This week’s WYP is based on a hand I witnessed during a rare live cash session at the Hollywood Casino in Charles Town, West Virginia. Rare for me, that is- the Hollywood has a surprisingly large and active poker room.
Hero and Villain are both regulars at the casino but don’t have significant history together. Villain is a quiet Asian guy in his early 20’s. He always borders on nitty and is especially so today because he’s playing 5/10 rather than his usual 2/5. He’s up on the session and seems inclined to keep it that way.
Hero is a white 40-something small business owner. Villain probably perceives him as tighter and less creative than he is but also knows him to be a winner in the game. He still has roughly the $2000 he bought in for, and Villain covers.
Villain open limps for $10 in early position. Hero raises to $50 with Td Th two off the button, everyone else folds, and Villain calls.
Flop comes 9c 6c 2h. Villain checks and calls $80.
Turn is the Ts. Villain checks, Hero bets $200, and Villain raises to $700. He is suddenly jittery, bouncing a bit in his seat and hands shaking as he pushes out his raise. Pot is $1160, and Hero has about $1600 still in his stack. What’s your play?
Post your thoughts here. If you choose to call, please also try to discuss how you will play various rivers. Results and my thoughts will go up on Friday.
I gave villian a range of 99,66,22,78s,t9s,t9c,qjc, based on your read. Almost everyhand in his range is calling a shove so theres no reason to flat and let a scare card come off. Ship it in with about 70%+ equity vs his range
I’m going to make the simplifying assumption that Villain never has anything he doesn’t think is a total monster. There are 4 combos of 78s and 9 combos of slowplayed sets. He might have raised 99 preflop, and he might also have decided to play 87o for whatever reason.
There are some obvious analytical steps to take here, but first I think we should point out a few things about live play:
(a) Villain’s raise is actually likely to be quite large in his own eyes. It’s less than pot-sized, but 500 more is probably serious business for him; siilarly, he is likely to have seen Hero’s 200 bet as serious business.
(b) Over the table, a really important piece of information is how Villain behaved _on the flop_. With an OESD, and playing bigger than usual, this is a trivial check-call in the eyes of many opponents, and I would expect much less indecision/hesitation than if he flopped a set. There are many places to look for physical information, but the flop is maybe better than the turn in this situation.
Ack, I have more to say, but there’s a family meal in 5 minutes…
In my experience in live games nits usually limp call with mid to small pairs or suited aces. I just don’t see a nit limping and calling 5x BB with a suited connector. It can’t be ruled out since he’s been winning. People tend to play more speculative hands and limp call with them OOP if they are up (at least at live tables from my experience). If you assign a range of suited A2-AJ of clubs, 78s+o, 99, 66, or 22 then Hero’s equity is 57%. You might be able to take out the sets since he probably would have donked or check raised the flop with a flush draw possibility, but I think it’s just as likely as limp calling with 78 (meaning you can’t rule it out).
However his physical actions as describe is an indicator of strength. In my experience it’s one of the more reliable tells. If you narrow his range down to lower sets or made straights then hero’s equity is down to 49.6%. If it was me I might actually fold, but it would really need to see the action myself and have a lot of confidence in my read. I once got away from KT on a JJJK9 board when they other guy had J4o. Looking at his reaction to the flop lead me to believe there is no way he could make that same reaction unless he had a Jack (he jumped up in his seat ever so slightly immediately when he saw the flop).
So just reading what I’ve read here I would say shove. Your equity is good and I wouldn’t know what cards to avoid on the river if I just called. However if I saw the action myself and I felt highly confident in my read that he has the nut straight I would be able to fold.
Base on the fact that you know what both were holding (since nits tend to not show their cards unless they have to) I’m guessing stacks go in and villain had the straight on the turn.
I shove. I’m not really sure of the odds at $5/$10 live of a nitty, good player limping in early position with 78 (suited or not suited) and then calling a raise vs. doing that with a small pocket pair, but I’m going to say he’s more likely to have the pocket pair. So my estimate of his range is 75% sets and 25% 78, so definitely getting the right odds on a shove (assuming he’s calling about half the time with lower sets). Even if I’m off on the range and it’s 1/3 sets & 2/3 78 then I still think it’s the right odds (36.7% pot equity with 22.7% odds to hit a full house (ten outs) vs. 78 and 97.7% odds to win vs. lower set (one out); by my calculation he would have to have 78 more than 86% of the time for shoving to be -EV, and that is assuming he doesn’t call the shove half of the time with his lower sets. I think it’s not likely he has 78 >86% of the time, but who knows maybe I am wrong.).
I also shove so I don’t risk making a bad decision on the river.
2nd choice would be a fold. If we put him on 78, we don’t have the right implied odds to draw to a full house so I think that’s the worse option.
Your description of villain def. would describe me playing up to $2/$5 if I was up big.
Is either villain or hero a student of yours?
Tl;dr– Skip to cliffs.
Limp-calling 22,66,99,T9s, and 78s all make sense in EP, FR live handed poker, especially if stacks are 2k effective (or greater) with most of the table. I can explain why this is the case if someone wants but I’ll use it as a working assumption.
It seems very unlikely that villain is ever check-raising the turn without a monster. So what we should do then is start with a narrow range of 22, 66, 99, T9s, 78s, and see what of those hands we can underweight, overweight, or eliminate, based on the spot and his sizing.
If effective stacks were 2k, pot on the flop was 115, pot on the turn was 275 before there was action, and once there is the check raise Hero has to call 500 into 1175 to see a 1675 pot on the river with 1170 behind. Now it strikes me that smaller check-raise sizes would be able to set up less than a pot sized shove on the river. For example, if villain check-raised to 550, the pot on the river would be 1375 with 1320 behind effective. 600 would set up a 1475 pot with 1270 behind. It isn’t super clear if Villain is going to be competent enough to do these calculations in game, but I imagine its reasonable to believe he would see 550 as a viable “get the money in” sizing. What this really tells me that, at the least, this sizing should eliminate the 78cc. While 78cc does have protection concerns, they aren’t nearly those of other monsters, and moreover, Villain isn’t going to perceive protection as much of a concern. The thing then to weight it seems is he more or less likely to make this size with 22,66, or 99 than 78dd, 78hh, 78ss. Both have protection concerns, but 78 actually has more. 78 is worried about 9-12 board pairs and 9-11 clubs, as well as possibly 6 7x or 8x. He is worried about these both killing his action and giving him the second best hand. Sets are really only concerned with the clubs and the 8, it seems to me. But at the same time villain is going to probably be equally scared to play rivers with a set as he is the nuts just by virtue of its absolute strength, so I would have a hard time figuring if his sizing affects sets v 78s not of clubs in any way.
Villain borders on nitty, Andrew knows him somehow or to some degree, and is protecting a win. I think this is enough info to rule out 78o from his EP limping range. I feel like we have to discount 99 because of the limp pre. While I think its a good play, more than tenable it might be optimal on this table, its unclear if Villain would always limp 99. T9s it should be pointed out, isn’t possible since all 4 suits are on the board or in Hero’s hand. So of the 3 99 combos I would like to imagine he can have 2/3 of those, ie: he would have opened 1/3 of the time limped 2/3 of the time. That’s the estimation I would make without knowing more.
I disagree with your preflop analysis when you don’t include suited aces in a limp call range. I also disagree with you when you say it’s “very unlikely Villian raises without a monster”. Put yourself in the villain’s shoe with a nut flush draw. You view hero as tight on uncreative so you can rule out 78. 2 c-bets for reasonable amounts could mean a monster, but could also be a TPTK type of hand. You have 9 solid outs, 12 if hero has JJ,QQ, or KK. A raise gets hero to fold TPTK type hands, and since you view him as tight and unimaginative and there is now a straight possibility maybe even an over pair. Seems like a good spot for a semi-bluff.
And I wouldn’t read too much into sizing, in the sense that he made a $700 raise instead of a $550 raise. With online play you know at all times exactly what’s in the pot and stack sizes. In this case hero probably has a mountain of $5 chips and a few $25 and $100 chips scattered around. If villain was looking to set up a pot size all in bet or less he could just have estimated $700 will do the trick.
Continuing this novel, we get to a range of 2 combos of 99, 3 of 66, 3 of 22, and 3 of 78s. This is a narrow range sure, but villain is representing a narrow range. We have 77.23% equity if the model is accurate. We should be concerned with losing action from 22 and even 66. One way we could lose action from them is obvious, if we call and the river is a club, a 7, an 8, even an A, or a club that is a 7,8,A. I think there are reasons an A is a scare card, but unless it is a club I don’t think it will cost us him stacking with 22,66,99 (I’ll save that for brevity). Its genuinely credible that villain could check-fold a club, since he would perceive Hero’s river betting (shoving) range as only better since he has the ability to check behind, its less clear how he would perceive a 7 or an 8. 9 clubs and 6 7s or 8s make for 15 possible action killing outs.
What the shove now argument has missed so far is that 3 bet shoving the turn is also a way we could lose action from 22 and 66 — Villain could talk himself into a Hero fold. What would villain see Hero 3 betting all in with on the flop? AA? AT? I think villain might construct a pretty narrow range for Hero 3 betting all in on the flop, like AA, T9s, 22, 66, 78s, 99, TT. And Villain might start (with good reason) discounting 78s, 22, AA, T9s because he would either overlimp preflop with 78s, T9s, 22, or just call turn with T9s, AA, 22. So the real risk we face is shoving and getting a 3 78s, 3 66, 3 22, 2 99 turn check-raise range becoming 3 78s, 2 99, 2 66, 1 22 turn calling all in range. Fortunately we still crush this range. So its really a matter of deciding between two very profitable things. One really good thing about calling turn is that we never fear any river card, we aren’t worried about a club, the board pairing, or a 7 or an 8. On a club villain basically has no flushes, so we can call a shove, as with the board pairing, and with a 7 or an 8 since he can still value shove his sets. On all these cards we can value shove ourselves if checked to. We are only worried about villain check-folding some of them. If villain can legitimately hero fold 3 of 8 set combos on the turn to a 3 bet shove, then calling to see a scare card river 30% of the time seems much better, since we stack his 8 set combos much more than 70% of the time, he’s not guaranteed to check-fold on a 8 river, or a Kc river, and he’s not guaranteed to not value shove on those cards anyways.
I think its close. If we bet/3bet the turn we can still rep hands like A8cc, A7cc, QJcc, KJcc, KQcc, which is great. Though we can rep these by bet/calling as well, it doesn’t actually play to our advantage. On the other hand if we bet/3bet the turn I doubt we can rep those value hands Hero wants to stack like JJ+ and he might get suspicious enough to fold some sets. Then again, if he can check-fold some clubs, presumably that means he can check-fold 78dd, 78hh, and 78ss on a club river as well, so that on like 7 cards we get him to check-fold his entire range including better, but again this shouldn’t be a good thing…..
When we fill on the river we should always be able to stack his straights and worse full houses since he can put us on a missed club or combo draw or unless its a 2, trips that had a gutshot on the turn. So we never lose action when we fill on the river if we bet/call. If we hit a club we are never worried about value shoving when checked to since he can never have flushes, and presumably his check-fold frequency with 78 isn’t different than his check-fold frequency with sets. Calling his shove since he can never have flushes seems like a good idea, but at the same time he’s going to be less likely to shove 22 than 78dd. Actually the 7 and the 8 should probably be dealt with in separate categories. If he check-calls or value shoves a 7 he might not do the same on an 8.
I kind of feel like this is a counter-intuitive spot. The standard analysis would be that since there are action killing cards on the river there is merit in 3 betting the turn all in, and since we have the toppest set, the set that dominates all others, then we also definitely want to stack off on the turn with equity versus the nuts and locks versus undersets.
But if we look deeper, there should be a real fear that villain hero folds a weak set because he realizes the badness of his own line. Like if villain has the image he does, knows Hero knows his image and is a tight thinking player himself, then check-raises the turn to stack AA, then gets shoved on on the turn, villain is going to suddenly realize that he isn’t stacking AA, and that his line isn’t accomplishing what he wanted to at all. Because of that the threat of folding out the hands that toppest set dominates is real the traditional logic of getting it in against a ton of dominated hands with the top of our range when we can isn’t going to hold. Instead we can keep our perceived range the widest by calling turn. We don’t fear any card giving us the second best hand on the river, we don’t fear making a poor decision. The only thing we fear is Hero check-folding a hand that we could have gotten it in with 97% equity against on the turn. But I have to believe that happens less often than the times he actually folds a 97% equity hand on the turn. The pot will be very big on the river for villain to check-fold a set, while on the turn he will be acutely aware he isn’t getting odds to draw versus an overset or the nut straight.
Cliffs: Call turn, shove any river when checked to, call any river when shoved on with possible exceptions of Ac, Kc, 8c. Not because he has ever has flush but b/c he’s very unlikely to shove these and much more likely to shove them with 78dd than 22.
It is funny to read the detailed analysis above, probably coming from guys who beat online. But remember this is live. Villain is taking a shot at a bigger game, described as nitty, and here his hands are shaking. He has 87 at least 95% of the time. Live ranges are much more narrow than online.
That said. I think he will call off all rivers since he had the nuts on the turn and will rarely fold. So you are getting the right odds to fill up. Call turn and do not bluff river if you do not fill up since he will call too frequently . If you do fill up and he checks, shove river.
Just got back from the casino to see your post… I’d have trouble assigning a 95% certainty to any holding in this spot. But since I also played online yesterday you must be right…
Normally, I hate hero folds, but here the live tells really do dwarf everything else. He could take the same actions with lower sets, but there is no way he would have this specific behavior with anything other than 78 IMO. This is the kind of spot where the wisdom of the guy who’s played in casinos for years is not to be disregarded. I’d bet willing to bet my entire bankroll that the villain has 78 here.
I guess my sarcastic post wasn’t so clear… but I’ve been grinding out live games for years. I just thought it funny that the quoted poster came in with the “must be online player if they are thinking about a situation deeply, in a more complicated way than my homespun wisdom” angle. Its just silly… like betting your entire bankroll on anything.
Villain knows Andrew or Andrew knows him. Its pretty clear villain could feel like the turn is a mandatory check raise with bottom set because of his background, playing style, etc. At the same time, he could be scared shitless about losing his whole stack, running into the top of Hero’s range despite him making the best play. So monsters under the bed syndrome is an equally plausible explanation for the hand shaking in my wealth of experience.
Like, a lot of people have constructed very narrow ranges for villain, we’re definitely on the same page that way. We all agree he has a narrow range, I think some people might be confused thinking that 6-8 combos of sets is somehow a wide range.
You seem to be assuming that I am the Hero. Here’s how I described him in the OP: “Hero is a white 40-something small business owner. Villain probably perceives him as tighter and less creative than he is but also knows him to be a winner in the game.” I know we’ve never met in real life, but I think you know enough to know that that’s not what I look like!
Lol. No I am definitely not assuming you are Hero don’t worry! I am saying that you have to know Villain somehow to know he is taking a shot right? And that therefore villain is likely to have a skill set that tells him, rightly or wrongly, that should he get to the turn with a set of deuces or a set of sixes, check-raising would be better than check-calling. I just don’t know how else you could know a quiet person in their early 20s (another hint) would be taking a shot. So not to say that actual Hero knows this or would make that inference, we aren’t privy to every conversation at the table. But I am sure Villain didn’t announce to the table that he was shot-taking and taciturn. Anyways the idea that when he gets to the turn with a set of sixes or deuces, he would check raise, is pretty integral to the idea that he hopes he doesn’t run into the top of hero’s range and gets oversetted (the shaking hands). Its making the right play in a big spot because he has some skills knowing that sometimes its not going to work out and he’s going to feel the pain. Anyways, yeah, that’s what I meant by you knowing him somehow, not that you are hero, but rather that we can then make a little bit of an assumption about his play.
This is quite ironical, because I am actually an online kid but seriously Gareth, there’s nothing wrong with betting my entire bankroll on something if I am dead sure. Obviously I wouldn’t do it unless I thought I could make a huge amount of money and I was almost 100% sure. Though again, “bet my bankroll” was a figure of speech here, though I would genuinely consider huge bets if someone gave me good odds here. I agree that sets are part of a very narrow range, but they are inconsistent with his behaviour of suddenly becoming agitated on the turn, because the turn is a innocuous card for a set given his reads on you. Straights do explain his sudden agitation perfectly.
My reasoning isn’t really about the general idea that he is a scared nit and has a narrow range. It’s about those facts combined with the fact that he seems especially nervous only now. Also given his disposition, I would have expected him to c/r the flop a lot of the time if he did have a set.
IME a live nit would not Beluga Whale with just clubs here, but I would have AcTc solidly in his range. His image is not one to turn a missed club draw into a big bluff on the end. I would not have too many clubs in his range (AcTc and Ac2c really), so it’s not clear who would be more scared of a club on the river. I don’t think you can expect him to c/f a straight on a club river even if he is a nit unless Hero has a supertight image. This is an underset so often. Live players have trouble folding sets, so I tend to weight that less than Gareth. The risk of losing value to a club or 8 on the river is equal to or greater than villain folding 22 to a turn shove IMO. It would be helpful to know if Hero’s image would allow Villain to think AcTc is a possibility for Hero (sounds like not from Andrew’s description). Agree that shoving combo draws is generally less frequent live. With a range like [[all sets, 78s, AcTc, Ac2c]] and maybe [[Ac8c or Ac7c]], this seems like a shove. The whole monster tell only gives me a little more anxiety than usual.
the pysichal response seems to be associated with the T so I think 87 is by far the most likely holding. Fold or shove (and pray)
I’m with Fuel55. It’s overwhelmingly 87 – given the nitty tight image. I question whether the described player is limping in with that type of hand and calling a raise in the first place – particularly with everyone folding around to him, but described villain is not going to essentially get it in without the nuts in a game above his bankroll.
Even though Villain is going to be out of position and will be calling a 5x raise after his open limp I wouldn’t put it past him to call with 78s.
He’s closing the action, you see a lot less hands live and he might be deciding to play, plus it’s s0000000ted!
I know I’ve taken fliers in bad spots because I was either bored or I just “felt like it”.
Wow that’s a lot of analysis already posted. Not going to read it all but here are my thoughts from what I have read:
1. People think in live poker, it’s almost always going to be 87s or 87o here. I disagree, I’m not too experienced but I have played live poker. Pocket pairs are just as likely to limp (aka sets at this point) as 87o. And we don’t even have any indication that he limps 87o.
2. Even if he has a straight, we have like 25% equity. Add in a few combos of sets and it’s an EASY shove.
Text results appended to pokerstove.txt
3,432 games 0.005 secs 686,400 games/sec
Board: 9c 6c 2h Ts
Dead:
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 48.601% 48.60% 00.00% 1668 0.00 { 99, 66, 22, ATs, 87s, 87o }
Hand 1: 51.399% 51.40% 00.00% 1764 0.00 { TT }
If you add in AT for top pair top kicker and one semi-bluff combo, it becomes even easier of a call since we become the favorite vs his entire range.
Board: 9c 6c 2h Ts
Dead:
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 47.138% 47.14% 00.00% 1680 0.00 { 99, 66, 22, ATs, 87s, Ac8s, 87o }
Hand 1: 52.862% 52.86% 00.00% 1884 0.00 { TT }
This is a tough one. The live tells indicate nothing but pure strength. My interpretation is that he is very very strong and desperately wants to get it in, but he is scared of being drawn out on. Unfortunately, the problem with live tells is they often do nothing but re-confirm what his betting action indicates. There is just no way this person is ever check-raising this turn without a HUGE hand.
However there IS one very interesting aspect to his behavior, which is that he is as Andrew describes, becomes SUDDENLY jittery on the turn. In other words, from the villain’s perspective the hand got really big on the turn. There are two reasons why I think villain almost never has anything other than 78 here.
Reason 1: If he has a set there is very little reason for him to be worried about flushes or straights given that he thinks we are very tight. He won’t assume we would make the big raise preflop with 78 and its not particularly likely that we have two clubs therefore his fear seems out of place.
Reasons 2: A straight perfectly explains his sudden reaction on the turn, because he now has a big hand on a dangerous board, which wasn’t true on the flop. It’s also very likely that he realizes we have a set quite often here, because the second barrel is indicative of quite a lot of strength.
If you just analyze this purely according to the action and maths, his range is a bunch of sets various 78 and maybe T9s. I don’t think its that unlikely that a live nit will limp call 78s this deep and in fact that seems standard to me a from a live nit’s perspective.
We don’t have the odds to hope for a full-house and he won’t fold if a club comes, so I fold here.
I wish I would have read your entry before posting mine. It pretty much sums up what I was thinking.
I really think the biggest thing to this are the visual ques. For others thinking it might be a set over set cooler, I don’t think that is the case.
Our villain becomes anxious when the 10 rolls off. If he had a set he wouldn’t check raise the turn. In most cases he would of either check raised the flop and be happy with what he won or he would have called the turn and possibly check folded the river if he didn’t get his full house.
I mostly agree with shadyJ saying that :
“I gave villian a range of 99,66,22,78s,t9s,t9c,qjc, based on your read. Almost everyhand in his range is calling a shove so theres no reason to flat and let a scare card come off. Ship it in with about 70%+ equity vs his range”
Pushing is +Ev, espacially, because a lot of cards could come on the river that will kill the action, when hero has him beat already.
10 cards give you the nuts (10,666,222,999) plus 9 other clubs [assuming he doesn’t make quads}. Why not call take all of it if you fill up + if a club falls, maybe he checks & you can shove, and you steal (assuming he folds a straight). He might call river with a straight or set but those outcomes don’t change if you shove turn. If you think Villain shoves all rivers (I don’t have a good guess about that) then I think shoving turn is best.
I really don’t mean to dish out a bad beat story since I know everyone hates them, but this one seems relevant. Live 1/2 game was about to break up and was like 3 handed. Villian is playing like he has QQ+ and AQ+ (I raised on button and he 3-bet a large amount from SB). I flop top set Jacks. He raises and I call the flop. Turn is a 7 which completes and an unlikely GS if he was playing T8. He bets and I re-raise enough so a river all in bet will be something like 2/3 pot or less and he calls. Another 7 comes and I figure that’s a good card for me in case he did have T8. The eff’r went runner runner for quad 7s. So trust me, base on recent history he only has 2 outs to the nuts.
IMO, the benefit of potentially using a river club to bluff a straight < club scare card shutting down worse (let alone potentially losing to a flush, though you'd think a scared money guy would lead a flush OTR pretty much always).
We have a nit playing above his normal stakes, visibly shaking check-raising the turn.
In my experience shaking or being jumpy means you have it. Normally people have less visible tells when bluffing because they’ve made up their mind before the cards come off that they are going to bluff. (think – I’m going to play my J2o like AA this time)
I know when I’ve played and hit gin that I have to steady myself. I have to focus on doing my same actions that I’ve done before. There have been times where I’ve knocked my chips over or didn’t grab them in the same order or lots of small things.
Either way it seems pretty obvious that he has the straight. Whether he also has a flush to go with it unless you think you could get him off of it if a club came. With roughly 1100 eff behind and a pot that’s going to be around 1700 I’m not sure if we can. (although he might if he’s playing scared)
As far as weighting other hands with the visual tells that we’ve gotten I think we can discount a lot of holdings since the Ten has certainly gotten his attention. Even though if he has 78s then logically thinking is he’s also got 109s in his range.
Board: 9c 6c 2h Ts
Hand 0: 77.841% {T9s, 87s}
Hand 1: 22.159% {TdTh}
We’d have to put in 500 more and leave ourselves 1100 behind in 1660 pot. If the 10c comes on the river and our nit takes 2 to 3 minutes and then quietly says all in with nervousness in his voice are we beating him into the pot?
If we call we’re left with about 2/3 PSB left. If we don’t pair the river I think we can fold. If we pair up on the river how much do we bet? If we shove does he fold his straight? I think he would. (going off player information we have) If we bet 350/400 I think he might talk himself into a call since he’d be risking 400 to win 2000. He’d have to right 1 out of 5 times to break even.
Tough spot for sure. I think shoving the turn is incorrect though going off our description of villain. Even though he’s a nit it doesn’t mean he CAN’T play 78s and when a nit’s taking a shot, start check raising I normally give them credit for it.
1. Fold
2. Call -> Check/Fold non-paired rivers
3. Call -> Call/bet 400ish on paired rivers
“If the 10c comes on the river and our nit takes 2 to 3 minutes and then quietly says all in with nervousness in his voice are we beating him into the pot?”
Um, yes.
I should have added that I’d never fold quad 10’s. Villain would have to flip over 87cc for me to fold.
Just going off our description of the situation and Villain if the 10c came on the river it would mean he’s turning his straight into a bluff or he’s jamming his nut flush into a paired board.
Villain is described as playing above his bank roll tonight and is up and looks to keep it that way.
Hero has raised preflop, c-bet and then called a check raise on the turn with less then a PSB behind.
Turning his straight into a bluff instead of having it as a bluff catcher doesn’t seem right. Also him jamming the nut flush on a paired board after hero has shown strength seems strange.
What about all or almost all of the full houses for value? Would “tigheter” hero raise 66 or 22 pre?
Pretty happy to valueshove.
Despite nitty descriptions, villains really tend to treat all sets like the nuts here. With bottom sett or middle set this would be gross, but with top set pretty clear jam.
Flatting I think is a mistake, because if we’re continuing its because we think we’re ahead of his range on the turn, and if that’s the case then jam and avoid a potential action killing / scary river where he accidentally bluffs us off the best hand. Flatting to boat up, or induce another bet seems bad – as I doubt villain is check-raising light here given description. This is just a spot where villain is pretty value heavy, but TT is ahead of his value range.
That being said, I can’t see how anyone justifies folding turn. We are calling $500 to win $900 with at least $500 more implied odds. Pot odds alone justify seeing the river.
Finally, I can’t speak much to live reads as I rarely play, but I do think its important to note that what everyone considers ‘strong’ can actually be a worse value hand! If villain has 99 and puts hero on a hand like KK/AA – of course he’ll be nervous, he might win $2000! The read of ‘strong’ doesn’t mean he has exactly the nuts.
That’s the thing about live tells, you have to be really sure about your read. Especially when it involves your whole stack. I’ve seen people get shaky hands on a bluff. And there are those who will think bottom set in this spot is the nuts. In marginal spots (like to call a half pot size bet on the river) if am fairly confident I picked up a tell I’ll usually go with my read. In this spot I would need to be darn sure about my read for it to affect my play.
Agree with those saying that it looks a lot more like a straight than a worse set. If hero has a read that villain became jittery specifically on the turn then a straight makes far more sense.
I’m inclined to think he doesn’t play a pair + flush draw like this on the turn, because I doubt he expects to get a lot of folds, and he doesn’t want to get shoved on.
Also when doing the equity calculations we have to discount pocket pairs somewhat since some of the time he’s going to check-raise them on that board – a lot of turn cards either kill his action or lead to him getting outdrawn.
We have 22% equity vs a straight. If we knew for sure that he has a straight, and that we always get his stack when we fill up then I think we might have correct odds to call intending to fold any river we miss, but it’s cutting it fine.
To the guy with 1.fold 2.call c/f non paired 3. Call bet 400 on prd boards. This advice is just bad. If we are calling the turn only to fill up and folding any other river. Then when we do fill up we need to bet at least 600ish to make turn call break even, so your line you lose money no matter what.
And that’s fair. Looking on it I’m not sure we can even call unless we plan on folding.
Any amount we bet at the end is going to look suspicious. I was trying to find an amount that Villain could call on the end of a paired board.
Which one does Villain call if any into a 1660 pot on a paired board?
1. Betting 400 leaving 700 behind?
2. Betting 600 leaving 500 behind?
3. Jamming 1100?
As you note betting 400 isn’t a break even bet. (I’m not sure how you figured this out so if you could elaborate that would help)
We need to call 500 to win 900. We’re getting like 1.8 to 1 on our call. If we assume that Villain is not going to put any more money in on a paired board and that we’re folding on non-paired rivers were still not getting the right odds to call. I’m not convinced that Villain has an under-set.
Board: 9c 6c 2h Ts
Hand 0: 65.909% {AcTc, T9s, 87s}
Hand 1: 34.091% {TdTh}
For one reason or another I’m having a hard time figuring our odds.
500 to 1000 = 2 to 1 or 50%?
500 to 1500 = 3 to 1 or 33%?
500 to 2000 = 4 to 1 or 25%?
So the pot would need to be about 1500 for us to call 500 for us to making money correct?
If we jam the rest of our stack of 1100 then Villain has to call 1100 to win 2760 or 2.5 to 1. With Villains range he would have the correct odds to call.
It appears that in any situation we’re either not getting the right odds to call or giving our opponent the correct odds to call. Calling and then folding a non-paired board I believe has us losing the least amount of money if we exclude all under sets.
I was this nit the first time I played up to $2/$5 live after having a great day at $1/$2. I was at a table full of regulars (which seemed to me like sharks). One hand I had pocket T’s on a AT33 board and check-raised a guy all-in. I must have been shaking like the villain from this hand. Villain (asian guy) stared me down a long time and finally asked me a couple times “Why you so nervous?” Finally he reluctantly called with A3. I didn’t have the absolute nuts but I thought I was good. So maybe this hand’s villain could have this reaction with other hands besides 78.
There is a huge difference between having a set on a board with a possible straight or flush and the board you described there. Out of 1326 possible hands you only have to fear 7 (the six AA and the one 33), and you could probably discount AA based on preflop play. A3 in that spot is a much tougher fold than top set in this.
First many wishes to all for a huppy new year in your life and poker games…
To our hand now… I don’t think hero can fold in any street. So, in my opinion, the problem is reraise all-in now or wait the river..
I think villain nervousness and shaking aren’t because he has the nuts but because he play higher than usual and as a result the bets are much bigger in this stakes… He is regular so he must feel comfortable with nuts…
About his range it looks very difficult to me to limp and call a big raise OOP with 78.. A small pair or a hand like A-Xs (with X=7,8,9,T,J) looks more likely..
Anyway he has now a made hand (set,78) a combo hand (AcTc for top pair and nut fl.dr.) or he decide to make a semi bluff to look like a made hand (A7c,A8c for gut shot and nut fl.dr.)… Less likely the semmi bluff…
In both cases I think hero have to go all-in now… He can’t fold if villain has 78 and he miss the river to full… but he may loose the river bet in the other cases if the river is a club and villain has set or in any other river if villain semi-bluffing…
Interesting point about the tell, Georgios. Being comfortable vs. nervous with the nuts may be more of a factor of experience vs. bankroll/stakes. That rings true to my experience. Anyway, it is another reason to consider but not overweight the read.
QJCC or J8CC anyone? Ferris? Bueller?
Results and my thoughts will go up on Friday.Am I missing something? Wheres your thoughts Focoult?