Foucault Just another PokerSavvy weblog

This hand from the 2+2 high-stakes multi-table tournament forum
got me thinking about what it means to be "at the top" of a polarized
range. Here's a quick summary, for those who can't/won't follow the
link:

It's a tournament, and blinds are 100/200. Hero raises to 475 UTG
with KK, and good loose aggressive regular calls out of the SB. The
flop comes Qd 4s 9d. SB checks, Hero bets 625, Villain calls.

The turn is the 4d, pairing the board and putting three diamonds
out.  Both players check. (I don't think it matters much, because the
turn decision isn't the important thing here, but Hero has the Kd.)

The river is the 4h, giving Hero Kings full of Fours. Villain
checks, Hero bets 1400 into a 2300 pot, and Villain shoves for 11080.
Hero has him covered.

Most of the forum seemed to think this was a call, and in many cases not a particularly close one. To me, it's a clear fold.

Not everyone articulated it this way, but the general sense seemed
to be that a pair of K's is at the top of Hero's range, and that
folding hands at the top of your range isn't what you do against a LAG.

The problem here is that Hero actually has two very separate ranges:
a bluff range and a value range. KK is actually only around the middle
of Hero's value range, which I would set at roughly TT+. Unless Villain
is floating the flop from out of position, a possibility made even less
likely since Hero can account for two of the K's, meaning he won't see
stuff like AK/KJ/KT very often, Villain probably has showdown value. He
called a bet on the flop, and the most obvious draw came in on the
river.

This means that Villain will primarily combat Hero's bluff range by
calling rather than by check-raise bluffing. When Villain check-raises,
it no longer matters much where KK fits in Hero's full range, because
Villain isn't really playing against the bluff portion of that range
any longer. Villain's shove is rarely a bluff, so it matters only where
KK fits relative to Hero's value range, and more importantly relative
to Villain's value range.

If you're thinking that this is just a very fancy way of saying that
Hero has a bluff catcher in a spot where Villain is rarely bluffing,
you're correct. The thing is that many people tend to use this flawed
"top of my range" or "hand under-represented" logic (which are really
the same argument, in my opinion) to justify some calls that I would
say are clearly bad. Yeah, your hand can be a bluff quite often, but
Villain can usually combat that by calling. When he shoves, KK is in
trouble.

...and it's not even that close:

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $80.00 BB (5 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

BB ($19098.50)
Hero (UTG) ($16000)
MP ($16538.30)
Button ($16485)
SB ($15277)

Preflop: Hero is UTG with K, K
Hero bets $280, 2 folds, SB raises to $1120, 1 fold, Hero raises to $2720, SB raises to $15277 (All-In), Hero calls $12557

Flop: ($30634) 3, A, 6 (2 players, 1 all-in)

Turn: ($30634) J (2 players, 1 all-in)

River: ($30634) 8 (2 players, 1 all-in)

Total pot: $30634 | Rake: $3

Results:
SB had Q, Q (one pair, Queens).
Hero had K, K (one pair, Kings).
Outcome: Hero won $30631

Believe it or not, I still managed to finish the day stuck, substantially.

Particularly earlier in the year, running too many big bluffs in
tournaments was a substantial leak of mine. I've made a concerted
effort to confine the monster bluffs to the cash tables, and my tourney
results have improved a bit. In the $300 rebuy 6-max FTOPS, though, I
did pull off what I think was a big, good tourney bluff:

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em Tournament, 80/160 Blinds (6 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

UTG (t6916)
MP (t3171)
CO (t7325)
Button (t12320)
SB (t12015)
Hero (BB) (t6713)

Hero's M: 27.97

Preflop: Hero is BB with J, K
2 folds, CO bets t320, 1 fold, SB calls t240, Hero raises to t900, 1 fold, SB calls t580

Flop: (t2120) J, Q, 5 (2 players)
SB bets t900, Hero calls t900

Turn: (t3920) A (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets t999, SB calls t999

River: (t5918) 5 (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets t3914 (All-In), 1 fold

Total pot: t5918

Results:
Hero didn't show J, K (nothing).
Outcome: Hero won t5918

Preflop is definitely good. The CO's range was like 75%, and I doubt
he's capable of 4-betting light. I don't know much about SB but it
almost doesn't matter.

Flop I think is close between shove and call. My hand is almost
always best, and while I'm in bad shape vs. his calling range, there's
also a lot of value in picking the pot up now given the spades out
there. I called only because I thought he'd give me the information I
needed on later streets, and he did, though not in the way I'd expected.

I doubt he checks a good spade on the turn, but he may well have
turned a weak flush or a better pair than mine. So I throw a little bet
out there just to see if he check-shoves. When he doesn't, I'm pretty
confident the pot is mine on the river. For a second, I worried about
the board pair, but then I realized that there were really no boats
possible for him except for maybe a disastrously played A5.

Tired of betting with decimal points?
Stuck in a rut? Feel like you're past due to get into the mid-stakes games and start earning some serious money?

 

Get high-end coaching on a small-stakes budget with my new SSNL Group Seminar.

I'm going to be conducting a series of seminars on small-stakes 6-max NLHE that will help you shore up your fundamentals and learn to deal with the tougher competition at $1/$2 NL and above.

These small group (4 students max) sessions allow smaller stakes players to receive in-depth instruction at a fraction of the price of individual coaching.

For more information or to register, please visit my coaching page or e-mail me.

Evidently there was a glitch on Poker Stars heads up Sit-and-Go's
that enabled players to start a new game using the "Rematch" button
even if they did not have sufficient funds in their accounts. What you
see here is a small stakes grinder who figured this out and hit up the
5K's. Clearly the guy's a thief, but still, it takes some stones for a
$100 player to put up $5000 (pretty sure he did have to pay his first
buy-in) in the hopes that the glitch exists in the higher stakes games
as well.

Scotty from Poker Stars support is supposed to be on next week's 2+2
Pokercast to explain how Stars is handling the issue, which I'm quite
curious to hear. Several 5K SNG regulars have posted e-mails purported
to be from Stars explaining that money they won from people abusing
this bug has been confiscated. I haven't yet seen an e-mail confirming
that money lost to these players was refunded, though if that happened
(and if you think about the optimal strategy for someone abusing this
glitch, it's actually quite unlikely that anyone playing a number of
games with them would lose in the long run) I'd be very surprised if
Stars didn't handle it properly. They have far and away the best
customer support in the business.

According to Stars security, posting in the 2+2 thread,

Pokerstars became aware of a system glitch which allowed
users to accept a rematch in heads-up SNGs despite having insufficient
funds in their account. Once we became aware of this we suspended the
rematch feature.

We have carefully reviewed each account which played in a SNG where
the glitch occurred, and have taken action as appropriate in each case.
We did not simply take action against everyone who received a financial
gain as a result of this glitch. We carefully investigated each
instance, and suspended player accounts only in cases where there was a
clear violation of PokerStars' terms and conditions, such as collusion
or chip dumping to exploit this glitch.

During the course of our investigation we initially suspended a
small number of accounts, however further investigations proved that
some of the accounts in question did not breach our terms and
conditions. Those accounts have been re-instated, and we regret any
inconvenience caused by the temporary suspension.

It should be noted that only a very small number of accounts have
been suspended for abusing this glitch for their financial gain. The
majority of affected players have aided us in resolving this problem in
a timely manner, and we would like to thank them for their continued
support and custom.

We will reactivate the rematch feature as soon as possible, but
we're not sure at this point when that will be. We apologise for any
inconvenience that this issue may have caused to our valued customers,
and thank those who helped to bring the issue to our attention.

I understand that they can't keep their winnings, but at the very
least, I think anyone who played these guys ought to get some sort of
compensation for the time they wasted as a result of this glitch. As
you can imagine, the time of a winning 5K SNG player, and if a flaw in
the Poker Stars client resulted in time wasted in games where they
wouldn't be allowed to keep their winnings, they ought to be
compensated.

Reminds me of how sometimes on the local news you'll see a story
about an ATM that's spitting out 100's instead of 20's and there's a
line of people waiting to use it. I always wondered: why is there a
line? Why would the first person ever leave?

(Presumably, the answer is that one can't withdraw more than 5x
one's account balance or daily withdrawal limit, since the machine
still thinks it's giving 20's).

This is one of the biggest leaks that I've helped my students to
find, and as these hands illustrate, it's not something I'm immune to
myself. I'm talking about choosing the wrong hands to defend against a
possible bluff/semi-bluff when there are still cards to come. It is so
much more important to defend with draws that have good equity against
your opponent's range than with hands that are "made" (which is really
a meaningless concept anyway).

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $20.00 BB (2 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from PokerSavvyPlus.com

SB ($2060)
Hero (BB) ($2239)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 9, 9
SB bets $60, Hero raises to $200, SB calls $140

Flop: ($400) J, 3, J (2 players)
Hero bets $244, SB raises to $520, Hero raises to $2039 (All-In), SB calls $1340 (All-In)

Turn: ($4120) 10 (2 players, 2 all-in)

River: ($4120) A (2 players, 2 all-in)

Total pot: $4120 | Rake: $0.50

Results:
SB had Q, J (three of a kind, Jacks).
Hero had 9, 9 (two pair, Jacks and nines).
Outcome: SB won $4119.50

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $10.00 BB (2 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from PokerSavvyPlus.com

SB ($3011)
Hero (BB) ($2010)

Preflop: Hero is BB with J, K
SB bets $30, Hero raises to $111, SB calls $81

Flop: ($222) 4, 4, 8 (2 players)
Hero bets $144, SB calls $144

Turn: ($510) 3 (2 players)
Hero bets $355, SB raises to $850, Hero calls $495

River: ($2210) 4 (2 players)
Hero checks, SB checks

Total pot: $2210 | Rake: $0.50

Results:
SB had J, A (three of a kind, fours).
Hero had J, K (three of a kind, fours).
Outcome: SB won $2209.50

Just look at hand 2 for a second. The results throw things off a
bit, but let's suppose Villain is planning on folding to a turn shove.
If I shove with 99, he folds worse hands like AJ and it doesn't matter
what I had. When he does call, I am drawing to 2 outs. If I shove KJs,
I apparently bluff him off some better hands and also I will usually
have 8+ outs (though occasionally I'll be drawing dead). Even without a
flush draw, two big cards like AK is a better hand to shove than 99.

I used to be afraid of check-raising the flop in a spot like this.
It felt like I was turning my hand into a bluff, because if he called,
I wouldn't know if it was with a Q or a draw or a worse pair or a total
float. Then I'd check the turn, and he'd bet, and I wouldn't know what
to do, then I'd call if it wasn't a spade (nevermind that I'm rarely
checking a flush myself on the turn), then the river would be like a
spade or an Ace or a King and I'd check and he'd bet and I'd fold and
feel stupid, like I should have just check-called the flop.

Increasingly, though, I've come to realize that your opponents only
get dealt so many hands and only have so many options with them. If he
really is calling the flop with all that stuff, then you're way ahead
of his range. Plus, you have at least some idea of which turn cards
will improve, not his specific hand, but the equity that his full range
against you. And when you get a relatively safe turn, you usually know
it, and you can even raise again:

No-Limit Hold'em, $10.00 BB (6 handed) - Hold'em Manager Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

UTG ($1052)
MP ($1076)
CO ($1042)
Button ($761.60)
Hero (SB) ($1005)
BB ($1639.55)

Preflop: Hero is SB with 9, 9
2 folds, CO bets $30, 1 fold, Hero calls $25, 1 fold

Flop: ($70) Q, 3, 6 (2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $50, Hero raises $123, CO calls $73

Turn: ($316) 5 (2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $200, Hero raises $852 (All-In), CO calls $652

River: ($2020) 4 (2 players, 1 all-in)

Total pot: $2020

Results:
Hero had 9, 9 (one pair, nines).
CO had 6, A (one pair, sixes).
Outcome: Hero won $2017

Granted this second raise is a lot thinner, but in my opinion it's
better than check-calling. I at least haven't yet figured out how to
turn a profit on the river if I just check-call the turn here, which
means it's to my advantage to end the hand now. I doubt I'm ahead of
Villain's calling range, but as you see, he can call worse. Not to
mention that since most people don't expect the double check-raise,
they'll open themselves up to getting blown off of a draw by betting it
when you check. That means there's a lot of value in picking up the pot
on the turn rather than giving Villain the opportunity to realize what
is often substantial equity on the river.

Oh, and this has the added value of strengthening your generally very weak check-raise-check range.

One of my students asked me about this hand today, and I thought it
was pretty interesting. My first instinct was that the check-raise was
thin but good. Q8 is pretty much the top of Hero's range here, and this
looks like such a weird line that I doubt Villain folds anything he was
betting for value.

The question, then, is how many worse hands Villain plays like this
for value. After discussing the hand for a while, we decided there
actually weren't many. AT+ mostly 3-bets pre-flop, 98 and 68 probably
aren't betting the turn, 96 needs to be discounted for lack of a flop
raise, and does A7 go for two streets of value? I think it ought to, but most players probably chicken out and check the river or bet smaller.

So I think this is a shove against really good value betters but a call against pretty much any 2/4 player.

No-Limit Hold'em, $4.00 BB (4 handed) - Hold'em Manager Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

Button ($620.90)
Hero (SB) ($458.70)
BB ($440)
UTG ($359)

Preflop: Hero is SB with Q, 8
2 folds, Hero bets $10, BB calls $8

Flop: ($24) 9, A, 6 (2 players)
Hero bets $16, BB calls $16

Turn: ($56) Q (2 players)
Hero checks, BB bets $40, Hero calls $40

River: ($136) 8 (2 players)
Hero checks, BB bets $100, Hero raises $390.70 (All-In), BB calls $272 (All-In)

Total pot: $880

Results:
Hero had Q, 8 (two pair, Queens and eights).
BB had A, 8 (two pair, Aces and eights).
Outcome: BB won $878

Some of you might remember a player named Jason Strasser, who in his
day was one of the very best NLHE players online, at both cash and
MTT's. He dominated the 25/50 games and won a WCOOP event before
largely quitting poker to become a Wall Street analyst or something
like that. Anyway, I actually saw him at the tables today, which
reminded me of one of his last 2+2 posts. It was about how he was
trying out bluffing in spots where people would generally say you
couldn't possibly be bluffing. After all, if they assume you can't
possibly be bluffing, they should fold anything that only beats a
bluff, right? Here's where I went with that:

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $20.00 BB (6 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

UTG ($3679)
MP ($3269)
CO ($4000)
Hero (Button) ($5708)
SB ($3117.65)
BB ($2000)

Preflop: Hero is Button with 8, 9
UTG bets $80, 2 folds, Hero calls $80, SB calls $70, 1 fold

Flop: ($260) 5, 3, Q (3 players)
SB checks, UTG checks, Hero checks

Turn: ($260) 7 (3 players)
SB bets $160, UTG raises to $540, Hero raises to $1028, 1 fold, UTG raises to $3599 (All-In), Hero folds

Total pot: $2476 | Rake: $3

Results:
UTG didn't show
Outcome: UTG won $2473

Well, I guess he found something worth shoving. A set of 7's would
make the most sense to me. His turn raise looks pretty strong, because
SB was sort of fishy and anyway the raise is probably bigger than it
would need to be if it were a bluff, but at the same time how many
monster hands really make sense for UTG? I doubt he raises 64, but if
he does, I'm almost certain he bets flop. I guess he can slowplay sets
sometimes, but I doubt that's standard for him even on a board this
dry. So whatever- it probably isn't a good bluff, but I had a feeling
and I pulled the trigger. I do that sometimes, and I've won some pots
you never would have expected. It's not the worst leak in the world to
have, as long as you keep it under control. I'd say that at least a
third of the time that you hear a voice in your head saying, "You know,
I bet he can't stand a raise here," you should just go ahead and do it.

Wicked Chops Poker is reporting
that, with 2400 players left in the main event, Phil Ivey accepted a
$20K wager from Andy Bloch at 99:1 that he would win the main event.
Now that he's made the final table, Bloch's got to be sweating the $2
million loss.

My first reaction was that, this close call notwithstanding, this
was a pretty good spot for Bloch. Granted everything I've heard about
Ivey is that he's both incredibly good at poker and insanely
intimidating in person, but is he really 24 times more likely than the
average player to take it down? The one thing I don't know, which would
make a big difference, is what his chip stack was like at the time. I
guess if he was already at like three times the average when he took
the bet, it might not be so unreasonable to think he'd close out eight
times as often as anyone else sitting on a stack that big.

Even against bad players in a great structure, that's an awfully
huge edge. Then again, if Ivey does make it to the final four with a
decent stack, I imagine he takes it down a large percentage of the time.

What do you think? Was Ivey getting the best of Bloch when he took 99:1?