Playing Top Set On A Wet Flop | Ask SplitSuit
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 сен 2024
- Not sure what a straddle is, or how it influences the game? Watch this video first: • Deciding To Straddle |...
Thomas had a question on a hand he played with pocket eights. He checked his straddle option with 88 and ends up flopping top set on a super wet flop. After facing a check/raise Thomas decided to just call and make decisions on the turn. SplitSuit pulls out Equilab to assign a range and get an equity idea, and explains why jamming the flop is the better option. If you aren’t sure when to get your stack in the middle with a near-nut, but exact nut, hand…pay special attention to the flop discussion.
Have your own poker question for SplitSuit? Ask it today: plus.google.co...
This is definitly a spot to 3-bet that flop to something like 80$ and get the rest in on the turn, if he call. Some commentators seem to be missing the fact, that poker is also about making your own decisions as easy as possible. And by committing to the pot on the flop, which is a very easy decision with this hand, you are protecting yourself from having to make any more decisions later in the hand, when they are often going to be more complicated. Which is exactly, what happened here.
Overall i like your logic fundiver and personally wouldn't fault anyone for playing the hand exactly as you suggested, where i guess i would disagree is that i would flat the check raise for pot control. Typically the way this hand played out on the flop its very easy that the guy flopped a straight. So now i can hope the board pairs or get away from the hand if i have to. And if he has the spade draw, and you shove on the flop then its pretty much flipping a coin on the turn and river (54-46 in your favor with the set) and bad players want to flip coins bc they cant outplay anybody. The fact that this goofball stacked off with two pair against that board shows for future reference how bad a player he is because he actually believed that was the best hand. Im just from the school of pot control and i would rather make a bad fold than a bad call. Then i would show the set of 8s to make the entire table think they can bully me. The thing is that of course before i saw his hand and realized how stupid of a player he was, i was thinking this is a text book over bet with the nuts trying to disguise it as a bluff. Maybe he got aggressive on the flop with a spade draw but either way im flatting because this guy wants to flip a coin for his flush and let the luck of the draw save him. This is the area of the game where (like the guy or not) Phil Hellmuth is remarkable, he never gets himself into a spot where he cant fold. I like the idea of seeing the turn, if the spades hits, tough shit for me, i just might have to get bluffed. If it doesnt hit, NOW the ball is back in his court when i shove it on him and he can decide if he wants to risk his stack on the flush draw being in a 3-1 underdog. Very goofy hand and given the way this played out, I dont think folding the set is a bad lay down before of course i saw the 74 lol.
Hi James, Love the new intro and sound editing! it gives the videos just that extra bit. thank you for the videos
Thanks Jaco!
Love most of your videos, but this is one I happen to really disagree with (about calling on flop). I think hero played it fine, maybe even close to optimal.
1. Theoretically, the "opportunity cost" of getting it in on the flop is your ability to play in position. This itself has a ton of equity, especially against passive fish. If a turn spade comes and it goes check/check, then villain checks river, you can now comfortably value-bet (and likely get called). You do lose a little equity here since the SPR isn't enough to get it in, but if you had gotten it in on the flop, the {turn+river} combos that give you great equity are mainly those without a spade (or two spades) anyway. In fact, it's pretty likely you can turn some negative-equity turn+rivers into breakeven just by observing the "passive" fish's play.
2. As played, fish decides to get it in with bottom two anyway even when a bad turn comes out. It doesn't appear that he thought he was bluffing either. So hero's analysis is wrong. But that shouldn't have mattered: we should know that if he's willing to get it in on the turn with bottom two in a 3-flush board, he's clearly also going to shove almost every other turn card (except possibly an 8). In that case, we don't lose any equity by *not* getting it in OTF, but we do lose equity if we 3-bet flop and end up getting a fold out of hands like 47. The dominant strategy is still to flat.
3. I know that's a little results-oriented, but the point is the combination of #1 and #2: (i) genuinely passive fish will give off tons of information about whether they actually make a stronger hand on the turn; (ii) crazy fish will get it in anyway regardless of the turn card, so it doesn't matter if you just flat them once. Your equilab shows 57-43 equity for OP assuming he gets called by everything in villain's range; so sure, it's +EV, but the maximal equity theoretically should be even better if you're playing in position with a top set against a fish. It just happens that in this video (i) he had a wrong read; (ii) he hit one of the < 1/5 of turns he probably isn't willing to get it in with.
+Seal Young so we should play the flop passively to wait until we have max info to get our stack inside when in reality a player like this is going to happily put his a huge chunk of his stack in with well under 40% equity on the flop? All that line does is give free chances for villain to improve, pick up equity to improve, or face a scary card that helps him fold whatever hand he would happily stack on the flop.
There is no reason not to ever go all in after being check-raised on that particular board and against that specific player. All you're doing by calling here is allow you or your opponent to get scared by subsequent cards and thus not stacking him when you normally would have.
I wouldn't say you should go all-in, because I think the goal should be to get a call. I think you re-raise around pot level, and hopefully he goes all-in over the top on ya.
Cool point abouts about how you wouldn't expect him to check-raise flop with too many spade combos since he's passive, but that he seems to like his hand so it would be good to try and get a good 3-bet in on the flop since he continues with many 2nd best hands.
I don't mind jamming at all on the flop because, worst case scenario, I make $58 that I wouldn't of had and he is unable to semi-bluff or just bluff on future street scare cards. Shoving gives him a chance to make calling mistakes too, that he might not make on the turn. On the turn with %18 equity vs a flush, I would call it off as well, especially with how weak our line looks to him. I know he is a passive fish, but many people may not diagnose checking the option on the BB, then just bet calling on the flop, to be super strong. Our hand looks a lot like 55s, 66s, 45, 46, 9x, 5x, 6x etc. The fact that calling destroys bluffs, semi bluffs, and some value hands, has got to be appealing with pot odds as well.
I put him on 74 from the beginning. I was surprised that you didn't add 74s to his equilab range.
+Janusz Januszewski and you assigned 84 as well?
+The Poker Bank 8/4 is implausible since we know where 3 of them are. But yes, if he could have 7/4 he could have 8/4. Given that he is a known passive fish I would expect that type of player to bet more often on 2 pair than on a draw of any kind.
especially since we're looking at a blond completion. A fish will pretty much complete anything.
+Janusz Januszewski You can't put someone on 1 possible set of combo's. You can include 74 in his range though.
While James may have overlooked this, it would only have strengthened his reasons for shoving.
I think the "passive fish" evaluation is plainly wrong if he's check-raising and shoving two pair into a made flush. As played, hero could easily have a nut flush on the turn.
Would love to see a video about Overpairs on paired boards . keep it up !
Do you have any specific hand examples in mind?
not really , just that i have troubles putting my whole stack at risk on paired board and looking for some answers . peace
I understand. I'll pass the suggestion along to SplitSuit all the same!
Hi why not just reraise flop? I mean so many bad turn cards if u think u are good and guy is fish isnt raising and getting it in better then thinking wtf on this turn?
That's what SplitSuit suggested as well!
tough call .. maybe his read on player was slightly off and player only plays certain parts of his range weak passive... cause the open shove on the turn was not passive at all... that is pretty much the bottom of a passive player's check raising and shoving range... I'd fold the turn a lot too
If the plan is to fold to a turn bet, then 3betting the flop becomes even more mandatory :)
I don't often fold on any non-spade turns... especially to reasonable bets... and I have no problem 3 betting flop ... we should have definitely made it $75-85 especially if we think we are against a bad player
+1
hey james,i was having a look through your videos and i was wondering if you have any videos that are just about calling 3bets and with what hands in and out of position?i know it depends on the opponent but i am having a pretty rough time with calling 3bets and wondering if you have any general guidlines.like say KTs vs a LAG 3betting from the blinds,is this call too loose?
I don't have a video that is 100% about calling 3bets, but I have this video about REACTING against 3bets that will get you started in the right direction: www.splitsuit.com/shop/reacting-to-preflop-3bets-in-nlhe
74o and 74s were def in my range since he acted super fishy before. Should have 3 bet PF.. and def called the turn. Looked like a typical "protect shove" - classic fish move.
Very good videos!
Thank you!
James, does your line change if you held bottom set in this scenario?
Holding bottom set will influence equities, yes. Plug the numbers into Equilab with top set vs bottom set and see how it works.
The Poker Bank I just tried this, and depending on the range of hands villian is willing to commit with our equity ranges from 35% (sets, straights, combo/nfds) to 60% (two pair+, any open ender/pair+draw). So if we don't think we have enough equity to profitably get it in, is it okay to just call the flop? What if we are out of position? There are so many bad cards on the turn it's going to be a nightmare to play, especially OOP. Any advice?
Playing it quickly ensures lots of money goes in now (especially since villain displayed interest in pot right this moment), and gets money in before the board goes to hell on the turn. When that's the case, I tend to put money in as quickly as possible.
Go all in
Always looks kinda ridiculous to fold when someone shoves on you while drawing dead
you can not straddle unless you are under the gun! I don't get what you mean
Neil Jerzynek there are many kinds of straddles. Here is an article based upon our video: redchippoker.com/should-i-straddle-in-poker/
draw to a full house