Jump to content


quiz question #11


  • Please log in to reply
97 replies to this topic

Poll: What would you do? (0 member(s) have cast votes)

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 blakheart

blakheart

    Bankroll manangement???

  • Members
  • 1,969 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Roseville CA
  • Favorite Poker Game:Any I can beat

Posted 17 October 2005 - 08:35 AM

As I think about it more, no way this guy has a jack. Nobody would bet out when flopping quads and then check it down. In fact, the same thing goes with aces, you are already getting Daniel to call, why let up? It really feels like he made a play at the flop, when he got called he let the hand go. The river check really feels like he is no longer interested in this pot, and is hoping to split. I really think a bet is in order, no way is Daniel beat in this spot. The only question is push or $1000, and the value bet looks scarier to the villian.

#22 dead money

dead money

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 933 posts
  • Location:The dark side of the moon
  • Interests:poker, football, golf, hockey, movies, music

Posted 17 October 2005 - 08:49 AM

Quote

As I think about it more, no way this guy has a jack. Nobody would bet out when flopping quads and then check it down. In fact, the same thing goes with aces, you are already getting Daniel to call, why let up? It really feels like he made a play at the flop, when he got called he let the hand go. The river check really feels like he is no longer interested in this pot, and is hoping to split. I really think a bet is in order, no way is Daniel beat in this spot. The only question is push or $1000, and the value bet looks scarier to the villian.
I concur.
"And behind Daniel we see Johnny Chan. He is showing off his Chubby Chinese Sweater Collection."

Gabe Kaplan

#23 DanielNegreanu

DanielNegreanu

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Root Admin
  • 8,565 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas

Posted 17 October 2005 - 11:25 AM

Excellent discussion guys, keep it up!
Posted Image

#24 goose

goose

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,154 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. Catharines, ON
  • Favorite Poker Game:PLO8

Posted 17 October 2005 - 11:38 AM

the bottom line is you're risking crippling yourself for a pot you've already got half of anyway. This doesn't seem like a smart raise to me at all.

#25 dreamcaster

dreamcaster

    Making a personal request: Please let my hands hold up.

  • Members
  • 1,217 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Burlington, ON

Posted 17 October 2005 - 12:10 PM

I agree with the posts stating the villian can't beat the board. So as the blinds come closer to getting interesting (intro to antes, etc) I believe it is important to start showing an aggressive table image for future hands.Plus as the blinds increase, stealing the extra 1000 in chips is helpful.

#26 kristianlinnell

kristianlinnell

    Poker Forum Regular

  • Members
  • 123 posts
  • Location:England
  • Interests:Wrestling and Poker

Posted 17 October 2005 - 12:13 PM

Now a really smart guy with AK might realise on the turn that he is either massively ahead on an incredibly intimidating board (for an opponent) or massively behind (with no chance of him folding) and can play it no better than check it down. Another huge benefit, if he percieves you to be an intelligent, aggressive player, is that you may bluff on either the turn or the river.Obviously, by the river the same thing applies only now he knows you don't have KK. So he checks. Having said that, and its possible, I still think he doesn't have it. For one he's far more likely to have another high/medium pair/AQ combination simply because the two kings are out there. It's extremely unlikely he has a jack. Everything play would fit with the standard way of playing a high pair such as QQ. It's a close decision, between checking and betting 1000. It's a lot more likely he's not trapping but counter-weighted by the chance he'll call and you'll split anyway, the value of a bet on the (coupled with a call on the occasions he raises) river is small. With no reads its very close, especially if you're the calibre of player to be able to use your remaining chips well.Another thing I've just though of is that, if as I put forward at the beginning, this guy is smart he'll know that there's more value in the long run from betting something like 800 than checking and hoping to induce a bluff. So it seems even a smart guy would bet the river. So either you're up against an insanely tricky trappy guy who would rather trap you than bet for legitimate value, or you're going to chop. Over the long run, my choice is definately to bet 1000.

#27 JBradburn6

JBradburn6

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,898 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 October 2005 - 01:02 PM

blakheart said:

As I think about it more, no way this guy has a jack. Nobody would bet out when flopping quads and then check it down. In fact, the same thing goes with aces, you are already getting Daniel to call, why let up? It really feels like he made a play at the flop, when he got called he let the hand go. The river check really feels like he is no longer interested in this pot, and is hoping to split. I really think a bet is in order, no way is Daniel beat in this spot. The only question is push or $1000, and the value bet looks scarier to the villian.
Thinking it through again, the check on the river screams that it's going to be split. I think he's going to call the 1000 hoping to split, but I'm not sure he'd put his tournament life on the line hoping for a split. I thinking pushing has the better chance to get him to fold.

#28 Sundevils21

Sundevils21

    Poker Forum Nut

  • Members
  • 474 posts
  • Location:Las Vegas

Posted 17 October 2005 - 01:23 PM

I think that pushing is better online than it is live. Online, nobody knows you're Daniel Negreanu. Odds of the play working is better online imo. I would have an easier time calling if I could look accross the table and know I was up against a tricky player like DN.

#29 screech

screech

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 6,376 posts

Posted 17 October 2005 - 01:26 PM

Quote

The math guys are all saying check, but I think they are wrong.
Yeah, yeah. Berate the math guys.You're just trying to get on DN's good side. :wink:

#30 Egarim

Egarim

    Poker Forum Nut

  • Members
  • 435 posts
  • Interests:http://sootedcards.blogspot.com/

Posted 17 October 2005 - 02:33 PM

Push all-in. 2nd best option is check (closely behind).Opponent checks both turn and river. If he had kings full or quads he would have bet the river hoping for DN to call for a split pot. I'm confident the person is has the board with either a pp q's or lower or aq (maybe worse). The way DN has played this, his opponent must bet on the river if he has a k, j or aces because DN either has quads or a k or nothing in which case he's probably thinking DN will check behind him if he holds the board too.The player raised preflop and kept his lead on the flop which doesn't mean a lot. When DN called the flop bet the opponent may have thought that DN was holding high cards and didn't like the k on the turn or he's afraid of DN slowplaying the nuts. In any case, this is a prime spot to steal a good size pot of over 2k. Going all-in will put a lot of pressure on the opponent. Though DN's play looks weak, he would have played the hand the same with quads, possibly aces, and maybe even ak (the check on the turn is the only small hole in the ak theory).

#31 blakheart

blakheart

    Bankroll manangement???

  • Members
  • 1,969 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Roseville CA
  • Favorite Poker Game:Any I can beat

Posted 17 October 2005 - 03:04 PM

By the way- if you flip seats with the other guy it is entirely possible that Daniel has either a Jack or pocket Aces and is trapping. If Daniel had a jack or aces, he could wait for the other guy to improve and then value bet the river. If Daniel had a jack the best play by far is to call the flop bet and hope you get bet into more. The way Daniel played that looks exactly like a guy who flopped quads and isn't an idiot. And all you guys who figured the ev as negative that also works the other way around. If the villian can't beat the board it is -ev to call Daniel's bet. Plus calling and losing puts him in a big hole chip wise, and folding leaves him enough chips to go to war with.

#32 murmar

murmar

    Poker Forum Nut

  • Members
  • 286 posts
  • Location:Vancouver

Posted 17 October 2005 - 03:05 PM

How much was the tourney for? If you give the player enough credit just in being there that he must be halfway decent, make what looks like a value bet, otherwise go all in. He doesn't check a king twice there, only thing he has that has you beat is AA.

#33 princeof56k

princeof56k

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,520 posts
  • Location:houston, tx

Posted 17 October 2005 - 03:13 PM

Sysvr4 said:

he's not checking the nuts to us on the turn and river.
I think this is the best point made so far. If this guy has a J or K, checking on the turn is an acceptable play to try and induce us to bluff. But after we check behind on the turn, he absolutely must bet the river and hope to get called (if he indeed ha a J or K). Therefore I think the likelyhood of him having the K or J is reduced.Since we have him covered and it would mean his tournament is over if he loses, I think the right move here is to push all-in. Since he feared the K on the turn and river, I think there's a good chance he wont call. To push playing the board is one thing, but to call playing the board (for all of your chips) is totally different.

#34 No_Neck

No_Neck

    this is how i roll

  • Members
  • 11,522 posts
  • Location:New Jersey OBV

Posted 17 October 2005 - 03:17 PM

what about betting out 1000 making it look like a value bet on the river. If he doesn't have a hand then we are in good shape, if he comes over the top we are going to have to fold. Also I don't think we can get a call here because of the fact that this guy just put in a huge % of his stack

#35 Fayvren

Fayvren

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 13 posts

Posted 17 October 2005 - 03:41 PM

Lets look at it from the villains perspective...Let's say the possible holdings for a middle position raise are AA-88 and AK. We've just raised to 350 and have a caller on the button. What holdings could the button have to make the call? (We will assume from his perspective that the button is competent as well and wont be calling with two random cards with a Jack included) It's quite possible to have called with a holding such as JTs in that position but more obvious holdings are another pair or a hand like AK.After the flop we're betting any of our possible hands AA-88 + AK. (Especially on a board of JJJ) . With the highly unlikely scenario that the button has a jack in his holding the call merely confirms the belief that the holding has to be AK and a decent pocket pair. No one is calling here with a small suited connector or trash hand. From here on we will assume that the button does NOT have Quads.For the Turn and River.Assuming AA:We might check the turn if we believe the K might have helped the button. Hoping to induce a bet from the button if its an AK holding. If the button's hand is anything lower than JJJKK then we're probably not going to get a call at this point. The K on the river is a disgusting card. Our holding of JJJAA while it may be the best hand at this point, any value bet is almost certainly going to be called or raised only by someone with a K or a J. No other hand is calling any significant bet at this point. A value bet here is problematic and Im checking down hoping to win the pot in a showdown.AK This scenario would remind me completely of Scotty Nguyen's win in the Main event. "You call baby and it's all over" albeit with a slight variation on the way the Full house comes onto the board.Checking the turn is a sensible play for either of these holdings. The button has called our raise preflop, then called our bet post flop. The button has a hand. With AK we're now ahead of every hand except for KK and AA, and with no reraise preflop and no raise post flop its hard to believe he has any of these holdings. (A majority of online players I've played with have re-raised with these holdings preflop and would almost certainly push post flop with that board.) We're chopping if it's AK that we're up against. Hopefully we can induce a bet from someone who has a pair and believes we've missed our hand or are scared by the K on the turn. After we check and the button checks the turn its hard to believe we don't have the best hand. Now on the river the with a KKKJJ and a (JJJKK board) we're positive we have the hand locked. Why check this? It makes no sense to check as we're only going to get a bet on a chop or a complete bluff. We only make money on the bluff. We probably have the same chance of betting and the button calling believing that we're bluffing and wanting to chop as we do of inducing a bluff. There is also added value that if there is no call we dont show our hand, hiding our play. By betting we gain either a bet or the side advantage of hiding our hand. As the villain I'm almost inclined to push and overbet the pot hoping for a very loose call by someone who believes we're attempting to buy the pot or someone with AA and might think they're ahead.KKWith KK we're doing the same on the turn as AK. The deck is crippled the only hand that calls a significant bet is the case J or the case K. We have a higher likelihood of making money by checking and hoping for a bet than betting. On the river, we're golden. We know we're a 100% lock on the hand and hoping we're up against the case J or someone with AA. Again as in the AK scenario we probably have the same probability of making someone call believing we're bluffing as we do of having someone bluffing if we check. Again the added value is that we dont have to show our hand and a bet is probably better than checking and calling with a chance of missing a bet. Pairs QQ and under. We hate the K on the turn. The very possible AK holding has now hit. It's the only hand that could have been a dog to our hand and is now a favorite. There are two perspectives on this:From the mentality of a slightly weaker player we might check/fold to a bet from the button. In all likelihood however we're only getting called only if we're beaten. It is highly unlikely that anyone will call without having a K or a AA with this board. (A stronger player might continue to bet this and with a call from the button check down the river... At the very least we have the opportunity to find out where we are in the hand. By checking we have absolutely no idea.)The River. We're now playing the board. Even if we were ahead of someone who didn't have a K or AA it doesn't matter at this point. Out of position and unsure of where we are since we didn't bet the turn to find out it's almost impossible to bet this river. I'd check hoping for a chop and fold to a large bet.Obviously there are many more scenarios but these are some likely reasons for the play to develop in this way if I were the middle position raiser. Back to Daniel's perspective:The way this hand developed screams of a pair (Not KK) I would have a difficult time believing that someone holding a King could check both the turn and the river hoping to induce a bet or be scared of the case J. We are chopping with all pairs QQ and under, and losing to AA. In this instance I believe both pushing or checking are way ahead of a bet of $1000. It screams of weakness and I don't think it accomplishes anything. Even from a pure odds perspective you're getting called everytime which will accomplish nothing. Against a really strong player you're going to get raised out of the pot and a weak player will call you. This does nothing for us and cannot possibly be a good move.I'd also put pushing ahead of checking. We're almost certainly not up against a K or a J. It's hard to fathom someone playing it that way. Pushing gives us the opportunity to take the whole pot if we're splitting and even make AA fold as that board would make it very difficult to call. An additional aspect of this scenario is the chip stacks left for both players. With 1700 left the MP has enough to stay competitive while he's eliminated if he's up against a K or a J. It would be awfully difficult to make the call given even with an AA holding in this situation.Aggression wins. I'd almost certainly try and push the person off the hand.Pushing > Checking >>>>>>> Betting $1000

#36 copernicus

copernicus

    Poker Forum God

  • Members
  • 10,676 posts
  • Interests:Hockey; poker...duh

Posted 17 October 2005 - 03:46 PM

I think you have to check here. Assuming he could have 7s through As, AK, AQ, KQ for his EP raise, youre betting into a higher boat 1/3 of the time, and I dont think youre going to get a pair of As to fold fearing a K, and of course a K is the nuts. Your EV with a check is 650.If you bet 1k you need him to fold more than 75% of the 2/3 of the time he doesnt have you beaten to make the bet worthile. It goes up to 95% folding if you go all in.After reading responses: First, I didnt include a J in my calculations, which, from the math guy end makes a check even more appropriate.From the "playing the player" perspective and assuming he doesnt have the board beat, can he fold more than 75% of the time? It is wrong to assume that because its online that he doesnt know its DN unless its a site he's unknown at. What is more powerful..fear of being outplayed the whole hand and going out to DN, or the desire to say he crippled DN? I still think he doesnt fold to 1000 bet often enough, but maybe more than I originally thought. If this were a bounty tournament his call would be a no brainer. He puts himself in a position of good chip strength at the same table as DN who is crippled, and makes the bounty a realistic opportunity.

#37 No_Neck

No_Neck

    this is how i roll

  • Members
  • 11,522 posts
  • Location:New Jersey OBV

Posted 17 October 2005 - 04:44 PM

isn't this online? How does he know that he is playing DN

#38 copernicus

copernicus

    Poker Forum God

  • Members
  • 10,676 posts
  • Interests:Hockey; poker...duh

Posted 17 October 2005 - 04:55 PM

No_Neck said:

isn't this online? How does he know that he is playing DN
Pros screen names are pretty well known, but I qualified it by saying it might be a site he's not known at. I think DNs is "doublesuited" or something like that?

#39 Sysvr4

Sysvr4

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 883 posts
  • Location:Nashvegas

Posted 17 October 2005 - 05:04 PM

Ok, let's look at this another way. There are 45 unseen cards at the river,meaning there are 141 hands out of a possible 1326 holdem starting hands thatbeat us:Final board: JJJKKAny hand with a J - 45 handsAny hand with a K (including KK) - 90 handsAA - 6 hands That's 10.6% of the time that we're beat (141/1326) if my calcs are right.Now let's do some EV..106*(-1700) =~ -180Now we need to look at what percentage of the time he needs to FOLD to makeour bet profitable enough to cover the -180 we lose when he has us beat:x * 975 = 180x = 180/975 = 18.46%This means if he folds only 18.46% of the time when we push, we break evenon our bet. If he folds more often than that, we profit from the push and itis +EV.Obviously this is opponent dependent, but I'd lay heavy odds that if Danielphrased this quiz with the villain going all-in at the river more than 20% ofyou would say fold. He's certainly going to fold more than 20% of the time, IMO,so pushing this at the river is +EV.Thus, I still submit this is an easy push for the following reasons:1) You're only beat 10.6% of the time2) Villain needs to fold only 18% of the time for push to be profitable3) Villain is not pot committed4) Villain checked the turn AND river to us, making it significantly less likely he has a hand that beats us5) We smooth called every street he bet making it appear we slowplayed a monsterwhen we push6) We have villain coveredMan I hope I didn't screw any of that up. Jeff

#40 copernicus

copernicus

    Poker Forum God

  • Members
  • 10,676 posts
  • Interests:Hockey; poker...duh

Posted 17 October 2005 - 05:24 PM

Sysvr4 said:

Ok, let's look at this another way. There are 45 unseen cards at the river,meaning there are 141 hands out of a possible 1326 holdem starting hands thatbeat us:Final board: JJJKKAny hand with a J - 45 handsAny hand with a K (including KK) - 90 handsAA - 6 hands That's 10.6% of the time that we're beat (141/1326) if my calcs are right.Now let's do some EV..106*(-1700) =~ -180Now we need to look at what percentage of the time he needs to FOLD to makeour bet profitable enough to cover the -180 we lose when he has us beat:x * 975 = 180x = 180/975 = 18.46%This means if he folds only 18.46% of the time when we push, we break evenon our bet. If he folds more often than that, we profit from the push and itis +EV.Obviously this is opponent dependent, but I'd lay heavy odds that if Danielphrased this quiz with the villain going all-in at the river more than 20% ofyou would say fold. He's certainly going to fold more than 20% of the time, IMO,so pushing this at the river is +EV.Thus, I still submit this is an easy push for the following reasons:1) You're only beat 10.6% of the time2) Villain needs to fold only 18% of the time for push to be profitable3) Villain is not pot committed4) Villain checked the turn AND river to us, making it significantly less likely he has a hand that beats us5) We smooth called every street he bet making it appear we slowplayed a monsterwhen we push6) We have villain coveredMan I hope I didn't screw any of that up. Jeff
Your calculation assumes that his preflop raise from MP after a limper means nothing and his hand is completely random. Bad assumptions=bad calculations.Also your calculations dont appear to take into account the half the pot you win when you arent beaten. Even if your assumption of being beaten by random cards about 10% of the time, your betting option needs to return 90% of 975, or around 875.Using your numbers (r0unded) and the 1000 bet, .9 x Fold% x (1950)-.1*1000 = 875or Fold % = 56%.Make the hands less than random and it gets worse.Edit: My bad. Canadas post later on makes the math easier, and points out an element missing above. The correct formula is.9xFold%x1950+.9*(1-Fold%)*975-.1*1000=875 or Fold% = 10%For the all in bet the breakeven fold % increases to 20%.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users