[Closed] NL100 Quads and the Zeebo Theorem

hmm.. depending on your image, but i d bet always more on wawb vs these cs, so also here on both flop & turn,i think u miss some value there.. river: as played i dont think shoving gets most of him, tho he s a station.. maybe on 3 it would be good, or some low card might be an option too, but T is an oc to many of his pps, so i ll just bet sth ~30 and hope for a call by mid pps

but if u bet more on both former streets river could have been more close to potsize left where shove would be easy then.

Originally posted by TheLastNail
hmm.. depending on your image, but i d bet always more on wawb vs these cs, so also here on both flop & turn,i think u miss some value there.. river: as played i dont think shoving gets most of him, tho he s a station.. maybe on 3 it would be good, or some low card might be an option too, but T is an oc to many of his pps, so i ll just bet sth ~30 and hope for a call by mid pps

but if u bet more on both former streets river could have been more close to potsize left where shove would be easy then.

I agree with betting more on earlier streets to set up a bigger river but - but one the river as played - if he is calling 30 he is also calling 70 so I don't really like giving away value by betting half as much

The reason I bet so small is that I usually don't bet large on WA/WB boards since there is little to protect against

Originally posted by SoyCD

Originally posted by TheLastNail
hmm.. depending on your image, but i d bet always more on wawb vs these cs, so also here on both flop & turn,i think u miss some value there.. river: as played i dont think shoving gets most of him, tho he s a station.. maybe on 3 it would be good, or some low card might be an option too, but T is an oc to many of his pps, so i ll just bet sth ~30 and hope for a call by mid pps

but if u bet more on both former streets river could have been more close to potsize left where shove would be easy then.

I agree with betting more on earlier streets to set up a bigger river but - but one the river as played - if he is calling 30 he is also calling 70 so I don't really like giving away value by betting half as much

The reason I bet so small is that I usually don't bet large on WA/WB boards since there is little to protect against

depending on type of a fish.. but generally: not necessarily.. some fish like to call fe sth that they have left sth /like 2-3$ is enough/, while others cant stand the heat of anything close to AI and are just relieved to see some smaller bet so they can INSTASNAP call coz the tension is released ♦ and some just abs dont care /those are the gambling ever doubting fish which u re talking abt/..

u have less $$$ than the fish so betting less slightly less than AI is out of question, but he can still be the 2nd group fish which much much more likely calls small bet, however if u saw him gambling a lot and is the 3rd group fish u should go AI there too.. /but from my exp.: most passive fish are1st or 2nd group/

Originally posted by TheLastNail

depending on type of a fish.. but generally: not necessarily.. some fish like to call fe sth that they have left sth /like 2-3$ is enough/, while others cant stand the heat of anything close to AI and are just relieved to see some smaller bet so they can INSTASNAP call coz the tension is released ♦ and some just abs dont care /those are the gambling ever doubting fish which u re talking abt/..

u have less $$$ than the fish so betting less slightly less than AI is out of question, but he can still be the 2nd group fish which much much more likely calls small bet, however if u saw him gambling a lot and is the 3rd group fish u should go AI there too.. /but from my exp.: most passive fish are1st or 2nd group/

In this case I disagree. Not on your assessment of different types of fish that might very well (and do) exist - nor your "leave them $2 theory" but with the relevance of that categorization in this hand.

The fish isn't calling 30$ without a full house. If he does have a full house - he is in all likelihood not folding it - 100% not if its TT or bigger probably he isn't even be folding 66+. He will next to never raise these hands though.

The difference between 30$ and 76$ is 43$ that we are potentially not winning by only betting smaller. As such even if he does fold 20% of the time more its still more profitable to push.

Originally posted by TheLastNail
[...]he can still be the 2nd group fish which [...] the 3rd group fish u should go AI there too.. /but from my exp.: most passive fish are1st or 2nd group/

how many fish-groups are there? u should rly write a column about fish, your grouping stuff and their thinking

about the hand:
generally, i dont like your play for several reasons.

1) the calling range of the fish does not change due to your betsize. hence, he will def. always call any pocket on the flop, as well as A-high most of the time. sc he might fold - it doesnt matter whether u bet 5 or 9.
if i know (well, i dont know, maybe a column of TLN gets me into deeper level thinking .... but for now, i assume im right ) the fish doesnt fold any pocket and A-high on the flop, i want to bet as big as possible. cuz on this street he will always call the widest range. any turn might let him fold a-high and the lowest pockets.

2) turn: nice card. now he wont fold a pocket to one more bet. now he might be able to fold a-high i guess, but again, your betsize doesnt rly matter. u just get very loose calls if u bet very small. but betting very small loses a ton of value vs pockets and strong a-high imo. i assume he is level 1. so he doesnt think about your value range, but about his hand. and 77 is not foldable on the turn for him. never. so i would just size the bet an amount, that makes it almost impossible for him to fold to a river bet due to stack/pot ratio. give him 3:1 on a river call or so and he will even call if an A hits cuz he has a full house, the pot is already soo big bla bla.

3) river: zeebo theorem

zeebo theorem says "“No player is capable of folding a full house on any betting round, regardless of the size of the bet.”"

to be honest, this is a rly fishy statement in itself. i dont even need to bring counter arguments to this (which i could, but i then have to write so much, and i already write too much when i analyze hands .... )
its enough to falsify it by saying there is at least one player, namely TwiceT, who is capable of folding a full house on any betting round.

i know, not many fish are such a soulread gangster as i am ... but if u shove 1k (which is their monthly income maybe) into a 100$ pot on nl100 on the river on 22247, even the fishiest fish might get cautious and find a hero fold w/ 66.

to summarize my thoughts: bet bigger on earlier streets to get the most value out of the fish when the board is safe for him to call with the widest range possible.

Originally posted by SoyCD

Originally posted by TheLastNail

depending on type of a fish.. but generally: not necessarily.. some fish like to call fe sth that they have left sth /like 2-3$ is enough/, while others cant stand the heat of anything close to AI and are just relieved to see some smaller bet so they can INSTASNAP call coz the tension is released ♦ and some just abs dont care /those are the gambling ever doubting fish which u re talking abt/..

u have less $$$ than the fish so betting less slightly less than AI is out of question, but he can still be the 2nd group fish which much much more likely calls small bet, however if u saw him gambling a lot and is the 3rd group fish u should go AI there too.. /but from my exp.: most passive fish are1st or 2nd group/

In this case I disagree. Not on your assessment of different types of fish that might very well (and do) exist - nor your "leave them $2 theory" but with the relevance of that categorization in this hand.

The fish isn't calling 30$ without a full house. If he does have a full house - he is in all likelihood not folding it - 100% not if its TT or bigger probably he isn't even be folding 66+. He will next to never raise these hands though.

The difference between 30$ and 76$ is 43$ that we are potentially not winning by only betting smaller. As such even if he does fold 20% of the time more its still more profitable to push.

i did say that biggest easy value diff comes from bad betsizing on flop and turn.. and based on my exp with most of the fish i am still saying they dont care about zeeebrrrra effect /or whats its name ♦/ and just come to think things through there with 44-99 on the river, and to a shove at least put u on T enough of the times to save their monieeeez and gamboool with it few more orbits ♦ ..

sth more in general with scenarious with more passive calling stationary fish:
by a rule they are much more sensitive to big river bets than anything on previous streets /this is obvious: they wanna play when they are in hand, see cards and get adrenaline, have fun + and more important!: they themselves on most occasions slowplay hands till river to shown agression, coz they are alw scared of losing their bait earlier --> they have terrible protections + vplays, and they themselves are shoving rivers almost exclusively with nuts, even without initiative.. like donking senslessly.. : conclusion: if they see a big overbet on river /no matter what theory it is imo: they see yourself applying their principles and are much much more inclined to think abt it more deeply./

hence: you should strive to: 1, put much more $$$ into the pot earlier than on river 2, if strong, look weaker on river, and fe: /not in this scenario/ but on some hyperdangerous boards where u feel they can play back at times even severely underbet with nuts so that they can shove it themselves as a bluff, which they sometimes do, but they never ever call sth strong on river when they are weak. --> exceptions are struktures like QJxxx, QTxxx, where they have 2nd p or even much smaller underp and hold on to it on 3 str of barelling coz they alw put u on AK ♦

now, gentlemen, i beg your pardon, but a poor student is off to school

I agree with the diamonds

- He figures he is ahead on flop and turn so bet near pot size.
- River: T(scarecard for his range) + shove = even station folds to such a show of strength. He doesn't put you on a bluff unless he has seen you play many hands this way, and I'm pretty sure he hasn't

Here's a hand I played yesterday(with aggro image):

Known players:
[tg]Position_Stack:hands/vp$ip/RaisePreflop/AF/WTS/ORL/BBvsSteal/W$SD;BB$68.70:59/27 /17 /2.4/27 /43 /100 /50 ;Hero$53.00:///////;CO$21.50:306/10 /4 /1.6/22 /22 /75 /33 ;[/tg]
0.25/0.5 No-Limit Hold'em (8 handed)
Hand recorder used for this poker hand: PokerStrategy Elephant 0.67 by www.pokerstrategy.com.

Preflop: Hero is MP3 with K♥, J♠
3 folds, Hero raises to $2.00, CO calls $2.00, 2 folds, BB calls $1.50.

Flop: ($6.25) 7♠, K♣, 2♠ (3 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $4.00, CO folds, BB calls $4.00.

Turn: ($14.25) K♦ (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $9.50, BB raises to $30.00, Hero raises to $47.00 (All-In), BB calls $17.00.

River: ($108.25) J♣ (1 players)

Final Pot: $108.25

Results follow (highlight to see):
Hero shows a full-house, kings full of jacks (Kh Js)
BB shows two pairs, kings and eights (8c 8d)

Hero wins with a full-house, kings full of jacks (Kh Js)