QUIZ : How good is your hold'em

Hi, glad to see people discussing the content.

can you post a link to the quiz so I can see the questions as posted?

All the quizzes are here:

http://www.pokerstrategy.com/strategy/weekly-fixed-limit/

And the one I am referring to is the 2nd on the list

1.4

I think he meant that if we get 3bet by bluff hand, we will fold river unimproved to his river bet.

2.3

We call flop so that we could trap MP3 between us and BB on turn. If we cap BB could go for check/raise on turn and MP3 would fold many hands to 2bets.

1.4
You may be right -- but this is not what is actually said. If this is indeed the thinking it should be made clear.
Also -- IF hero believes opponent is capable of making a 3B bluff -- pot size on the River dictates we should call.

I think the point being made here is we dont want to inflate the pot with a marginal hand that iis only a weak bluff-catcher on the River if we miss our draw.

2.3
The size of the pot after a Flop cap means that MP3 will have odds to call for his flush regardless if it is 1 or 2 BB. If MP3 is calling for the flush he is trapped regardless -- the pot is too big to fold his draw on the Turn.

We have a huge hand -- we should be building the pot as large as possible -- quickly -- not looking to make and extra 1 or 2 BB!!
Your thinking applies to TPTK-type hands -- not monsters like this.

I think if the Turn is XR and a flush draw folds (unlikely) its not the end of the world either - as we take almost all the extra equity released with no flush re-draw possible PLUS we get to 3-bet and maybe see a CAP.

Problem 2.3.

Preflop: Hero is CO with A♠, A

MP2 folds, MP3 raises, Hero 3-bets, 2 folds, BB calls, MP3 calls.

Flop: (9.40 SB) A :club:, 8 :spade:, 2 (3 players)
BB bets, MP3 calls, Hero raises, BB 3-bets, MP3 calls. You?

The BB 3-betted you and MP3 coldcalled 2 SB. You have to decide again.

[ ] cap
[ ] call
[ ] fold

When the BB leads the flop its unlikely for him to have a strong made hand.

We're holding top set on an uncoordinated board so we've basically cornered the market on strong made hands. He might only have 6 combinations of 2 pair, and 6 more combinations of sets.

By contrast, he can have perhaps 12 combinations of flush draws that may 3-bet on the flop.

hand range for midly fishy BB

I'd tend to advocate for a flop cap since, if we think he's capable of playing this aggressive with a draw, then he may tend to think we'll also play our draws aggressively.

This may lead him to bet the turn with a lot of made hands, some of which are fairly marginal, in order to prevent us from checking back. As a result, our flop cap will not make it that much less likely to get in a turn raise.

Whether or not to raise/cap the flop seems dependent on whether or not we expect him to bet the turn with initiative with a draw. If he'll check the turn with a draw then its hard for us to do anything but cap the flop.

2.3.

MP3 may have weak A or draw for 2pair-trips, not only flushes and those hands would fold to 2BB on turn. We aren't 100% sure if BB will donk the turn. We can't make flushdraws fold but we can make them pay the max for drawing. Also we give a chance for BB to 3bet turn so we can cap.

I don't think that there are any logical inconsistencies in the answers.

What the correct answers are obiously depens heavily on the tendencies of the opponents. On average, I guess that the answers are correct versus many, but not all, opponents.

Hand 1:4: The fear of the 3-bet is real. Sure, we are not folding on the turn to the 3-bet. But we probably fold unimproved on the river to the next barrel. The initially dry board is now full of draws and any pair or better, or a bluff, may decide to 3-bet.

The point is that you, a prioi, don't like the thought of paying 3 bets with a draw in a small pot out of position. You'd avoid it if you knew the 3-bet is coming. Only an explicit EV-calculation can show what would be correct versus different opponent profiles.

Hand 2:3: You'd want to get as much action as possible on the flop, turn and river combined. If you flipped over your hand by accident, then both opponents are sure to slow down. A flop cap doesn't necessarily imply weakness on your part - it might even be taken for what it really is. A call on the flop keeps your perceived range pretty wide. Again, only an explicit EV-calculation (a hairy one) would give the correct answer in every scenario.

/Johan =

Problem 2.4.
Preflop: Hero is BB with A, 7
4 folds, SB raises, Hero 3-bets, SB caps, Hero calls.

Flop: (8.00 SB) Ah, 6c, Tc (2 players)
SB bets, Hero calls.

Turn: (5.00 BB) Jh (2 players)
SB bets, Hero calls.

River: (7.00 BB) 2d (2 players)
SB Checks, You?

You play against a thinking TAG from pokerstrategy in the blind battle. You 3-bet with A7 and are capped. The opponent bets the flop and the turn, but suddenly only checks the river. What do you do?

bet
check behind
fold

I think a bet is the only right thing to do here. The TAG knows about poker and does not mindlessly press call or raise. I often see on the micro/low stakes that when players check on the river after flopturn bets. on that kind of board it is either something like small pps. or a random king/jack where after hero calls twice its most likely you have an ace. which makes them give up. but may call just to see if they are right or you called with draws.

If the guy has a high Ax he would bet river aswell. considering we call turn there is no way we have KQ - 66 - TT .. he should put us on QJ or a low Ax where if he has any ace he should be betting again. He will ofcourse bet all streets with set. basically any ace set KQ .. so his range is flush draws or middle pairs like KJ - QJ where he gets scared of the ever dominating ace.

Well he sure does have a c/r range here(well at least he should and since we assume he is a good player that should be the case) .Since he put us on low Ax and other worse made hands mostly Jx,Tx c/r makes sense.Also if he wants to c/f hands like KK,QQ in this spot he must have a range that balances it and since he doesnt really c/c anything on this board c/r range should be quite big....so yes I see reason for checking behind...but...!

Im not happy about his preflop range.Good thinking player wont just have premiums in his range when he caps in blind battles.He should have some weaker hands as well and he should also not expect us to be super tight in calldown as well+we have some FDs,SDs or maybe even some 67s,68 which we may decide to turn into a bluff(and if we are thinking players we definatelly should have a bluffing range when he checks just to balance our valuebetting range)...therefore thinking he will simply just c/f KK,QQ is not totally realistic.I also see merit in betting...actually I would preffer betting since I see him on QJ,KJ quit often as well.

If this was more like MP3 vs CO then yes,checking behind is totally the best play

For once, reading the official answer made me feel exceedingly bright. That is a good thing because my play lately has been anything but bright. Bad and unlucky is not a great combination.

The hand from two posts up: Taking our opponents 4-betting range from some chart practically implies that we beat KK and QQ only on his part.

These hands and are pretty much exactly the hands in his range that he should bet-fold with if he figures that we bet aces or better (if checked to) in this spot but with no worse hands and call with aces + some weaker hands. [Wether he should bet-fold, bet-call or check-raise with his stronger holdings is another matter. He shouldn't check-call.]

So, given that our opponent is a thinking player from PS that does follow the advice and charts (up to level gold), then a bet is a losing play 100% of the time.

If he is not that thinking, but still tight, he might check-call some hands that we beat. This is still not good at all.

Take a good player that has a much wider 4-betting range. Suppose that we have him beat. Now his hand is bluff catcher at most. The questions now are, "How wide is his 4-betting range preflop filtered through flop and turn action?" and "Would he check-call with something that we beat?"

We beat 33, 44, 55, 77, 88, 99, A3s, A4s, A5s, KJ, KTs, QJs, QTs Q9s, J9s, T9s, T8s, 98s, 87s, ... . Going much further down the list we cannot be speaking of a good player with a wide 4-betting range, only a bad one.

From his original 4-betting range we have AA, JJ, TT, AJ, AT that will cost us 2 bets if we are unable to fold. If we play bet-fold we need exactly as many hands in his bluff-catching range. If we play bet-call we need to find two times as many hands that our opponent will now check-raise bluff with.

Bet-calling is clearly not good against very many opponents, good or not. Bet-folding takes a pretty loose opponent. If he would call with (say) KJ, QT, 99, 88, 77 and perhaps two more hands, then we still have a problem. Now we seriously should begin to fear the other possible combinations.

I think I'm going to play around a little with Equilab.

/Johan

EDIT: Sorry about spewing in the thread, but it's quite helpful to analyze problems and write about it too. I tend to remeber things better if I force myself to try to convince others and let myself be convinced by others.

Against a good player - check. That was, after all, the original problem.

If our oppnent (loose version) is still around with any pair, any A, and any broadway, then our equity is 55%. If he is around with 7x as well, then we have 65%. Now we might bet if he calls with 33 and 73 or better and is kind enough not to check-raise us with pure bluffs.

Technically speaking, the part of our opponents check-calling range that we beat must be wider (by some margin) than the part that we lose to plus his check-raising range.

If we can conclude that his check-raising range is not empty, say that he check-raises with AA, JJ, TT, KQ (25 combinations) then it's not good enough to beat KK, QQ, KJ, QJ , 88, 77, 55, 44, 33 (51 combinations) because most of his Ax and all of his two pairs will call as well and beat us. I have value bet king high on the river and felt a lot more comfortable about it. (both before and after losing the hands.)

If our opponents check allows us to exclude all A (except AA) and all two pairs on his part, then only his check-raising hands beat us. So against a straightforward loose player we should value bet. But not against a good player - loose or not - we should check there.

/Johan =