66 heads up, home tournament (1 Viewer)

[Kain8]

When your line is shown to be absolutely soul crushing in this spot:

 

[Moxie Mike]

Preflop, I think villain is at least calling me with 80% of holdings, so opening 66 for value is a pretty obvious proposition. It's not ideal to face a 3 bet, but limping this against an opponent that will call super wide is just weak poker.

You should be opening most of the time with the button heads up regardless of what you're holding. Especially if you're dealing with a fish who's VPIPing 80%.

Some limps and folds should be mixed in too though, just so you're not always telling the exact same story. Varying bet sizes is also a good thing to so... depending on the number of BBs on the table of course.

Turn, I am certainly not happy about getting checked to because my goal is still to get all my chips to the middle.

From the entire discussion, I don't think the Villain is a particularly sophisticated opponent. Top pair/OESD draw is a very strong hand heads up. So if I'm in that spot, deciding to lead the flop and getting a call feels like I'm ahead. Checking and giving a free card to someone who might only have Ace-hi is risky. So if I'm taking the line of betting into the PF raiser while OOP, I'm going to bet again on the turn since I improved greatly.

So if the guy liked his hand on the flop, he's got to really like his hand after the turn. So a check/call line on that turn is rather odd and not becoming of a consistent winner. I would expect a player with that holding to be the one doing the betting.

Do you play with this opponent often? How often does he do well?

But as played, he donk-shoved the river after a c/c line on the turn. It's just an odd way to play a hand where you've improved in the worst possible way. Does he really expect to get called by a worse hand? If not, we have to assume he decided to turn his hand into a bluff? I don't know what he thought you had... or if he even has the ability to consider what you're holding.

Was there any discussion about the hand between you and him after the fact? This would be beneficial - you could learn a lot about how he does or doesn't think.

This is a bad river and I would have checked it behind if villain checked. However, villain did shove and forced me into the tank. It occurs to me 87 makes a lot of sense here (flop OESD), as does 97. I am the preflop raiser so it's possible he chose to check-call a 9 on the turn given he has to put TT+ in my range. It's also possible he chose to check call 87. I also figured he interprets my turn bet as strength so I don't feel like he is trying to get me to fold. And to his credit, he did not betray his holding to my statement.

I kind of figured this was going to be one of those 'gross river' threads.

What are my odds of winning the tournament if I fold vs what are the odds this hand is good right now. If I figure I would be overcoming a 5:1 deficit and we were of equal ability, I would assume a 17% or so chance of winning the tournament after the fold. (And I did assume I was somewhat the better player so I might give a bump to 20% or so.) If I have a better chance than that holding the winner right now, I should call. I just didn't think I did, I couldn't see a shove without villain having a straight until I actually saw villain's holding. If I could have put 95o in villains range, I could have made the call.

I disagree that your skill edge is only worth 3%. I would suggest that given the Villain, the skill discrepancy makes you about 25% more likely to win.

In the situation you described, there's only ~43 BBs on the table. One double up and you'll have an almost even chip stack. The odds of doubling up in that spot are probably about 50/50.

Once the chip stacks are even, an edge in the understanding of tournament dynamics is significant. Understanding ranges and all the nuances of a player's tendencies should result in the superior player winning the match the majority of the time. So I'd estimate your chances of winning after folding at about 35-40%.

So if you want to analyze the river decision, there were 8 cards in the deck that you're dead to. Is there a 35% the Villain holds one of them? I don't think so. I think the odds that he's holding what he was repping were closer to 20%*.

*This type of theory isn't applicable to every type of player, but against guys like you described, I've found it to be reasonably reliable.

 

[upNdown]

But as played, he donk-shoved the river after a c/c line on the turn. It's just an odd way to play a hand where you've improved in the worst possible way. Does he really expect to get called by a worse hand? If not, we have to assume he decided to turn his hand into a bluff? I don't know what he thought you had... or if he even has the ability to consider what you're holding.

This was my question. Either he made a great river bluff or he's an idiot. Tough to say

 

[Steve Birrer]

Well I understand your thinking. But as I said I would have shoved post flop But I for SURE would shove after the turn. Just too many ugly rivers that could lead to just what happened.

 

[Moxie Mike]

This was my question. Either he made a great river bluff or he's an idiot. Tough to say

I've classified this Villain as a fishy, unsophisticated, gambler type. No chance he was bluffing. What's he hoping to fold out? The only better 2-pair combo? Sets? That's ambitious. Beyond that he can't really expect to fold out any of the straights (if he even noticed). He probably read HERO for an overpair (if he reads his opponents at all), binked his gin card and went with it. I'm sure he was betting for value.

 

[HaRDHouSeiNC]

It was 9/7 or a semi bluf to me
That’s why you smoke it in on the turn or flop
I think it’s a crying call when he shoves unless he never ever makes moves like that

 

[JustinInMN]

Do you play with this opponent often? How often does he do well?

He's a first timer in my game anyway. But his high level of etiquette indicates he's been playing a while. But I don't know how successfully. Personally the really loose calls I saw I planned to exploit.

I disagree that your skill edge is only worth 3%. I would suggest that given the Villain, the skill discrepancy makes you about 25% more likely to win.

Well if I have odds of 17% on chips alone and I give myself a 20% chance to win that's actually about a 20% improvement compared to 17 , but your point is well taken, I am perhaps being too modest.

This was my question. Either he made a great river bluff or he's an idiot. Tough to say

Yeah, if he didn't notice the straight, it's all together possible he is hoping I can't fold Tt-Aa. Obviously this assumption is incorrect given I folded 666.

Well I understand your thinking. But as I said I would have shoved post flop But I for SURE would shove after the turn. Just too many ugly rivers that could lead to just what happened.

Well knowing all the cards. If I had raised the flop, we surely would have got it all in there. I didn't raise the flop because I think he just had at least twice as much air as value, especially given how little value was out there.

 

[JustinInMN]

It was 9/7 or a semi bluf to me
That’s why you smoke it in on the turn or flop
I think it’s a crying call when he shoves unless he never ever makes moves like that

So my two regrets in the hand are this.

1) if I give him credit for possible 97, I should probably also give him credit for 95 too right?

2) I think I actually oversized the turn bet and 200k-250k would probably have been better. Now that probably makes it easier for me to make the wrong laydown given the benefit of retrospect, but it would have set up closer to a 3/4 pot shove on the end or if I did induce the all in check raise.

 

[HaRDHouSeiNC]

So my two regrets in the hand are this.

1) if I give him credit for possible 97, I should probably also give him credit for 95 too right?

2) I think I actually oversized the turn bet and 200k-250k would probably have been better. Now that probably makes it easier for me to make the wrong laydown given the benefit of retrospect, but it would have set up closer to a 3/4 pot shove on the end or if I did induce the all in check raise.

Yah a 9-5 or 3-4 jam are plausible if he knows you aren’t playing 6-7 & 9-7
In tourneys I tend to just ship the flop or turn in spots like that
The turn for sure like too easy to get river bluffed that board later and think did I let him get there
At a home tourney I’m probably calling since it’s likely I’d get whittled away later soon after on a short stack

 

[Moxie Mike]

So my two regrets in the hand are this.

1) if I give him credit for possible 97, I should probably also give him credit for 95 too right?

2) I think I actually oversized the turn bet and 200k-250k would probably have been better. Now that probably makes it easier for me to make the wrong laydown given the benefit of retrospect, but it would have set up closer to a 3/4 pot shove on the end or if I did induce the all in check raise.

I mean this in the most constructive way possible - so please don't take this as anything other than me trying to give you a little perspective.

You're overthinking this. You overthought it when it happened and you're doing so now as well.

Your bet sizing on the turn was fine. That realistically should have ended the hand but the Villain had what he had.

My point is there are times where it's beneficial to try to put someone on a hand in order to make the best possible decision but this isn't one of those situations. You need to KNOW - not think or wonder but be virtually certain that you're dealing with an individual that would only make that river play with a straight in order to justify folding a set there.

There are times where the correct play is dictated by tournament dynamics and less so about the circumstances of the hand itself. When an opponent has demonstrably shown a blatant lack of risk aversion, you shouldn't be looking to make big laydowns. Of course he'll have it some of the time... but there is a high enough percentage of the time where you'll table a winning hand to where calling is the correct play.

Well if I have odds of 17% on chips alone and I give myself a 20% chance to win that's actually about a 20% improvement compared to 17 , but your point is well taken, I am perhaps being too modest.

From the comments you consistently make you seem like a solid player with a desire to improve. So I'll leave you with this:

Poker players go through an evolution as they improve. Part of that evolution is of course learning to recognize when they might be beat. This is a good thing, but there's a balance that needs to be found. Most players go from too loose to too tight before settling on a playing style that gives them the best results. Part of the learning process includes the growing pains of seeing things that aren't actually there.

In the hand in question, a weak opponent put you to the test and you arrived at the incorrect conclusion. You'll learn from this.

So my advice is to internalize the fact that you made a mistake. The mistake wasn't folding... it was failing to recognize that that moment represented your absolute best chance to win the tournament.

He's a first timer in my game anyway.

Make sure he has a standing invite... and if he is ever looking for action in Michigan...

 

[JustinInMN]

You need to KNOW - not think or wonder but be virtually certain that you're dealing with an individual that would only make that river play with a straight in order to justify folding a set there.

So my advice is to internalize the fact that you made a mistake. The mistake wasn't folding... it was failing to recognize that that moment represented your absolute best chance to win the tournament.

Absolutely agree with both of these points, and as I said elsewhere in the thread, if I could have put 95 in villain's range in the moment, I can make that call. But you are also right, not being "risk averse" is a good way to describe this villain, and that is probably a factor I under-thought. And 95 made perfect sense to me once I saw it.

I also play way more cash than tournaments, though I do cash in tournaments rather frequently for as few as I play, but you are right, I am always trying to get better.

One of the points of this thread was to see if anyone was going to shout out 95 in villain's range before the reveal so I can see if I should have seen it myself.

 

[Moxie Mike]

One of the points of this thread was to see if anyone was going to shout out 95 in villain's range before the reveal so I can see if I should have seen it myself.

OK man this is where I'm at.

I think you're hung up on the fact that you know you should have found a call there but you're looking for validation in the sense that if no one who posts here puts the Villain on that specific hand... But you're missing the point of WHY you call in that spot. It's not about hand reading.

It kind of feels like by posting this thread you're looking to learn about the indicators that you feel should you have been obvious in real time. But it's deeper than that.

Look man... it sucks when you feel like you got outplayed by an inferior opponent.

The bottom line is you made a bad fold against a weak opponent for whom you just gave too much credit. Shit happens man. You didn't know how bad he was at the time but hopefully after this analysis now you know.

 

[ninedeuce]

One of the points of this thread was to see if anyone was going to shout out 95 in villain's range before the reveal so I can see if I should have seen it myself.

But not that much. Main consideration is why I bet turn (instead of a totally plausible shove). If it's to dodge a straight, then I fold. If it's to keep his bluffs in (or value hands I'm beating), then I call.

Lol I wasn't explicit about it but 95 (or any two pair with the river 5, or a set of 5s) are what I was referring to in the "value hands I'm beating" category.

 

[Legend5555]

I just don't think you can fold this river given the price you have yourself by betting so large on the turn.

I highly disagree with anyone saying to jam turn. This isn't some spot where you need to go crazy to "protect" your hand. Yes, there are a lot of scary river cards. But you can't just go jamming 1.8x pot every time the board gets scary. This is heads up play, the only thing that matters is maximizing value against the villain's range.

Some of this is villain dependent. If you think villain is heavily weighted to air over value, then jamming is horrible. But if he's weighted toward 9x and some combo draws, then sure, a jam could be good. But in general, this donk then check line is indicative more of air/marginal holding. And in those cases we want to try and get them to make a bad call with a weak hand. Jamming doesn't accomplish that.

As played, we have to call 370 to win 1330. That's almost 4 to 1. The minimum defense frequency here is like 72%. So you would have to defend with the top 72% of hands that get here as played to make sure your opponent doesn't have a profitable bluff. And if they can ever have worse value, then it makes it even more of a call. Certainly 66 is in the top quarter of hands we get here with. We may still be able to win on 12bb, but again, we are heads up. No ICM to think about. We don't have to fear going broke.

 

[JustinInMN]

I highly disagree with anyone saying to jam turn. This isn't some spot where you need to go crazy to "protect" your hand. Yes, there are a lot of scary river cards. But you can't just go jamming 1.8x pot every time the board gets scary. This is heads up play, the only thing that matters is maximizing value against the villain's range.

I absolutely agree with this. Jamming flop or turn gets my chips to the middle, but I think reduces the likelyhood of getting villain's chips to the middle by giving him an opportunity to fold what slim value he has. And I think my estimate that he has twice as much air as value here is close. I had to bet something on the turn for sure. I still think 200-250K is a broadly better sizing, even if not for this particular runout.

I hadn't considered minimum defense frequency, but yes 66 is near top of range. I am not sure I would bet the turn with 87, I probably would with 97 or 76 so there are at least some straights in range. I certainly can have 99 as played. I can probably also have AA-TT (at least AA and KK, I probably would be less likely to flat flop with QQ, JJ, TT) as played so plenty of hands below a set as well. In that sense, calling for defense is a valid point. Otherwise I can be bluffed anytime I have 12BB behind if villain is observant.

 

[trigs]

Against a villain who, according to hero, calls light all the time, I don't see anything wrong with a turn shove. Top pair would call. Two pair would definitively call. Any other turn bet for less (which I think everyone agrees should be a bet) is probably also getting called and leaving us barely anything behind. If he's calling most likely anyway, might as well bet as much as you can. An overbet on the turn also could make villain think you're chasing a straight and/or flush and trying to steal the pot right now.

I'm not saying a turn shove is the only possible play here, but I think it's valid against this type of opponent.

 

[grebe]

I am late to the party...I just want to say that you played this hand beautifully until the river. Sorry, you just cannot fold here. It's a sick runout, but you still have a set. He has a whole pile of cards that you beat and got a great chance to bluff on the river. Sure, he will have it sometimes, but you are good here way too much to fold. He could be shoving with top pair, any two pair, any over pair (which I highly doubt he has ever), and a straight up bluff, such as KQ

Love the preflop raise, love the flop call (absolutely NEVER is a shove good here), love the turn bet setting up the river shove. CANNOT fold on any river card here. Stick to the plan. Sorry, but you just can't do it. I would run some simulations, but it's not even close.

Sorry my dude, it's a bad fold both in game (obviously) and theoretically.

 

[Poker Zombie]

love the flop call (absolutely NEVER is a shove good here)

I guess that's poker.

I am shoving that flop 100 out of 100 times. Not even room for a .001% margin of error. It's a shove, all day, every day. Snap shove even.

Villain put 20% of his stack in the pot. A call represents 40% of what the villain started with, or 50% of what he has left. Here are villains options to a shove:

• Option 1: If he has anything, he has to call the shove.
• Option 2: If he is on a stone cold bluff, he folds.

There is no option 3.

However, by calling, you are giving the villain free cards. Nearly every card in the deck is the villains. Any 10, J, Q,K, or A gives the villain "juice" to bluff you off the pot by "representing" a bigger set. Any 4,5,7,or 8 gives him the ability to represent a straight and take your weak-ass calling chips.

So yes, call, if you don't mind losing to 36 cards, or 77% of the time. Me, I'd Jam, and take the easy money.

 

[JustinInMN]

I am shoving that flop 100 out of 100 times. Not even room for a .001% margin of error. It's a shove, all day, every day. Snap shove even.

Problem is villain's value is just so weak and some of it foldable to a shove. The shove on the flop is 3x the pot. (770K in a pot of 260K if my math is right.) That actually give even a loose villain a chance to make a considered laydown. And I just don't think villain has anything more than medium value at best. Whether he leading value or not, I think the best play is to hope he leads again on the turn and then shove, increasing the odds of getting villain's chips to the middle of the table. I'm not trying to make sure I win the pot, I am trying to give myself the best chance to stack villain and practically win the tournament right here.

CANNOT fold on any river card here. Stick to the plan. Sorry, but you just can't do it. I would run some simulations, but it's not even close.

Sorry my dude, it's a bad fold both in game (obviously) and theoretically.

In the moment, I think I agree with everyone saying my fail was underestimating non-straight holdings on this line with the river shove. And also underestimating how little I had to be right to prefer the call over trying a comeback with 12BB. I guess I expected villain to check most non-straights which is why I found the fold in the moment. Even though I was wrong, I'm glad I got the data point as to how I was wrong, and appreciate all the input here. I sort of interpreted the river right, the shove meant he thought he outdrew me. Based on the conversation I don't remember the exact words, but he didn't think he was turning 95 into a bluff, I think it was a value play, he either put me on another 9x or TT-AA and wanted a call. Obviously he underestimated what I am calling with on this board if I folded three sixes. (But if I am in this spot again, I am more convinced I would call.)

 

[JustinInMN]

I don't see anything wrong with a turn shove. Top pair would call.

It's still nearly a 2x shove, 680 in a pot of 360. I do think villain's particular holding would call having just picked up an OESD, but 98, T9 might be able to find a fold, where a call is clearer for a lesser number. Or also villain may decide to go for a shove over a smaller bet, which I would clearly call.

 

[Poker Zombie]

Problem is villain's value is just so weak and some of it foldable to a shove. The shove on the flop is 3x the pot. (770K in a pot of 260K if my math is right.) That actually give even a loose villain a chance to make a considered laydown.

Tournament poker, right?

In that case, if the villain folds, you took 20% of his stack.

In a cash game sure, you may lead him along, but in a tournament, you are getting a significant advantage by taking 20%, especially late-game like this, where he no longer has many opening salvos left.

 

[JustinInMN]

In that case, if the villain folds, you took 20% of his stack.

In a cash game sure, you may lead him along, but in a tournament, you are getting a significant advantage by taking 20%, especially late-game like this, where he no longer has many opening salvos left.

Taking 20% of his stack puts me at about 1.05M v 750K or so. An advantage, but not even 2:1 and nothing compared to 1.7M v 100K. Opportunities to win 5-6BB pots are frequent in heads up play, especially when most pots are raise pre-call with anything. That goes back and forth all the time. Passing on the opportunity to cripple villain just because one is scared of being bluffed makes no sense.

 

[Chippy McChiperson]

You can forget all the rest of the hand history at this point.

Anytime you feel a calling is wrong, it's wrong. You might as well say "I know you got me beat, but I'll call". How often does that pan out for the individual saying that?

Only a Sith deals in absolutes. If you think you’re winning 21.7% of the time (3700/17000) then you should call.

 

[upNdown]

For the record, I never posted what I'd do, after that gross river card. I'd like to think I'd stick to my guns (can't fear the suckout) and call. The truth is, I've certainly both called and folded in this exact position in real tournaments, multiple times. There's a lot of villain dependency on this. For example, when @Frogzilla said it was a snap call, I laughed, because I know he'd call, because I've played against him online enough to know how he plays tournaments - he'd call because he makes his money jamming in tournaments and getting people to fold. So if I were playing frogzilla, yeah, it's a snap call for me too.
And the tournament dynamics are a huge factor too, of course. I'm mostly persuaded by @Moxie Mike comment that this is your best chance to win this tournament - that was my sentiment the moment the set hit. On the other hand, folding with 12bb behind (20-25% of the chips in play) isn't a horrible idea either - one hand evens the score.
I'm not sure there's a right or wrong here, and that's probably why we're all discussing it so much.

 

[JMC9389]

Tournament poker, right?

In that case, if the villain folds, you took 20% of his stack.

In a cash game sure, you may lead him along, but in a tournament, you are getting a significant advantage by taking 20%, especially late-game like this, where he no longer has many opening salvos left.

This. Shove on the flop and even if villain folds hero is now ahead in chip count and has the upper hand.

 

[JustinInMN]

And the tournament dynamics are a huge factor too, of course. I'm mostly persuaded by @Moxie Mike comment that this is your best chance to win this tournament - that was my sentiment the moment the set hit. On the other hand, folding with 12bb behind (20-25% of the chips in play) isn't a horrible idea either - one hand evens the score.
I'm not sure there's a right or wrong here, and that's probably why we're all discussing it so much.

In the moment, I certainly wasn't convicted either way. I knew both paths could be "wrong."

I'll stick to what I said, I didn't put 95 in villain's range until after he showed. If I could have done that in the moment, I think it's a call, and I think most of the other points after the fact supporting why make sense.

I also am just unconvinced shoving earlier in the hand with a monster makes any sense. Yes obviously, getting the money in should be a goal, but it only helps if you get as much of villain's money to go with.

Yes it's kind of gaudy that a 9BB pot represents nearly 20% of the chips in play. But that pot is actually going to go back and forth a lot heads up. This was a chance to get it all, and shoving I think reduces that chance unless you know villain has "value" here.

 

[grebe]

I just cannot fathom being head's up for a tournament win, flopping the joint, AND having my opponent donking into me....then thinking "I need to take this down now". These are the nom nom nom Juicy moments in poker that come around so rarely....taking 20% of his stack would be throwing money away. You NEED to be thinking "how much can I get him to put into the pot", not "how do I get him to fold."

Shoving the flop is being given a gift and giving it back.

 

[Poker Zombie]

Only a Sith deals in absolutes. If you think you’re winning 21.7% of the time (3700/17000) then you should call.

This is why I love poker. My decision may or may not match your decision. I've read nothing that would make me think the shove after the flop was wrong. Villain opened for 80k. If he folds, he only has 9 more bullets. I doubt he is getting away from the hand after shoveling 20% of his stack away.

If there is a valuable bounty you should try to take all his chips, but poker tournaments are a game of attrition. Chip away at his stack, and let the blinds swallow him whole.

Sith do deal in absolutes... and has the big stack...

 

[Legend5555]

I just cannot fathom being head's up for a tournament win, flopping the joint, AND having my opponent donking into me....then thinking "I need to take this down now". These are the nom nom nom Juicy moments in poker that come around so rarely....taking 20% of his stack would be throwing money away. You NEED to be thinking "how much can I get him to put into the pot", not "how do I get him to fold."

Shoving the flop is being given a gift and giving it back.

So many times this.

IMO, thinking about how to get people to fold so you can protect your equity is just scared poker. It's not how you win the monies.

This is HEADS UP, we should be concerned about value first. The fact that it's a tournament is almost inconsequential when heads up. It matters some if the skill disparity is big, stacks are large, or for ICM. But when stacks are this shallow and there are no money jumps to be concerned with, maximize, maximize, maximize!

Shallow stacks negate skill to a decent degree. And you don't have all day in a tournament to find those A+ spots. In fast tournaments, you really need to go for the gusto with your big hands. Even if it means navigating some scary boards.

 

[grebe]

I like you, @Legend5555 ! Not sure I want to play against you, but I like you.

Kidding about the not wanting to play against you, but I do feel like maybe I actually do know what the F I am talking about when you agree with me.