To show the other side of my post from yesterday, I want to briefly discuss the folly of overbetting the pot out of fear. This is a play and mindset that's common with some amateur players and effectively causes them to bleed money. I'll use an example from a hand I played last week that's a bit over-the-top, but still demonstrates what I'm talking about:
Seat 1: Dealer ($78.51 in chips)
Seat 2: Donzo ($166.05 in chips)
Seat 3: Big Blind ($199.74 in chips)
Seat 4: UTG ($88 in chips)
Seat 5: UTGplus1 ($122.75 in chips)
Seat 6: UTGplus2 ($96.45 in chips)
Donzo: posts small blind $0.50
Big Blind: posts big blind $1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Donzo [7h 7s]
UTG: folds
UTGplus1: folds
UTGplus2: raises $3 to $3
Dealer: calls $3
Donzo: calls $2.50
Big Blind: folds
*** FLOP *** [Qd 8h 7c]
Donzo: checks
UTGplus2: checks
Dealer: bets $3
Donzo: calls $3
UTGplus2: folds
We're dealt 77 in the small blind and have a raise and call when it gets to us. Raising here is sometimes legitimate, but we decide to just flat and the big blind folds. Q87 is a semi-drawish flop, so leading out is an option, but if no one has a Q, overpair, or OESD, it will be difficult to get called. We check with the hope that we can call a bet and decide the best course of action on the turn. The villain (the button) bets $3 into $9. While that's a smaller bet than we'd like, it's possible that they are betting air or betting tentatively with either a Q, 7, or 8. Or conversely, they're betting small because they (think) they're big and don't want to scare everyone out of the pot. Consequently, we want to keep all those hands in and therefor elect to just call.
*** TURN *** [Qd 8h 7c] [2d]
Donzo: checks
Dealer: bets $72.51 and is all-in
A 2 comes on the turn which changes nothing and we check again. Inexplicably, the villain shoves all-in for $72, which is 4.5 times the size of the pot, and we're all like, "Christmas came early." Yeah yeah, it's theoretically possible that the villain has QQ or 88, but the 4.5x is so absurdly large that almost no player, without a prior read, is going to bet that much with those hands when they're hoping to extract maximum value. We call and the villain shows QJ.
Donzo: calls $72.51
*** RIVER *** [Qd 8h 7c 2d] [Kc]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Dealer: shows [Jd Qs] (a pair of Queens)
Donzo: shows [7h 7s] (three of a kind, Sevens)
Donzo collected $158.02 from pot
The villain's shove is a perfect demonstration of fearful, fishy thinking. All the villain's thinking is: "People always outdraw on me, there are two cards to a straight out there and now two diamonds as well?! Screw this guy, no way am I letting that happen again, all-in!" What fish never seem to realize is that you want people to call you when they're drawing. Getting people to call with inferior equity is how money is made in poker and getting calls from straight draws and flush draws is part of that. But the fish was so afraid of the possibility that he/she might see a 3rd diamond or straight card come and be put to a decision that they made a bet that almost always gets inferior hands to fold and superior hands to call. Nevermind the fact that the only information the villain has about our
range is a $3 check/call on the flop and a check on the turn, which
gives us a far wider range of hands than a straight or flush draw. As if
that wasn't bad enough, the flush draw didn't come until the turn, making a turned flush draw an incidental occurrence. It's possible that such a huge overbet could compel a fold from a hand like KQ or AQ, but that isn't why the fish made the bet and it would have been a bad reason anyway.
When holding a decent hand (like TP) for which one hopes to get value, it's imperative not to allow fear of hypotheticals to compel terrible decisions like the one above. Learn to live with the fact that sometimes people will outdraw you and that's ok and that it doesn't mean that you "didn't bet enough." If you make more reasonable bets and allow some of those hands to draw on you, you'll play a more profitable game and become more accustomed to being put to decisions and the reality that having an opponent outdraw you is just part of poker.
Showing posts with label fear. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fear. Show all posts
Saturday, July 20, 2013
Friday, June 14, 2013
Premium Hands and Not Being Ruled By Fear
When many amateurs pick up a premium hand, they don't know any other way to play it than "fast," i.e. raising at every opportunity and/or betting large whenever possible. In reality, it is a slightly different manifestation of the fear I talked about in this post. Players are afraid that if they have to make a post-flop decision they will make the wrong one and don't want to deal with the discomfort of such a decision. Therefore, they raise, period. While such "fast playing" is sometimes the best way to play a big hand, it is not always the most profitable. As an example, let's look at a hand I played a few days ago:
Seat 2: Donzo ($62.87 in chips)
Seat 3: UTGplus2 ($47.27 in chips)
Seat 5: Small Blind ($71.73 in chips)
Seat 6: Big Blind ($50 in chips)
Small Blind: posts small blind $0.25
Big Blind: posts big blind $0.50
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Donzo [Qh Qd]
Donzo: raises $1.50 to $1.50
UTGplus2: raises $4.75 to $4.75
Small Blind: folds
Big Blind: folds
We're playing 4-handed and are dealt QQ in the cutoff (to the right of the button) and make a standard 3x raise. The button (identified above as UTGplus2 because it was technically a dead button) 3-bets us to $4.75 and the blinds fold. At this point we need to figure out our best course of action. Unless we have a crazy read and know that this player is only 3-betting AA and KK, there's no way we can fold here, particularly 4-handed. A raise is a definite possibility for a few reasons:
1) The villain's range is inherently wider because of the fact that we're raising from the cutoff, which means the villain knows our range is wider than it would be from an earlier position, and therefore their 3-betting range should be wider.
2) We want to get maximum value for our big hand and the villain may not be able to fold a strong-but-inferior hand.
3) We are content to potentially fold out some hands that are behind, but have significant equity against us, particularly as we are out of position.
However, some of those reasons are exactly why we shouldn't raise. If the villain is raising with a hand like, say, T9 or AJ, we don't want those hands to fold. By just calling out of position, we can appear the reluctant/passive player and present the opportunity for the villain to bluff with all hands that miss. We definitely want to avoid folding out hands like 99-JJ, which are way behind us but will find some of the same flops attractive/non-scary. Even if we assign a fairly conservative range of 99+ and AJ+ (leaving out plausible hands like KQ, JT, or T9), our equity against the villain's range is about 61%. If we were to raise, the plausible calling/re-raising range shrinks to about 51%, a virtual coin flip. With that in mind, we just call.
Donzo: calls $3.25
*** FLOP *** [8h 2h 8s]
Donzo: checks
UTGplus2: bets $10.25
The flop is excellent for us, as it all but assures we have the best hand so long as our opponent doesn't have AA or KK (or an aggressively played mid-range hand like 98). We could bet here to get value out of hands like the aforementioned 99-JJ, but then we've caused all the ace high hands (and potential other missed hands) to fold. Instead we check, and the villain bets the size of the pot. This is interesting for two reasons: 1) it's a large bet on an extremely dry board; except for the flush draw, there is no reason for the villain to be concerned about all the combinations to which we might hypothetically be drawing. In other words, if the villain had KK or AA, he virtually assures I'm folding everything from which he wants to get value, except for 99-QQ, and is therefore not extracting maximum value. While there are some players who bet the size of the pot just as a regular matter of course, they are in the minority. 2) If I call, there will be about $31 in the pot and the villain will have $32 remaining, meaning that I may need to deal with an all-in on the turn or river. While there is some concern that this could be an aggressively-played KK or AA, we should be happy about the spot we're in and likely prepared to call such an all-in depending on the card(s) that come.
Donzo: calls $10.25
*** TURN *** [8h 2h 8s] [4c]
Donzo: checks
UTGplus2: bets $32.27 and is all-in
We check and, as anticipated, the villain moves all-in. While it's a large, potentially intimidating bet, the important thing to remember is that nothing has changed--the villain is still making a large bet on a dry board and the likelihood of him holding a hand like AK, AQ, or a random worse hand is still the same, as our actions have done nothing to indicate that we have a hand as strong as QQ. We call and the villain shows AK.
Donzo: calls $32.27
*** RIVER *** [8h 2h 8s 4c] [6s]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Donzo: shows [Qh Qd] (two pair, Queens and Eights)
UTGplus2: shows [Ac Kh] (a pair of Eights)
Donzo collected $93.29 from pot
If we had re-raised preflop, the villain likely would have shoved, and we'd have called and been a slight favorite with 57% equity. Instead, because we were prepared to deal with a somewhat difficult decision, we gave the villain the opportunity to bluff off his entire stack and got it all-in with the villain drawing to 6 outs on the river, giving us 86% equity.
Will the villain show up with AA or KK sometimes? Of course. But again, we should be happy with our decision regardless of the outcome, if our logic is good.
Seat 2: Donzo ($62.87 in chips)
Seat 3: UTGplus2 ($47.27 in chips)
Seat 5: Small Blind ($71.73 in chips)
Seat 6: Big Blind ($50 in chips)
Small Blind: posts small blind $0.25
Big Blind: posts big blind $0.50
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Donzo [Qh Qd]
Donzo: raises $1.50 to $1.50
UTGplus2: raises $4.75 to $4.75
Small Blind: folds
Big Blind: folds
We're playing 4-handed and are dealt QQ in the cutoff (to the right of the button) and make a standard 3x raise. The button (identified above as UTGplus2 because it was technically a dead button) 3-bets us to $4.75 and the blinds fold. At this point we need to figure out our best course of action. Unless we have a crazy read and know that this player is only 3-betting AA and KK, there's no way we can fold here, particularly 4-handed. A raise is a definite possibility for a few reasons:
1) The villain's range is inherently wider because of the fact that we're raising from the cutoff, which means the villain knows our range is wider than it would be from an earlier position, and therefore their 3-betting range should be wider.
2) We want to get maximum value for our big hand and the villain may not be able to fold a strong-but-inferior hand.
3) We are content to potentially fold out some hands that are behind, but have significant equity against us, particularly as we are out of position.
However, some of those reasons are exactly why we shouldn't raise. If the villain is raising with a hand like, say, T9 or AJ, we don't want those hands to fold. By just calling out of position, we can appear the reluctant/passive player and present the opportunity for the villain to bluff with all hands that miss. We definitely want to avoid folding out hands like 99-JJ, which are way behind us but will find some of the same flops attractive/non-scary. Even if we assign a fairly conservative range of 99+ and AJ+ (leaving out plausible hands like KQ, JT, or T9), our equity against the villain's range is about 61%. If we were to raise, the plausible calling/re-raising range shrinks to about 51%, a virtual coin flip. With that in mind, we just call.
Donzo: calls $3.25
*** FLOP *** [8h 2h 8s]
Donzo: checks
UTGplus2: bets $10.25
The flop is excellent for us, as it all but assures we have the best hand so long as our opponent doesn't have AA or KK (or an aggressively played mid-range hand like 98). We could bet here to get value out of hands like the aforementioned 99-JJ, but then we've caused all the ace high hands (and potential other missed hands) to fold. Instead we check, and the villain bets the size of the pot. This is interesting for two reasons: 1) it's a large bet on an extremely dry board; except for the flush draw, there is no reason for the villain to be concerned about all the combinations to which we might hypothetically be drawing. In other words, if the villain had KK or AA, he virtually assures I'm folding everything from which he wants to get value, except for 99-QQ, and is therefore not extracting maximum value. While there are some players who bet the size of the pot just as a regular matter of course, they are in the minority. 2) If I call, there will be about $31 in the pot and the villain will have $32 remaining, meaning that I may need to deal with an all-in on the turn or river. While there is some concern that this could be an aggressively-played KK or AA, we should be happy about the spot we're in and likely prepared to call such an all-in depending on the card(s) that come.
Donzo: calls $10.25
*** TURN *** [8h 2h 8s] [4c]
Donzo: checks
UTGplus2: bets $32.27 and is all-in
We check and, as anticipated, the villain moves all-in. While it's a large, potentially intimidating bet, the important thing to remember is that nothing has changed--the villain is still making a large bet on a dry board and the likelihood of him holding a hand like AK, AQ, or a random worse hand is still the same, as our actions have done nothing to indicate that we have a hand as strong as QQ. We call and the villain shows AK.
Donzo: calls $32.27
*** RIVER *** [8h 2h 8s 4c] [6s]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Donzo: shows [Qh Qd] (two pair, Queens and Eights)
UTGplus2: shows [Ac Kh] (a pair of Eights)
Donzo collected $93.29 from pot
If we had re-raised preflop, the villain likely would have shoved, and we'd have called and been a slight favorite with 57% equity. Instead, because we were prepared to deal with a somewhat difficult decision, we gave the villain the opportunity to bluff off his entire stack and got it all-in with the villain drawing to 6 outs on the river, giving us 86% equity.
Will the villain show up with AA or KK sometimes? Of course. But again, we should be happy with our decision regardless of the outcome, if our logic is good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)