Set On A Coordinated Board

[mkeller3086 0]

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $0.25 BB (6 handed) Full Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FCP)BB ($25.55)UTG ($9.85)MP ($48)Hero ($25.70)Button ($28.50)SB ($26.85)Preflop: Hero is CO with 4 , 4 . UTG calls $0.25, 1 fold, Hero calls $0.25, 2 folds, BB checks.Flop: ($0.85) 5 , 6 , 4 (3 players)BB bets $0.85, UTG calls $0.85, Hero raises to $5, BB raises to $26.15 (All-In), UTG folds, Hero calls $20.30.

[Temporary Nuts 1]

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $0.25 BB (6 handed) Full Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FCP)BB ($25.55)UTG ($9.85)MP ($48)Hero ($25.70)Button ($28.50)SB ($26.85)Preflop: Hero is CO with 4 , 4 . UTG calls $0.25, 1 fold, Hero calls $0.25, 2 folds, BB checks.Flop: ($0.85) 5 , 6 , 4 (3 players)BB bets $0.85, UTG calls $0.85, Hero raises to $5, BB raises to $26.15 (All-In), UTG folds, Hero calls $20.30.

Life sucks if he had the nuts but you played this correctly IMO

[mtdesmoines 3]

This is an instacall.

[Sheiky 0]

Call for the joy of hitting a full house on the river and making the guy with 78 go crazy.

[AimHigher 0]

I think you played the hand well and I doubt I could fold it, but it is one of those hands where you wish you COULD lay it down.What hands take this line that we can beat? His line in this situation is definitely about as honest as they come. He is not wasting ANY time getting his chips in.

[mtdesmoines 3]

Call for the joy of hitting a full house on the river and making the guy with 78 go crazy.

It's more likely two pair.

[Sheiky 0]

Mmmm, maybe.Also, i raise any PP in the cutoff after a limper (i acctualy raise any PP not in the blinds) at 6-max, is this good/bad/indifferent?

[AimHigher 0]

It's more likely two pair.

Just based on sheer mathematics I don't think that is true. There are 48 possible hand combinations for a straight but only 15 possible hand combinations for two pair (every 4 but the 4c is accounted for). Also I am not 100% convinced that two pair would even take this line.

[Willing 2 Die 0]

No way im folding here unless we're twice as deep with more specific reads on villian.

[AimHigher 0]

Here is where I make myself look like an idiot.The more I think about this hand the more I want to fold it. Everybody is saying it is a call, and if I were playing the hand I would definitely call. Hell, I am not even experienced enough to consider a fold while playing a hand like this, but when I take my time and break down the hand and really think about it I just want to fold.If you consider his range to be a straight, two pair or a bigger set then this is a marginally profitable call. equity win tie pots won pots tied Hand 0: 43.425% 41.91% 01.52% 28628 1035.50 { 4d4h }Hand 1: 56.575% 55.06% 01.52% 37611 1035.50 { 66-55, 87s, 73s, 64s+, 54s, 32s, 87o, 73o, 64o+, 54o, 32o }But here's the thing, I don't think he has two pair and if that is the case then it is really not a profitable call at all, it's not even close. This line just screams, "I know I'm ahead and I know you're strong." It doesn't scream, "I have two pair and I think you have an overpair because you limped from the cut off preflop so I'm shoving hoping you'll call." or "I have two pair and I'm putting you on a draw." I mean let's face it, when he shoves his entire stack in, he has just $1.10 invested in the pot. Sure, maybe sometimes he shows up with an overplayed two pair, but it's probably pretty unlikely and that likelyhood is greatly reduced if we think that the hero has been playing fairly steady poker.

[nomad_monad 0]

spoiler: I think this is the extremely rare case where we fold a set absent a read or stats suggesting villain is too aggressive. Can't believe I'm saying that, but the reasoning is all below.We should be more worried about being oversetted than begin up against a straight. Here's why: with the action as it stands, we need 39% equity to make this call break even. If the villain's range is only a str8 and overplayed top two, how often does he need to be overplaying top two to hit that break even point?(equity v. str8)(% its a str8) + (equity v. top 2)(equity v. top 2) = 3935.6(1-x) + 80.3x = 3935.6 - 35.6x + 80.3x = 3944.7x = 3.4x = 0.076In other words, villain only needs to have top two 7.6% of the time for us to break even. So without oversets in villain's range, we should call this since he doesn't need to overplay top two much at all for us to break even.BUT, if we toss in 55 and 66 into his range, it gets a lot uglier for obvious reasons. We can't really solve exactly for percentages because we only have a single expressible equation for 2 variables, but we can solve for the ratio, i.e. how many more times he has to have two pair compared to an overset for us to break even.(equity v. str8)(1 - % times two pair - % times overset) + (equity v. overset)(% of times overset) + (equity v. 2 pair)(equity v. 2 pair) = 3935.6(1-x-y) + 4.3y + 80.3x = 3935.6 - 35.6x - 35.6y + 4.3y + 80.3x = 3944.4x - 31.3y = 3.413x - 9.2y = 1x/y = 1.4So, villain needs to overplay two pair nearly 1 and half times as often as he's pushing an overset.If we use just simple hand combos, there are 9 combos of 56, 6 combos of 55, and 6 combos of 66. So right there based on pure hand combos, we're in bad shape.We could just say that oversetting happens only 1% of the time, but to just say that here would basically be ignoring the information the board and the action is giving us, which we always do at our peril.In sum, fold this and curse the poker gods. If you had 55 or 66, it's a snap call. (because having 55 means whatever equity you lose against 66 is made up for against 44, and of course with 66 your overall equity increases since villain could also have 44/55)

[krup24 0]

equity win tie pots won pots tied Hand 0: 43.425% 41.91% 01.52% 28628 1035.50 { 4d4h }Hand 1: 56.575% 55.06% 01.52% 37611 1035.50 { 66-55, 87s, 73s, 64s+, 54s, 32s, 87o, 73o, 64o+, 54o, 32o }

you need all combos of 67 as wellthis hand plays soooooo different if you raise pf. as for raising from the co everytime you have a pp w/ limpers is just a leak imo. i think this is a made straight more often then not but I have trouble folding sets but i might tender it here.

[mtdesmoines 3]

...

...

You're overthinking this hand at .25NL. This isn't akin to DN making a $300,000 call with the fourth nuts. We never fold this, we try to get our money in.

[krup24 0]

We never fold this, we try to get our money in.

i dunno. i think this is true if we raise preflop.

[Temporary Nuts 1]

you need all combos of 67 as wellthis hand plays soooooo different if you raise pf. as for raising from the co everytime you have a pp w/ limpers is just a leak imo. i think this is a made straight more often then not but I have trouble folding sets but i might tender it here.

And all combos of 7-7 or 8-8

[nomad_monad 0]

You're overthinking this hand at .25NL.

Maybe.Regardless, I think it's something people should think about once they move up to even as low as 100NL, where the average unknown is pretty damn unlikely to be showing up here with anything less than top two. The hand range probably loosens up again to include stuff like 67 once you get into loosey-goosey-aggressive-as-hell 1000NL+, making it a call.

[krup24 0]

And all combos of 7-7 or 8-8

i wouldn't include 88 but defintely 77 good looki failed

[Temporary Nuts 1]

i wouldn't include 88 but defintely 77 good looki failed

No... if you failed I would have had the big red text of justice ready

[mtdesmoines 3]

Maybe.Regardless, I think it's something people should think about once they move up to even as low as 100NL, where the average unknown is pretty damn unlikely to be showing up here with anything less than top two. The hand range probably loosens up again to include stuff like 67 once you get into loosey-goosey-aggressive-as-hell 1000NL+, making it a call.

Seriously. 65% of the time, this is A6, an over pair, overs, garbage, or two pair.30% of the time, this is a made straight and we catch up 35% of the time when it is. 5% of the time, this is an overset and we have one out. We're not quite getting 2:1, but close to it for an 80% winner. I have to have to have a skin-tight read to fold this.

[nomad_monad 0]

Seriously. 65% of the time, this is A6, an over pair, overs, garbage, or two pair.30% of the time, this is a made straight and we catch up 35% of the time when it is. 5% of the time, this is an overset and we have one out. We're not quite getting 2:1, but close to it for an 80% winner. I have to have to have a skin-tight read to fold this.

I think you're being pretty generous with your percentages there but I get your point.I'll concede that at 25NL this is call because the average unknown shows up often enough here with a less than reasonable range.Still, I don't see retardedness like this at 100NL-200NL online, unless hero has been playing aggressive enough to inspire villain to shove with less than two pair (in an unraised pot, no less).

[Temporary Nuts 1]

I think you're being pretty generous with your percentages there but I get your point.I'll concede that at 25NL this is call because the average unknown shows up often enough here with a less than reasonable range.Still, I don't see retardedness like this at 100NL-200NL online, unless hero has been playing aggressive enough to inspire villain to shove with less than two pair (in an unraised pot, no less).

WTF sites are you playing on? Find a better room.Also, FWIW, I'm pretty sure if the stakes are good enough where this is always a straight, then it's equally likely the stakes are good enough to flat call the raise with the straight on this flop...

[mtdesmoines 3]

I think you're being pretty generous with your percentages there but I get your point.I'll concede that at 25NL this is call because the average unknown shows up often enough here with a less than reasonable range.Still, I don't see retardedness like this at 100NL-200NL online, unless hero has been playing aggressive enough to inspire villain to shove with less than two pair (in an unraised pot, no less).

WTF sites are you playing on? Find a better room.Also, FWIW, I'm pretty sure if the stakes are good enough where this is always a straight, then it's equally likely the stakes are good enough to flat call the raise with the straight on this flop...

We don't fold flopped sets. Not ever. We get the money in and if we're beat, oh well. But we don't fold flopped sets.

[Temporary Nuts 1]

We don't fold flopped sets on the flop. We get the money in and if we're beat, oh well. But we don't fold flopped sets.

FYP

[nomad_monad 0]

WTF sites are you playing on? Find a better room.

LOL. Touche.At least I didn't get a big fat FAIL for my choice of site (which is UB, btw).Love the software, results have been good, and it's probably due to get bigger & fishier with the impending merge with Absolute.Not to mention, I haven't heard that FT is any softer at those stakes. Stars maybe, but I don't get rakeback there.

[Temporary Nuts 1]

LOL. Touche.At least I didn't get a big fat FAIL for my choice of site (which is UB, btw).Love the software, results have been good, and it's probably due to get bigger & fishier with the impending merge with Absolute.Not to mention, I haven't heard that FT is any softer at those stakes. Stars maybe, but I don't get rakeback there.

I loathe all sites designed specifically for poker.