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.

$7 STT: Rivered Possible Underfull, 987K9 Board; River Action: Call or Raise All-In?

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

  • $7 STT: Rivered Possible Underfull, 987K9 Board; River Action: Call or Raise All-In?

    Both villains involved in this hand are randoms.

    Decided to bet out the flop to take the lead and get info. I was calling a bet anyway, so I figured betting couldn't hurt. Building the pot and denying free cards were on my mind, but I was definitely intending to pot-control this later if I got callers. If I had been raised on this flop, I would have had a difficult decision, and I think I would have folded. That would be a hard spot for sure, though.

    On the turn, I check/called for pot control. Checking happened to get me some unexpected info; UTG bet t100 into t260 and got just a call from MP1. That made me feel more confident in my holding.

    The river was a yummy board pair, but it gave a few possible villain holdings an overfull. I checked, expecting another t100 bet for me to checkraise-jam, but I was beat into the pot by MP1. Is this a call spot (t900 left behind if I lose) or a jam spot?

    Thanks for the input, guys.

    PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, 7 Tournament, 10/20 Blinds (9 handed) - PokerStars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

    UTG (t760)
    UTG+1 (t1290)
    MP1 (t1470)
    MP2 (t1470)
    MP3 (t1470)
    CO (t3160)
    Button (t760)
    Panicky (SB) (t1620)
    BB (t1500)

    Panicky's M: 54.00

    Preflop: Panicky is SB with 7, 7
    UTG calls t20, 1 fold, MP1 calls t20, 4 folds, Panicky calls t10, BB checks

    Flop: (t80) 9, 8, 7 (4 players)
    Panicky bets t60, 1 fold, UTG calls t60, MP1 calls t60

    Turn: (t260) K (3 players)
    Panicky checks, UTG bets t100, MP1 calls t100, Panicky calls t100

    River: (t560) 9 (3 players)
    Panicky checks, UTG bets t100, MP1 raises to t540, Panicky ???

  • #2
    even though i'm pretty risk tolerant, with that unexpected raise by MP1, i'd probably reevaluate and just call. not sure if that's weak, but i can only really see a couple hands that you beat, calling a jam. A9,910 J10, and maybe AK(doubtful given pf action) and maybe KQ by a random. at the point of your decision the pot is 1200
    a call gets pretty good (not great though) value for your under boat, and could also serve to invite the UTG to call along too, getting another 440 in the pot. if you win you have a pretty descent stack to get itm.
    if you lose, 900 chips left on level 1 is still plenty to get u back up to a descent stack, unless you go totally card dead, and will give you an opportunity to pick up some reads and play situations more. not just the cards.
    i'm pretty torn about this one tbh. like dave said to another poster, when close like this, make the decision that is the smallest mistake. i think a call does that. would love some more input. nice posting hand.
    obviously there's been a few hands played here (stats on villains?) or other reads?UTG's obviously a weak player limping in
    Last edited by mtnestegg; Wed Jan 18, 2012, 03:25 PM.
    May the tinfoil protect you. MT

    Comment


    • #3
      Nice analysis, mtn. This is still the t10/t20 blind level, only about 8 hands in, and my stats don't start showing until about 15 hands in (I block them until I have a decent sample size). Open limping at the t10/t20 level actually isn't the mark of a bad player in STT's; most pros actually do it with lots of pocket pairs.

      I thought this was a really interesting, tough spot. Easy forum post though.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by PanickyPoker View Post
        Open limping at the t10/t20 level actually isn't the mark of a bad player in STT's; most pros actually do it with lots of pocket pairs..
        yes but this is just a random, not a reg. hence my evaluation.
        May the tinfoil protect you. MT

        Comment


        • #5
          personally i think MP1 have a 9 so i'll jam for full value

          Comment


          • #6
            Hey Panicky! Interesting spot to say the least. Preflop: completing with a mid pkt pair. Like the play and it helps to conceal the hand. Flop: bottom set on a board with a straight draw. I like the lead bet here. It gets you the lead in the hand and also prices anyone out drawing at a straight. Actually just got done reading a section on this scenario of Annie Duke's book and she says to lead everytime here too. Turn: while pot control is a good thing, If it were up to me, I'm leading here too. With a flush and a straight draw (or even made straight), I would want to bet enough to protect the set. Especially with a flush draw now out there, any opp with a made straight should raise a lead... to protect their hand. Its' nice that UTG did it for us, but I wouldn't want to take a chance at someone drawing for free that could beat me. River: made low full house. If I thought UTG would bet, I like your idea of going for a check/raise here. However, when the opp that had been passive the entire hand suddenly wakes up and raises, that is a big red flag to me. 9 10 or 8 9 or 7 9s is definitely within the range of a preflop limper, even K9s or 99 or 88. Due to this, I like flatting MP1's raise here. Instead of using the pot control on the turn, I'll use it here and flat, as bottom full house definitely has showdown value, but there is no way to know for certain that it's the best hand. Hope you won the hand and good luck at the tables.umbup: John (JWK24) MT, like your comment too about a call here being able to lose the least and win a good sized pot(smallest mistake but can still win the hand). Even if the opp had a larger FH or quads, it's worth the call and a 900 chip stack is still very playable at 10/20 blinds.
            Super-Moderator



            6 Time Bracelet Winner


            Comment


            • #7
              Hey Panicky, interesting spot.

              I say ship it. I think if MP had a set they would have raised by now and this line looks precisely like a passive player with 9x. Especially T9 or J9. If he has K9 or 99 so be it.
              4 Time Bracelet Winner


              Comment


              • #8
                @John, if this were a structure besides a 9-man SNG, I'd have triple-barreled for sure. Since I'm comfortable folding the river facing big action on bad cards, I prefer lowering my variance by pot controlling two streets instead of one. By continuing to build the pot on the turn, I make it harder to fold the river, so by check/calling the turn, I'm anticipating future events and picking a course of action which will make my life easiest. If the river comes a J and I have under a pot-sized bet behind, I'm simply not confident in my ability to make a +EV play. I suppose there's a lot of room for debate on the optimal turn action. Definitely an interesting hand to discuss.

                @Jared, there are more than just flopped sets that beat me; a lot of two pair hands also became boats. It does seem likely that anything currently beating me would have raised earlier, but it's not inconceivable that a random might have slowplayed a hand that just became better than mine. I don't have enough experience in spots like this to recognize whether jamming is borderline bad, good, or just super +EV all around.

                Comment


                • #9
                  The funny thing about this situation is that the tournament structure does not favour high-variance plays for one's entire stack early in the game, so only calling can be correct, whereas calling would probably be just plain bad in a cash game or MTT. I think my ability to shy away from all-in's is a sign of a higher-than-average level of skill for an STT player, but you're right that it would hinder me if it keeps me from taking wildly +EV spots. If I had a better idea whether or not shoving here is wildly +EV, I'd know whether or not only calling was a good play. However, if shoving here is not wildly +EV, then my line is correct.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    IMO calling is the only sensible play here. If you call and have the best hand, you win a large pot and give yourself a solid chance to win. If you call and are beat, you still have a viable stack and can continue to play competitively. On the other hand if you shove and are beat, you lose most of your stack and can almost give up on victory. No need to be greedy. As others have said: Don't make the big mistake. Get your hand to showdown and you'll have a good chance to win. umbup:
                    3 Time Bracelet Winner


                    Comment


                    • #11
                      imo all the "ship it" comments seem to forget that this is stage 1 of an STT , and like panicky said, it is a good idea to avoid AIs when this early. if it was a cash game id ship it all day and reload if i was wrong, but here a more conservative line (that still gets a descent pot) makes more sense, as winning or losing this particular pot with this line does 2 things for you
                      1) if your best, your pretty well set to get itm.
                      2) if your beat, you still have enough chips to come back (as opposed to out w/ no chance)

                      @ marvin of coarse he has the nine, or for sure that's what he's repping, but nine what is the little dilemma we have here. we're just in a "way ahead or way behind" kinda spot, and being the 1st level, i think the call is a much lower variance play. 88, 89, 99, K9, and to a lesser extent 79 (since three 7s are accounted for), are all in an unknowns limp range. and as a side benefit, by calling we get some info on how he plays w/o risking our life this early to get it.
                      May the tinfoil protect you. MT

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Tournament EV is different than Cash EV

                        Originally posted by PanickyPoker View Post
                        The funny thing about this situation is that the tournament structure does not favour high-variance plays for one's entire stack early in the game, so only calling can be correct, whereas calling would probably be just plain bad in a cash game or MTT. I think my ability to shy away from all-in's is a sign of a higher-than-average level of skill for an STT player, but you're right that it would hinder me if it keeps me from taking wildly +EV spots. If I had a better idea whether or not shoving here is wildly +EV, I'd know whether or not only calling was a good play. However, if shoving here is not wildly +EV, then my line is correct.
                        Tournament EV is different than Cash EV!

                        I saw this post when it was first submitted; at the time, no one had replied to it. I was about to respond with one of my lengthy thought out replies, but saw this was an easy call situation. I as well, would not risk my SNG chances on a shove at this point of the tourney; especially with a workable stack still left, if I happen to lose this hand.

                        Kudos, Panicky - good call!
                        .
                        "May the cards be with you!"

                        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.