Out Now
×

Lol, this hand is so twisted I just had to post

Posted by

Posted by posted in High Stakes

Lol, this hand is so twisted I just had to post

Efff my lifiiiiifeeee


PokerStars Hand #90924486317: Omaha Pot Limit ($50/$100 USD) - 2012/12/17 20:30:36 ET
Table 'Vibilia IV' 6-max Seat #5 is the button
Seat 5: Sauce123 ($28261 in chips)
Seat 6: Odd_Oddsen ($60371 in chips)
Sauce123: posts small blind $50
Odd_Oddsen: posts big blind $100
Sauce123: posts the ante $20
Odd_Oddsen: posts the ante $20
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Sauce123 [Qs Kh 8h Qh]
Sauce123: raises $240 to $340
Odd_Oddsen: raises $720 to $1060
Sauce123: calls $720
*** FLOP *** [9c 7h Tc]
Odd_Oddsen: bets $1700
Sauce123: calls $1700
*** TURN *** [9c 7h Tc] [Qd]
Odd_Oddsen: bets $4100
Sauce123: calls $4100
*** RIVER *** [9c 7h Tc Qd] [Qc]
Odd_Oddsen: checks
Sauce123: bets $12800
Odd_Oddsen: raises $39358 to $52158
Sauce123 said, "sigh"

72 Comments

Loading 72 Comments...

Phil Galfond 12 years, 4 months ago
Pray for him to turn over the JJT9?

This really sucks. Not much to say. I don't think I could lay it down in practice, but we probably should?
Zachary Freeman 12 years, 4 months ago
If it werent Ben and Phil posting this hand I would just say "sorry you lost" "put it in BBV". I probably should still say the same.
a) your range doesnt have many boats given sets are most often raising flop and Qs-full would require runner-runner combos. Thus making it a spot he might opt to c/r bluff.
b) needless to say if you b/f this you have no b/c range.
c) you beat some of his value range, he could check flopped sets and hope you value bet flushes and bluff. He then can realize that with TT for ex. that he is right at the top of his range and that if he ever plans to bluff river using this line, he should probably be raising river with underfulls which can get called by trips and flushes.

Sauce123 12 years, 4 months ago
This sort of post is so frustrating to me because it dismisses what is legitimately a very close spot out of hand. It's so rare in poker that it's reasonable to fold quads and this is that one in 100 time and this guy just comes in the thread to tell me I'm whining and should post in BBV. Give me a little more credit, dude. This isn't a BBV hand, this is a legitimate decision. You might even learn something !

As far as the substantive points of your post. (a) is way wrong- I have a fair amount of sets and so should you in your flop call range, I also have a lot of runner Qs full in this spot look at the action please, (b) is wrong, i can easily have QT which im never folding, (c) is way way wrong for the same reasons (a) was.
pacmang 12 years, 4 months ago
I remember posting a similar hand in 2p2 and the consensus was to always call here although I'm not sure if I agree with that
MajaIvarsson99 12 years, 4 months ago
First of all I would say it's a clear call vs dumb people at lower stakes, a clear fold vs uncreative nits on mid stakes and probably a fold vs uncreative people overall. Obviously your opponent are not uncreative.

I think that he valueraises worse almost never because it's too easy for both hero and villain (or villain thinks so since he doesn't know you block both queens) and he reps the straight flush fairly well. Thus it comes down to if he has a bluffraising range here and even though I would assume most would say he has based on him being really good (I've played a little with him when he played much, much lower but not enough to tell really, I'll assume so for this post though.)

I'm not sold on anyone bluffing enough in all spots though so I'd just take your guesstimation of his bluff raising frequencies here and put it against his range of 1 hand and make a decision on that. I assume that on of the following 3 alternatives are true:

1. He's, in your opinion, very rarely bluffs in this kind of situation.
2. You're kind of running bad and letting it effect you.
3. For some reason or other you got either a timing tell or a msg from GOD that said he was strong.

I don't really think 2 is true but I assume it happens even to great players so I included it.

I played something like this on 2/4 on a Euro site a few days ago where Board was KdKxTd Ax Ad or and I 3barreled and got shipped on on the river by some nit when I had AA and I actually thought for a good 10 sec before I decided that he could be dumb with KK** (he was!) but in this case it's much harder since there's no real obvious valuecutting hand.

All in all I'd end up calling if I thought he had any kind of half way reasonable frequency of raising blockers here (I dunno, like JcXcT9 or something). What kind of makes it more of a call, at least against a mid stakes mind, would be that your range is fairly wide and includes both a lot of bluffs and some thin value, which, in that regard, makes it a fairly decent spot to blow you off stuff.
MajaIvarsson99 12 years, 4 months ago
Forgot one fairly obvious thing. He could turn his Q*** hands into bluffs and in that case he doesn't actually have a bluff range in this case. That'd be cool, and spot where quads is a fold but top boat is a call.
Zachary Freeman 12 years, 4 months ago
You find my post frustrating because I disagreed? Or just because I playfully said its BBV. I didn't dismiss the possibilities of folding, and I recognize that you are beat at a significant clip but I gave multiple reasons why it's not a fold.

- I never said he could have Qs full, I said under fulls. With an aggro dynamic it's not inconceivable he will opt to cr TT here if you vbet flushes and combo wise with TT if you call with 99 77 and some flushes, then as long as there are more combos of those than better its a +ev raise. Obv if you never b/c flushes a cr with TT would be bad. I just argue he could expect you to b/c with flushes some, whether you really do or not is not relevant.

- the most common hand you'll have in this spot on river is a flush, if villain expects you to vbet your better flushes than its a pretty good spot to bluff raise with some pair blockers which will skew your range more to flushes reducing boat combos.
- sure you can flat some sets on flop but you'll also be raising sets often so all I was saying is those combos are discounted.

-likewise his jc8c combos are narrowed given he will be raising flop with them some significant %

-you could argue you would be raising several FDs on flop as well which makes your river range contain less flushes which would support your stance and I'd agree but I ink there are more FDs that flat than J8cc and sets.

-you argue that you you can b/c QT but b/f QQ which is interesting because in general we should be hero calling on a sliding scale starting at the top of our range. I am anticipating that you mention QT because it allows him to have worse value combos of Qs full, am I correct? If so I can see merits there.

-I apologize for belittling your post by labeling it BBV , I was however surprised that you and Phil who are both very concerned with playing non exploitive would consider folding the very top of your hero calling range. I do agree that you most often only beat a bluff, but not many combos of bluffs are required to make it a call. Especially without any specific reads on villains bluffing tendencies on river, I would not choose to make such a exploitive fold.

-if you still disagree with all or some of this, I'm all ears and open to being convinced otherwise.
chum 12 years, 4 months ago
holdem player^^?

your sense of people's ranges is pretty off. he is never c/raising underfulls. we really aren't raising sets on the flop as often as you think. people call flop with sets quite a bit more than raise. and betting a flush on the river is actually pretty close
eq.fest 12 years, 4 months ago
"-you argue that you you can b/c QT but b/f QQ which is interesting because in general we should be hero calling on a sliding scale starting at the top of our range. I am anticipating that you mention QT because it allows him to have worse value combos of Qs full, am I correct? If so I can see merits there. "

We slide the hand strength scale relative to villains hand not our absolute hand strength.
Sauce123 12 years, 4 months ago
Zach- This is the problem with talking qualitatively about hands. I DO appreciate reasonable disagreement, but I happen to know your not just kinda off, but waaaayyyy off with the ranges you're putting people on in this hand. So, my advice is, try to make a quantitative argument where you set frequencies for the sorts of hands he'll have pre/flop/turn/river and what sorts of hand classes fall in them (I've already done this btw, I'm not just saying you have to do it and I don't- but I don't want to post for fear of making discussion less fun). I can't sit in the thread and trade qualitative arguments with you cause frankly it just takes so long and it's extremely slow to clear up disagreement in paragraph form. I don't want to condescend, but I should also say it doesn't count as a quantitative argument if you have a thought like "IP's range is mostly flushes" and then just slap a number on there like 'IP has 50% flushes' and then post and call it a quantitative argument. I don't have the time to teach you how to do all this stuff, but I recommend watching someone like Lefort's vids on here for a primer on how to go about making reasonable disagreements. I know sometimes when I post or Phil posts it looks like we are just making sloppy qualitative arguments too; but we kinda get the benefit of the doubt to do that because we're just so comfortable with the numbers for plo we don't have to show our work everytime. I know that's a little annoying, so I usually try to show mine, but obviously it's a fair amount of work so I don't always do it.
Sauce123 12 years, 4 months ago
To put this same point differently.

I don't think there is a single thing you could say without including a street by street breakdown of both players' hand ranges with reference to either optimal or exploitative play with those ranges which could possibly change my mind in any way about this hand.
Sauce123 12 years, 4 months ago
Def not being malicious either. I totally applaud your balls for coming in a thread where a pro-ish player is posting and basically telling him he's full of shit. Sometimes I need to be told I'm full of shit, I just happen not to be full of it this time.
Zachary Freeman 12 years, 4 months ago
Firstly, let me say that the tension in our discussion is a result of my poor choice to compare this hand to BBV. i have no vested interest in convincing you of my viewpoint. We can disagree. However, you never till now said you think it's a fold, you just implied you weren't sure. I do find some of your post condescending. You posted a hand which implies you were unsure of the right play, if you were certain it was a fold then why post? I never said you were full of shit, I just argued that a call was +ev with the info provided. Furthermore, I'm fully capable of analyzing the progression of yours and his range taking into consideration street by street action. I don't just slap on a statement of you arrive at river with X.... As you pointed out, including every detail in how I arrive at those approximations is cumbersome at least.
Certainly you will know your ranges better than I so if you never vbet flushes then your river value range will be only boats and bluffs. Likewise if other of my assumptions were off then my conclusions will be off, only you are privy to that info. But to be clear I never sad you're vbet range had more flushes than boats, I said you arrive at river with more flushes.

I am aware of your reputation as an elite player, and I respect that. however in a discussion especially one that you are OP looking for input, getting a benefit of doubt for articulating viewpoints is not only inappropriate but also counter productive to the discussion. If you can't be expected to take the time to give quality analysis, why do you expect me to or others?
I suggest we move on from this hand. I intend to contribute and to learn in these threads as I assume you do as well. I have no need or intension to create friction with you given I anticipate having future discussions on other topics and value any high level posters opinions.
Sauce123 12 years, 4 months ago
I don't think the hand is a fold. At the time I played it I had no idea what to do really. Now I have a better idea from doing some analysis, but I still don't know the right answer.
Sam Lang 12 years, 4 months ago
That is just sick.. one of those spots ranges somewhat go out the equation and I think this spot is very 'feel' or gameflow orientated on how we should base our decision off, this spot comes up so infrequently that getting an accurate makeup of the proportion of their range that is a bluff is really difficult. I don't think he's ever raising tt or worse for value, and I don't know the gameflow dynamics between you or how sick/play happy Oddsen is, I very well think folding qq calling with qt may be correct, but in practice that is somewhat difficult to do.
Marty K 12 years, 4 months ago
Hey Sauce,
To do a proper analysis of this river spot as you know starts with PF. Since I haven't played either you HU in an ante game, could you just provide a rough % breakdown of Oddsens 3bet range in this spot and your defence range.
Sauce123 12 years, 4 months ago
Call my opening range top 60%, and call Odds' 3bet range 17%. Precision with preflop ranges isn't going to be essential here though.
Zachary Freeman 12 years, 4 months ago
Firstly, let me say that the tension in our discussion is a result of my poor choice to compare this hand to BBV. i have no vested interest in convincing you of my viewpoint. We can disagree. However, you never till now said you think it's a fold, you just implied you weren't sure. I do find some of your post condescending. You posted a hand which implies you were unsure of the right play, if you were certain it was a fold then why post? I never said you were full of shit, I just argued that a call was +ev with the info provided. Furthermore, I'm fully capable of analyzing the progression of yours and his range taking into consideration street by street action. I don't just slap on a statement of you arrive at river with X.... As you pointed out, including every detail in how I arrive at those approximations is cumbersome at least.
Certainly you will know your ranges better than I so if you never vbet flushes then your river value range will be only boats and bluffs. Likewise if other of my assumptions were off then my conclusions will be off, only you are privy to that info. But to be clear I never sad you're vbet range had more flushes than boats, I said you arrive at river with more flushes.

I am aware of your reputation as an elite player, and I respect that. however in a discussion especially one that you are OP looking for input, getting a benefit of doubt for articulating viewpoints is not only inappropriate but also counter productive to the discussion. If you can't be expected to take the time to give quality analysis, why do you expect me to or others?
I suggest we move on from this hand. I intend to contribute and to learn in these threads as I assume you do as well. I have no need or intension to create friction with you given I anticipate having future discussions on other topics and value any high level posters opinions.

Edit: sorry for double post.
Joe Monge 12 years, 4 months ago
Seems like a fold in this spot... Hands that can feel comfortable bluffing in this spot TTJ9, 99TJ, JJ9T. 89TJ.. anything else??? Dont see you giving away the strength of your hand to warrant a bluff from the first two. So like Phil says pray its one of the last two? With any under full he cant really put you on anything but a straight (which would make it very hard for you to bet, so why check for value?) Seems like only check for value hands have you beat (w/ straight blockers as well), and as it has been said w/o a queen in his hand its neary impossible to bluff here, as I would probably have to call w/ Q9xx and better. Just off hand remarks and have never done full statistical breakdowns, hopefully with the site can learn to do this as well.
Phil Galfond 12 years, 4 months ago
You guys and your fighting :)

I just want to jump in and say that QT is MUCH more of a clear call than QQ here. Many of you have pointed out that he can value raise with chops or Q9, but more importantly, Qxxx is far and away the most likely bluffing hand in villain's spot.
sly 12 years, 4 months ago
Any chance because it turn Q, river Q, that villain may find some value with his range? Or turn it into a bluff?
MsReed 12 years, 4 months ago
I am surely the stupidest person ITT, but it looks to me like maybe he just doesn't believe you. If you had QQ in your hand, why did you only call the turn? Doesn't it look like something simple like: he has the set of tens and thinks you are calling him down to the nut flush draw and he boats the river and checks to raise a river bet? I mean, I know I'm dumb, but couldn't the play so far have led him to put you on a hand that just didn't include QQ?
Donkpredator 12 years, 4 months ago
I railed the hand and I think I'd fold aswell. Because of these reasons;
- He does not shove worse for value.
- He is not sick enough to bluff in that spot, especially knowing u get like 5-1 to a call.
- He does not expect u to fold almost anything you bet for value.
- His timing indicated he had it (from my experience with him).
Sean Lefort 12 years, 4 months ago
BBJ table one time? :)

This might have been addressed already (I haven't read through the posts yet) but something that bothers me about this hand is that I feel like his best line on the river with a SF is to bet as he likely (evidently) gets 2bets in more often that way, plus of course all of your bluff-catching calls that would have chkd back river. Any insight into why he might not think this Ben?
Phil Galfond 12 years, 4 months ago
Excellent point, Sean. I would pretty much always be betting my SFs here. You're absolutely right, and I think it's far and away the superior line.

One reason he may not vs. Ben is that Ben bets river when checked to much more frequently than most (obviously with more bluffs and a wider value range).

Still though, I feel so strongly that a bet is better than a c/r with the SF that I'm now snap-calling. Even though I'm still thinking we usually lose, it takes enough away from his value range (a significant amount, IMO) that we have more than good enough pot odds.
Sauce123 12 years, 4 months ago
Can one of you guys explain this to me? Why is this obvious? If I'm villain, I think I'm checkraising all my strongest hands almost always (if not always), although I haven't really thought about it too hard.
Phil Galfond 12 years, 4 months ago
Well Ben, I don't buy that you "haven't thought about it that hard" but okay :)

A good chunk of hands that you successfully c/r and get called will be value raising anyways. The fact that you (presumably) don't have many or any boat blockers with Your straight-flush means you get raised by boat blocker hands more often than normal. Qxxx would very likely check back but has a decent chance of raising your lead, or perhaps calling. Hands that block boats are significantly more likely to bluff for the 2nd bet than the first, because the first bet doesn't necessarily rep boats and because they often have the SD value to check.

QT is a much better c/r hand because your opponent had more flushes to VB, fewer Q9 hands to raise with, and fewer hands (Qxxx) with strong showdown value that will check back.
riverboatking 12 years, 4 months ago
this hand is a perfect example of why you should only play in games that have a bad beat jackpot.
true story, right after i graduated and moved back down to LA i was playing in a 1/2NL game. i had TT (jackpot qualifier was aces full of tens or better beaten by quads or better and both cards had to play) board was AA2 in a 3bet pot and on flop i looked at villain and his eyes were all big. flop went check check and as dealer was about to burn and turn i stopped him and said "put another ace up there please" he ripped off another ace and i looked at villain again and he was staring at me with his eyes about to pop out of his head. i just kindv tilted my head in a questioning manner and he started bobbing his head frantically. now we just needed a low card to come on river so not to counterfeit his kicker so again i stop the dealer and say "make it low please" he rips off a 4 and the guy doesn't even wait for any action he just slams over his AJ and starts fist-pumping. the best part was he could've just open shoved the river and obv i would be forced to call and he would've won a lil extra but he clearly was so excited he didn't consider that (prolly kindv scummy to do in his spot tho i dunno). i also won the lion share of the jackpot as i had the losing hand (think my cut was ~23K which at the time was huge).
i hadn't even wanted to come play that night but my buddy called me and convinced me to come play, and i didn't want to play in the 1/2NL but i was on the WL for the 5/10NL and bored so decided to mess around in the small game.
Lucas Greenwood 12 years, 4 months ago
Three Questions

1. If villain checks river with the ace high flush or king high flush do we expect him to call? Those hand seems to strong to turn into a bluff (particularly the ace high flush)

2. Does villain value jam TT** otr? My guess would be no thinking he would be more likely to bet fold(or bet call) , making it very difficult to have a worse hand otr for value

3. How often does villain arrive at the river with the Jc blocker and opt to shove, its obviously a bit of a kamikaze bluff but we are sitting here with 4 queens considering fold.

svindle 12 years, 4 months ago

Ben Sulsky disagreed in Zachary Freemans imo really solid line of thoughts. And shows very poor manners. Its so exploitable for Ben to fold top of his range river. Odd clearly nows that Ben is good/bad enough to fold his premiums with 5-1 in odds. So he own his soul, and bluff the river. MBN :)
blabla 12 years, 4 months ago
It seems to me, we need to know if Oddsen thinks hero is likely to lay down a vast number off hands with this play...?
I would prob put your bet considerfolding range to q k a flush 77 99 and folding range to all bluffs ( whitch could incl baby flushes baby straights ) Lets say he puts you on callingforsure with all your boats and folding the rest of your range - he comes out ok ? ( he´s got no reason to put you on too many q´s ) - he might even think he can get you to lay down q 7 ... and his range is really wide on turn ? ..... I would call happy on these grounds alone .....
If we take into consideration , that he is trying to come up with a counter to your strong riverplay as phil describes it , this could be a line he came up with
.... if you call youll know - its a good time to by some info with qqqq :)
schellenbauer 12 years, 4 months ago
The fact that ben is holding both queens makes his bet/calling range much more narrow than oddsen would expect it to be. Due to this fact, i think its much closer to a fold than a call.
blabla 12 years, 4 months ago
.... also , if you start folding your unlikly q boats , oddsen will have a very easy line with his small flushes and straights - he can hardly call in this spot with those , and its also tough for him to bet fold ..... again - your opponent will start this line eventually if you dont call enough ?
- im not an expert player - and would like a comment on my thougts ...
blabla 12 years, 4 months ago
or you choose to call with your boats , because of the split chances and the chance he bluffs with single queens ? ...... I think the single queens without flushes or straights are rare - and since your chances for having a boat is smaller in these events , these are hands hes likely to bluffcath with .... also it seems to me , he is leading with hes boats - that is if hes ever on a total bluff on flop ? ..... so all in all I would put him on a single ace of clubs ( with a 10 :) ) , the big straight og a baby flush ....
MajaIvarsson99 12 years, 4 months ago
Don't think most people would use the Ac blocker to bluff with here since the nut flush is actually on of the more likely hands we'd want to fold out in villains spot.
Alix Martin 12 years, 4 months ago
So we have a strategy pair :
Sauce : call QT!Q!Q, KcJc**, Jc8c**, QQJc*, fold the rest (QT!Q!Q means QT but not QQT)
Odd : reraise all in QQ**, QT**, KcJc, Jc8c

What are the necessary / sufficient conditions on incoming frequencies for this to be an equilibrium for this river's sub-game ?

Odd is risking 21401 to win 26520, he needs to succeed 45% of times to break even, which transfers in to a 55% calling frequency for Ben.

So if QT!Q!Q, KcJc**, Jc8c**, QQJc* is more than 55 % of Sauce's range, the equilibrium is stable.
But if Odd has the Jc blocker, and no straight flush, it becomes harder for Sauce to reach the threshold calling frequency : if QT!Q!Q is less than 55% of his range, then bluffing Jc blockers is good.
Then from Sauce's point of view we would need those bluffs to be less than 15% of Odd's reraising range for the fold to still be correct, as he's calling 8601 to win 56522.
Sauce123 12 years, 4 months ago
Alix- I'm probably calling any value betting hand which contains either 8c or Kc, as well as hands like Q9. It's probably reasonable for villain to c/r bluff some Qx non boat hands not containing a str8 flush blocker to punish my value bets with fairly frequent underfulls, so I will also likely be calling all vbetting hands which contain the Jc cause they block a subset of villain's value c/r and c/r bluff hands but not exclusively just the c/r bluffs.
sim87 12 years, 3 months ago
I'm not sure that nobody has mentioned this before, but if we do fold this hand in this spot here, can't oddsen just always c/shove JcXXX hands here and make us fold our entire range?
Phil Galfond 12 years, 3 months ago
Everyone who's saying that folding this is exploitable needs to understand that this is NOT the top of our calling range. QT, Q9, TT, T9xxcc, Qxxxcc... These are all more of a call than QQ, for reasons already stated in the thread.
Bryce Yockey 12 years, 3 months ago
not quite sure I get why Qxxxcc is more of a call, if his most likely bluffing hand is a bare Q, doesn't that significantly reduce his combos of bluffs? I understand it also reduces the frequency he has Queens full, but it reduces that at a lesser degree does it not?
newt 12 years, 3 months ago
In the heat of battle, not sure you are going to be folding too often. But, in practice, I agree that QTxx is a much better calling hand than QQxx here.
bingerminn 12 years, 3 months ago
Lot's of awesome posts in this thread.

I don't know much about villain or you but it seems like you have a lot of Q's->boats in your range, which makes me think he is not likely to try and bluff you in this spot.

How wide are you generally betting this river for value, or how wide does villain think you are?
Karim Jomeen 12 years, 3 months ago
Worked this out very quickly (thus could be slighlty off) villain only has to be bluffing or value betting worse boats 16.5% or more to make it a profitable call
phu trinh 12 years, 3 months ago
reading this thread made me realize why I have lost a lot of money to PLO... it is truly a complicated game that is difficult to grasp =[
David Nicholson 12 years, 3 months ago
FYL your stomach must have hit the floor when he ships the river. I would be (as others have said) really surprised that he doesn't lead the SF OTR. Does anyone ever actually bluff these spots with no Q in their hand when it's so easy for you to have a hand that will call, it's pretty reasonable for you to have a hand with the 8c which would prolly easy sway you into calling as well, or the Jc but surely if he's bluffing THIS spot he HAS to have the Jack of clubs in his hand and there is, ofc no reason at all why he cant.

No range analysis which makes me post a little dormant but I couldn't really add anything that hasn't' already been said, i agree he only ships a SF and it's perfectly reasonable for him to have it.

As in interesting question if he leads the river you shipping QT and just calling QQ ??

FFS though as if the river just comes the Queen of clubs, tilt.

Be the first to add a comment

Runitonce.com uses cookies to give you the best experience. Learn more about our Cookie Policy