Home / Community / Forum / Poker Community / Brags, Beats and Variance /

Holy Wow Surprise Hand

Old
Default
Holy Wow Surprise Hand - Sun Jun 19, 2011, 07:52 PM
(#1)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168


I felt like the guy's hand was like a whack-a-mole, except when it popped up, it had the hammer and smashed me in the face. Crazy.
 
Old
Default
Sun Jun 19, 2011, 08:37 PM
(#2)
roomik17's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,556
BronzeStar
why call his shove with 8outs? pretty loosey goosey...
 
Old
Default
Sun Jun 19, 2011, 08:54 PM
(#3)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
Final pot would be $50.75, I need to call $19.25. That works out to pot odds of 2.64-to-1, which means I need about 27.5% equity to call. I calculated this before I decided whether or not I should call.

Assuming all of my straight outs are good (a safe assumption, imo), then by the rule of four, I have my number of outs multiplied by 4% as an estimate of my equity in the pot. 8 x 4% is 32%, and since 32% is greater than 27.5%, the call should be good.

However, the range of hands that people will 4bet shove on a checkraiser with is pretty slim. Here, top/top might be in this player's range if he's bad, but I think that a strong straight draw, set, or overpair makes the most sense. Against overpairs, I will usually have 11 outs, and against sets, I have fewer. Since overpairs make up the vast majority of this player's range, given that he seemed semi-tight in his PFR's from my observations, and given that he opened UTG, I assumed that I would usually have more than 8 outs.

If I put all flopped straights, sets, two pair+, pair + OESD hands, and overpairs as this player's range, my equity turns out to be 26.3%. That's not above 27.5%, so this was potentially a losing play, but a 1.2% leak in a situation like this is hardly 'loosey-goosey'.

Last edited by PanickyPoker; Sun Jun 19, 2011 at 09:07 PM..
 
Old
Default
Sun Jun 19, 2011, 09:02 PM
(#4)
roomik17's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,556
BronzeStar
lol well thought out mathematical explanation.. how did you do that all in15 seconds? for me the thought of losing a buyin would make me tighten up and not shoot for the 2% +EV situation.... if I had unlimited bankroll no prob
Its not a call I would make, but I see your argument and dont disagree with you
 
Old
Default
Sun Jun 19, 2011, 09:02 PM
(#5)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
If I assume that he never shows up with 85 for the bottom-end flopped straight, my equity actually increases to 27.76%. I think that's a fair assumption. If I assume that he will also never show up with the unsuited one-gappers, my equity goes up further to 29.9%. After rake, my play may still be -EV, but I based this play on the assumption that this guy wasn't opening hands like T8 from UTG. That was a bad read, obviously. My mistake. If my mistakes continue to give me breakeven results, though, I think I'll end up doing pretty well.
 
Old
Default
Sun Jun 19, 2011, 09:06 PM
(#6)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
I didn't do all of that in 15 seconds, I just popped open my computer's calculator, figured out my pot odds, and figured out whether or not 11 x 4% is bigger than my required equity. My estimation of my actual pot equity was actually way off, though. So really, this hand was a massive leak for me, since roughly 30% equity is nowhere near 44% equity. But I'll remember this situation in future and remember to consider that the guy might have two pair+ hands in his range, which is the main reason my calculations were off (the read).
 
Old
Default
Sun Jun 19, 2011, 09:09 PM
(#7)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
lol if this gets moved to the HA forum.
 
Old
Default
Sun Jun 19, 2011, 09:11 PM
(#8)
roomik17's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,556
BronzeStar
i think it would be a good topic in the HA forum, not the usual pat my back posts lol... this one has some interesting features in it
 
Old
Default
Sun Jun 19, 2011, 09:15 PM
(#9)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
I wonder if it'd be the first time a post would've been moved from this forum to that one.
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 20, 2011, 03:02 AM
(#10)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
Panicky I'm not trying to bust your chops here but really can't believe that you posted this in the "Bad Beats" thread bro.

This isn't anywhere near a bad beat IMO,it's bad plays straight through the hand on your part to me.
Now you can use any mathematical equation spinning to try and defend the play here but to me you quite simply called 2 3x bet raises ahead of you with A8o. What hand ranges can you have these guys on pre-flop that A-rag plays well against post-flop? Should have folded right then and there to me.

Then after the flop when he raises $1.71 I don't like your re-pop here at all. A call I could see but to re-pop on just a draw,especially with a potential bigger drawing hand in play (flush,which you have NO piece of incidentally)is just way over aggressive IMO. If he had just called your re-pop here there are more scare cards that can come on the turn than cards that make your hand. I don't see you as having 8 outs myself because 10 and 5 of hearts are big time scare cards for you in this spot. When he came back at you all-in I really,really don't agree with the idea of putting my buy-in in here with only a straight draw when there is also a potential flush draw on the board as well.

To me I just don't see how you can completely discount the possibility of the villain having a flush draw as AKs or AQs would easily be in the range of a semi-tight player pre-flop and making a stand with the nut flush draw is a perfectly reasonable play to assume one would make.And if you give him credit for the flush draw then 2 of your outs for a straight go by the boards.And if he does have top-top or a set here then I don't know,you're calling his shove knowing you need to improve,just a loose play for my buy-in if it's me.

To me this is a pure gamble play on your part,which I don't have a problem with per se...but it's a long way from a bad beat if it doesn't work out.
 
Old
Default
?? - Mon Jun 20, 2011, 07:09 AM
(#11)
monkeyskunk4's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,818
am guessing you wont have to defend yourself against being called too passive anymore-- lolos--
sure does succ when you are semi bluffing the nuts- into the nuts-- tuff one PP--
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 20, 2011, 03:20 PM
(#12)
roomik17's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,556
BronzeStar
took this from another site, sorta resembles my thoughts

WSOP observations

*There are a LOT of very good, very young players. These kids have studied the game at a mathematical level that I vaguely understand. As they discuss these concepts I know enough to follow the conversation, but I haven’t done near the work they have in this type of analysis. I learned a great deal just by listening to them talk to each other during breaks. Sometimes, however, they seemed to lose sight of the person they were playing against. You could see their minds at work doing complex mathematical calculations when making their decisions. It was amazing how they “figured” out the best solution. And most the time they were correct. But when they were wrong, it seemed to be because they failed to look across the table. They failed to consider, that the player in the hand with them was not making decisions based on the same mathematical realities. They were not observing the human side of the game.
 
Old
Default
?? - Mon Jun 20, 2011, 03:27 PM
(#13)
monkeyskunk4's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,818
i hear ya roomik- yet my take on it is- and i may be wrong here- when mass multitabling online- if you play by the numbers-- you will profit over time--
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 20, 2011, 03:38 PM
(#14)
roomik17's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,556
BronzeStar
true dat Monk, mass tabling aint for me lol 3-4 max and I am happy... I play more by feel than straight number crunching
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 20, 2011, 03:48 PM
(#15)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by roomik17 View Post
took this from another site, sorta resembles my thoughts

WSOP observations

*There are a LOT of very good, very young players. These kids have studied the game at a mathematical level that I vaguely understand. As they discuss these concepts I know enough to follow the conversation, but I haven’t done near the work they have in this type of analysis. I learned a great deal just by listening to them talk to each other during breaks. Sometimes, however, they seemed to lose sight of the person they were playing against. You could see their minds at work doing complex mathematical calculations when making their decisions. It was amazing how they “figured” out the best solution. And most the time they were correct. But when they were wrong, it seemed to be because they failed to look across the table. They failed to consider, that the player in the hand with them was not making decisions based on the same mathematical realities. They were not observing the human side of the game.
Again don't want this to come out like I'm busting Panicky's chops because I think he could very well be on his way to being quite a player but playing A8o from the BB with 2 3x bets in front of him is NOT a sound mathematical play IMO so I'm not sure the "he was making the rote bean-counter type play " applies here. Think it's more an example of A-rag sucks,fold the thing,lol.

Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyskunk4 View Post
i hear ya roomik- yet my take on it is- and i may be wrong here- when mass multitabling online- if you play by the numbers-- you will profit over time--
Especially considering that we play (or in mine and Roomik's case we PLAYED...) at micro-levels where metagame thinking and deep conceptual plays can many times get you in more trouble than just sticking to solid ABC poker to begin with. If surrounded by bad players let them try to beat you I always say.

A mental image I had started to always try to take to the table when I played before we got the boot was of the Ali-Foreman Championship fight in Zaire in '74 (I think) where Ali broke out the "rope-a-dope" and let Foreman punch himself out with repeated shots to Ali's forearms as Ali just leaned on the ropes,biding his time. This went on for 3-4 rounds and when Foreman was finally spent Ali turned it on and put Foreman away in short time. It's like a bad player---keep nipping at my stack a little here and there,but when my turn comes,more often than not you can get them to stack off to you in one fell swoop.

The old saying is don't hunt what you can't kill. Well in poker mine is, why chase the deer all over Hell's Creation when more often than not their dumbazz will walk right up to the salt lick?

Freeze Gopher!!! Blam!!!
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 20, 2011, 03:56 PM
(#16)
roomik17's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,556
BronzeStar
I agree Mox I am not trying bust his chops either... I know he has a more mathematical game than I do, its just I saw the same as you, not a great hand to shove over a reraise, with a straight draw on a wet board... I think PP has a very bright future playing this game we love soo much, he just needs to add some of the other more human elements, and not rely wholly on the mathematical side.... especially when its -EV or neutral lol

Anyways PP keep on the track you are on and I bet one day I will be able to say I know that guy
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 20, 2011, 04:45 PM
(#17)
PaidInFull6's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 342
I'm curious, what was your reasoning when you decide to ck/raise the flop? What kind hand ranges did you put this guy on? You were getting about 4:1 to call on the flop did you consider just calling?
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 20, 2011, 09:07 PM
(#18)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moxie Pip View Post
What hand ranges can you have these guys on pre-flop that A-rag plays well against post-flop?
Getting 3.5-to-1 pre-flop isn't all that bad. I didn't have them on any real ranges yet (although it wouldn't be inconceivable to say that I was probably ahead of both).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moxie Pip View Post
To me I just don't see how you can completely discount the possibility of the villain having a flush draw
If he had a flush draw, then I was already beating most of the hands in his range and I wasn't drawing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaidInFull6 View Post
I'm curious, what was your reasoning when you decide to ck/raise the flop? What kind hand ranges did you put this guy on? You were getting about 4:1 to call on the flop did you consider just calling?
Initially, I thought that he would be c-bet bluffing most of the time, so I was just going for the flop bet with the check-raise. I did not size my bet to make my decision easier were he to check-raise me. Instead, I estimated whether it would be correct to call or fold given the amount that was in the pot, after he decided to check-raise. I would have folded if I thought I was behind his range.
 

Getting PokerStars is easy: download and install the PokerStars game software, create your free player account, and validate your email address. Clicking on the download poker button will lead to the installation of compatible poker software on your PC of 51.7 MB, which will enable you to register and play poker on the PokerStars platform. To uninstall PokerStars use the Windows uninstaller: click Start > Control Panel and then select Add or Remove programs > Select PokerStars and click Uninstall or Remove.

Copyright (c) PokerSchoolOnline.com. All rights reserved, Rational Group, Douglas Bay Complex, King Edward Road, Onchan, Isle of Man, IM3 1DZ. You can email us on support@pokerschoolonline.com