Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

what to do on the river ? am I too nitty ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • what to do on the river ? am I too nitty ?

    Hold'em No Limit - 15/30 (4 ante) - 8 players


    UTG: 4,727 (158 bb)
    UTG+1: 5,742 (191 bb)
    MP: 4,992 (166 bb)
    MP+1: 4,902 (163 bb)
    CO: 4,398 (147 bb)
    BU: 4,947 (165 bb)
    SB: 4,962 (165 bb)
    BB (Hero): 4,992 (166 bb)

    Pre-Flop: (77) Hero is BB with 9♦ 8♦
    1 fold, UTG+1 calls 30, 2 players fold, CO raises to 90, 2 players fold, Hero calls 60, UTG+1 calls 60

    Flop: (317) J♠ 8♥ 7♦ (3 players)
    Hero checks, UTG+1 checks, CO bets 159, Hero calls 159, UTG+1 folds

    Turn: (635) 3♥ (2 players)
    Hero checks, CO bets 318, Hero calls 318

    River: (1,271) 3♦ (2 players)
    Hero checks, CO bets 636, BB (Hero) folds

    Total pot: 1,271
    CO wins 1,271

    solver says


    preflop i need to fold , this is a little bit too loose , I need at least JTs to call (see picture)

    but this deep i think i have so much implied odds , in a tournament calling is mandatory

    on flop this is an open check 100% of the time

    but betting pot (optimal betsize) has almost the same EV

    but vs 2 oop with a marginal made hand i really prefer checking here as the solver does

    when one of the villians bets 159 this is a 100% call


    on the turn you need to open check 100% if you want to play gto : )

    when villain bets 318 this is a 100% call

    raising is no option at all , folding is way better than raising but this is just a side note , 100% call is the play here

    on the river you are supposed to open check 100% and this is not eve close

    when villian bets 636 this is a clear call , folding is notthat bad compared to raising but this is a clear call

    am I too nitty ?

    i thought this was closer a fold than it actually is but when i call in those spots i seem to always lose because my villians are not bluffing the river as often as they should do

    thoughts ?

  • #2
    This problem is exactly why you shouldn't play 89s from OOP.

    In Ed Miller's "Poker's 1%" I learned that these mid suited connectors are best as bluffing hands, or semi-bluffing hands. You're going to miss a lot of flops, or you are going to flop with a little equity, but you're not going to hit Yahtzee all that often. What is most likely to happen with these hands, if you aren't paying attention, is to get sucked in by a draw or marginal pair. Exactly what happened here. You're V is betting all three streets. About the only hand you beat is AK.

    You want hands like 89s IP, and as the preflop raiser so you have fold equity on later streets. These hands allow you to bluff at a lot of pots but still be able to pick up equity on later streets. Bluffing with equity. That's their main power. If you play these hands passively, trying to bink, you will lose more money chasing than you will win.

    Think about your hand in reverse. Imagine you have AA in the CO. What would you hope your opponent had?

    Comment


    • #3
      Sometimes I think solver or snowie doesn't know shit But makes interesting read .... so is the 1% thing

      Does 1% book say the pros won big before they became good ??

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by CrazyEddie Reloaded View Post
        Sometimes I think solver or snowie doesn't know shit But makes interesting read .... so is the 1% thing

        Does 1% book say the pros won big before they became good ??
        The book doesn't really talk about the pros specifically, just how they think about poker. The basic theory of the book is that most players treat poker like a slot machine, trying to hit good flops. Miller says you are only thinking of one way to win, and what will happen is that you will call/check/fold a lot if this is your go to move. He continues by saying that the way winning players think is about frequencies, not hitting hands. You pay attention, learn what your players are doing wrong, and then exploit those frequencies. Then you have multiple ways to win. Hit a hand, run a bluff with equity, fold often, call often. You construct a solid range, and then learn how to stray from that range when necessary to maximally exploit.

        An example he gives is the trouble a lot of TAGs get into with calling stations. He says stations are actually doing one thing correctly - not folding too much to aggression. Sometimes we should do the same thing if we read that a player c-bets at too high a frequency.

        I consider it a companion piece to JL's "Mastering Small Stakes." Both get you thinking about range-based play. JL provides the technical layout. Miller gets more into how to adjust those ranges so you aren't playing like a robot.

        Comment


        • #5
          maybe I'm wrong, but I think I call the river here all of the draws missed. TB27 why do you not call a PFR here? 98s is a hand you want to see a flop with.

          Comment


          • #6
            Suited connectors are generally difficult hands to play OOP. If you hit, you have to rely on leading or check raising to reach their full potential. Likewise, it’s difficult to bluff or semi bluff them out of position. You also need to define what “hitting” means. Is a mid pair a hit? How much showdown value do you have?

            So, you are mostly relying on one way to win (hitting your hand hard) and it being difficult to realize your full equity when you do hit hard. As I said before, a lot more often than not you’re going to be hitting a marginal hand or draw post flop that will do nothing but suck you in and not earn you profit.

            Suited connectors thrive on their versatility. BUT you lose a lot of this versatility by being OOP, not to mention 3-way in this hand. You have to rely a lot more on what your opponent does instead of being able to drive action yourself.

            I’m not saying saying never play these hands. I’m saying be aware of the strengths and weaknesses and play accordingly. OP took a marginal hand too far, but the initial mistake was calling pre OOP and trying to play it like he had position and an information advantage.

            Comment


            • #7
              Starting to wonder if Guido had ever been a nit. He posed a nit, had a lot of friends on the forum.

              They used to comment on his play, but not anymore .. some might be offended by the plays ?

              Now nobody understands him



              TB27 I can see that you really believe that stuff. It's good.
              Last edited by CrazyEddie Reloaded; 09-26-2020, 01:49 AM.

              Comment

              Working...
              X