3/6nl Straight Baby

[mikeysong 0]

Villain is 17/14. A good 2p2er who I don't think really gets out of hand. I don't have any strong reads on him. any street is up for questioningPoker StarsNo Limit Holdem Ring gameBlinds: $3/$66 playersConverterStack sizes:UTG: $976.05UTG+1: $102CO: $806.25Button: $600Hero: $2305.10BB: $288.55Pre-flop: (6 players) Hero is SB with 9 8 UTG raises to $24, 3 folds, Hero calls, BB folds.Flop: 7 A T ($54, 2 players)Hero checks, UTG bets $36, Hero calls.Turn: 7 ($126, 2 players)Hero checks, UTG bets $84, Hero calls.River: 6 ($294, 2 players)Hero checks, UTG bets $222, Hero ???????

[gilbertology 0]

I think you played it fine, if you donkbet the river and he shoves it's a tough decision on you, if you want to minimize those sticky situations check calling is fine if he has a high AF(esp river AF) and you think he would bluff and/or valuebet a big A or A10. No point in cring the river, you could checkraise the flop but I like the check-call line on the flop better than that. After flop leading the turn or cring looks like a move because you usually don't have 78 in this situation.Leading all three streets for similar type bets as the villian is the path I may have chosen but it all depends on villians tendencies.btw what's your stars sn mikey?

[mikeysong 0]

that's a secret : )

[cwik 0]

In general I don't like to call OOP with suit connectors because it makes playing hands just like these very difficult to play profitably. But I suppose you are deep enough to where it is alright.As played, I kinda like a c/r on the turn (folding to a shove), especially if you are going to hit and then c/c the river. But I don't hate the check.I am pretty sure you need to lead the river though. Is he three barreling you with air here often? I doubt it. AK/AQ might bet for value, but might not (and call bets on river probably anyways). And you really can't c/r the river, because AA/TT is too big of his range from an UTG raiser, and I don't see what else calls you.

[mikeysong 0]

if he's 3barreling then he's not calling if i lead riverwhy wouldn't ak/aq bet for value here? If he's gonna fire flop n turn, surely he'll fire river for value

[dscoot 0]

min raise the river

[Bubba83 0]

You could definitely fold this preflop but calling isn't terrible either... The rest of the hand is fine, with a call on the river of course.Curious though, what if the turn is the 7 , we check, and he bets $84? Then what do we do?

[Acid_Knight 2]

I don't really like cwik's c/r turn, fold to a shove line because we get flatted in position by a boat there A LOT if he's got one.I think the hand is fine. A river c/r seems bad because he can't call us with anything we're beating. He should legitimately be value betting AK/AQ on this river like 100% of the time since your hand looks a lot like a weaker ace than anything. I just think that if you do c/r, he figures out very quickly that you were probably holding the only draw on the board (which just got there) and he folds.

[cwik 0]

I don't really like cwik's c/r turn, fold to a shove line because we get flatted in position by a boat there A LOT if he's got one.I think the hand is fine. A river c/r seems bad because he can't call us with anything we're beating. He should legitimately be value betting AK/AQ on this river like 100% of the time since your hand looks a lot like a weaker ace than anything. I just think that if you do c/r, he figures out very quickly that you were probably holding the only draw on the board (which just got there) and he folds.

OK, IMO as played can almost never be right.On the turn you have 15 outs to hit, so you are 32.6% or 2-1. As played, c/c'ing $84 and then c/c'ing $222, our EV is like -$33.50. (84 - ((432*0.33)/2 + (210*0.33)/2) - (84*0.66)) = -33.5 -- This is assuming the villain is 3 barreling half the time, and you are always ahead when you hit. Because I think both of those figures are pretty generous, as when the villain 3 barrels the river you are going to me behind a good portion of the time and it is going to cost you a lot of chips. I would think your EV is actually quit a bit lower. Other factors that would also lower the EV of your play, is if the villain 3barrels this less then 50% of the time and if he is ever 3 barreling less then $222 which is actually a pretty big bet considering his bets on earlier streets. So what do we do instead? Well, I am not in love with any play specifically, but if we c/r the turn at least we bring in some fold equity into the equation. The fact he can have the boat here matters less I think, because if we are c/r/f'ing we are losing the same amount of chips as calling the turn and river anyways. So then your figure now would be how often does he have air here or will muck AK/AQ to the c/r. This one is hard to do the math on, because I don't really know how broad his range or how likely he is to fold tp/tk. But I would say the play is slightly more EV then calling down. Is it profitable, maybe.We could also c/f the turn. Or we could c/c the turn and b/f the river. The fact of the matter is hands like these are extremely hard to play OOP (especially against an UTG raisers range), even when you get about as decent a board as you can expect like the hand above. I still think from the SB this is a Fold>Raise>Call. Especially with reads that this is a good tight player, who is probably not stacking off light.

[fdsafdsa 0]

(84 - ((432*0.33)/2 + (210*0.33)/2) - (84*0.66)) = -33.5

I'm confused, isn't EV calculated as (Return - Cost), as in, if it costs us 12 but we win 23 in return our EV is +11?Aren't you calculating (Cost - Return)?I don't see how calling the turn as a 2-1 dog can be unprofitable if we are getting better than 2-1 on our money.EDIT: I'm probably missing something but I still don't get it.One of out every six times we call, hit, call a bet on the river, and win: +432/6One of out every six times we call, hit, no more bets, and win: +210/6Four out of six times we call, and miss: -84*4/6 = 336/6So EV would be (432+210-336)/6 = 306/6 = +51

[cwik 0]

I'm confused, isn't EV calculated as (Return - Cost), as in, if it costs us 12 but we win 23 in return our EV is +11?Aren't you calculating (Cost - Return)?I don't see how calling the turn as a 2-1 dog can be unprofitable if we are getting better than 2-1 on our money.

You are right it is Return-Cost, I just typed it down in the wrong order, but calculated it right ((432*0.33)/2 + (210*0.33)/2) - (84*0.66) - 84 = -33.5the EV is actually $50.50. It costs us $84 but we get back $50.50, so basically we are loseing $33.50 every time we make this play. The reason it is unprofitable is cause we are not getting better than 2-1 on our money. We are assuming we will with implied odds, but they really aren't there. Especially if we are never stacking the opponent, because we can't c/r the river (because of paired board). We are only getting any more money in this pot a pretty small amount of the time (when we hit the river and the villain 3 barrels). And again this is not counting the times the villain is ahead, which I would think is at least 25% of the time he is firing all 3 streets that significantly lowers your EV even more.

[fdsafdsa 0]

You are right it is Return-Cost, I just typed it down in the wrong order, but calculated it right ((432*0.33)/2 + (210*0.33)/2) - (84*0.66) - 84 = -33.5the EV is actually $50.50. It costs us $84 but we get back $50.50, so basically we are loseing $33.50 every time we make this play. The reason it is unprofitable is cause we are not getting better than 2-1 on our money. We are assuming we will with implied odds, but they really aren't there. Especially if we are never stacking the opponent, because we can't c/r the river (because of pair board). We are only getting any more money in this pot a pretty small amount of the time (when we hit the river and the villain 3 barrels). And again this is not counting the times the villain is ahead, which I would think is at least 25% he is firing all 3 streets that significantly lowers your EV even more.

But, after his bet on the turn the pot is $210 and we have to call $84 to win, isn't that better than 2-1?It's fairly late where I live and I'm tired so I don't know if what I'm saying makes sense, thanks for bearing with me.

[cwik 0]

But, after his bet on the turn the pot is $210 and we have to call $84 to win, isn't that better than 2-1?It's fairly late where I live and I'm tired so I don't know if what I'm saying makes sense, thanks for bearing with me.

Oh, I think my math was wrong, and not sure if I should be adding in that last -84 in there. So he is +$50 if he won ever time he hit. But lets say the villain has the boat 25% of the time he is 3 barreling, that is -(84+222)*0.25= -76.5. And $50.50-76.5= -$26. So it is still a loseing play. The villain would have to have boat less then 16.5% of the time for it to be profitable.Edit: If he is just 3 barreling this with AA, TT, 77, AK, AQ, AT then he is going to have the boat 21.2% of the time. 7 (combinations of AA,TT,77) / 33 (combinations of AK/AQ/AT) = 0.212. This means he has to be betting AK/AQ 100% of the time and bluffing this with air a pretty good amount of time to make it profitable. Also, does AK/AQ value bet 3/4th of the pot on the river?Also, I just want to point out the times he has AKss and AQss it also lowers our expectation (but this is not a sustainable loss).

[David_Nicoson 1]

Reading poker math is harder than writing it, I'm discovering.If our outs are live, then we can call the turn based on only pot odds. The pot is laying us 2.5 : 1.($ in the pot already after the flop + amount of the bet) / (amount of the bet)(126 + 84) / 84 = 2.5We have 15 outs and 30 non-outs against Ax. So we're only a 30/15 = 2:1 dog to improve.That's not really a particularly compelling edge if we're not sure who's ahead on the river.

[CobaltBlue 662]

We have 15 outs and 30 non-outs against Ax. So we're only a 30/15 = 2:1 dog to improve.

14 outs against Ax ( isn't much of an out).I think this is a fold pre-flop. Playing mid-connectors for 4xR OOP isn't frequently +EV.Personally, I think I bet this river, because I have little expectation that villains 3-barrel. A lot of villains that I've played against lately will check AQ/AJ behind there. That said, I don't hate the c/c if we think villain is willing to v-bet an ace.

[David_Nicoson 1]

14 outs against Ax ( isn't much of an out).I think this is a fold pre-flop. Playing mid-connectors for 4xR OOP isn't frequently +EV.Personally, I think I bet this river, because I have little expectation that villains 3-barrel. A lot of villains that I've played against lately will check AQ/AJ behind there. That said, I don't hate the c/c if we think villain is willing to v-bet an ace.

Yeah, 14 outs. 2.07:1. *sigh*. Senility sucks.I'm thinking it's easier to get paid with spades than a straight since the spades come runner-runner. It makes him more like to bet and more likely to call, so I don't know that it really matters as far as our choice.

[NoBBiR 0]

You are right it is Return-Cost, I just typed it down in the wrong order, but calculated it right ((432*0.33)/2 + (210*0.33)/2) - (84*0.66) - 84 = -33.5the EV is actually $50.50. It costs us $84 but we get back $50.50, so basically we are loseing $33.50 every time we make this play. The reason it is unprofitable is cause we are not getting better than 2-1 on our money. We are assuming we will with implied odds, but they really aren't there. Especially if we are never stacking the opponent, because we can't c/r the river (because of paired board). We are only getting any more money in this pot a pretty small amount of the time (when we hit the river and the villain 3 barrels). And again this is not counting the times the villain is ahead, which I would think is at least 25% of the time he is firing all 3 streets that significantly lowers your EV even more.

That's really being results orientated that he bet exactly what he did on the river. And implied odds are there. We hit, and he bet and we're most likely getting that money. The seven is a bad card on the turn, but I don't think folding is really legit in this spot.However, folding or raise the turn is silly. If you raise the turn and he shoves, do you just call and say "I have 9 high, and am definitely behind, and maybe even drawing dead, so I call." And folding the turn is even sillier.

[cwik 0]

That's really being results orientated that he bet exactly what he did on the river. And implied odds are there. We hit, and he bet and we're most likely getting that money. The seven is a bad card on the turn, but I don't think folding is really legit in this spot.However, folding or raise the turn is silly. If you raise the turn and he shoves, do you just call and say "I have 9 high, and am definitely behind, and maybe even drawing dead, so I call." And folding the turn is even sillier.

Fold PF.

[mikeysong 0]

Fold PF.

on what basis? that because our decisions are hard we should just fold?if it weren't for hands like this, there wouldn't be fun threads about it : )and fwiw, I do strongly believe it is profitable for players to play this out of position, after all, you'll see some players play this in the toughest games online. It's definitely hard but it's not impossible. I would never fold a hand in a cash game if i didn't believe I could return a profit.

[CobaltBlue 662]

Yeah, 14 outs. 2.07:1. *sigh*. Senility sucks.I'm thinking it's easier to get paid with spades than a straight since the spades come runner-runner. It makes him more like to bet and more likely to call, so I don't know that it really matters as far as our choice.

Other people missed it too...as did I until I stopped to think about it.I mean, 1 out less probably doesn't matter much. I also agree with you that there's enough implied out there with the bdfd to at least continue on this turn.

I would never fold a hand in a cash game if i didn't believe I could return a profit.

Might want to check you wording there, bud.

[cwik 0]

Leading the turn is looking a lot better to me right now. Villain can only continue with an ace which is going to to bet anyways, so you are in the same spot on the river except you pick up fold equity on the turn. Plus the fact you get to see a free card if it goes c/c on the turn doesn't matter that much, because even if you hit the river, there is not much that he is calling with that he doesn't bet the turn.And bet/folding the turn might save you some money in the long run, unless you think he re raises AK here.

[mikeysong 0]

Leading the turn is looking a lot better to me right now. Villain can only continue with an ace which is going to to bet anyways, so you are in the same spot on the river except you pick up fold equity on the turn. Plus the fact you get to see a free card if it goes c/c on the turn doesn't matter that much, because even if you hit the river, there is not much that he is calling with that he doesn't bet the turn.And bet/folding the turn might save you some money in the long run, unless you think he re raises AK here.

then you cr the river

[Sheiky 0]

I like the flop and turn play, i'm kind of split as to what i like best on the river.What would you do if you lead the river for $220 and he shoved? I think i like check/calling best here.

[Acid_Knight 2]

I tried to follow cwik's math, but it confused me because I think he was confused.On the turn, we are getting fairly close to the immediate pot odds that we need to draw to the hand at about 2.5-1, are we not? If we are calling there, it should be a relatively neutral EV situation going to the river and whether we show a profit in the hand or not will be dependent on the frequency with which he actually has a full house combined with the frequency with which we hit and how often we get paid off compared to how often we pay him off.Also, I agree with the fold prelfop. Since you're both deeper, it's more excusable, but I still think folding is usually best OOP.

[CobaltBlue 662]

On the turn, we are getting fairly close to the immediate implied odds that we need to draw to the hand at about 2.5-1, are we not?

I think you intended the former and not the latter.Mike, if the PF raiser had min-raised or even 3xed, I think I could feel like a call's not completely unreasonable. With him 4xing though...I'll reiterate that I don't think it's a winning play.