blonde poker forum

villain is decent reg, value bets wide.

Thoughts?

€2/€4  No Limit Holdem 
Prima 
6 Players 
Hand Conversion Powered by weaktight.com (http://weaktight.com/) 
 
Stacks: 
UTG  Player2 (€820.40) 205bb 
UTG+1  Player3 (€220) 55bb 
CO  Player4 (€1,032.35) 258bb 
BTN  Player5 (€722.10) 181bb 
SB  Player6 (€1,337.32) 334bb 
BB  pleno1 (€1,003.20) 251bb 
 
Pre-Flop: (€6, 6 players) pleno1 is BB :6h :8h 
Player2 raises to €12, 4 folds, pleno1 calls €8 
 
Flop: :2s :4d :7c (€26, 2 players) 
pleno1 checks, Player2 bets €20, pleno1 calls €20 
 
Turn: :6s (€66, 2 players) 
pleno1 checks, Player2 bets €44, pleno1 calls €44 
 
River: :kh (€154, 2 players) 
pleno1 checks, Player2 bets €136, pleno1 goes all-in €927.20 
 
Final Pot: €426 
 
 


He has around, €610 left otr after his €135

Guess it depends what you normally do with sets on the flop or 2 pr on the turn, if call is your standard line it looks ok,

I think sets and 2 prs are more likely to c/c flop and c/r turn as opposed to your line here. I am assuming we don't feel like we have any showdown when the 6 hits? If this is the case I would opt to c/r turn, still can do lots of get theres if he calls. Think your line in this hand is what it is, just feels a bit bluffy to me and would expect him to be calling with pretty much his entire range.

Pretty interesting hh, interested to see what others think.

This is a very good bluff IMO.

Pre feels a little suspect if he is decent.

Looks like such a sweet bluff vs his size (y)

edit: Can you play 22 this way? Seems a little unbalanced if you fold 22/44 pre which i presume you do if you dont open them utg.

Hi Pleno, will the villain not consider the check-raise all in on the river more suspicious? i.e. if you had a monster, check-calling flop then check-calling or check-raising turn makes sense, but surely he'd expect you to lead out on the river to prevent him checking behind?

Check-raising the turn with a set here is NOT the best way to play - although it is the line that weaker players very often take. Once you have chosen to check-call the flop rather than check-raise, you usually have to man up and check-call the turn too rather than pussy out and check-raise. Yes, the board is getting drawy and sometimes a really shitty river comes, but the whole point is to maximise vs villain's 3 barrel bluffs and thin value bets and you need to stay consistent with this plan. Villain will often bluff scary river cards remember!

Thus villain should expect hero to play a set/straight this way (i.e. c/c all way to the river) a decent amount of the time, so the line is consistent with having a strong hand and thus is a good bluff spot. Also, on this board run out hero has pretty much no complete air with which to bluff with, so he should be choosing some of the weak made hands in his range to turn into bluffs - blockers to villain having a set himself etc.

N.B. I don't necessarily agree with hero's play prior to the river, but I think the river c/r bluff is good.


c/c flop, c/c turn, donk river line here would be pretty bad - like I said, if you are targetting villain's bluffs and thin value bets you've got to stay consistent to the plan and not pussy out on either the turn or the river. Villain would presumably expect hero to know this, so would not expect hero to be donking the river with his good hands. Especially on this river card BTW.

makes sense honeybadger - how would your approach on the river change if you thought the villain was a weak player (i.e. and may not associate this line with strength)?

I'd try to have a set instead of third pair ;)

I feel that in 2013 this gets seen for what it is.

Everyones river aggression is sky high these days

He will most likely give you credit for half the set combos then 5 or so combos of 88-JJ turned into a bluff and click the middle button.

Another population read? This time of 400NL players...

When you say "in 2013 this gets seen for what it is", what exactly are you meaning? Because 'what it is' is going to be a relatively balanced range composed mainly of sets/straights but with some weak hands turned into bluffs to balance this. This is one of those weak hands turned into a bluff.

Also, you said "5 or so combos of 88-JJ turned into a bluff". If villain sees hero as competent he would not expect hero to turn something like TT into a bluff. Because 88-JJ is not the right part of your range to be turning into a bluff on the river.

this would work vs me everytime lol

What I mean when I say "in 2013 this gets seen for what it is" is that almost all players at 400nl will be familiar with the concept of turning made hands into bluffs, instead of bluffcatching.

So they will see this line and start to construct a range that Pleno takes this line with. We cant give any credit for straights since defending 58s/35s is very optimistic. So we are left with 12 combos of sets. Lets give 67s too just to give Pleno a really thin CRAI range otr. So now we are at 14 value combos. I imagine he will also most likely "discount" combos since he will expect the average reg to try and pile more money in at a earlier street with 1 of these 14 hands.

He will then look at the range of hands that could be turned into a bluff and from Pleno previous hands taking a educated guess at what frequency he will be doing this.

Since Pleno has 24 combos of 88-JJ, lets say A3ss,A5ss and 2 combos of 78s. We are left with 28 potential bluff combos.

Now obviously Pleno wont be bluffing with 100% frequency. However his value range is going to be perceived as waaaay narrower than 14 combos of value (due to action in previous streets and stack depth)

So what I imagine a lot of regs will think, "ok, 12 combos of sets, he didnt raise and we are really deep, lets say half the combos, so 6 combos. Is it really a stretch of the imagination that he is turning some SDV into a bluff"

It certainly isnt a bad bluff. But the reason I said "in 2013" is because these kinds of bluffs are becoming extremely common place and as a result they are being picked off way lighter than before.

thing is though if pads has the right amount of value combos for this spot then the guy doesn't "win" by just stubbornly stationing off here. Although he will be awarded the chips on this specific occasion.

For sure, if Pleno actually has all 14 combos for value here then he cant really bluffcatch "thin" at all.

However what Plenos actual range is and what his range will be perceived to be is two different things, as I am sure you know :D

As I said before, 88-JJ is not the right part of hero's range to be turning into a bluff.

fwiw, decent reg usually means still terrible :) theres no way they are ever b/calling jj/qq for 200bbs.

There isnt much else he gets to the river with though?

yeh lol, very true.

56?

Do we have all 22/44 combos pre too? Really enjoying thread.

Hands like 87s, 65s etc... these are the hands we should be turning into bluffs on the river some reasonable % of the time. We don't have that many combos of them, but we don't need that many combos of them to balance our sets.

Whenever I have pulled this sort of move at 200NL and 400NL I don't remember ever having been called by JJ or KQ - I have only ever been called by sets/two pair or AA (no-one likes to fold AA even though it is obv the same as AK or JJ here).

Quote from: dwayne110 on February 23, 2013, 11:34:09 PM
makes sense honeybadger - how would your approach on the river change if you thought the villain was a weak player (i.e. and may not associate this line with strength)?

I'd try to have a set instead of third pair ;)


Lol - I suppose that was my point, it's likely to get snapped off if the weak player is holding A-K/K-Q for example.

Surely a raise to $350 is going to achieve the same result most of the time, saving us the $250 villain would have back if he shoves the rest as he'll presume we have no fold equity? Or do you consider this looks more 'bluffy' by not going full max value?

try to think in ranges dwayne, not in a vacuum.

Maybe, maybe not. It's impossible to know how villain will interpret different raise sizes.

But the larger we make our raise size the greater number of bluff combos we are allowed to have to balance our value hands.

This is perhaps one of the most complicated but essential pieces of game theory for people to get their heads around.

but what if villain adapts and becomes clever and starts calling lighter with TPTK ect,, realising we are adding more bluff combos to are larger raise sizing's should we be adjusting to near enough no bluff combos OTR and then try to build up and construct another perceived range but continue with the same sizing, losing potential value??   this is something i have always found hard to adjust to myself.
personally i think this bluff is great, i cant see what villains UTG range pre can call off with on this board

Thanks for the feedback guys, I'm trying to develop my game which is why I keep throwing my 2 pence in on these PHA hands!  I've just been reading this article by Phil Galfond which was written in 2007 and to me seems a good starting basic for hand range analysis? How relevant/strong would you say this material is now? :

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/poker/columns/story?columnist=bluff_magazine&id=2817110


 

G Bucks in an important concept to understand, once you understand sklansky bux and general theory of poker (sklansky early book) stuff.

Probably the most important article you could read. Probably read it 5+ times myself and its time for one more!

from a GTO perspective and we're onto Game Theory as opposed to practical application here, providing you have the right amount of bluffs and value bets then your villain can't actually exploit you theoretically he can just find the appropiate calling frequency to break even against your range, and the more bluffs you're "allowed" to have in a spot then the more flexibility you'll have generally in the previous streets.

68s is in your defend range to a utg opener? Interesting as its a hand most people would 3 bet or fold pre I think

fyp

and thats why its terrible and Pleno is right

yep, I'm a recreational player.

yeah obv :)

Seriously though why do you choose to defend such a hand OOP? My standard would be to just fold tbh in this spot pre

this doen't mean anything

why what is terrible? 3b/f? And what is Pleno right about? I never said anything as wrong either just asked a question fwiw

When table selectIng, I always go for reg filled tables, that's all. You can discuss the merits of how good regs are All you like, but I'd still sooner play them, and I'd never fold 86s vs a reg to a single open

^^^ not trying to be smart or anything but I really don't understand what you mean

'when table select' isn't a sentence and doesn't really mean anything to me in the context of this thread

Sorry, I Post like pleno from my phone. Obv supposed to be when I table select

The point being that regs are lovely to play against because they are so formulaic. So if you peel a wide range vs a reg, they can't play "their style" vs you. So how does a reg EVER get 3 streets with premiums vs you on a 5 7 9 "raggy" board, throw in a 2 flush on the turn and they are going to be in a tizz.

Full in the remainder of the blanks yourself

But what about when the flop is 842, and then they bet the turn and river too with a balanced range? Regs are not going to be in too much of a tizz if you defend really wide OOP. Yes you are slightly more likely to be nutted on certain board runs outs, but you also have loads of weak hands on exactly the same board run outs. If you can have 86 on 579 then you can also have a TON of other stuff that regs can either get thin value from or bluff out on later streets.

I hate all this 'regs are terrible' stuff (it mainly comes from Pleno). The truth is that most regs play poker pretty well.

I mean unless you really beat regs for a better bb/100 there isn't a reason to game select poorly/hunt regs instead of fish. And if so wtf are you doing posting on blonde, go print the monies.

I think Plenos peel pre is fine as long as it has a frequency that isn't 100% and somewhere between 15-45% as a rough guess. Outrageous does have a good point, but its a bit strong here. You simply can't peel too wide here or our ranges are really weak. I find it hard to believe that a 400nl reg cannot dynamically adjust his double barrel percentages in order to react to our peeling. I mean he might not do it well or correctly, but as long as he isn't incredibly tight we can't be making a significant profit pulling things like this. But that isn't to say they don't have a place and are not underrated. I find it interesting Outrageous backs this play so highly and Callum basically said lol 2013 bro (w/e that means :P). Guess even the reg exploiters don't agree here.

It doesnt come from Pleno as far as I am concerned - i have never spoken strat with Pads

Regs are very predictable with their betting and Id say within 30 mins of being at any reg filled table I can have them all on the edge of a cliff

As a very non specific example - i had a "good" reg call me off for a river over shove (100bbs) with A high (which he would simply never do vs regs), just because he hadnt been to a river where he was good (or paid to see whether he was).

Im not flicking it in with J2 - thats terrible - but when you widen your range to a point where they cant define it, and you play accordingly, there are alot of 5 card run outs where their ranges just cant stand the heat you can apply -- in or out of position (obv prefer to be in) -  it gets even more fun when you have doubeld thru and you are 200bbs deep!

I would welcome the opportunity for you to rail me next time I play a cash session (this is not a frequent event) and we can talk "reg perfect" vs GJ adjusted. Infact doing it where you cant see my cards would be incred, you can play villain and see how often you make the right decisions.

I sent a HH to a friend recently - I will try and dig it out - where I got myself into a pickle - (for a reason I wont go into on here), but It happens much less frequently to me than I can do it to them.

people suggesting that its more profitable to play against a winning poker player than a losing poker player are truly off their heads lol.

If anyone needs me to prove why just ask :P

I should point out that I dont play a gazzillion tables - this is really important

Any reg filled table! What limits?

LOL Guy you are hilarious <3

Wait... you are being serious?

Just imagine what you'd do to the bad players if you really can 'wow them with your fast game' so well vs the regs!

John Black multiaccounting!

Start a diary pls Guy!

if you play one 6max table with andy, franky, george, colin and vanessa. Andy, frank and george are all average winning poker players and have an ev of 1bb/100. Vanessa is the best reg and has an EV of 4bb/100, colin is unfortunatley a very poor poker player and is expected to be a loser in this game (luckily for colin he is filthy rich from a software company he started owns several very large houses and has an incredibly hot wife so he doesnt give too much of a shit) and ofc the other player in the game, is you.

every 100 hands colin has to lose 7bb for you to break even.

Now lets replace frank and George with Alex and Stuart (who are both also losing poker players, alex especially is very poor) now the three of them only 2big blinds every 100 hand an you make a small profit.

The point isn't that you can win more off the regs than the weaker players, it's that the regs will win some off the weaker players diluting the profit you can expect to make.

Outrageous76, that is an absurd statement imo. I've played with you at 100nl and i realized how blow up u were v quickly and just adjusted accordingly. Seemed like u were just punting around. Maybe that was the case?

its obviously a massively ridiculously false statement from guy.

What he might have meant was that he had a better HOURLY by playing regs as he plays significantly more hands per hour and is playing enough tables to try and exploit them and thus show a good bb/100 and good hourly, rather than the regs who bumhunt, don't play many hands per hour at all and even though they win at 10bb/100 are playing 8000 hands per month and thus guy is winning more.

It's obviously better to play fish, playing regs can be fine, players are winning at 6bb/100 at 500nl zoom which is supposed to be the "toughest mid stakes game out there" so its definitely achievable to beat regs hard, but never more than fish.

I have no issue playing regs, I think you should tbh as its hard to get decent volume in and stay sharp if you dont. That being said i'm not above quitting certain players who i think have the better than me or changing tables cos i don't like my seat etc

You can't beat bad players because they call with anything and hit. You gotta search out the good players who respect your raises cos you can outplay them and rub their regfish dollars on your titties.

 :)up

Yep, you rep very little air OTR and can make plenty of combos fold on a board that I think lots of regs will barrel for thin-ish value, none of which you beat. wp.

At 6max 400nl roughly 25bb/100 comes off the table in rake, so Colin would actually have to lose at 32bb/100 for us to break even, all other things being equal. With 3 fish they only have to lose at 10bb/100 each on average.

@pleno: 500nl zoom isn't beatable for 6bb/100 imo. Sounds like there is some selection bias there, take the next month's results of those regs who you think beat it at 6bb/100 and average them to find a more realistic projection.

Theres been some sickos on 2p2 who have done challenges and achieved it over a decent sample. Not sure on exact figures tho. But yeh ur probs right, just heaters itts.

yeh some people have definitely beat it at 6bb/100 over 200k+ hands, and a decent amount of regs have won at over 4bb/100 over bigger samples.

but how many tried? #selectionbiasunderstandingfail

can anyone even win at poker anymore?

Just Trickett

ironic!

what? All I was saying is that its possible to achieve such win rates, obviously not everybody wins at 4bb/100 DUCY?

It's like saying "I think achieving 7bb/100 at 200nl on ipoker is achieveable" and posting lots of examples. You would then say..

but how many tried? #selectionbiasunderstandingfail

Don't 'DUCY' me you cheeky whippersnapper, you've misunderstood my post, only proving that my clumsy hashtag assessment was spot on. Take 2 mins to google selection bias and get back to me. However, Lewis clearly understands it and his post means I'm probably wrong on this one. Good motivation to get grinding tho!