Kjs 10/20

[Shimmering Wang 1]

I played this hand yesterday or the day before (???). I think we're 9 handed, but it could be 10. 10/20 live with some local guys. The game is good. I'm known as a good player. I posted this in Off-Topic, and decided I want to post it here, too.MP is too loose preflop, and is very predictable. Button is bad.Preflop:MP limps, I raise on the CO with KdJd, Button calls, blinds fold, MP calls.Flop (6 sb)Qs 9d 5sMP checks, I BET, Button calls, MP foldsTurn (4BB)QhI BET, Button callsRiver (6BB)9xI check, Button BETS, I RAISEI've been thinking about this and similar hands. Talk to me.

[Actuary 3]

I'm not a fan.How bad is he?I can't see him folding enough for it to justify 2 bets to win 7.Once he decides to bet, I think he call with Ace high (sometimes K high) and obv any pair >9.Will he fold K high enough? Would he bet something like KTs here?Obv, we tie K highs; but if that's the best you can hope for it blows, that's what I'm saying.Is he getting this far with TJs and would he fire knowing Ace high is getting 7:1 to call his bluff?Would anyone believe you actually had Ace high beat here making this play?The boards too scary to not value bet a 9 or Q here, so I would think it's transparentTo summarize, I don't see him having enough hands that get this far and now bet the river, which fold for one more betI would tend to c/f this EDIT: I c/c. I missed the FD on the flop. I thought it was rainbow.if he would rarely bet worse hands but would fold K-high and never bluff-raise, I like b/fps: I like the play sometimes with Ace high here. If he is prone to bluff + sometimes folds Ace high, especially if we know he bets a better hand before now.

[navybuttons 15]

I played this hand yesterday or the day before (???). I think we're 9 handed, but it could be 10. 10/20 live with some local guys. The game is good. I'm known as a good player. I posted this in Off-Topic, and decided I want to post it here, too.MP is too loose preflop, and is very predictable. Button is bad.Preflop:MP limps, I raise on the CO with KdJd, Button calls, blinds fold, MP calls.Flop (6 sb)Qs 9d 5sMP checks, I BET, Button calls, MP foldsTurn (4BB)QhI BET, Button callsRiver (6BB)9xI check, Button BETS, I RAISEI've been thinking about this and similar hands. Talk to me.

i can't figure out what villian has. nothing makes sense. i can't think of a hand he could have in this spot that we wouldn't at least tie with.this just boggles my mind. i guess you're left to your read.maybe he's got 55, 99, or QQ and was slowplaying. those are the only hand that makes even the slightest of sense in the situation.

[Mattnxtc 0]

i can't figure out what villian has. nothing makes sense. i can't think of a hand he could have in this spot that we wouldn't at least tie with.this just boggles my mind. i guess you're left to your read.maybe he's got 55, 99, or QQ and was slowplaying. those are the only hand that makes even the slightest of sense in the situation.

he could have quite a few things...missed flush draw, Ax, a small pocket pair...it is quite an interesting play...ace high calls you always but other hands have to fold

[Shimmering Wang 1]

he could have quite a few things...missed flush draw, Ax, a small pocket pair...it is quite an interesting play...ace high calls you always but other hands have to fold

This play is really really bad if A-hi is always calling. In the games I play, A-hi folds here enough to make this play profitable. I keep running into people that suggest A-hi is calling as often as, like, a 9, here. A-hi doesn't even have to fold like 100% of the time for this to be profitable. I lose 2 extra bets when he calls and I lose. But I win seven extra bets when he folds a winner. I win one extra bet, as opposed to just leading out, when he bluffs/folds a broken draw or counterfeited underpair. I win 4 extra bets when he foks Kx. Let's say he bets a non-ace winner 25% of the time (Q, 9, or TT/JJ, AA/KK, which he'll never show me)Let's say he has a busted draw (or counterfeited 2 pair) 40% of the time. Let's say he bets A-hi 35% of the time. -2(.25) + .4 (1) = -.1 BB by check/raising, before we get to the A-hi hands.We have to makeup ONE TENTH of one Big Bet by check/raising and inducing a fold in a 7 bet pot when he has Ace high (allowing that we'll lose 2 BB when he calls). .1 = .35[7x - 2(1-x)] = 2.45x - .7 - .7x.8 = 1.75xx = ~45%And that's when he only has Ace high 35% of the time he bets (I suspect that number is higher), and completely ignores the fact that he'll sometimes bluff K/hi here, and fold to a checkraise. Even so, most people I play with/against are folding A-hi here to a check raise more than half the time, for sure.Wang

[Actuary 3]

Wang,your math is offthe 2nd line corrected:.1 = .35[7x - 2(1-x)] = 2.45x - .7 + .7x.8 = 3.15xx = ~25%So, he has to fold even less often.Now, consider, who's silly enough to bet Ace high in pos here?Are they bad enough, or aware enough actually, to call now?It's a neutral play against Ace high if the fold 22% compared to a c/fIf you are planning on c/c, then you don't even need him to fold as often as 22% to make the c/r a better play vs THAT handHere's a thought: Compare how often he folds Ace high to a c/r vs how often he folds it to a lead ? But the lead stinks vs a large part of his holdings, that will bluff at us when we check. The lead is 1/2 the cost though.

[Shimmering Wang 1]

Wang,your math is offthe 2nd line corrected:.1 = .35[7x - 2(1-x)] = 2.45x - .7 + .7x.8 = 3.15xx = ~25%So, he has to fold even less often.Now, consider, who's silly enough to bet Ace high in pos here?Are they bad enough, or aware enough actually, to call now?It's a neutral play against Ace high if the fold 22% compared to a c/fIf you are planning on c/c, then you don't even need him to fold as often as 22% to make the c/r a better play vs THAT handHere's a thought: Compare how often he folds Ace high to a c/r vs how often he folds it to a lead ? But the lead stinks vs a large part of his holdings, that will bluff at us when we check. The lead is 1/2 the cost though.

HAR HAR HAR. I was in bad shape when I posted this hand, and in pretty awful shape when I tried to defend it via math. I was pretty sure my maths were off. I'll come back tomorrow and check them out, make sure the professional actuarial mathematician isn't screwing up or anything...That being said:He'll fold A-HIGH much more often to a c/r than to a lead. I'm reasonably certain he'll call with A-hi 75-90% of the time, but fold it (when he bets and I c/r) much more than half the time. But: I'm trying to enumerate his "river bet with A-hi or K-hi" %age, and I'm really struggling. I keep coming back to: "It's higher than you think it is." But I don't know how often that is.My play is good against bluffing losers (and ever moreso slightly positive when I raise, given future concerns), like when he has hands with no showdown value (underpairs, busted draws).It's break-even vs. losing hands that check back.I'm getting smoked when he's betting TT/JJ, and calling. I don't think he bets THAT often (75%??? what do you think??), but when he does, he calls ~75% of the time. That's a pretty pessimistic range, for my play.It's also important that when I check and he bluffs, I win an extra bet. He'll almost NEVER 3-bet bluff, probably like ~1% of the time. Maybe half that. To me, the issue is: He'll call with A-hi or K-hi most of the time when I lead OOP. He'll raise nothing. He'll bet when I check with myriad hands (busted draws, busted pairs, frustrated A-hi, frustrated K-his that whiffed on some draw) that I can either (a) beat or (b) knock him off with a check/raise.I think my check-raise is good when he has an A as often as he will here.WangPS- This might make no sense. I am sure you all know why.