Two-pair On A Troublesome Board

[Young Turk 0]

7-handed, very late at night (2ish, 3ish). I've built up my £100 buy-in to about £300. I'm on the cutoff when the following hand occurs:Preflop:UTG is a drunk player who has just taken out the 3rd £100 chip from his pocket (one of the others is nestled in my stack, another in someone else's) asking for change having just lost a huge pot (preflop all-in) with 94o against JJ. After giving him the necessary change, the hand is dealt. UTG announces his raise and throws a solitary £5 chip into the middle. It's folded round to me on the cutoff and I call with my JT hearts. The button (a tricky aggressive player) also calls and we see a flop:Flop: QJT rainbow Pot: £16.50The drunk bets £5, I raise to £25 and the button reraises to £60. The drunk folds after dallying for a while, and it's on me to act. What should I do? The button has a stack of about £250; I have him covered but barely.

[rdtedm 0]

7-handed, very late at night (2ish, 3ish). I've built up my £100 buy-in to about £300. I'm on the cutoff when the following hand occurs:Preflop:UTG is a drunk player who has just taken out the 3rd £100 chip from his pocket (one of the others is nestled in my stack, another in someone else's) asking for change having just lost a huge pot (preflop all-in) with 94o against JJ. After giving him the necessary change, the hand is dealt. UTG announces his raise and throws a solitary £5 chip into the middle. It's folded round to me on the cutoff and I call with my JT hearts. The button (a tricky aggressive player) also calls and we see a flop:Flop: QJT rainbow Pot: £16.50The drunk bets £5, I raise to £25 and the button reraises to £60. The drunk folds after dallying for a while, and it's on me to act. What should I do? The button has a stack of about £250; I have him covered but barely.

Tough spot, but I don't like bottom two on this board after all the action. I think pretty much the only hand we have an edge on here is AQ, but will button make a third bet with TPTK? I think his range here is ahead of us, so it's a close fold.

[David_Nicoson 1]

You're slightly ahead or way behind. Dump it.

[mtdesmoines 3]

The drunk folded, right? Why do you want to be in, then? I can see this being AQ, but still ... target the easy money.

[whatgreatis 0]

I dont like that spot, I'm pretty sure he has you beat. Fold and move on to the next hand and take the drunk guys last 100 dollar chip.

[ActionFalko 0]

Tough spot, but I don't like bottom two on this board after all the action. I think pretty much the only hand we have an edge on here is AQ, but will button make a third bet with TPTK? I think his range here is ahead of us, so it's a close fold.

agreed. I think we could be up against a higher two pair, like QJ, maybe he has a set, which is a bit unlikely, since we have JT, so he could have QQ, but he didnt reraise PF. So I think it's a higher Two-Pair. I dont see any hands, which we are way ahead and since he has Position on us, I give up now.Worst case would be, that you call and hit your FH on the turn only to lose against a higher FH. Wait for another spot. I think you entered the pot to play against the UTG-maniac IP, but hes out of the hand, so wait until next hand...

[sabes99 0]

there are way too many hands that beat you...he could have a straight, a set, Q-J, Q-10...with the drunk not in there i think it's a fairly easy fold

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

Was all of the preamble about the drunk just a thinly disguised brag post?

[Young Turk 0]

Was all of the preamble about the drunk just a thinly disguised brag post?

Partly yes , but also because it shows that there are less marginal, more bountiful pots available to me in the future if I chose to fold. Indeed the drunk would proceed to buy-in for £200 more before he stumbled away into the night (strangely enough, 10 minutes after his departure the table broke...it was one of the more talkative queues at the Cashier that night ).

[Young Turk 0]

I raised to £140 and he folded fairly promptly. He was a pretty tricky player and I guessed (correctly) that he was doing a quasi-squeeze play. Unfortunately the drunk gave the rest of his chips to others, but it was an overall good night for me...to counteract the bragging, I lost most of that profit tonight when both my £100 buy-ins were sunk by outdraws .On reflection, however, I think my play was a bit on the gambling side and the replies in the thread kind of back up that view. I was either up against a hand that had me crushed, or I could take the pot with that bet...I think more often than not I'm probably crushed in this spot.

[Zach6668 513]

Partly yes , but also because it shows that there are less marginal, more bountiful pots available to me in the future if I chose to fold.

And there would be if you got stacked on this hand.This is not an attack on you, but I see this WAY too much in the forums here. I'm mostly picking on MtDesMoines, cuz he says this all the time:NL CASH GAMES ARE NOT TOURNAMENTS. There is no "waiting for a better spot. There is either +EV or -EV (or neutral EV, I suppose).The point is, don't be weak tight because you want to save your chips for hands vs the drunkard. If you have an edge push it. You probably don't here, so this hand need not apply, but my point is valid.

[AKProdigy 0]

And there would be if you got stacked on this hand.This is not an attack on you, but I see this WAY too much in the forums here. I'm mostly picking on MtDesMoines, cuz he says this all the time:NL CASH GAMES ARE NOT TOURNAMENTS. There is no "waiting for a better spot. There is either +EV or -EV (or neutral EV, I suppose).The point is, don't be weak tight because you want to save your chips for hands vs the drunkard. If you have an edge push it. You probably don't here, so this hand need not apply, but my point is valid.

I generally agree with this, but I think there are a couple of specific situations where you don't measure +EV or -EV of a specific hand independently in a cash game. The one I came up with off the top of my head is if you have a loose passive donk who has a stack of say 3x the original buyin. You're current stack is 2.5 x buyin, and your currently in a pot with a good solid player. Your pushed into all in on the flop, and feel like your range versus his range makes it slightly +EV in that hand independently to call. Do you still call though knowing that if you lose your stack here, you will not have access to the full stack of the easy money in later hands? In my opinion, something like that needs to be figured into your decision, although its probably a rare case. Just food for thought, I have nothing to contribute to the OP lol.

[David_Nicoson 1]

I generally agree with this, but I think there are a couple of specific situations where you don't measure +EV or -EV of a specific hand independently in a cash game. The one I came up with off the top of my head is if you have a loose passive donk who has a stack of say 3x the original buyin. You're current stack is 2.5 x buyin, and your currently in a pot with a good solid player. Your pushed into all in on the flop, and feel like your range versus his range makes it slightly +EV in that hand independently to call. Do you still call though knowing that if you lose your stack here, you will not have access to the full stack of the easy money in later hands? In my opinion, something like that needs to be figured into your decision, although its probably a rare case. Just food for thought, I have nothing to contribute to the OP lol.

That's a valid point. And the corollary is also true: sometimes we should take slightly the worst of it to try to win the chips to stack the fish. It is, however, such a subtle point in a full ring game that it is very easy to overdo it. We expect the bad player to lose his money. That's the definition of a bad player. So his stack size is a temporary thing. Moreover, he may just cash out.Clearly, if we're playing three-handed with one very bad player it's a bigger issue.

[mtdesmoines 3]

And there would be if you got stacked on this hand.This is not an attack on you, but I see this WAY too much in the forums here. I'm mostly picking on MtDesMoines, cuz he says this all the time:NL CASH GAMES ARE NOT TOURNAMENTS. There is no "waiting for a better spot. There is either +EV or -EV (or neutral EV, I suppose).The point is, don't be weak tight because you want to save your chips for hands vs the drunkard. If you have an edge push it. You probably don't here, so this hand need not apply, but my point is valid.

If EVERY POT we played was the same size and there was no rake, we could push 50.1% +EV all day long and expect to win over a very long period of time in NLHE. However, it's my opinion (and just my own) that the recommendation of pushing neutral EV or very marginal +EV at every opportunity in NLHE has a good chance of NOT being a long run winner. Two reasons. First, the rake steals our margin at very thin +EV. If we're playing $50 pots with 51% +EV and there's a four dollar rake, we automatically lose. Second is variance in pot size. If we're playing varying $ level pots for 51% +EV — which we are in NLHE -- we stand a really good chance of not being a winning player. In plain English, we have to use really good judgment in what 51% +EV pots we are willing to play in. For example, if I play ten different 50% to 55% +EV pots at these values: $100$300$200$400$500$100$200$500$600$900And I get these 50/50 results: win $100lose $300win $200lose $400win $500lose $100win $200lose $500win $600lose $900Win Lose$100........... $300$200........... $400$500........... $100$200........... $500$600........... $900____________$1,600 -$2,200... even though we see ourselves getting the money in with consistently +EV, we end up being a losing player. You can argue that it evens out in the long run, even in NLHE, but it's going to take a ton of pots to make up for it. That's what I mean when I say "wait for better spots" in cash NLHE games. It's probably the wrong way to express it, but it's just the language I use to get an idea across.Structured games (limit) are different because you can much more easily control pot size and mitigate the impact of pot-size variance.Stop picking on me, Zach. I'm in a foul mood today.

[David_Nicoson 1]

First, the rake steals our margin at very thin +EV. If we're playing $50 pots with 51% +EV and there's a four dollar rake, we automatically lose.

True enough. We should be including the rake before deciding if this situation is +EV.

[Zach6668 513]

Yes, rake is a factor, and should be calculated in before making decisions. I thought we already did this.Saying the pot sizes will be different is wrong.Plain wrong.Over the long run, the theory assumes exact situations. You'll be in the same sized pots, etc.Seriously.

[mtdesmoines 3]

Yes, rake is a factor, and should be calculated in before making decisions. I thought we already did this.Saying the pot sizes will be different is wrong.Plain wrong.Over the long run, the theory assumes exact situations. You'll be in the same sized pots, etc.Seriously.

Theory is not real.

[Zach6668 513]

LoLgl.

[mtdesmoines 3]

LoLgl.

I *know* what the theory assumes. Seriously.