[NL2-NL10] NL6 FR KQs

    • UnknownJoseph
      UnknownJoseph
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.04.2010 Posts: 5,735
      - $0.06 NL - Holdem - 8 players
      Hand converted by PokerTracker 3

      SB: $5.85
      BB: $4.16
      UTG: $1.19
      Hero (UTG+1): $6.59
      MP: $3.45
      MP+1: $3.46
      CO: $5.02
      BTN: $7.55

      SB posts SB $0.03, BB posts BB $0.06

      Pre Flop: ($0.09) Hero has Q:spade: K:spade:

      fold, Hero raises to $0.24, fold, fold, fold, BTN calls $0.24, fold, fold

      Flop: ($0.57, 2 players) 8:spade: J:diamond: 6:diamond:
      Hero bets $0.38, BTN calls $0.38

      Turn: ($1.33, 2 players) T:heart:
      Hero checks, BTN bets $0.54, fold

      do u think that I could have bet on the river?
  • 11 replies
    • giliNL
      giliNL
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.07.2011 Posts: 56
      Well in order to bet the river you'd have to call the turn first and you've got nothing to do that with.

      It's ~3.5:1 to call a 5:1 OESD, the implied odds aren't great because if an ace or 9 hits it's pretty obvious that there's a straight there so your opponent is unlikely to pay you off, and then there's the flush draw.

      I assume you mean bet on the turn and I don't really see that the ten changed much. The only way you've made a straight, is if you raised preflop with Q9 from UTG which seems very unlikely. I guess you could've made trips with TT but it's a bit thin and you'll probably get called.

      check/fold seems fine. Your cbet-bluff didn't work
    • veriz
      veriz
      Black
      Joined: 20.07.2008 Posts: 65,504
      Hello BGawli,

      While not even knowing the opponent I wouldn't really 2nd barrel there. We ain't gonna get much fold equity anyways while the T could easily even help his range.

      Also we can't Check/Call there while we don't get correct implied odds and can be very likely that we even don't get paid. Plus of course we have to discount few outs.

      Best regards.
    • giliNL
      giliNL
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.07.2011 Posts: 56
      I actually realized that I made a mistake, the odds are ~4.5:1 so not even that bad but yeah, like veriz says you'll have to discount some of the odds due to the flush draw.

      Anyway just wanted to correct myself :)
    • UnknownJoseph
      UnknownJoseph
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.04.2010 Posts: 5,735
      what about if turn card was:
      a) Ts- so I have FD+OESD... do I play check/call... what about bet/fold? I think that Ts didn't change much so I wouldn't bet...
      b) Ax- so it's scary card and I would bet on the turn..
    • Cooleyman
      Cooleyman
      Bronze
      Joined: 01.03.2011 Posts: 144
      Originally posted by giliNL
      I actually realized that I made a mistake, the odds are ~4.5:1 so not even that bad but yeah, like veriz says you'll have to discount some of the odds due to the flush draw.

      Anyway just wanted to correct myself :)
      I think you were right with your original calculation. We would have to pay $0.54 into a pot of $1.33 so our pot odds are 3.46:1. The odds against us drawing to the OESD are 5:1 against (not taking into consideration the flush potential), so the pot is not offering sufficient odds.
    • giliNL
      giliNL
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.07.2011 Posts: 56
      Originally posted by Cooleyman
      Originally posted by giliNL
      I actually realized that I made a mistake, the odds are ~4.5:1 so not even that bad but yeah, like veriz says you'll have to discount some of the odds due to the flush draw.

      Anyway just wanted to correct myself :)
      I think you were right with your original calculation. We would have to pay $0.54 into a pot of $1.33 so our pot odds are 3.46:1. The odds against us drawing to the OESD are 5:1 against (not taking into consideration the flush potential), so the pot is not offering sufficient odds.
      I thought that normally when you calculate odds, you include your own bet into the pot that you stand to win, since if you win, you also win your own bet back.

      Hence it's 0.54 into a 2.24 pot or ~4,5:1

      But in the article here on the site they do present an example the way you say. The logic doesn't make sense to me tho. If you bet, you stand to lose 2.24 5 times, but the one time you win, you win 2.24, not 1.88.

      I'm also fairly certain it is calculated this way in my poker books but I don't have them to hand atm.

      Either way, you can't call :)

      [edit] you seem to be right tho, so maybe I need to redo my homework :)
    • giliNL
      giliNL
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.07.2011 Posts: 56
      Actually I guess I was right after all.. confusingness :)

      Pot odds are invariably a function of calling or folding, rather than betting. In the simplest terms, if the bet is $1 to you, and there is already $4 in the pot, your pot odds are 5:1.
    • Cooleyman
      Cooleyman
      Bronze
      Joined: 01.03.2011 Posts: 144
      Originally posted by giliNL
      Actually I guess I was right after all.. confusingness :)

      Pot odds are invariably a function of calling or folding, rather than betting. In the simplest terms, if the bet is $1 to you, and there is already $4 in the pot, your pot odds are 5:1.
      I don't think that is correct. I believe you only include your own investment if you are trying to calculate your equity. I found this quote "Pot odds are simply the ratio of the amount of money in the pot to how much money it costs to call. If there is $100 in the pot and it takes $10 to call, your pot odds are 100:10, or 10:1" on the website detailed below.

      http://www.tightpoker.com/poker_odds.html
    • giliNL
      giliNL
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.07.2011 Posts: 56
      Yeah I think you're right.

      According to Hold'em Poker For Advanced Players:

      Pot Odds: The ratio of the amount of money in the pot to the bet you must call to continue the hand.


      Also seems to be that way in Sklansky's Theory of Poker and Small Stakes Hold'em so I guess wikihow got it wrong :)

      I suppose it makes sense when you think of the definition, as it is the ratio of a to b, where a is the pot and b is the required bet.

      On the other hand I think the reasoning that I made earlier also makes sense, because you are effectively always also going to win or lose your own bet too.
    • UnknownJoseph
      UnknownJoseph
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.04.2010 Posts: 5,735
      Hi coach,
      because of a lot of posts, my post missed, could u back to this situation and analyze it deeper
      Originally posted by BGawli
      what about if turn card was:
      a) Ts- so I have FD+OESD... do I play check/call... what about bet/fold? I think that Ts didn't change much so I wouldn't bet...but can I call his bet in this situation?
      b) Ax- so it's scary card and I would bet on the turn..
    • veriz
      veriz
      Black
      Joined: 20.07.2008 Posts: 65,504
      a) Ts- so I have FD+OESD... do I play check/call... what about bet/fold? I think that Ts didn't change much so I wouldn't bet...but can I call his bet in this situation?

      Most likely I would still 2nd barrel it while we might even have small chance to have fold equity and of course our equity against any hand should be very good. Therefore bet/Fold should work perfectly. With Check/Call we might just turn our hand into bluff-catcher and of course wont get correct implied odds.

      b) Ax- so it's scary card and I would bet on the turn..

      Depends once again against what kind of opponent we are against. Some loose players don't mind either it's a scare card or not, they will anyways continue. :D But basically it's considerable as well but I'd prefer it to do A.