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.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

5NL 6-max Zoom. I raise AKs got 3-bet by the bb, 4-bet called and c-bet got slammed

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 5NL 6-max Zoom. I raise AKs got 3-bet by the bb, 4-bet called and c-bet got slammed

    Hi,

    How can beginners beat the micros? I had a bit of a moan in another thread about the madness we have to face to grind a few bucks at micro stakes.

    Here the question is - Against an unknown is this a fold?

    I raise my button with AKs got 3-bet by the bb, my 4-bet called and c-bet slammed on.

    My head was telling me this is stupid JJ 190bb deep wouldn't flat a 4-bet to set mine so >>this hand<< has to be QQ+ or perhaps calling a 4-bet with JJ is the modern micros game.
    Last edited by ForrestFive; Thu Feb 07, 2013, 08:31 AM. Reason: villain's stack

  • #2
    Hey Forrest

    I am having a bit of trouble identifying what your difficulty is in this hand. We four bet preflop with AK and got a great flop when our opponent decided to flat call. What we have to go through in the hand reading process is considering what hands they can have and what hands they can't have.

    There is a general rule (the stack to pot ratio rule) that at this stack depth you should be happy to stack off with top pair top kicker on this board type. That is to say, look there is a lot of money in the pot, and we have a pretty strong hand, and there is not that much money behind. That's a kind of dumb and basic rule, but if you like dumb, basic rules then it makes bet/calling the flop a bit easier.

    Anyways, how can you win at the micros? By playing hands exactly the way you played this one. You bet for value after four-betting for value, what's wrong with all that? That your opponent put you to a tough decision with a hand that you had crushed? I would love if poker was always like that, just opponents putting me to tough decisions that if I get right I win their stack with a massive equity advantage.

    So maybe you can elaborate what I am missing, but this hand history seems to be all happy things. You played well, your opponent didn't. You evaluated the strength of your hand correctly, your opponent didn't. And so on but of course I am always missing something

    Comment


    • #3
      I'll just echo Gareth's comment about the SPR. In a 100bb cash game, if you see a flop in a 3-bet or 4-bet pot and make TPTK or an overpair, you are committed. On a rainbow flop of KJ3, you have to stack off with AA, AK, KK or JJ, especially after c-betting. Villain will spew with AQ or QQ or worse surprisingly often. (Since he's also invested so much pre-flop, he feels committed to shovelling in the rest). When the pot is big and remaining stacks are not, fold equity declines. You'll make a ton of money in the micros by making top pair in 3-bet pots against fish or maniacs that can't fold their second best hands.
      Bracelet Winner

      Comment


      • #4
        Not to mention that the villain seems to want us to fold with this action. With a hand at the top of our range it's an easy call. But I would seriously consider callling him with QQ here as well.

        Gareth is right, making money in the micros is actually really easy because we make money from our opponent's mistakes and in micros they make lots of them. This guy misplayed his 88 at every step and ended up giving you his stack as a result... what's not to like.
        Head Live Trainer
        Check out my Videos

        4 Time Bracelet Winner



        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks for the replies, @Gareth your not missing anything apart from finding the fold button to reduce showdown losses. I'm happier now to take from this a "put you to a tough decision" and making the correct call. However I don't find it easy considering I could flat KK+ in his spot as 5-betting folds out worse. Another thing is I don't fully understand SPR in certain situations. Here it's polarized I'm beat or I'm giving implied odds to draw. Like @Arty said the rainbow flop was part of my thought process. So with little money behind and as @Dave said he seems to want a fold. I would feel a lot more confident with a mathematically correct rule rather than a dumb and basic one. Please correct this I'll have a stab at the maths. Is the villain looking at $3.13 to win $2.57 in implied odds? 313/257 = 1.2 / 1 odds with all the money in and 2 cards to come. So from my crib sheet about 12 outs - so the villain would have to have a gut shot and flush draw and or better to shove? Right or wrong on my math here. If I had the correct calculation in my head I could then discount those draws from his range. Sort of reverse engineer a call knowing a draw is unlikely. I probably confused matters. Thanks again for the feed back guys. umbup:
          Last edited by ForrestFive; Thu Feb 07, 2013, 07:17 PM. Reason: gut shot and flush draw

          Comment


          • #6
            I understand what you're asking Forrest

            Would it be a big mistake to fold to the check-raise on the flop?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by TrustySam View Post
              I understand what you're asking Forrest

              Would it be a big mistake to fold to the check-raise on the flop?

              Hi Sam,

              Yes I'm thinking a fold against an unknown check raise in a 4b pot is optional.

              Problem is convincing myself can I call again and lose. Just put another in for 5NL 6-max Zoom HA - What the Flop is going on at these stakes.

              Comment


              • #8
                Please correct this I'll have a stab at the maths. Is the villain looking at $3.13 to win $2.57 in implied odds?
                Not exactly. He's not setting his own odds. He's trying to deny you the right odds to call. But because it's a 4-bet pot, with relatively small remaining stacks, you don't need much equity to make a profitable call. With TPTK, you have good equity against villain's range.

                On the flop, there is 1.59 in the pot and the effective stack is 4.11.
                You bet $0.98.
                Villain's shove is effectively a bet of 4.11 (a raise of 3.13) to make the new pot 6.78.
                For you, the pot lays 6.78 to 3.13 on a call, meaning you only need 31.6% equity. 3.13/(6.78+3.13)
                Because it's a 4-bet pot, it's almost impossible for villain to get you to fold.
                Villain would have to win this almost 70% of the time for a fold to be the right decision for you.

                In this particular hand, if we put villain on JJ+ and AK, we're only actually beating QQ, but we have 48.2% equity against that range. If we include semi-bluffs with AQ, then our equity goes up to 62%. Remember we only need 31% equity to call the shove. So with TPTK, it's an easy call.
                With anything worse, it would be a clear fold.
                Bracelet Winner

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hey Forrest!! Ahhh ... I didn't actually expect to be thinking too much about strategy with this hand when I commented - guess there's more going on with this hand than I thought at first glance? Because everybody's made such great points. Maybe I'll just sort of try to tie everything together a bit? Like, I guess Forrest's overarching question is to wonder how we might be able to tell the bluffers from the value-bettors? Because sometimes they look the same. And then, the answer to that seems to be that maybe sometimes, based on the info we have, we can't always be sure? But then Gareth/Dave/Arty make the point that what makes this hand unique is the low SPR. Like, there's 3 possible outcomes to this hand: 1. Lose $1.80 2. Win a net of $4.93 3. Lose an extra $3.13 (on top of the $1.80), so ... RULE: When there's more money in the middle, you don't need to be as sure that you're ahead to proceed (because you just have to invest a little more to win a lot). And here, a pair of K's with an A kicker, on a dry board is a solid holding. And then Dave/Arty also added that ... RULE: When there's a low SPR, people might be more inclined to try to leverage fold equity with draws. So that's good stuff - I've been really into trying to give folding more of a shot lately, but I guess maybe sometimes it's okay to be calling, eh? umbup: On the other hand, now that I'm trying to give folding more of a shot, I guess some reasons to consider a fold in this spot might be that people at 5nl oftentimes mini-3bet with big pocket pairs like JJ-AA. And a check-raise on a dry board usually signifies strength. And here since the villain didn't have much left behind, it might be reasonable for somebody to be check-shoving for value? And if the villain has AA, KK, or JJ, AK is in bad shape, whereas against a hand like QTd, AKs could still lose 30% of the time. But then I guess the rebuttal to that counterargument would be that Forrest had blockers to AA and KK, AQ (making a better pair), QT (making a straight), and Forrest also had a backdoor flush draw. So, absent player reads, in sum it looks like this was a call, and that folding was probably less EV? umbup: Maybe I AM going too far in the other direction with my folds now! You think that's possible?? Apparently!! That being said, Forrest I wouldn't be surprised if there was a timing tell that you picked up on – like knowing what we know how about the bb, I could see this person check-shoving pretty fast, without the pause you'd get from somebody holding JJ? So maybe that might be one way to try and get specific reads on the villain to try and discern whether he's betting for value or as a bluff? And then there's those other reads like #tables, stack size, (#hands played showing on our HUD if we use one), avi, etc? After playing without a HUD for a couple of weeks, sometimes those little reads can make a big difference I think, eh? I think so ... and based on a timing tell, I'd have probably called in this spot too. So I guess we're all on the same page after all?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    You don't have to think too deeply about this Trusty. Just repeat the following guidelines in your head until the ideas are ingrained.

                    [Considering 100bb effective]

                    "In a 3-bet/4-bet pot, I will stack off if I make TPTK/Overpair or better, in order to maximise profit".
                    "In a single-raised pot, it is fine to fold TPTK/overpair on the flop, in order to minimise losses".

                    While there are obviously adjustments you can make on a per-hand basis, taking into account reads/stats etc, you won't go far wrong in the microstakes if you fold to raises when you have one pair and don't have much invested, but commit yourself to stacking off when you do.
                    Bracelet Winner

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Thanks Arty & Sam for your replies, The back story here is that - now we have found our fold button - are we folding too much? Now putting ourselves in the villain's seat looking at Forrest's chip stack - what is WRONG with the action? a) Are there some implied odds IF I can get Forrest's stack b) Would I play a better hand in that way. Hopefully correcting my maths here using the ratio method (2.57+3.13)/3.13 = 1.8 : 1 in implied odds? This doesn't change much we shouldn't be worried about AQ. So thinking about this now. To me the shove is WRONG because a set or AA should check call and try to get get all my chips by the river. Is QQ shoving just hoping a K is not in my 4-bet range? Definitely a more comfient call now. umbup:

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I personally wouldn't make the play with an underpair like this villain did, but there are plenty of players at these stakes that make crazy moves.

                        A set or overpair can just call, or it can raise. Over-shoving looks more like "Please fold, because I have a weak hand or draw".
                        Sometimes the villain is shoving for big fat value w/ KK or JJ, hoping you'll call off your stack with worse, but against his entire range, you're not doing badly at all.
                        It kind of helps to have notes on players for situations like this, as players tend to be habitual. Some players tend to overbet only when they have the nuts, so you should ALWAYS fold when they shove. Others tend to overbet when they have the opposite (inc airball bluffs), so you should call with medium strength hands. The best players mix up their value shoves and and their bluff shoves, making your decision harder.

                        But as we said earlier, if he's shoving his entire range in this situation, then you have good equity against that range. Unless you have a note that specifically says "Overbet jams with flopped sets" (and believe me, lots of multitablers adopt this exact strategy) then you should be calling, because you're ahead of some of his range and the pot lays good odds.

                        Making good folds is a key skill, but in this spot a call is much more valuable. If you're not prepared to stack off with TPTK in a 4-bet pot, then don't 4-bet AK in the first place!
                        Bracelet Winner

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by ArtySmokesPS View Post
                          If you're not prepared to stack off with TPTK in a 4-bet pot, then don't 4-bet AK in the first place!
                          QFT umbup:
                          Head Live Trainer
                          Check out my Videos

                          4 Time Bracelet Winner



                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X

                          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.