DTD 300- Tough spot or easiest fold ever

[the rage]

I actually think that your fist mistake was in not 4 betting pre flop. You're hand is way ahead of villian's range and i think that if villian has AA or KK he will more than likely jam all in pre flop and give you an easy decision to fold.
 As played,  you only have TPTK. When villian bets out on the flop, you may well be ahead, and up against KQ, or K6 or some other similar hand. If you had 4 bet pre i think you would have got rid of villian's junk hands, prob incl 88, 66 etc. You would have probably been given an easy decision to fold if you were being crushed pre flop, but as it stands you really don't have any idea whether you are in ahead or not.

You still have a good stack if you FOLD.

By 4bet/folding you're turning AK into a bluff.  Since it is a relatively strong hand it makes doing this pretty bad mostly.  With AK you want to 4bet for value when you think villain will either 5 bet bluff a decent amount of the time or 5bet for value with worse hands.  Will our opponent really get 120BBs in pre with a worse ace or a random bluff?  If we dont think so then we can either call and play a flop in position against his 3betting range which might include hands we dominate, and we have position and are pretty deep.  4bet/folding is turning Ak into 72o

I really disagree with your 3bet range for the villain based on the info given in this thread, but if he was 3betting 22+,Ax+, Kx+ then how wide is he 5 betting our 4bet?  If he is still 5betting ridic wide then 4bet/get it in is fine, but if he is 3betting that wide, but only 5betting JJ+/AK then flatting gives us position 120bbs deep where we keep him in, we crush most of his range and we will play better than him postflop most of the time anyway.  In reality , from the description given Id be surprised if they didnt flat almost that entire range.

Cheers Boba. I appreciate that my comments about villian's 3 bet range might seem contradictory, but i do think that villian MIGHT 3 bet light, whereas i would expect him to only be five betting with a very narrow range (AA, KK). If this was the case, getting him to fold, or play a likely inferior hand out of position against our AK is surely not such a bad thing?

[Nit Tendencies]

Dave, I don't think it makes a massive difference but in the AT hand he did check/raise the flop. So he has some aggression in him. Ok, he did then proceed to call it off but it was his own aggressive action there that led to all the money getting in the middle.

Yeah but Charles this is a completely different kind of aggression. This is aggression to protect his hand because he has top pair top kicker and doesn't want to get outdrawn, not aggressive with a semi bluff after 3betting pre. These two things are very very different and fit into two separate mentalities. In my experience people that are in the "check raise top pair because I think I have the best hand" camp usually aren't as aggressive with draws and tend to take much more passive lines aiming to ultimately make their hand and then bet. People that fit into the other category are capable of both, but from the evidence I've been given he hasn't shown any stone cold or even semi bluff tendencies.

In conclusion, the aggression he showed in the AT hand cannot be used as evidence to prove a bluffing tendency or a widened 3bet range, because it stemmed from completely different reasons in the fish's logic than what usually make people capable of running these kind of semi bluffs.

[Nit Tendencies]

Have I ever seen fish acquire a stack and lose them again straight away? err yes.

Completely different kind of fish I imagine.

[Nit Tendencies]

And big nasty george raising every hand has now raised his big blind. Time to do something about it! In my experience bad players like this when they've got chips are happy to 3bet from their big blind to make the point of "that's what you get for trying to steal my big blind".

In my experience fish tend to spite peel more often than spite 3bet when they perceive someone to be getting out of line.

Also, nobody has mentioned how there are different categories of fish, and each category tends to stick to it's own school of thought. I don't have time to type out the whole cross section, but there is no evidence to suggest that he is anything other than a cally cally fish who only gets aggressive when he thinks he has the best hand.

I'm not sure why people have been overlooking this. As (presumably winning) poker players we're supposed to be using nothing but a combination of our experience and the immediate evidence to come to logical conclusions and make educated decisions based on this. But there has been lots of just assuming that this guy might be randomly getting stubborn and getting aggressive oop all of a sudden despite the evidence (admittedly only a small amount) suggesting otherwise. These kind of assumptions are really common of winning poker players because they always want to think really creatively about hands and often overlook really simple immediate information. This is the difference between good players and really good players. The really good players use all of this information and don't take it for granted.

[outragous76]

And big nasty george raising every hand has now raised his big blind. Time to do something about it! In my experience bad players like this when they've got chips are happy to 3bet from their big blind to make the point of "that's what you get for trying to steal my big blind".

In my experience fish tend to spite peel more often than spite 3bet when they perceive someone to be getting out of line.

Also, nobody has mentioned how there are different categories of fish, and each category tends to stick to it's own school of thought. I don't have time to type out the whole cross section, but there is no evidence to suggest that he is anything other than a cally cally fish who only gets aggressive when he thinks he has the best hand.

I'm not sure why people have been overlooking this. As (presumably winning) poker players we're supposed to be using nothing but a combination of our experience and the immediate evidence to come to logical conclusions and make educated decisions based on this. But there has been lots of just assuming that this guy might be randomly getting stubborn and getting aggressive oop all of a sudden despite the evidence (admittedly only a small amount) suggesting otherwise. These kind of assumptions are really common of winning poker players because they always want to think really creatively about hands and often overlook really simple immediate information. This is the difference between good players and really good players. The really good players use all of this information and don't take it for granted.

so good

[leethefish]

fold pre

[Nico29]

Got more to say. But for now, surely ppl shld remember that this fish COLD CALLED a 3bet with a10 previously. Thus he massive overrates moderate holdings.

 Facing a single raise from an aggressive player this fish may easily see this as a great spot to 'value' raise in his deluded mind with similar moderate holdings. I see it all the time in live comps from fish.

They have no idea of position, think they have to defend their blind to the death-hence cold calling a 3b with a10 and getting the lot in with top pair deep.

Now he has to have aces. Totally disagree, think ppl polarise fish specific holdings too much, when potentially if they showed up with two jokers in their hands we shldnt be shocked.

Anyway gotta reply to lil dave's reply to my post from earlier-cannot believe he agreed with one point i made-i feel special! Seems a lot of love for mr sykes itt, he's clearly very intelligent but do we always have to think so nitty really? Nice nic obv!

[Solaris]

Got more to say. But for now, surely ppl shld remember that this fish COLD CALLED a 3bet with a10 previously. Thus he massive overrates moderate holdings.

I think applying a hand like that, to the hand in question is a huge mistake that players will make vs live fish.

In the hand you are talking about, he's got aggro POST-FLOP when he's hit top top. His line was pretty passive pre-flop. I doubt he understands what sort of hands should be cold-calling 3 bets and what shouldn't.

In this hand he's taken the lead pre by being the aggressor and has bet the flop and jammed the turn. Think there's a huge difference because of the way he's played it pre-flop.

I've thought about this hand for a while and whilst it seems absolutely absurd to fold as we're effectively assigning him one hand in his range which is pretty lol, I really can't see how I'd do anything but fold in this spot. I cannot agree that he's doing this with QQ or JJ, it makes no sense.

The thing which would make me fold above all is given how bad the guy plays, it seems pretty awful be sticking in 100+bbs with one pair vs the fish who we will almost certainly own post-flop every other time we tangle with him.

The fact he bets over the pot size OTF, then jams the turn means I have to sigh fold. The worst hand I can ever see him turning over is AK here.

Will read the thread properly in its entirety in a second, as I'm intrigued to see what the general consensus is.

[SuuPRlim]

This whole thread is just baffling.

we need 40% vs his range to make a EV0 call. do we have this, bearing in mind the only hand he could EVER be betting for straight value we beat is KQ, which ok is possible i spose. The rest of the time he needs to be a) spazzing with QQ/JJ which I just don't think ever happens but some people do so I'll agree a small % of the time maybe he shows up with it. and the rest of the 40% of the time we need him to have some rando flush draws?

Again, I think  extremely unlikely.

SO lets say we DO have 40% equity vs his range here, we get it in AND WE'RE STILL LOSING MONEY ON THE PLAY.

I'm not suggesting its a simple fold in game at all, I'd be hating life. But surely after we've analysed it how can it not be a simple fold?

[Nit Tendencies]

The last two posts perfectly sum up what my rushed posts tried to show. This should be /thread in my opinion now.

[Pinchop73]

Don't know If this is a poignant question or not?

To all advocating a call 'because he might be 3betting us light because of our perceived laggy image.'

If you feel so strongly that villain may do this, why haven't you 4bet pre?

You have to be pretty convinced that he's 3b'ing light as your  happy to call off 110bb's with tptk, so why haven't you got the big guns out pre?

[cambridgealex]

Good to have you on pha Jamie. Poast moarrrrrr

[Boba Fett]

Good to have you on pha Jamie. Poast moarrrrrr

[MANTIS01]

The last two posts perfectly sum up what my rushed posts tried to show. This should be /thread in my opinion now.

Nah we can't end the thread now cos I haven't asked my main question and wonder if you could help me out.

A few weeks ago I was involved in a debate about live streams at DTD and my opinion was they shouldn't be allowed. However, Simon Trumper who's opinion I respect said that hole card information isn't very important at all. He said because the dynamics in poker are always changing you can't apply historic information involving different dynamics into current hands. Then James Keys, who is also a respected player, said Trumper's post was the best he had read in a long time and that any hole card info from 30 mins ago was useless.

In this hand I suspect the A-10 was from a previous round and thus from over 30 minutes ago, but even if it's from this round the dynamics have certainly changed a lot. Villain is feeling intoxicated from hitting miracles, feels like he's freerolling, has more than twice the chips, and is playing a different oppo with a different image. Yet you can deduce from seeing that A-10 hand and only that one hand exactly what type of player we have, what his 3betting range is, how he plays various holdings, and how he's going to play this hand based on knowledge from a different dynamic some time ago. And tbf there are a lot of people who are similarly convinced that they know exactly how this player thinks from seeing that one hand. That is very interesting to me.

Sorry for looking stupid.

[pleno1]

Good to have you on pha Jamie. Poast moarrrrrr