Author Topic: its always the jacks  (Read 10273 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Erimus

  • Staker Licensed Player
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 943
its always the jacks
« on: June 20, 2013, 15:52:44 PM »
What do you do with JJ here, the stats on villain h:127 vp:10 pf:6 3b:8.6 bb:32, we are down to last 2 tables, i have 45 bigs at this point.

Trivial fold ?, or man up get it in and win the tournmaent or lose berating yourself for the next hour saying easy fold, wait for better spot etc,
flipping at best although 77, 88, 99 10 could well be played like this by villain.

Full Tilt Poker Game #32844562501: $12,000 Guarantee (255409359), Table 20 - NL Hold'em - 2500/5000 Ante 600 - 22:41:29 WET - 2013/06/18 [17:41:29 ET - 2013/06/18]

Seat 1: dawod (70,030)
Seat 2: THEOLDLION (161,252)
Seat 3: Cedrick1 (49,576)
Seat 4: Eggbert87 (84,848)
Seat 5: chirindingas (56,480)
Seat 7: AnalFetto (79,280)
Seat 8: himik79 (169,607)
Seat 9: Credo7 (227,112)
dawod antes 600
THEOLDLION antes 600
Cedrick1 antes 600
Eggbert87 antes 600
chirindingas antes 600
AnalFetto antes 600
himik79 antes 600
Credo7 antes 600
THEOLDLION posts the small blind of 2,500
Cedrick1 posts the big blind of 5,000

The button is in seat #1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Credo7 [Js Jc]
raises to 10,000
Eggbert87 folds
chirindingas has 15 seconds left to act
chirindingas folds
AnalFetto folds
himik79 folds
dawod folds

THEOLDLION raises to 160,652, and is all in.

AMRN

  • Staker Licensed Player
  • Platinum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5261
Re: its always the jacks
« Reply #1 on: June 20, 2013, 15:59:17 PM »
His stats suggest a very tight range, however 32bb is a fairly large stack to shove for value with a premium hand.... for that reason I probably like to discount AA/KK... so suggest you"re up against 88-QQ, AKs, AKo.   Against that range, we"re around 60%....  I can find a call here. Could probably find a fold too though ;)


AMRN

  • Staker Licensed Player
  • Platinum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5261
Re: its always the jacks
« Reply #2 on: June 20, 2013, 16:03:15 PM »
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP9CBtSW0kA&feature=share&list=FLQ4Tg8Y3XiwCNomF-Kn5l_Q[/youtube]


.

Erimus

  • Staker Licensed Player
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 943
Re: its always the jacks
« Reply #3 on: June 20, 2013, 16:05:42 PM »
lol love that video, have it on my phone, will watch if feeling a bit low.


Fatcatstu

  • Staker Licensed Player
  • Platinum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2648
Re: its always the jacks
« Reply #4 on: June 20, 2013, 18:14:49 PM »
Uuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrg.

"orrible spot. His stats say he is a bigger nit than you are  :P

We have a good hand, but you have also got a fair few chips to go smacking half of them on the line in this situation. I dont like it, but i probably just do a fold and forget it ever happened.
England C Captain 2012
World Team Champions England 2013

KarmaDope

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1894
  • The Groom
    • Blonde Forum
Re: its always the jacks
« Reply #5 on: June 20, 2013, 22:03:20 PM »
Probably do a fold as against his value shoving range against an UTG raise from a nit - he"s not really gonna be shoving 88-TT here imo. At best we"re flipping against AQs.

[IMG=http://www.vegasmessageboard.com/countdown/countdown.php?c=purple&f=3&y=2013&m=11&d=12&h=18&mi=20&o=0&p=1][/img]

AAroddersAA

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2609
Re: its always the jacks
« Reply #6 on: June 20, 2013, 23:15:28 PM »
This is a tough spot.

I don"t think we are flipping at best though. To be honest it is quite a large shove. There is 17800 in the pot already. It kind of looks like AK but yeah I have seen hands like 88 to QQ played this way for sure. I think AA or KK is more likely to just raise than shove.

If his range is AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AK and AQ then we should fold. If we think he can do this with TT and AJ as well then it is a call from an cEV point of view. We are only 42% against this range which makes calling a losing play.

If we add TT into the range though we become 46.8% which make calling at +cEV play.

585,607,968  games     0.000 secs   117,121,593,600  games/sec

Board:
Dead:  

   equity    win    tie          pots won    pots tied   
Hand 0:    46.876%     45.83%    01.04%         268395396      6112398.00   { JJ }
Hand 1:    53.124%     52.08%    01.04%         304987776      6112398.00   { TT+, AQs+, AQo+ }


---

585,607,968  games     0.001 secs   585,607,968,000  games/sec

Board:
Dead:  

   equity    win    tie          pots won    pots tied   
Hand 0:    46.876%     45.83%    01.04%         268395396      6112398.00   { JJ }
Hand 1:    53.124%     52.08%    01.04%         304987776      6112398.00   { TT+, AQs+, AQo+ }

46.876% * 178452 = 8365115.952
53.124% * 150652 = 8003236.848

Calling against this range is +EV. If we add in AJ instead of TT the situation is the same, if we add both then calling becomes more +EV. In fact against a range of TT+ and AJ+ folding is a very clear mistake.

Given his stats I would guess (and it is little more than a guess based on what we have here) that his range does include hands like TT and AJ which he does not want to go to the flop with and would rather take it down now, 99 may well be in his range as well. What is your fold to 3-bet stat and you PFR? Is he likely to know this do we know. Would he do this with AJ?

Based on the incomplete info we have here I would favour a call as I just don"t think his range is going to be tight enough to make a fold correct unless we have specifc reads to suggest it is.
-----------------------------

Still trying to think of something amusing to write in this bit.

Fatcatstu

  • Staker Licensed Player
  • Platinum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2648
Re: its always the jacks
« Reply #7 on: June 20, 2013, 23:42:13 PM »


Based on the incomplete info we have here I would favour a call as I just don"t think his range is going to be tight enough to make a fold correct unless we have specifc reads to suggest it is.



So we are ignoring HEM and the stats we have on him here and presuming he isnt as tight as the stats say? What is the point in having some infor saying he is an uber nit, if we are jsut gonna say "oh feck it" and throw them in?

Surely (if we are Brian "The machine" Harland) we can find a much better spot that doesnt involve us losing putting ourselves down to 16bb by calling a shove from someone we are pretty sure is a rock?

I really just dont see it as close the more i think about it. Fold and move on?
England C Captain 2012
World Team Champions England 2013

AMRN

  • Staker Licensed Player
  • Platinum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5261
Re: its always the jacks
« Reply #8 on: June 21, 2013, 00:02:52 AM »

I really just dont see it as close the more i think about it. Fold and move on?


What range do you think he shoves with?


Fatcatstu

  • Staker Licensed Player
  • Platinum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2648
Re: its always the jacks
« Reply #9 on: June 21, 2013, 00:07:54 AM »


I really just dont see it as close the more i think about it. Fold and move on?


What range do you think he shoves with?




AQo, AQs, , 1010+

i dunno, that may be too tight, i just dont think that this is a call we need to make with our stack here, we have nothing invested, why risk so much with something that is so marginal?
England C Captain 2012
World Team Champions England 2013

AAroddersAA

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2609
Re: its always the jacks
« Reply #10 on: June 21, 2013, 00:41:56 AM »



Based on the incomplete info we have here I would favour a call as I just don"t think his range is going to be tight enough to make a fold correct unless we have specifc reads to suggest it is.



So we are ignoring HEM and the stats we have on him here and presuming he isnt as tight as the stats say? What is the point in having some infor saying he is an uber nit, if we are jsut gonna say "oh feck it" and throw them in?

Surely (if we are Brian "The machine" Harland) we can find a much better spot that doesnt involve us losing putting ourselves down to 16bb by calling a shove from someone we are pretty sure is a rock?

I really just dont see it as close the more i think about it. Fold and move on?

We don"t say feck it and throw them in. We consider all of the factors....... and then throw them in. Also 10/6 is tight and kind of passive but not really an uber nit. They are playing 66+ and most broadway hands (although not playing them like this I grant you). Positional stats would help here actually.

The play looks like a play from somebody who wants to take the pot now, this is usually because he has a strong but not very strong hand (ie not AA or KK). At this point in the conversation somebody usually tells me, yes that is what he wants you to think, he could be holding AA or KK and be wanting you to call with a hand like JJ. This is true but at the end of the day it is just not likely, this play is usually exactly what it looks like, it actually looks like AK or AQ, some hand he would rather just take the pot with now and move on. I really do think that we can at least put TT in his range here, he isn"t going to fold TT and I doubt he want to play a flop with an overcard on it. If TT is in his range it is a call, even if we pretend there is a 0% chance of anything else (and the spazz out factor is there).

He doesn"t really want to play this hand post flop. I actually think that we can remove some of the AA and KK combos from his range in this spot as he would be less afraid to take these hands to the flop. This also makes it more of a call.

I would still like to know Brian"s PFR and fold to 3-bet stat as these do tighten or loosen his range for doing this. It comes down to do you think hands like TT and AJ are in his range for doing this when he is playing 10/6. I don"t know but if I had to guess I would say yes. His stats suggest he has 3-bet before, do we know how many times? was it a similar 3-bet (ie an overbet), did he show the hand. I may change my mind if these factors are pointing to another conclusion but with only his stats (10/6) and background knowledge of how this kind of player usually plays then I am calling, it is not a snap but my instinct said call and having looked through the facts I don"t see a reason to think I was wrong :-)

*Disclaimer - I don"t play on Full Tilt but I assume it to be pretty much the same as Stars. If the plays is drastically different I am most likely wrong.
-----------------------------

Still trying to think of something amusing to write in this bit.

noble1

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2518
Re: its always the jacks
« Reply #11 on: June 21, 2013, 00:45:14 AM »
a blast from the past, i played against this guy years ago [06,07] on the 10/20 cash tables, he used to be mainly a mtt player then.

AAroddersAA

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2609
Re: its always the jacks
« Reply #12 on: June 21, 2013, 00:53:34 AM »



I really just dont see it as close the more i think about it. Fold and move on?


What range do you think he shoves with?




AQo, AQs, , 1010+

i dunno, that may be too tight, i just dont think that this is a call we need to make with our stack here, we have nothing invested, why risk so much with something that is so marginal?

fwiw I think the range is pretty good. I think you can add in a small spazz out factor as well, that"s important as it is so close in terms of cEV against that range, assuming he is doing this with all combos of AA and KK of course, which I actually don"t think he is.

Anyway, why do we need to make the call? Because it is +EV and the best percentage chance we have to get to 388364 chips. ICM considerations aside to a certain extent, but I doubt they make much difference, I am very bad with ICM tbh.

If our range is right we have about a 47% chance of getting to that chip count here and now. If you fold and leave yourself with 216512 have you got a better or worse than 47% chance of finding a better spot to get our chips in and win that hand?Don"t forget we will be having to risk a larger percentage of our stack to do it.

I think it is less (although only marginally). You have to take the chances whilst they are there, yes you sometimes lose but that"s the game.
-----------------------------

Still trying to think of something amusing to write in this bit.

noble1

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2518
Re: its always the jacks
« Reply #13 on: June 21, 2013, 01:34:33 AM »
all on how active u"ve been,what your image/stats look like to him, also look at the stack sizes your raising into, if i viewed you as weak or curious:) i"d shove AA KK here if i thought your range is fairly narrow, wouldn"t anyone else?
« Last Edit: June 21, 2013, 01:47:07 AM by noble1 »

Erimus

  • Staker Licensed Player
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 943
Re: its always the jacks
« Reply #14 on: June 21, 2013, 09:53:58 AM »
I never get out of line  ::) ::) ::)

My stats at this point were h:128 vp:17 pf:13 3b 5 fold to 3bet:45, pretty standard ABC (Hem2 had tagged me as this) a check on opr has him down as a winning player overall but most of his results were a few years ago, no big scores since tilt reopened.

I dont think its a trivial fold and did give it some thought, on Full tILT AK is overplayed by the majority of players and this was his most likely holding although any pair could be played like this.

AA or KK could easily be played this way as well, i would definately do it because AK is usually non foldable on Tilt however many big blinds are involved, to win mtts you have to win a few flips but you dont have to take every one.

Given the position i was in, 2cd and relatively comfortable, there were enough shorstacks on this table and the other one i decided to fold, i am willing to take flips when reqd but at this point didnt fancy it, perhaps a bit nitty but it was close, dont think either play is bad calling or folding, sometimes just got to go with instinct rather than the maths.

Perhaps this is the reason why I don"t win mtts that often not taking the spots which are marginal, winning this hand would put me in a very good position to win it, on the other hand losing it means probably another frustrating min cash.

if villain only has 22 bigs i will snap it off but that extra 10 made my decision a bit easier.

Thanks for responses by the way.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2013, 10:05:25 AM by Erimus »