/3 barrelling frequencies). So by c/f the river when we miss, we MAKE MONEY the time he gives up on his 2 barrel bluffs and just checks the river behind. Of cource there will be some times he 3barrel bluffs and we fold the best hand. But thats OK, b/c we still make money on the turn call from 1) when we hit the flush and 2) when hye gives up on his 2barrel bluffs.
So thats what I was trying to explain earlier
stormswa
Legend
Silver Level
k
think we just got off on wrong foot, I do understand what you are saying im just kinda hardheaded sometimes. I agree my have to fold on turn was incorrect play so I concede.
lets start over.
think we just got off on wrong foot, I do understand what you are saying im just kinda hardheaded sometimes. I agree my have to fold on turn was incorrect play so I concede.
lets start over.
Dorkus Malorkus
HELLO INTERNET
Silver Level
Group hug? 
edit: missed this
i think they all got answered at some point by someone or other, heh.
edit: missed this
i think they all got answered at some point by someone or other, heh.
stormswa
Legend
Silver Level
Debi
Forum Admin
Administrator
Coming from a player who is not the greatest and has trouble following a lot of the strategy posts - I get the most out of ones like this where different views are debated - because points are driven home over and over and my hard head eventually gets it lol.
So don't stop the debates - but keep them good natured. Was nice to see this come around to that.
So don't stop the debates - but keep them good natured. Was nice to see this come around to that.
dbitel
Rock Star
Silver Level
Dorkus,
What does "taking the pot down now" actually mean? I mean, thinking about it logically, is this really a good reason for betting? If he has a better hand than us, sure....its a great reason to bet. if he has a worse hand than us (and we know this), is betting to take down the pot ever really the best move?
You said you think we most likely have the best hand, so the best is fro value. But these 2 points don't follow from each other. The bet can only be for value is a worse hand can call us. eg. lets say he has 55, we're obv ahead, but whats best, checking or betting? IMO, the best thing to do is check, b/c its much more likely he bets with that hand than he calls a bet. What if he has 78dd, quite clearly checking is best. So in pure terms of value, whats the only hand where betting MIGHT be better than checking? well I guess A6 or any other weaker ace. but is it really better than checking? If we bet flop, how many streets of value do you think we get from a weaker ace? if we check flop, how many streets of value (through him betting or us betting) do you think we get?
So the flop bet cant really be for value. And its certainly not for fold equity, as I cant see a better hand folding. And like you point out...its not like our hand needs protecting.
So ask yourself this: are you betting the flop because its what you've always done/read, because it makes the hand easy to play, or are you truely doing it because you think its the most +EV way of playing the hand?
(I think that if you are honest with yourself, you will realise its becaise of teh 1st two reasons, and not because you think its teh most +EV way of playing the hand)
What does "taking the pot down now" actually mean? I mean, thinking about it logically, is this really a good reason for betting? If he has a better hand than us, sure....its a great reason to bet. if he has a worse hand than us (and we know this), is betting to take down the pot ever really the best move?
You said you think we most likely have the best hand, so the best is fro value. But these 2 points don't follow from each other. The bet can only be for value is a worse hand can call us. eg. lets say he has 55, we're obv ahead, but whats best, checking or betting? IMO, the best thing to do is check, b/c its much more likely he bets with that hand than he calls a bet. What if he has 78dd, quite clearly checking is best. So in pure terms of value, whats the only hand where betting MIGHT be better than checking? well I guess A6 or any other weaker ace. but is it really better than checking? If we bet flop, how many streets of value do you think we get from a weaker ace? if we check flop, how many streets of value (through him betting or us betting) do you think we get?
So the flop bet cant really be for value. And its certainly not for fold equity, as I cant see a better hand folding. And like you point out...its not like our hand needs protecting.
So ask yourself this: are you betting the flop because its what you've always done/read, because it makes the hand easy to play, or are you truely doing it because you think its the most +EV way of playing the hand?
(I think that if you are honest with yourself, you will realise its becaise of teh 1st two reasons, and not because you think its teh most +EV way of playing the hand)
stormswa
Legend
Silver Level
I also like the debate but this post was a little too far because it had nothing to do with the hand, sorry about that post.
stormswa
Legend
Silver Level
how about this
how about betting to conceal the strength of our hand, this might be too advanced for the level but could we put out a bet designed to be called or better yet bluffed. Like bet 1/3 of the pot because we are out of position and then plan on check/calling turn and river.
once we check turn we should induce a bluff by worse hands like ace/rag?
if we honestly think we have best hand we should give him chance to bluff more, I think a small bet on flop could look like feeler bet.
of course check/calling river assumes no flush shows up and board is real safe, of course if flush hits we are going to lead out.
how about betting to conceal the strength of our hand, this might be too advanced for the level but could we put out a bet designed to be called or better yet bluffed. Like bet 1/3 of the pot because we are out of position and then plan on check/calling turn and river.
once we check turn we should induce a bluff by worse hands like ace/rag?
if we honestly think we have best hand we should give him chance to bluff more, I think a small bet on flop could look like feeler bet.
of course check/calling river assumes no flush shows up and board is real safe, of course if flush hits we are going to lead out.
Egon Towst
Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Egon Towst
Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Dorkus Malorkus
HELLO INTERNET
Silver Level
I think this is a somewhat short-sighted way of looking at the hand. There is somewhat of a correlation between making a +EV decision and making a hand 'easy to play'. Maybe not on the flop alone, but in terms of the development of the hand as a whole.
If we check-call, we are out of position (I really cannot state the importance of position enough in this hand), and we have handed our opponent the initiative. If we miss and check the turn and he checks behind, we have lost a 'street of value' as you refer to it as. If villain bets pot, what do we do? You're online, and have 45 seconds to decide. I don't know about you, but even in this example where villain bet 2/3 pot or so and the answer on reflection is relatively clear-cut, I still had to think about it for more than 45 seconds. If villain bets pot, I could forseeably spend 15 minutes thinking and still not know what the 'most +EV' decision is on the turn.
If you're the best player in the world and can calculate EV in examples like this in a few seconds, then I agree, you probably should check-call the flop. But the simple fact is neither you nor I are the best player in the world, and neither you nor I could come to a sound conclusion in such limited time, and given that we've check-called the flop, we're going to hate any reasonable action villain takes on the turn assuming we've missed our draw.
Leading the flop might not be the most +EV move if we treat the flop in absolute isolation, but with regard to the hand as a whole and especially the fact that if we continue we will have to act out of position with little information, and if we miss our draw we will be holding just top pair decent kicker, I think we absolutely have to lead the flop.
If you had AJo and the flop was the same but rainbow, would you still advocate check-calling?
If we check-call, we are out of position (I really cannot state the importance of position enough in this hand), and we have handed our opponent the initiative. If we miss and check the turn and he checks behind, we have lost a 'street of value' as you refer to it as. If villain bets pot, what do we do? You're online, and have 45 seconds to decide. I don't know about you, but even in this example where villain bet 2/3 pot or so and the answer on reflection is relatively clear-cut, I still had to think about it for more than 45 seconds. If villain bets pot, I could forseeably spend 15 minutes thinking and still not know what the 'most +EV' decision is on the turn.
If you're the best player in the world and can calculate EV in examples like this in a few seconds, then I agree, you probably should check-call the flop. But the simple fact is neither you nor I are the best player in the world, and neither you nor I could come to a sound conclusion in such limited time, and given that we've check-called the flop, we're going to hate any reasonable action villain takes on the turn assuming we've missed our draw.
Leading the flop might not be the most +EV move if we treat the flop in absolute isolation, but with regard to the hand as a whole and especially the fact that if we continue we will have to act out of position with little information, and if we miss our draw we will be holding just top pair decent kicker, I think we absolutely have to lead the flop.
If you had AJo and the flop was the same but rainbow, would you still advocate check-calling?
dbitel
Rock Star
Silver Level
DM,
being OOP isn't nearly as large a problem as you seem to think. There are just about no players actually good enough to have their bluffing frequencies good enough to exploit it, and just about no1 fires 3 barrels, which makes a c/c c/f line or a c/c c/c c/f line absolute money OOP.
The whole point is that I WANT to give up the initiative in the hand, as thats quite clearly the best way to get value vs 95%+ of his range (even though it means losing the pot with the best hand some of the time).
Now while I'm obv not the best player in the world, I've spent a lot of time doing calculations and thinking/talking about these situations on another site and with players far better than myself. So although in the 45seconds, I won't know the exact EV of the decision, the more and more you see a situation, the more you you get an instictive feel of the most +EV decision.
If he checks behind the turn, I can guarentee you that 90%+ of the time, he has a hand we were getting 0 strteets of value from until we checked the flop. Checking the flop is a very long term view and not short sighted at all IMO.
You say that there is correlation between easyness to play and most +EV. This is true for bad players, but I'm sure that you can see the better a player one becomes, the less and less these 2 are correlated. So as a result, we should always strive to take the line that is the most +EV.
If you bet the flop, how do you respond to a raise? What about your turn plan if called?
With AJo, I think checking flop is even more important than with the FD, as our hand is in desperate need to get to showdown, and betting the flop is basically a bluff
being OOP isn't nearly as large a problem as you seem to think. There are just about no players actually good enough to have their bluffing frequencies good enough to exploit it, and just about no1 fires 3 barrels, which makes a c/c c/f line or a c/c c/c c/f line absolute money OOP.
The whole point is that I WANT to give up the initiative in the hand, as thats quite clearly the best way to get value vs 95%+ of his range (even though it means losing the pot with the best hand some of the time).
Now while I'm obv not the best player in the world, I've spent a lot of time doing calculations and thinking/talking about these situations on another site and with players far better than myself. So although in the 45seconds, I won't know the exact EV of the decision, the more and more you see a situation, the more you you get an instictive feel of the most +EV decision.
If he checks behind the turn, I can guarentee you that 90%+ of the time, he has a hand we were getting 0 strteets of value from until we checked the flop. Checking the flop is a very long term view and not short sighted at all IMO.
You say that there is correlation between easyness to play and most +EV. This is true for bad players, but I'm sure that you can see the better a player one becomes, the less and less these 2 are correlated. So as a result, we should always strive to take the line that is the most +EV.
If you bet the flop, how do you respond to a raise? What about your turn plan if called?
With AJo, I think checking flop is even more important than with the FD, as our hand is in desperate need to get to showdown, and betting the flop is basically a bluff
gord962
Legend
Silver Level
I'll chime in even tough it's way too late. You raised PF, throw a post flop bet out whether you hit or not. You have TP, betting post flop is not a bluff. You are likely ahead here and there is no reason not to build the pot. Take control of the hand and if villain is showing strength by a big re-raise or push, then lay down.
Dorkus Malorkus
HELLO INTERNET
Silver Level
db,
I think we've gotten to the stage where we can agree to disagree. I'm still going to ramble though.
To check-call as you're suggesting, I need some kind of specific read on villain that urges me to do so. I'm assuming as we're given no such information in the OP that we're acting devoid of reads, and thus know nothing about villain.
So we do not know what he is capable of leading the flop with if checked to. We do not know if he is capable of continuing to run a bluff if called, and if so, how far he is willing to go. We do not know if he is an habitual slowplayer. We don't know if he will call preflop raises with weak Aces and habitually overplay them. We don't know if he will slowplay AA preflop.
Basically, we don't know much, and as such I feel we need to take the course of action that forces our opponent to define his range of hands the most. If we check-call, villain's likely range is huge. If we bet and are called, we still purport to have the best hand. We can call a reasonable flop raise, but if we miss the turn I think we can actually fold to a big follow-up bet, simply because we can be far more certain that villain has a 'real', strong hand.
If we have a read on villain as a LAG, of course we can rope-a-dope. If we have a read on villain as a loose-passive typical calling station, we are obliged to bet. But we have no reads, we have no information, we can make no solid assumptions and if we are to maximise our EV on the hand as a whole we need to get information and narrow villain's range if we're going to go deep into a hand while OOP.
You seem to think villain would be 'good' enough to fold a very weak ace, a weaker flush draw, or even something like KQ, perhaps even ~TT if we led the flop. I'd suggest you're giving the average $100NL player too much credit.
I think we've gotten to the stage where we can agree to disagree. I'm still going to ramble though.
To check-call as you're suggesting, I need some kind of specific read on villain that urges me to do so. I'm assuming as we're given no such information in the OP that we're acting devoid of reads, and thus know nothing about villain.
So we do not know what he is capable of leading the flop with if checked to. We do not know if he is capable of continuing to run a bluff if called, and if so, how far he is willing to go. We do not know if he is an habitual slowplayer. We don't know if he will call preflop raises with weak Aces and habitually overplay them. We don't know if he will slowplay AA preflop.
Basically, we don't know much, and as such I feel we need to take the course of action that forces our opponent to define his range of hands the most. If we check-call, villain's likely range is huge. If we bet and are called, we still purport to have the best hand. We can call a reasonable flop raise, but if we miss the turn I think we can actually fold to a big follow-up bet, simply because we can be far more certain that villain has a 'real', strong hand.
If we have a read on villain as a LAG, of course we can rope-a-dope. If we have a read on villain as a loose-passive typical calling station, we are obliged to bet. But we have no reads, we have no information, we can make no solid assumptions and if we are to maximise our EV on the hand as a whole we need to get information and narrow villain's range if we're going to go deep into a hand while OOP.
You seem to think villain would be 'good' enough to fold a very weak ace, a weaker flush draw, or even something like KQ, perhaps even ~TT if we led the flop. I'd suggest you're giving the average $100NL player too much credit.
zebranky
Rock Star
Silver Level
And DM hits the one point that is most valid here. With the AJ and the flop you're ahead of 90% of your $100NL players that would call the PF. We've all seen the donk plays, the suck outs with A6 and 69, the 27os played into an all-in. The fact is that, especially in online poker, where reputation and respect is not a factor, and the money is too low to be an issue to the players, too many players have every reason to make bad plays, because the only thing that matters is being able to brag about it later ("Dude, I took down a guy who had AA with 27os - I'm a Poker God!")
This is exactly why I play online as little as possible - "real" poker in the casinos might have a huge rake, but the level of play is much more consistent (although I wouldn't say any better), so you can make money far more consistently than online.
I'm ranting - back to the cards at hand. Here's the simple, I've got 30-seconds-to-decide answer. Top pair, good kicker. Nut flush draw. Even if top pair is no good, you still have 12 outs (9 for the flush, 3 for the 2nd pair). 12 outs = roughly 50% chance to turn or river your best hand.
Bad guy bets less than the pot - I call.
Should you bet on the flop? Yes. Or check-raise even, just to check that the opponent is not making a position bet.
blankoblanco
plays poker on hard mode
Silver Level
Wow, lots of discussion. I like. Thank you for your viewpoints DM, storm, dbitel, everyone else. But the hand is not over yet.
OLD21PLAYA bets $24
combuboom has 15 seconds left to act
combuboom calls $24
*** RIVER *** [Qs 4s Ad 8c] K♠ Yesssssss. In the words of Chau Giang: "Poker is niiice. I love play poker"
combubooom...
how much would you bet? $72.50 in the pot, I have $59.15 left and villain has me covered. could i consider the quick all-in meant to look like a bluff, or does that scare him off too often? ~ Half pot? At this point I really don't know if he's put me on a flush draw or not
OLD21PLAYA bets $24
combuboom has 15 seconds left to act
combuboom calls $24
*** RIVER *** [Qs 4s Ad 8c] K♠ Yesssssss. In the words of Chau Giang: "Poker is niiice. I love play poker"
combubooom...
how much would you bet? $72.50 in the pot, I have $59.15 left and villain has me covered. could i consider the quick all-in meant to look like a bluff, or does that scare him off too often? ~ Half pot? At this point I really don't know if he's put me on a flush draw or not
Egon Towst
Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
I`d be inclined to go no more than half the pot, CB. He must surely be aware that the flush draw is a possible holding for you. No point in scaring him off. Make it reasonable for him to call if he is holding two pair or trips.
zebranky
Rock Star
Silver Level
I'd agree - its a nice enough pot already, and unless he believes you're a donk, he's got to realize a big bet on the river isn't worth calling with the flush out there. This is a no-draw value bet for you - somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 the pot.
Of course, if you have good stats on him as being a "can't let a good hand go" type, you can push - but I think over time, against the mythcial "average" player, you'll get more money out by making a modest bet.
Whatever you do, don't check - three of a suit out there and he would likely check behind you
ChuckTs
Legend
Silver Level
(damn I wished I had gotten in on this discussion earlier )
Pot odds on turn:
24/58.5 = 2.5 (2.5:1 pot odds)
so
24/x = 3.6 (3.6 --> odds needed for flush)
24 = 3.6x
x = 24/3.6
x = 15 (15 needed to make up for lost pot odds)
So by the numbers (I'm counting 10 outs total since your jacks aren't pure outs, giving us 3.6:1 pot odds on the turn), we need to make at least ~15 for your turn call to be +EV.
I'm sure he'll call $15, but you could squeeze much more out of him...I think this would depend on my previous reads of him, but considering his betting you could probably push and get a call - especially if he's got 44.
)Pot odds on turn:
24/58.5 = 2.5 (2.5:1 pot odds)
so
24/x = 3.6 (3.6 --> odds needed for flush)
24 = 3.6x
x = 24/3.6
x = 15 (15 needed to make up for lost pot odds)
So by the numbers (I'm counting 10 outs total since your jacks aren't pure outs, giving us 3.6:1 pot odds on the turn), we need to make at least ~15 for your turn call to be +EV.
I'm sure he'll call $15, but you could squeeze much more out of him...I think this would depend on my previous reads of him, but considering his betting you could probably push and get a call - especially if he's got 44.
blankoblanco
plays poker on hard mode
Silver Level
I kind of figured this too. I mean, what hand is going to definitely call a half pot bet ($36) but fold to an all-in ($59)? If anything, the half pot bet might look scarier to me, whereas the sort of hasty all-in when a spade comes could be more indicative of a bluff. Maybe a smaller bet is more profitable in the long run... I can't say for sure. Was just my thought process. I just know online players have a damn hard time folding any sort of a strong hand when they've invested so much in the pot.
RESULTS:
*** RIVER *** [Qs 4s Ad 8c] K♠
combuboom bets $59.15, and is all in
OLD21PLAYA calls $59.15
*** SHOW DOWN ***
combuboom shows [As Js] (a flush, Ace high)
OLD21PLAYA shows [4d 4c] (three of a kind, Fours)
combuboom wins the pot ($197.80) with a flush, Ace high
Ooooops
Good call Chuck...I can't say I put him on a set... that was more of a worst case scenario kind of thing. Obviously I don't call on the turn if I put him on a hand that strong, because I'm only like 18% to win. Felt bad because I think I misplayed the hand, whereas I think he played it about as well as could have, and denied me odds to draw to a hand that would beat him. I don't think he can be faulted for calling the river push either... if you're him could you fold here?