87s vs UTG raise what do you think to this play is it exploiting

fold pre

Hi CustardKid,

I have to say that I think you are massively overestimating the combos in villains range that you will make fold on such a dry board. I cannot imagine I would fold any Kx, TT-QQ a lot of the time AQ,AJ,AT w backdoor draws. What exactly would you be trying to rep here (hypothetical situation I assume) beyond the weak holding you have and other small/mid pairs? I think raising villains flop Cbet doesn't rep value (as I think it would be better to call with such hands) and is actually more suggestive of weakness.

I don't think you ever have 84% fold equity in spots like this. That said, as an exercise in how to make range orientated decisions, I think you are on the right track simply using a poor example.

MD

Hey MD,

I haven't played this hand, I was just thinking ways to implement this into my game and came up with this example hand, I wont try putting this into my game until I learn a bit more theory behind it and I would be extremely selective to the opponent I do this too, I would be repping a set obviously the player would have to be able to fold.

this is based on a 6max table so I think them UTG ranges should be accurate.

also I was just wondering is that a good way of estimating your fold equity, i haven't come across working out your fold equity yet in the strategy section.

Dont we only need 30% fold equity to make a profit here since we still have 24% equity in the pot?

Thanks
CK

Sure, ranges may be accurate but you still rep very small value range by raising such a flop and so will have very little fold equity. You say you would be repping a set but a set wouldn't raise that flop. The logic appears flawed in my opinion.

I would be interested to see if one of the hand judges or more advanced players think that they ever have a raising range in such spots. My inclination is that if you were raising your sets (not optimum imo) then you would have to raise some air to balance. This doesn't include many hands that aren't Ax or hit the board as you have cold-called UTG pre-flop and A high has some value here and arguably would also be better flatting the flop Cbet.

But again -

...as an exercise in how to make range orientated decisions, I think you are on the right track, simply using a poor example.

MD

ps - thread title says 89s but example is 78s.

Hey MD,
Yeah you are totally right flatting would be the best line since all bluffs would fold and only better hands would call it is a bad example but the topic I was aiming at was more like combos and fold equity to be honest I think that is more advanced and I'm thinking too far ahead I'm going to leave this out of my game for now and focus on the bigger leaks in my game.

Sorry about the 89s topic, the hand was an example that I made up in my head lol

Ck

Originally posted by MasochisticDesire
ps - thread title says 89s but example is 78s.

Fixed:f_cool:

55+,A9s+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,AJo+,KQo

Probably something like this. You could use Equilab to assign ranges to your opponent. What in this example you think has the most EV?

Call the flop.
Raising doesn't make him fold any better hand. (If you think he folds KQ to a flop raise, you can call any two cards preflop and then raise every cbet and show a massive profit.)
Raising flop also doesn't make him call any worse hands.
It's just a really silly raise.

It's still not that bad, because you get protection, and he never 3bets the flop, but fundamentally it's not a raise you wanna have the habit of making.

Originally posted by lnternet
Call the flop.
Raising doesn't make him fold any better hand. (If you think he folds KQ to a flop raise, you can call any two cards preflop and then raise every cbet and show a massive profit.)
Raising flop also doesn't make him call any worse hands.
It's just a really silly raise.

Assume hero wants a raising range. And he wants to raise half his sets, so about 3 combos. He'll want about 9 combos of bluffs.
89s and QJs with bdfd's make ok bluffs. After that? What is better than 78s? Perhaps some PP's below 77's achieve a similar thing as 78s, but they don't block villains 77.
Is it relevant that we don't get a better hand to fold? As long as we are 'bluffing or semi-bluffing enough so that we get paid with our value hands?

He may not fold a better hand on the flop. But he will when barrelled on the turn (which should probably happen about half the time). That combined with the equity denied of his flop b/f range make this a better bluff than something like T9s?

It's still not that bad, because you get protection, and he never 3bets the flop, but fundamentally it's not a raise you wanna have the habit of making.

On a dry board such as this, fundamentally it's no big deal whether raised or not. But on a wetter board, I'd argue that fundamentally it's a raise that should be habitual.

Raising some weaker made hands such as this also prevent villain from receiving free EV when he floats the flop raise with showdown value hands that beat heros pure bluffs, but are behind yet have nut equity against heros value raises. So without these weak made hands in ones raising range, villains can float flop raises (and turn barrels) wider and more profitably.

Originally posted by jules97

Originally posted by lnternet
Call the flop.
Raising doesn't make him fold any better hand. (If you think he folds KQ to a flop raise, you can call any two cards preflop and then raise every cbet and show a massive profit.)
Raising flop also doesn't make him call any worse hands.
It's just a really silly raise.

Assume hero wants a raising range. And he wants to raise half his sets, so about 3 combos. He'll want about 9 combos of bluffs.
89s and QJs with bdfd's make ok bluffs. After that? What is better than 78s? Perhaps some PP's below 77's achieve a similar thing as 78s, but they don't block villains 77.
Is it relevant that we don't get a better hand to fold? As long as we are 'bluffing or semi-bluffing enough so that we get paid with our value hands?

He may not fold a better hand on the flop. But he will when barrelled on the turn (which should probably happen about half the time). That combined with the equity denied of his flop b/f range make this a better bluff than something like T9s?

It's still not that bad, because you get protection, and he never 3bets the flop, but fundamentally it's not a raise you wanna have the habit of making.

On a dry board such as this, fundamentally it's no big deal whether raised or not. But on a wetter board, I'd argue that fundamentally it's a raise that should be habitual.

Raising some weaker made hands such as this also prevent villain from receiving free EV when he floats the flop raise with showdown value hands that beat heros pure bluffs, but are behind yet have nut equity against heros value raises. So without these weak made hands in ones raising range, villains can float flop raises (and turn barrels) wider and more profitably.

I think you made mistake by saying 9 bluffs for 3 value, it should be 6 bluffs considering that bluffs have low equity. So with that you dont have problem adding more bluffs

I also think that it is not important at all if we dont fold better hand and villian doesnt call weaker, all it should matter is that we play our range max
EV.

And it should be obvious that raising 78s is +EV, since villian will defend vs raise in a way to make our low equity hands indifferent, so having nice equity ensures +EV. It is just the question if calling EV is higher than raising, it is impossible to calculate it, so we can imo just logically purely assume which line is max EV. I dont even have a clue here, which one is higher, there are arguments for both.

Internet (coach), can you please explain your logic in more details why do you think that call EV is max (beside what you already said about folding only worse hands).