[Closed] Gay fold or what?

no, i fold too. risk/reward ratio sucks.

Hi,

bet turn 1,25$.
If getting called bet/c river 3$.
As played: Your hand looks so weak, so I'd call. Although risk/reward ratio sucks. Villain can bluff you off with Ax, 2pair, straight, set, TT.....

Best regards,
Anin

Originally posted by AninIII
Hi,

bet turn 1,25$.
If getting called bet/c river 3$.
As played: Your hand looks so weak, so I'd call. Although risk/reward ratio sucks. Villain can bluff you off with Ax, 2pair, straight, set, TT.....

Best regards,
Anin

Yeah thats the point i plyed it super weak and they can bluff off my line easy but would they bluff shove? Almost never seen a bluff shove when pot is so small at these stakes..and even i do such things with nutz like quads.

Exactly, villain doesnt need to shove in order to bluff. He could achieve the same with raise to $5.

When he shoves 10x pot, you need a better hand than 7 high flush to call, imo. Or rather, you need very solid reads he's capable of this before you consider it. Against unknown, I just make a note of his play and fold.

Originally posted by Tim64
Exactly, villain doesnt need to shove in order to bluff. He could achieve the same with raise to $5.

When he shoves 10x pot, you need a better hand than 7 high flush to call, imo. Or rather, you need very solid reads he's capable of this before you consider it. Against unknown, I just make a note of his play and fold.

But that's exactly the point:
If he raises to 5$ with a bluff you call with your flush....
With pushing he has either nuts or air.

I agree with the principle of what you're saying: when he over bet shoves, his hand is either: nuts or air. That's clear.

So, let's think about what his range is. We don't have any information on villain, so his value range is any flush. First, against these possible flushes {JcTc, Jc9c, Jc8c, Jc6c, Jc4c, Jc3c, Jc2c, Tc9c, Tc8c, Tc6c, Tc4c, Tc3c, Tc2c, 9c8c, 9c6c, 9c4c, 9c3c, 9c2c, 8c6c, 8c4c, 8c3c, 8c2c, 6c4c, 6c3c, 6c2c, 4c3c, 4c2c, 3c2c} we only have 21.4% equity on the River.

we risk $19.98 to win $23.72, so we need 45.72% equity here. If we only have 21.4% equity, we must fold. So therefore villain must be bluffing some proportion of the time to justify a call, to make up for the times when we call and villain has a better flush.

Obviously, if villain is bluffing >50% of the time, we can call.

However, if villain is bluffing only 30% of the time, we get:

0.3* 23.72 = $7.116 plus
0.7* 0.214* $43.70 = $6.54 less

0.7* $19.98 = $13.99 (cost of call*% of time villain is not bluffing)

= -$0.33

Well, I'm not sure if I did the calculation correct - maybe someone can confirm? However I think you can see that we need to be pretty sure that villain is bluffing a reasonable amount here to justify a call. We can't just say he either has nuts or air.
(ofc, if he never shoves low flushes, he needs to be bluffing 45% of the time - in my opinion that's unlikely given the size of his bet. Maybe you are right that $5 is not enough to get us to fold our flushes but I don't think he needs to bet $20, so I would say, generally, his overbet 10x pot is more heavily weighted to nutz).

Edit: I just checked this with a very intelligent friend, he gave me the following equation:

EV = F(vb) x (0.214xP - 0.786xC) + F(bl) x P

where:
F(vb) is frequency of value bet,
F(bl) is frequency of bluff,
F(vb) = 1-F(bl),
P is pot that we can win (excluding amount of our call),
C is amount of our call, and
and 0.214 is our equity.

so, for breakeven:

EV = F(vb) x (0.214xP - 0.786xC) + F(bl) x P
0 = F(vb) x ($5.080 - $15.70) + F(bl) x P
0 = F(vb) x (-$10.62) + F(bl) x P
0 = F(vb) x (-$10.62) + (1-F(vb)) x P
0 = -$10.62 F(vb) + 23.72 - 23.72 F(vb)
F(vb) = $23.72/-$34.34
F(vb) = 0.69
F (bl) = 0.31

So, villain must be bluffing at least 31% of the time given the above assumptions.

A lot of math ;). Too much pressure for nl20 player ♦.

^^
Well, I don't understand the math either - i just repeat what others tell me and take the credit.

Originally posted by AninIII

Originally posted by Tim64
Exactly, villain doesnt need to shove in order to bluff. He could achieve the same with raise to $5.

When he shoves 10x pot, you need a better hand than 7 high flush to call, imo. Or rather, you need very solid reads he's capable of this before you consider it. Against unknown, I just make a note of his play and fold.

But that's exactly the point:
If he raises to 5$ with a bluff you call with your flush....
With pushing he has either nuts or air.

If he would put me on flush he wouldn't bluff cos a lot of people would never fold that.

Originally posted by Zemnieks11

Originally posted by AninIII

Originally posted by Tim64
Exactly, villain doesnt need to shove in order to bluff. He could achieve the same with raise to $5.

When he shoves 10x pot, you need a better hand than 7 high flush to call, imo. Or rather, you need very solid reads he's capable of this before you consider it. Against unknown, I just make a note of his play and fold.

But that's exactly the point:
If he raises to 5$ with a bluff you call with your flush....
With pushing he has either nuts or air.

If he would put me on flush he wouldn't bluff cos a lot of people would never fold that.

That's true.
BUT on NL20 fishes don't think about your hand too much.
I don't say that it's bad to fold, maybe even the best play; at least to save some variance.
BUT the way you played the hand I assume that he thinks he can bluff you off whatever you have with whatever he has.

Let's see what the judges say.

Originally posted by Tim64
I agree with the principle of what you're saying: when he over bet shoves, his hand is either: nuts or air. That's clear.

So, let's think about what his range is. We don't have any information on villain, so his value range is any flush. First, against these possible flushes {JcTc, Jc9c, Jc8c, Jc6c, Jc4c, Jc3c, Jc2c, Tc9c, Tc8c, Tc6c, Tc4c, Tc3c, Tc2c, 9c8c, 9c6c, 9c4c, 9c3c, 9c2c, 8c6c, 8c4c, 8c3c, 8c2c, 6c4c, 6c3c, 6c2c, 4c3c, 4c2c, 3c2c} we only have 21.4% equity on the River.

we risk $19.98 to win $23.72, so we need 45.72% equity here. If we only have 21.4% equity, we must fold. So therefore villain must be bluffing some proportion of the time to justify a call, to make up for the times when we call and villain has a better flush.

Obviously, if villain is bluffing >50% of the time, we can call.

However, if villain is bluffing only 30% of the time, we get:

0.3* 23.72 = $7.116 plus
0.7* 0.214* $43.70 = $6.54 less

0.7* $19.98 = $13.99 (cost of call*% of time villain is not bluffing)

= -$0.33

Well, I'm not sure if I did the calculation correct - maybe someone can confirm? However I think you can see that we need to be pretty sure that villain is bluffing a reasonable amount here to justify a call. We can't just say he either has nuts or air.
(ofc, if he never shoves low flushes, he needs to be bluffing 45% of the time - in my opinion that's unlikely given the size of his bet. Maybe you are right that $5 is not enough to get us to fold our flushes but I don't think he needs to bet $20, so I would say, generally, his overbet 10x pot is more heavily weighted to nutz).

Edit: I just checked this with a very intelligent friend, he gave me the following equation:

EV = F(vb) x (0.214xP - 0.786xC) + F(bl) x P

where:
F(vb) is frequency of value bet,
F(bl) is frequency of bluff,
F(vb) = 1-F(bl),
P is pot that we can win (excluding amount of our call),
C is amount of our call, and
and 0.214 is our equity.

so, for breakeven:

EV = F(vb) x (0.214xP - 0.786xC) + F(bl) x P
0 = F(vb) x ($5.080 - $15.70) + F(bl) x P
0 = F(vb) x (-$10.62) + F(bl) x P
0 = F(vb) x (-$10.62) + (1-F(vb)) x P
0 = -$10.62 F(vb) + 23.72 - 23.72 F(vb)
F(vb) = $23.72/-$34.34
F(vb) = 0.69
F (bl) = 0.31

So, villain must be bluffing at least 31% of the time given the above assumptions.

That's true.
But you give villain only flushes in his "valuerange".
Keep the following in mind: 32s is the same hand as JT = straight
So villain fish can think by himself "I has straight, villain doesn't have a flush because he played so weak and so I valuepush..."´
I have often seen this type of play.
Maybe he even pushes sets or Acesup, fe. A6, A5 thinking this is a valuepush.

Well I agree, once we add non-flush value range, our eQuity of course improves drastically, and we can think hard about calling.

But I feel we need reads (or at least some stats) to tell us whether we are playing against a fish who might think his set/straight = "nutz".

Problem for me is that we dont seem to have such information. All we know is that we bet the flush and villain overbet shoves by a massive amount. So, in order to justify the call, we either need to know villain bluffs a reasonable amount or need to have good reason to think he is bad enough to value-push "near-nutz" hands.

Thing is, when he pushes here, it doesnt make sense if he wants us to call with our two pair type hands. (i.e. he has a straight/set and he wants us to call with AQ or whatever). He would be more likely to bet some smaller amount, generally.

My final thought here is that calling here is never a massive mistake, becuase - after all - we have a flush. But since 1. we have limited info on villain, 2. we get relatively bad odds because pot is so small relative to stack sizes, and 3. our flush is rather low, I prefer the fold since it represents a less expensive mistake. (i.e. when villain is bluffing or mistakenly value shoving "near nutz" hands, he wins around $2.50 if we fold, but when we call and he is not bluffing we lose $20).

vs. unknown there's no reason to start leveling yourself to make bad calls. Just muck and proceed.

Originally posted by Shevtshenko
vs. unknown there's no reason to start leveling yourself to make bad calls. Just muck and proceed.

+1
I also think pot is too small to get really high variance spot a dn when they shove they tend to have nuts, so fold is fine