quiz question #11

[copernicus 0]

"Please enlighten me then. Perhaps it is wrong, but I'd like to see your calculation of the same rather than just an assertion that it's incorrect. Jeff"Its at the end of my post that you responded to originally.Fayvren answered the other half, although I think it elminates more than 3/4 of the hands.

[copernicus 0]

There is almost no chance the villain has a king, AA, or a jack.  He will  always bet  these on thiss river because  the way the hand played out Daniel has too call almost any river  bet and hope for a split .Realistically, if Daniel pushes he is freerolling to win an extra 1000.  If he only bets 1000 his opponent will almost always  call getting 3-1, but unless his opponent has him greatly outchipped Daniel will be putting ultimate pressure  on him.The math of this relates almost directly to Daniel's most recent cardplayer article.  if his opponet were to hold any random hand checking would be the ideal action, but because his opponent practically  never holds a king, jack or AA, after he has checked the turn and river an all in push is the best option.

What is almost no chance? Again, if its just a 10% chance, there needs to be more than 50% probability of a fold to break even.I think the checks on the turn and river are totally dependent on the opponents read on Daniel, and very possibly whether he knows its Daniel or not. If he reads him as very aggressive, or if he knows its DN he can easily be checking both times because of the very good chance that he's going to get a bet out of him at some point.Since I cant infer anything either way with much confidence, I have to fall back on the range of hands that would call preflop which makes this a fold (barring outside blah blah blah).

[Book 0]

Here's what I'm not understanding from the calculatin' folks:Any calculations should be based on the range of hands the villain could have. What range of hands bets 500 on the flop and checks the turn and the river?

[copernicus 0]

Here's what I'm not understanding from the calculatin' folks:Any calculations should be based on the range of hands the villain could have.  What range of hands bets 500 on the flop and checks the turn and the river?

Thats the point of my last post...I dont think there is enough information here to infer anything from the two checks, so I fall back to what could reasonably call pre-flop. The range I put him on in my first post gives him a winning hand 1/3 (actually slightly more because of the J) of the time.

[Book 0]

That's a worthwhile point about the villain reading DN for aggression. The more deep-stacked a tournament is, the more likely a play like that would be made.But the most the super-slowplaying villain could expect to get out of DN isn't even the size of the pot, right? Any low bet on the river stands a very good chance of getting called. A more likely read of DN in this situation is that he is in call mode after his flop call. If you've got the nuts or near-nuts, you're not going to check twice into someone in call mode when just 400 extra chips would be pretty valuable. At least 90% of the time the villain is ahead, he will at least bet the river, I'd imagine, which would put the % of the time he is ahead at well under 10.

[Book 0]

Okey doke, that makes sense; I guess I just disagree. I think there's quite a bit to infer from the postflop play. But I may be inferring myself into the infernal reaches of bustedville.

[nutzbuster 7]

Wow! :? All this debate is fantastic.You guys had me flip flopping my position like 10 times. I've read many times that most pros hate going all in and that they normally try to avoid this type of thing. So why risk the tourney on what I feel could be a trap by the villan?The real crux of this dilemma is that the decision on what to ultimately do had to be made in fairly short order, without the benefit of all this lengthly analysis. How would we all react if we only had a minute to try to consider all of these possibilities?My gut immediately said push it hard. But the other gut said don't risk your whole tournement on this hand.Maybe it's weak, but I'd still probably check this one.Best...

[Newbs 0]

If I was playing live, betting 1000 may work, but at least in my experience in online play (granted at lower limits than daniel), a value bet-looking-bluff rarely works. I actually thing betting 1k is the worst thing to do. But I find it hard to believe that someone would check the nuts on the turn and river as well (but I did run into one such fella actually the other day). So, going all in might work best for the online crowd. Say he probably will call, but may fold.When he sees that bet of all in, he thinks:A) Whatever. Obvious overbet to scare me. Split pot. I call.B) All in? Crap. He has got me beat. Fold.C) All in? Bluff buying the pot? Trying to make it look like a bluff? What to do, what to do... *time limit expires, auto fold*

[Newbs 0]

Wait. Is the other guy Freddy Deeb? If so, I bet 1k. :wink:

[Canada 0]

If you check and its a split you still have about 30BBIf you check and you lose you still have 20BBBoth these situations leave you in a competitive situationIf you raise and win you will have 39BB. 39BB vs 30BB is not that much of a gain (you would've had 30 anyway...)All 3 of these situations are acceptable if you are more skilled than your opponents.If you raise and lose you are down to 3BB or 10BB (probably 3 because raising 1000 sucks) and luck becomes a major factor.20BB vs 3BB is a major differenceThe question is are their reasonable holdings for the villain that we lose to.A nervous player with AA, AK or KQ plays this way. A very tricky player with AJ or another J holding also plays this way.KK is played this way by nervous/tricky donkey/genious players.Problem is we know nothing about our opponent. So lets assume he is standard.What 'standard' raising hands do we split with? AQ, QQ & maybe TT.If you think you have more skill than your opponents surely checking and remaining competitive with no risk is the best option.

[Canada 0]

My gut immediately said push it hard. But the other gut said don't risk your whole tournement on this hand.

Are you a cow?Wow! A typing cow!!How now brown typing cow?

[justin 0]

value bet, i'd say around 1100. feels like two high cards, queens or a pair lower than jacks.

[copernicus 0]

If you check and its a split you still have about 30BBIf you check and you lose you still have 20BBBoth these situations leave you in a competitive situationIf you raise and win you will have 39BB.  39BB vs 30BB  is not that much of a gain (you would've had 30 anyway...)All 3 of these situations are acceptable if you are more skilled than your opponents.If you raise and lose you are down to 3BB or 10BB  (probably 3 because raising 1000 sucks) and luck becomes a major factor.20BB vs 3BB is a major differenceThe question is are their reasonable holdings for the villain that we lose to.A nervous player with AA, AK or KQ plays this way.  A very tricky player with AJ or another J holding also plays this way.KK is played this way by nervous/tricky donkey/genious players.Problem is we know nothing about our opponent.  So lets assume he is standard.What 'standard' raising hands do we split with?  AQ, QQ & maybe TT.If you think you have more skill than your opponents surely checking and remaining competitive with no risk is the best option.

Excellent way to put it Canada, it makes the math much more intuitive. Say he's 10% to have a winning hand. Then the check option leaves you 30BB 90% of the time and 20 BB 10% of the time, or 29 BB overall.The all in option leaves you with 3 BB 10% of the time (when he has the better hand) or .3 BB. When he doesnt have a hand you'll have 39 BB Fold% of the time and 30 BB Call % of the time. So .3BB+.9x(39BB x F% + 30BBx(1-F%))=29BB so F% needs to be about 20%.If you assume he has a winning hand 1/3 of the time (based on the range of hands I put him on) F% jumps all the way to 86%. So the critical element is the hands you put him on (ie the chances that he beats the board).

[cheetaking 0]

I'd check. This is just one of those hands, and betting on the river would be a huge risk. If you check, you are probably splitting. And even if you lose, you still have plenty of chips left. I just don't think it's worth the risk here. I check and take the split.

[MrNiceGuy 0]

I check. He should be reading us for not having a J - I think the stacks are too short for us to make a positional call preflop with a hand like AJs. So, he probably doesn't have a J or K, since I'd think he value bets the river either way.But, he probably can't put us on a K - maybe we call preflop with AK (rather than raise), but would we peel on the flop when the only reasonable hand we'd be ahead of is AQ? And with two kings on the board, he won't put us on KK. So, since he likely won't put us on a K or J, I think he's calling any bluff we make, even getting only a bit better than 1-2 on his money.So I think that he's very unlikely to have a K or a J. But I also think it's very unlikely that our bluff will work. And we're only getting a bit better than 1-2 on our bluff. I don't like those odds well enough to risk the tournament.

[ol'number7 0]

great discussion -- I voted check. I fully understand the logic on the other side, but I just think the risk is too great if we are wrong in our analysis; I look for a better spot

[johnyblaze139 0]

Well, in middile posistion in a pre-flop raise 3 1/2 times the blind, I start thinking AK,QQ,AA, KK,A10s,KQs, AJs or a meduim poket Pair TT,99. The raise on the flop seemed almost like an aggresive continuation/ probe bet. I would put him on QQ. Now the tourney is on level 5, so most of the loose people are gone so you can more than likely count random hands out. You have posistion on him, it would seem odd for him to check the river to get a check raise out of you. But with no info on the player I would have to check to avoid any possiable traps by the player, and use the info from that hand for the future. It also depends on what site your playing on . Also depends on your table image too. and what you think he thinks what you have. In my mind the oppenent thinks its a split and is gonna call you any ways unless you go all in. betting a grand your giving him almost 3-1 which isnt enuf to call, but from experince alot of players will call with 3-1. So All in or check, I might move all in, you will still have about a grand left its not that bad. In my opinion its gonna be a split why not try and get it all thats my read maybe im wrong. I don't know but we will find out

[Balloon guy 158]

Bet $1000He doesn't have a jack, or else he is changing gears in the middle of the same hand.If he has a king, and checked 4th street, he must bet river in order to get valueSame for aces.All in bet makes him think we are bluffingsmallish bet sells the idea of value betting with best handhe folds we get to show the bluff and get alot of action for awhilehe comes over top, we have a tougher decision

[Burdo 0]

Well, in middile posistion in a pre-flop raise 3 1/2 times the blind, I start thinking AK,QQ,AA, KK,A10s,KQs, AJs or a meduim poket Pair TT,99. The raise on the flop seemed almost like an aggresive continuation/ probe bet. I would put him on QQ. Now the tourney is on level 5, so most of the loose people are gone so you can more than likely count random hands out. You have posistion on him, it would seem odd for him to check the river to get a check raise out of you. But with no info on the player I would have to check to avoid any possiable traps by the player, and use the info from that hand for the future. It also depends on what site your playing on . Also depends on your table image too. and what you think he thinks what you have. In my mind the oppenent thinks its a split and is gonna call you any ways unless you go all in. betting a grand your giving him almost 3-1 which isnt enuf to call, but from experince alot of players will call with 3-1. So All in or check, I might move all in, you will still have about a grand left its not that bad. In my opinion its gonna be a split why not try and get it all thats my read maybe im wrong. I don't know but we will find out

If you bet $1000 he is not getting 3 to 1; because he is winning only half of the pot; so he is calling 1000 to win 975.

[copernicus 0]

np

[Rocketwadster 0]

This seems similar to (but not exactly like) the hand against Forrest (I think it was him) where Ted had pocket aces for the higher boat against DN...I don't realistically see us betting $1000 and folding to a re-raise, so it seems like we would be only hoping to be called by hands that have us tied, which doesn't win us anything. Hands that have us beat will call our bet or push us all-in, meaning we again win nothing, and lose more.Check. while certainly safer, will give us 1/2 the pot when we are tied, and none of it when we are behind.Going all in MAY entice a hand that has us beat (but not the nuts) to reconsider and fold. This seems like the only choice IMO.Maybe I am way off track here. :?

[Guest XXEddie]

Im checking thisThis is a hard hand to play because you dont have much to play with, a raise on the flop would almost commit youhis bet on the flop says high cards or a high pair, but not a J. No reason to bet with the Jan all in bet would be the only thing that COULD make him fold high cards or a pair like QQhe could also have AA, in which you arent splitting.a bet of 1000, roughly half your stack) my give the player a sense youre trying to steal it, and he'll either call or move allin, and you'd be put in a tough situationcheck.

[goose 0]

his bet on the flop says high cards or a high pair, but not a J. No reason to bet with the J

I agree with your overall analysis, but I do disagree that because he bet he doesn't have a jack. If he's a good player, he knows that betting the pot with his J looks like a continuation bet, and will likely be called or raised if you have anything decent - which your preflop raise call indicates you do. I would say it's unlikely he has the J (this only puts him on one hand really - AJs - unless he's really tricky) but not impossible.

[CoranMoran 0]

I believe that your opponent has 3 possible responses if you were to push all in:1) He has you beat and was setting a trap. So he will call.2) He does not have you beat. But will call anyways and play the board.3) He does not have you beat. And he doesn't want to risk his whole stack so he folds.Let's analize.1) He has you beat.He only wins if he holds a J, K, or AA.So let's look at how he has played the hand to see if any of these holdings make sense.With a J, he would have flopped quads.He bet the flop with the quads. And then checked the turn and river.I don't believe I have ever seen this play before.And it seems incredibly unlikely.With AA, he led out on the flop and got called. This told him that DN had a decent hand himself.Surely he realized that he was still ahead at this point.So it would seem that he would gain more from his Aces by continuing to bet them. Yet he checked the turn.While this could possibly be a slowplay, his check on the river seems to suggest that it was not.With a K, the betting pattern seems to make a little more sense.His flop bet was a standard continuation bet.He hits on the turn so decides to slowplay for one street.But once again, the river check just doesn't make too much sense.Let's look at it this way...The action is to you to bet first on the river.There is a full house on the board.There are only a few possible holdings that you can have to beat the board.But you actually do have one of these holding.And you just checked the turn to show weakenss.This is an ideal chance to get a lot of value on your hand.How would you maximize your powerful hand here?If you check, it will probably be checked back and you got nothing.This would be a disaster.But if you bet, your opponent will very likely believe you are just trying to steal this pot to avoid the split.He will likely call this river bet and you will rake in a whole lot of chips.Conclusion: if this player had a winning hand, then checking the turn and the river in this golden situation seems way too passive and I believe it is a big mistake.Thus if he seems like a good player, he likely does not have you beat.2) He does not have you beat, but he will call your river bet anyways.In this scenario, there is one key point to think about.If he were going to call an all-in bet on the river, he certainly should have gone all in himself.Checking and then calling a huge bet when the most he can hope for is a split is simply not very logical. Conclusion:From my logic, it seems that both options 1 & 2 are not highly probable.Thus, by process of elimination, option 3 seems to have a lot of weight.3) He does not have you beat and he may fold.If you agree with this logic, then we must decide how much to bet.Betting a portion of your stack is only helpful if you are going to fold to a raise. If you are going to call a raise, you should just push all in yourself.Making a partial bet gives your opponent the chance to outplay you by giving him hope that he can steal the pot with a raise.Pushing all in puts the most pressure on your opponent and puts him to the test.Note: Online sng's are filled with plenty of crazy players. And if I had observed my opponent making any such crazy plays in the past, then taking the safe road by checking may be advisable.But, in general, I believe that making a play here for this pot by pushing is profitable in this situation.--cnm

[167-169 0]

Sorry, didn't bother to read the whole thread.This reminds me of the hand that DN played against Freddie Deeb at the Plaza. DN won the pot instead of a chop.Seems like an all in play for sure.If it's getting near the end I'd be more cautious but level 5 is way too early and you've got some many coinflips coming up you've got to build a stack.Mind you, I'm an amateur so taking bigger risks are worth it. A pro can grind it out and chop away. Just like a DN/Hellmuth style of small ball. Wait for better spots.Unless you think you can dominate the table, allin's the move here.