Interesting hand with James Keys in the DTD £300 deepstack

[GarethW]

Will post reasoning in a bit.

schweet. sick call

[George2Loose]

I just dont get how people are supposedly only raising the nuts vs an aggro thinking opponent on this board.

I think its pretty flawed thinking to just expect to check the nuts and expect people to just bluff off every street for you, sometimes you have to induce your own action.

With lots of legitimate hands that you want to get value from (not the hand in this situation obv) there are going to be a bunch of action killers on the turn that will make the betting slow down when the original raiser actually does have a decent hand, which some people seem to forget they are allowed to have sometimes, even if they are opening the hijack.

If your perception of people raising in this situation is nuts or draws only then its so easy to get value towned surely!?

mitch, i think the point being made by the "nuts or air crew" is that hands that might raise the flop such as 2pr, and top pair with o/e check for showdown on the end when they mostly miss

Yeah, i get what your saying, but personally, if i have any of the hands i check raise the flop with that i am continuing, im going to bet the river because either;

a) I have a hand that i want to get value from because the river is going to go check check unless he missed a draw and you want to bluff catch (if that is your read of your opponents hand)

b) You have a hand that cant often win at showdown due to the way the action has gone on previous streets.

c) He might be a hero

Yeh but your also a sicko

[buzzharvey22]

We have 2 hopes playing against you keysey, one of them is BOB HOPE

[GarethW]

OK so I think up to the river my hand plays itself. IIRC I actually had Q7dd so the open is fine too

Then on the river I decided that you were capable of having a bluff. The argument that I don't know you is a valid one, however I stereotyped you pretty early as someone young, wearing a hoody, headphones and sunglasses, and you looked comfortable with live poker, playing with your chips, paying blinds unprompted, watching other players for tells etc. Also you had already had a short conversation with Alex from DTD (sick brag) which, although I didn't listen in over my headphones, tells me at the very least that you probably play a bit of poker online. So... if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck etc etc, i.e. you are probably good+aggressive. The fact that we've never played before and you had been quite quiet up until this point I think makes it more likely you will make a big bluff, because you're thinking that you ought to be deserving of some respect (maybe caution is a better word, I don't disrespect you by calling)

The hands I figured you might 'bluff' (some/all of these are not bluffs on the flop obv) are pair+up and down (35, 57, 67), 2 overs+up and down (97, T7, J7, maybe A7), 2 overs + gutshot (89, 8T, 8J). Along similar lines you could say pair+gutshot (58, 68) is possible but I think 58 folds pre and 68 check-calls flop most of the time. So combined with your value range of that got there (47, 34), full houses and flopped straights, I figured I beat more than I didn't beat, or at least near enough to make the pot odds I was getting, and called. Also there were one or two small live-tells that I don't want to say on a public forum for obvious reasons.

I obviously considered the shove but tbh in the moment I struggled to work out the maths of it. I think this is the most interesting part of the hand and would like to hear people's thoughts. At the time I figured I needed to work out roughly the ratio of hands that call a shove to hands that fold to a shove and have me beat, the number of hands I actually beat is irrelevant because it's the same result, does this seem right? And then that ratio needs to be greater than the amount of the shove compared to the amount in the pot for a shove to be better? The shove would have been an extra 3.5k I think and the pot would have had about 10k in. The hands I beat that fold are imo 65 (although this almost hand is no different to 76, people often play the same hands differently depending on how they got there, so I would expect most villains to check this on the river), 67 57 A7 and 35, total of about 42 combos. The hands that call a shove are 78 66 55 44 45 46 47 43, or about 48 combos. Doesn't actually even look close tbh, shove is probably way the better option, although I would weight the hands on the right as much more likely to show up in villain's range than those on the left. Also I think I would have been left with 4k if i was wrong and called, whereas if I was wrong and shoved, I would have been left with 500 chips. At the time tho I just thought there's too much to work out here and basically in the end I decided I would call because I can muck if I'm wrong and noone will be any the wiser (unless he has A7) but I have to show my hand and look like a donk if I shove into the nuts.

NB: My memory of the hand is that the board ran out 456 K 4, which I think is pretty crucial to my reasoning. However I could be misremembering I guess.

printed out and going on my wall.   vvvv nice poaaast

[NigDawG]

can't believe you opened Q7o pre ante

[bobAlike]

OK so I think up to the river my hand plays itself. IIRC I actually had Q7dd so the open is fine too

Then on the river I decided that you were capable of having a bluff. The argument that I don't know you is a valid one, however I stereotyped you pretty early as someone young, wearing a hoody, headphones and sunglasses, and you looked comfortable with live poker, playing with your chips, paying blinds unprompted, watching other players for tells etc. Also you had already had a short conversation with Alex from DTD (sick brag) which, although I didn't listen in over my headphones, tells me at the very least that you probably play a bit of poker online. So... if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck etc etc, i.e. you are probably good+aggressive. The fact that we've never played before and you had been quite quiet up until this point I think makes it more likely you will make a big bluff, because you're thinking that you ought to be deserving of some respect (maybe caution is a better word, I don't disrespect you by calling)

The hands I figured you might 'bluff' (some/all of these are not bluffs on the flop obv) are pair+up and down (35, 57, 67), 2 overs+up and down (97, T7, J7, maybe A7), 2 overs + gutshot (89, 8T, 8J). Along similar lines you could say pair+gutshot (58, 68) is possible but I think 58 folds pre and 68 check-calls flop most of the time. So combined with your value range of that got there (47, 34), full houses and flopped straights, I figured I beat more than I didn't beat, or at least near enough to make the pot odds I was getting, and called. Also there were one or two small live-tells that I don't want to say on a public forum for obvious reasons.

I obviously considered the shove but tbh in the moment I struggled to work out the maths of it. I think this is the most interesting part of the hand and would like to hear people's thoughts. At the time I figured I needed to work out roughly the ratio of hands that call a shove to hands that fold to a shove and have me beat, the number of hands I actually beat is irrelevant because it's the same result, does this seem right? And then that ratio needs to be greater than the amount of the shove compared to the amount in the pot for a shove to be better? The shove would have been an extra 3.5k I think and the pot would have had about 10k in. The hands I beat that fold are imo 65 (although this almost hand is no different to 76, people often play the same hands differently depending on how they got there, so I would expect most villains to check this on the river), 67 57 A7 and 35, total of about 42 combos. The hands that call a shove are 78 66 55 44 45 46 47 43, or about 48 combos. Doesn't actually even look close tbh, shove is probably way the better option, although I would weight the hands on the right as much more likely to show up in villain's range than those on the left. Also I think I would have been left with 4k if i was wrong and called, whereas if I was wrong and shoved, I would have been left with 500 chips. At the time tho I just thought there's too much to work out here and basically in the end I decided I would call because I can muck if I'm wrong and noone will be any the wiser (unless he has A7) but I have to show my hand and look like a donk if I shove into the nuts.

NB: My memory of the hand is that the board ran out 456 K 4, which I think is pretty crucial to my reasoning. However I could be misremembering I guess.

Bloody hell, forget Blondenders I think we have the next Poirot, or Miss Marple.

[LB44]

Taking lessons from Vanessa Rousso ldo

Will post reasoning in a bit. FWIW, actually the turn was a K and the river was a 4. I don't remember if the turn brought a flush draw but I know it didn't for diamonds as I had Qd7d.

Im sure the river was King, and sure the turn was Jack. I just guessed ur q7 suits because I couldnt remember them. I think I might not even remember the hand correctly anyway because your call put me in abit of a daze haha! Sick call wp!

I was trying to rep 67 or 57 hand here and then turn the river into a bluff, didnt think you could call with more air than me lol.

Good response though. Thanks. I think I know what the tells were, looking back I remember what I did wrong on the turn and river, did the exact same thing in other hand vs another guy when I had the nut straight, but I dont think he was paying any attention to our hand and he folded

[NoflopsHomer]

Fold pre vs a good villain when oop, it's a leak.

[StuartHopkin]

Every time I share a table with you James I want you to sing to me.

[tikay]

Mr K wrote......

".....Then on the river I decided that you were capable of having a bluff. The argument that I don't know you is a valid one, however I stereotyped you pretty early as someone young, wearing a hoody, headphones and sunglasses, and you looked comfortable with live poker, playing with your chips, paying blinds unprompted, watching other players for tells etc. Also you had already had a short conversation with Alex from DTD (sick brag) which, although I didn't listen in over my headphones, tells me at the very least that you probably play a bit of poker online. So... if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck etc etc, i.e. you are probably good+aggressive. The fact that we've never played before and you had been quite quiet up until this point I think makes it more likely you will make a big bluff, because you're thinking that you ought to be deserving of some respect (maybe caution is a better word, I don't disrespect you by calling)....."

Write more, Mr K, that's great stuff, all the better because we rarely see that sort of thinking so beautifully articulated.

I think we all do a bit of that stereotyping. Personally, I widen my Range depending on oppos garish Hoodie wear-age (add 20%), headphones (add another 5%), age (all kidz are at it, add 40%), & that cool way peeps like Praz & James place their chips in the middle (deduct 30%).

But really, it's great reading.

Post more, please.