PokerStars homepage
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.


No announcement yet.

PL today, input please

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • PL today, input please

    Hello all; Thanks, Dale
    3 Time Bracelet Winner

  • #2

    KK does not mind a big pre-flop pot, so you really are better off raising.
    You did.
    A standard type raise would be to 3BB + 1BB for each limper though, making it 5BB total, or 300 to go. You raised to 180.
    Even if you are attempting to "pot control" a little bit, you are still well under what you could easily have raised.
    I think you AT LEAST want to raise to 240 to go here.


    It comes with a coordinated board and all 3 are spades.
    Since both villains called your raise pre, the pot is 570.
    First you must consider what a C-Bet does for you in terms of your stack size.
    Break that down a second...

    A "standard" C-Bet would be for half pot.
    That would be 285 here.
    285 + 180 = 465, or roughly 30.6% of the total start stack you had (including the posted BB).
    That would be a pretty close to a "committing" amount for you if you get called, or if you get raised.
    Do you "know" what types of hands might call or raise you?
    Let's break that down...

    If you are against just a "naked" spade, it is most likely an As if it calls or raises any "standard" type C-Bet by you.
    That hand would have at least 12 outs against you, or a decent 51.6% equity if it gets to see the turn and river.
    We can come close to "assuming" that Heartake OR rainBows WOULD get the turn and river because their stack sizes are near your's, thusly almost at the same committment level... you also feel pretty "committed" by calling a standard type C-Bet, so that means they would "leverage" full equity if they are on 12 outs with this type of hand.

    If you face a paired spade, and since you do not have a spade, you are facing at least 14 outs.
    (9 spades, 3 non spade "hits" on the villain's spade, and 2 "hits" for thier paired card)
    Again, since we have similar stack sizes to start, all will feel relatively committed by calling a C-Bet by you, so all will derive full equity.
    14 outs has 60.2% equity against you.

    About the only hand you have good equity agaisnt would be a top pair "hit", without a spade.
    In that case, even assuming it is a non spade AJ, then you'd be fading just 5 outs.
    Villain would have 21.5% equity in that case.


    Since this is the PL league, you pretty much MUST credit Villains here as having "awareness" of the benefits of ladder climbing.
    If you assume that fact, then the chance a Villain would call, or re-raise on an all spade board WITHOUT a spade in hand goes down quite a bit.
    Where does all that leave you?

    Well, google "reverse implied odds in poker", or check out this link:

    You have essentially "hit" your hand pre-flop; you are looking at most likely holding an over pair, and that will be good more often than not.
    This means BEFORE you C-Bet any amount which "commits" you for the rest of your stack, you must analyze how likely it is that your hand is really "good".
    For the purpose of arguement, anything LESS than a 50% chance to "win" means your "hit" is NOT good for you at all.

    We see that we are ahead (mathematically) of only 1 type of hand which may call or raise a C-Bet by us.
    We also have seen that the hand we are "good" against is the one LEAST LIKELY to be held by any opponent calling or raising our C-Bet.
    How much do we "like" our over pair, with only 1 "clean out" to improve in that spot?
    Do we like it enough to "commit" our stack to it?

    If the answer is "yes, it is very unlikely these Villains would have called my pre-flop raise holding only suited cards" then..
    Why not ship all in immediately, thus exercising MAXIMUM CHANCE of folding out "just" a spade drawing A (the hand closest to 50/50 equity)?

    If the answer is "no", then why "force" the issue by betting an amount which does commit us, and also which will tend to commit a similar sized stack held by a Villain here?

    So what this all comes down to is:

    We really had 3 options here-

    1) Check, with the intent of check/folding to a large bet (anyhting committing us or the villain), or check/calling a small bet (anything we might perceive as a "blocking bet") with the intent of jamming the turn.

    2) Lead SMALL, with the intent of bet/folding to ANY raise (since any raise would be omitting to us and Villain).

    3) Open Jam (because we are "banking" on the fact a villain cannot call on jsut a spade, and that is likely all we are facing).

    You did none of these...

    You led a committing amount, and ran into a hand with 15 outs against you, or a 64.5% equity hand against you.
    When he jammed, you did "pull the trigger" as you should have, simply BECAUSE you had bet a committing amount.
    But you might have put the villain into position of making a "mistake" by NOT "allowing" him to realize his 64.5% equity agaisnt you by open jamming, leadng small, or checking to pot control (and maybe jamming the turn if the Villain had "missed"and the turn blanked).


    this really is a "hard" situation for you to see, unless you are HIGHLY AWARE of your stack size, and board texture. This is a quite common spot for more ABC palyers to find themselves in, because they are performing "standard" actions so often in "standard" situations. Unfortunately, someimes very SMALL THINGS occur in a hand that turn a "standard" situation into one fraught with great risk.

    That looks like what happened here, and you paid for it.

    Last edited by JDean; Thu Aug 04, 2011, 05:22 AM.
    Double Bracelet Winner


    • #3
      Thanks Jd great review!!

      I very much considered jamming, that was my first thought. The spade issue made me consider the check. Previous history with this player was quite likely a very bad, but large part of the decision. Top Top was well within his range as well.

      I so realize how I put myself in this predicament, and I recieved my just due.

      Last edited by dale442; Thu Aug 04, 2011, 05:30 AM. Reason: oops
      3 Time Bracelet Winner


      • #4
        Heartake is an "old PSO'er", from long before Stars bought the site...

        I have played him both live and on line.

        I know enough about Heartake that if it had been me, and I led only to see him jam, then KK is in NO WAY any "good" (he'd have at least a set or AJ with As).

        You probably didn't have that info though...

        Still, it is the 'Premiere League", with players who almost certainly know the benefits of ladder climbing in league play. That probably should have been "enough" info for you...

        Next time it probably will be though, right?

        Double Bracelet Winner


        • #5
          That is a big yes. That is why I posted here for the first time. I know I screwed up the hand....Just wasn't so sure how/when in the hand. Sad when you put yourself in a position to lose. Clearly, what happened here. The biggest issue I am having lately is moving between the different formats and adapting quickly enough to not put myself in dumbazz positions. It is coming, more time, more research, more learning,....means many less bad spots!!! Thanks to you, it is very clear now....crystal clear. umbup: Thanks again, Dale
          3 Time Bracelet Winner


          • #6
            I hope this will make you feel even better about your help here tonight. I am sitting replaying recent, and some older hands in my head with a new perspective!! One which I surely needed!! Don't throw a shoulder out , but do pat yourself on the back!! Hope this makes the time you invest worthwhile!! umbup:umbup:umbup: Dale
            3 Time Bracelet Winner


            • #7
              It does, and I really appreciate the comments.

              Thank you.
              Double Bracelet Winner



              X Cookies Information

              We have placed cookies on your computer to improve your experience on our website. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.