It's Time To Play Deep With Mikeysong!

[Jordan 1]

here is the problemall overpairs have showdown value. So when I check turn and he shoves, he has to expect that I will fold QQ/KK/AA a good amount of the time. Now is it reasonable to assume this? I think the answer is no. I don't know much about his game so he may be infact a blufftard but I think we can agree that it is pretty suicidal to try and get someone to fold an overpair given these actions as well as pot size.so now i ask,if the above is true and if it makes sense, against what types of opponents can we call the turn? This is a spot where if we call, we are either against a monster or a draw/i.e. coinflip. Am I wrong? This is certainly debatable. But if the statement is true, then isn't folding correct? i'm not strong on the math here but from my pov it looks like 50% of the time we're ahead and the other 50% of the time we're way behind. So folding is correct.But then if that's true, shouldn't we check the flop and possibly check fold the turn?IT's hard and I've possibly overcomplicated the whole thing

someone just needs to make his range up and that'll be the math.i think his range will be like 30-40% equity vs your hand, meaning you should call...i could be wrong(ish) but that's kinda off the top of my head/feel..so if someone has pokerstove and wants to make a few ranges that be nice.- Jordan

[Sheiky 0]

here is the problemall overpairs have showdown value. So when I check turn and he shoves, he has to expect that I will fold QQ/KK/AA a good amount of the time. Now is it reasonable to assume this? I think the answer is no. I don't know much about his game so he may be infact a blufftard but I think we can agree that it is pretty suicidal to try and get someone to fold an overpair given these actions as well as pot size.so now i ask,if the above is true and if it makes sense, against what types of opponents can we call the turn? This is a spot where if we call, we are either against a monster or a draw/i.e. coinflip. Am I wrong? This is certainly debatable. But if the statement is true, then isn't folding correct? i'm not strong on the math here but from my pov it looks like 50% of the time we're ahead and the other 50% of the time we're way behind. So folding is correct.But then if that's true, shouldn't we check the flop and possibly check fold the turn?IT's hard and I've possibly overcomplicated the whole thing

By my crude math we have to have 33% equity against his range to call.Some pokerstove numbers- If he's either got AKhh, a set or pocket aces we're 7%Text results appended to pokerstove.txt 704 games 0.005 secs 140,800 games/secBoard: 4h 8h 9s 6sDead: equity win tie pots won pots tied Hand 0: 07.386% 04.26% 03.13% 30 22.00 { KdKh }Hand 1: 92.614% 89.49% 03.13% 630 22.00 { KK+, 99-88, 44, AhKh }However, our equity jumps massively if we include QQ,JJ,TT.Text results appended to pokerstove.txt 1,496 games 0.005 secs 299,200 games/secBoard: 4h 8h 9s 6sDead: equity win tie pots won pots tied Hand 0: 52.406% 50.94% 01.47% 762 22.00 { KdKh }Hand 1: 47.594% 46.12% 01.47% 690 22.00 { 88+, 44, AhKh }But even then it's only 50/50.

[Jordan 1]

Daut is 19/14/1.75I don't know much about his game. Would you play any street differently?Poker StarsNo Limit Holdem Ring gameBlinds: $3/$66 playersConverterStack sizes:UTG: $502.20Hero: $2516.95CO: $573Button: $1362.60SB: $898BB: $796.60Pre-flop: (6 players) Hero is UTG+1 with K K UTG folds, Hero raises to $21, CO folds, Button raises to $72, 2 folds, Hero raises to $186, Button calls.Flop: 4 8 9 ($381, 2 players)Hero bets $288, Button calls.Turn: 6 ($957, 2 players)Hero checks, Button is all-in $888.6, Hero ????

sheiky, plz add the 7s8s, TsJs, 5h6h, and a random hand for the air. please. to the second set of ranges.- Jordan

[Sheiky 0]

It improves our chances by ~6%Text results appended to pokerstove.txt 1,980 games 0.005 secs 396,000 games/secBoard: 4h 8h 9s 6sDead: equity win tie pots won pots tied Hand 0: 57.172% 56.06% 01.11% 1110 22.00 { KdKh }Hand 1: 42.828% 41.72% 01.11% 826 22.00 { 88+, 66, AhKh, AhQh, JTs, 87s, 65s }

[Jordan 1]

take out 66, i also think AKhh is pushing it...i really think with a hand like that, or combo str8/flush draw, or pair str8 draw on the flop more money gets in cause of the turns that would kill action, and cause he won't stack off if he misses turn...all the more reason he'd push AKhh on the flop, and wait for his semibluffing hands that improved on the turn to push (since he just called flop).- Jordan

[CobaltBlue 662]

Poker StarsNo Limit Holdem Ring gameBlinds: $3/$66 playersConverterStack sizes:UTG: $502.20Hero: $2516.95CO: $573Button: $1362.60SB: $898BB: $796.60Pre-flop: (6 players) Hero is UTG+1 with K K UTG folds, Hero raises to $21, CO folds, Button raises to $72, 2 folds, Hero raises to $186, Button calls.Flop: 4 8 9 ($381, 2 players)Hero bets $288, Button calls.Turn: 6 ($957, 2 players)Hero checks, Button is all-in $888.6, Hero ????

Brag obv.I think I like it...trying to convince him that we're giving up with AK (so we probably need to call), though I'm somewhat considering just going ahead and pushing the turn. I mean, you'd push AhKh/AhQh there, right?

[Sheiky 0]

take out 66, i also think AKhh is pushing it...i really think with a hand like that, or combo str8/flush draw, or pair str8 draw on the flop more money gets in cause of the turns that would kill action, and cause he won't stack off if he misses turn...all the more reason he'd push AKhh on the flop, and wait for his semibluffing hands that improved on the turn to push (since he just called flop).- Jordan

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt 1,892 games 0.005 secs 378,400 games/secBoard: 4h 8h 9s 6sDead: equity win tie pots won pots tied Hand 0: 58.615% 57.45% 01.16% 1087 22.00 { KdKh }Hand 1: 41.385% 40.22% 01.16% 761 22.00 { 88+, JTs, 98s, 87s, 65s }

[Jordan 1]

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt 1,892 games 0.005 secs 378,400 games/secBoard: 4h 8h 9s 6sDead: equity win tie pots won pots tied Hand 0: 58.615% 57.45% 01.16% 1087 22.00 { KdKh }Hand 1: 41.385% 40.22% 01.16% 761 22.00 { 88+, JTs, 98s, 87s, 65s }

add 44 to that range, and if you can put a random hand in there for a bluff, i'll be happy.thx.- Jordan

[Sheiky 0]

add 44 to that range, and if you can put a random hand in there for a bluff, i'll be happy.thx.- Jordan

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt 2,552 games 0.005 secs 510,400 games/secBoard: 4h 8h 9s 6sDead: equity win tie pots won pots tied Hand 0: 62.500% 61.64% 00.86% 1573 22.00 { KdKh }Hand 1: 37.500% 36.64% 00.86% 935 22.00 { 88+, 44, JTs, 98s, 87s, 65s, 32o }:)Including a random bluff in here is more of a weighting issue i think so putting 23o in there is just another way of weighting his range more towards a a total bluff, if that makes sense. There's acctualy a way in pokerstove that you can manualy weight the chance of certain hands with certain equity ranges rather than by the amount of card combos for them, but i have no idea how.

[Zach6668 513]

Jordan, wtf, download pokerstove you goddamn fish.

[Acid_Knight 2]

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt 2,552 games 0.005 secs 510,400 games/secBoard: 4h 8h 9s 6sDead: equity win tie pots won pots tied Hand 0: 62.500% 61.64% 00.86% 1573 22.00 { KdKh }Hand 1: 37.500% 36.64% 00.86% 935 22.00 { 88+, 44, JTs, 98s, 87s, 65s, 32o }:)Including a random bluff in here is more of a weighting issue i think so putting 23o in there is just another way of weighting his range more towards a a total bluff, if that makes sense. There's acctualy a way in pokerstove that you can manualy weight the chance of certain hands with certain equity ranges rather than by the amount of card combos for them, but i have no idea how.

When you put in a random bluff, it should be like 2 specific hands, whereas 23o is actually 12 combinations of hands. What you'd really want to do is add like 2c3h and 2h3c or something. That's why it skews the equities so much.Also Zach, I don't have pokerstove.

[Sheiky 0]

When you put in a random bluff, it should be like 2 specific hands, whereas 23o is actually 12 combinations of hands. What you'd really want to do is add like 2c3h and 2h3c or something. That's why it skews the equities so much.Also Zach, I don't have pokerstove.

Meh, it's an approximation of the assumed % of times he's stone cold bluffing, which imo we're never going to be able to have an accurate % of anyway so it doesn't have much bearing on our equity in the hand.

[Zach6668 513]

Also Zach, I don't have pokerstove.

Yeah. You should.

[Acid_Knight 2]

Meh, it's an approximation of the assumed % of times he's stone cold bluffing, which imo we're never going to be able to have an accurate % of anyway so it doesn't have much bearing on our equity in the hand.

I think you're wrong here. When you add in 23o and throw in 12 combos of hands that are drawing dead against us, it makes a MASSIVE difference in how the equity will calc out. Basically, when you add in that many combos, I think it's amounting to the assumption that he's bluffing like 25-35% of the time, which is just unrealistic.I agree that we can't get an accurate idea, but we want to include the off chance that he's bluffing without making it a significant part of his range, which is why I think a few specific hands with suits specified like 3 or 4 hands of 23o would be better than 12.

[mikeysong 0]

i would much rather see the stove ranges without bluffs. Daut didn't seem to be bluffy and I don't think people at 3/6nl are really going to bother calling a 4bet with 23o when 2 buyins deep

[shinzilla 0]

i would much rather see the stove ranges without bluffs. Daut didn't seem to be bluffy and I don't think people at 3/6nl are really going to bother calling a 4bet with 23o when 2 buyins deep

Bluffs should definitely be included in his range. Daut is very capable of bluffing. 23o is just included so bluffs are part of the equity calculation; obviously he isn't calling with 23o there ever.

[Acid_Knight 2]

i would much rather see the stove ranges without bluffs. Daut didn't seem to be bluffy and I don't think people at 3/6nl are really going to bother calling a 4bet with 23o when 2 buyins deep

Yeah, what Shinzilla said.I don't think you want to make up any meaningful portion of his range, but you really do want to see how a bluffing hand or 2 affects your overall equity because even if he is only bluffing like 5% of the time, if he's drawing dead or near to it that 5% of the time, then that helps you out big time and I'm sure he's capable of bluffing some airballed type of hand here.

[mikeysong 0]

but despite me being looseif we haven't been active against each other at the table and don't have history, is he really going to try and pull a bluff here? I don't know his game but imo it would be very reckless and pretty stupid to try and bluff someone in this spot, especially because we're not in each other's heads at all.Which is why I'm not a fan of adding a bluff at all. A bluff would lean towards raising the flop anyhow rather than floating and giving me a chance to catch a card to either vbet or semibluff.

[Acid_Knight 2]

but despite me being looseif we haven't been active against each other at the table and don't have history, is he really going to try and pull a bluff here? I don't know his game but imo it would be very reckless and pretty stupid to try and bluff someone in this spot, especially because we're not in each other's heads at all.Which is why I'm not a fan of adding a bluff at all. A bluff would lean towards raising the flop anyhow rather than floating and giving me a chance to catch a card to either vbet or semibluff.

I think with the action going down as it did, I think he'd flat with the intent to bluff here way more than he'd ever raise the flop because he'd have more options and be able to maneuver more cheaply in the hand.Look at it this way:Most of the time you should show up with the big pair that you're representing here. On occasion, you're gonna show up with AK or some other weird hand that has totally airballed. Most of the time, he should show up with a pair of some kind or AK or some weird connector or whatever. If he raises the flop, then all he does is basically guarantee that he gets it in vs your pair, which he'll almost never want to do. If he's got air or intends to bluff, he can easily flat call and assume that you're gonna give up on your AK type hands and he'll win the pot, but if you fire the turn, he just gives up the pot. I also think that flatting the flop allows him to possibly take advantage of the board getting scarier to help move you off of a hand. I don't think that bluffs make up a huge part of his range, but when people are pokerstoving things and giving the villain only massive draws or hands that are crushing us/getting crushed by us, then it skews things a little out of reality becasue they can always show up with some weird bluff here because you know people are capabale of that crap, especially Daut. I don't think this is in any way the most common scenario, but I think it's crucial to consider it because adding 1 bluffing hand in there might gain you 3 or 4% equity in the pot, which makes a huge deal when the decision is close and it also mathematically takes into considertion the possibility that someone is bluffing, which should always be accounted for IMO, whether or not the two of you are going at it.

[CobaltBlue 662]

I don't think this is in any way the most common scenario, but I think it's crucial to consider it because adding 1 bluffing hand in there might gain you 3 or 4% equity in the pot, which makes a huge deal when the decision is close and it also mathematically takes into considertion the possibility that someone is bluffing, which should always be accounted for IMO, whether or not the two of you are going at it.

I forget which poker author talks about it, but he always adds in a 10% "berzerk" factor (accounting for villain pulling some random bluff or going crazy).

[Hector Cerif 0]

I forget which poker author talks about it, but he always adds in a 10% "berzerk" factor (accounting for villain pulling some random bluff or going crazy).

Harrington

[mikeysong 0]

Harrington

even more reason to not listen to that advice1) live pro - although the top top players are to be respected2) tourney donk3) not a respected cash player from what I remember

[Acid_Knight 2]

even more reason to not listen to that advice1) live pro - although the top top players are to be respected2) tourney donk3) not a respected cash player from what I remember

You can easily read HOH and disregard like 99% of the stuff when you're playing cash games because it simply doesn't apply.There are other things in the book that relate to poker in a much more general sense and this is one of them.If you're looking at this hand, you MUST account for the slight chance that he's bluffing, IMO, even if it's only like 5% of the time, it's going to make a difference. I mean, saying "you should always consider that your opponent may be bluffing" really has nothing to do with Harrington playing tournaments, it has everything to do with him playing poker. Yes, in some spots there is probably a <1% chance that your opponent is bluffing, but I don't think this is one of those. It's really unlikely, but he could definitely be bluff shoving some weird hand here on you.

[CobaltBlue 662]

even more reason to not listen to that advice

There are other things in the book that relate to poker in a much more general sense and this is one of them.

^ this

[cwik 0]

even more reason to not listen to that advice1) live pro - although the top top players are to be respected2) tourney donk3) not a respected cash player from what I remember

He is comeing out with a cash game book soon. It is supposed to be good... but I am sure everybody who has read it up to this point is biased.Results?