Top and bottom 2 pair against top pair top kicker ?

Bandana boy

Stacks hero 200 on button villain 150 on Sb
1-2 6 max NL he

2 limpers I make it 9 to play on button with A3 suited
I have been playing postion very agressive more so than normal still steaming after a couple of horrendous beats

SB and 1 other calls
Pot 31
Flop A83
Checked to me and I lead for 32
SB raises to 64 limper folds

Action

ianmc38

I push.

This "tip" was mailed by Full Tilt Poker this morning:

"There will be occasions when you flop bottom two pair or top and bottom pair at the same time your opponent catches top two pair or a set. When that happens, you're going to go broke. In fact, you should lose your stack in most situations like this. If you're not willing to risk a lot of chips in this kind of hand, you're probably not doing enough to maximize your pots when you hold the best hand. "

Anyone disagree with that?

Bandana boy

I seen this from FT which got me thinking if i agree with it hence this post

so what is this guys range of hands ?
i think not very likely top 2 possible set 8s and highly likely AK AQ AJ

With that in my mind i think i can get his whole stack in now or on turn and i will have reduced his odds of outdrawing me from 1in 3 to 1 in 5

is this crazy talk

Culchie

Bandana boy wrote:

I seen this from FT which got me thinking if i agree with it hence this post

so what is this guys range of hands ?
i think not very likely top 2 possible set 8s and highly likely AK AQ AJ

With that in my mind i think i can get his whole stack in now or on turn and i will have reduced his odds of outdrawing me from 1in 3 to 1 in 5

is this crazy talk

You have to play this hand fast.
You are too vunerable with your 3 kicker, get your stack in now whilst ahead, 75% of the time you win the hand, you have to maximise your winnings to compensate for the beats.

Bandana boy

So i pushed and he called his last 77 bucks he did indeed have AK and the turn paired the 8
what got me thinking was he was not folding 77 into 160 on turn even if it was a blank but if i called flop raise I could fold to the paired board which I know destroys me

Am i being to cautious trying to play around the variance or should i embrace it

Culchie

Bandana boy wrote:

So i pushed and he called his last 77 bucks he did indeed have AK and the turn paired the 8
what got me thinking was he was not folding 77 into 160 on turn even if it was a blank but if i called flop raise I could fold to the paired board which I know destroys me

Am i being to cautious trying to play around the variance or should i embrace it

You played it correctly, embrace it.

fuzzbox

You can call and see a safe turn if you like, as you know for sure you are going for your stack on a non-pairing turn, and you know he will never fold. This is fine.

If there were more draws you would not like to do that, because a draw could hit, and villain could shut down, so you go for your stack now.

I would call in the situation you described ... because I have position.
If I was OOP, I would push.

fuzzbox

As an aside .... do you all see why check/minraising with AK here is bad?

ianmc38

fuzzbox wrote:

As an aside .... do you all see why check/minraising with AK here is bad?

Is that a rhetorical question?

fuzzbox

ianmc38 wrote:

Is that a rhetorical question?

A rhetorical question answers itself ian .... did that?

Waylander

ianmc38 wrote:

I push.

This "tip" was mailed by Full Tilt Poker this morning:

"There will be occasions when you flop bottom two pair or top and bottom pair at the same time your opponent catches top two pair or a set. When that happens, you're going to go broke. In fact, you should lose your stack in most situations like this. If you're not willing to risk a lot of chips in this kind of hand, you're probably not doing enough to maximize your pots when you hold the best hand. "

Anyone disagree with that?

In Supersystem (I think) DB writes that he has lost more money on flopping bottom two pair then any other hand. I have suffered with bottom two pair in the past and tend to play it fairly conservatively. Two pair may be ahead post flop but would not neccessarily be favourite to win the hand if it is played out. However, I think I would have played this hand much the same way, as it is likely you are up against A K\Q\J.

Culchie

Waylander wrote:

In Supersystem (I think) DB writes that he has lost more money on flopping bottom two pair then any other hand. I have suffered with bottom two pair in the past and tend to play it fairly conservatively. Two pair may be ahead post flop but would not neccessarily be favourite to win the hand if it is played out. However, I think I would have played this hand much the same way, as it is likely you are up against A K\Q\J.

Big difference between Top&Bottom 2 pair, and bottom 2 pair.

ianmc38

fuzzbox wrote:

A rhetorical question answers itself ian?

I'd have to disagree with that definition.

It's more a question that doesn't require an answer as the answer is obvious.

Norwich Fan Rob

his check raise with AK is bad cause it gets AQ and AJ to fold, and it almost pot commits him to call a set, 2 pair etc with tptk in this case.

Waylander

Culchie wrote:

Big difference between Top&Bottom 2 pair, and bottom 2 pair.

I agree Culchie there is, it was Ian's quote that did not diffrentiate between the two hands. He asked for opinions on that, and that is what I was discussing as opposed to the hand in the original post.

fuzzbox

ianmc38 wrote:

I'd have to disagree with that definition.

It's more a question that doesn't require an answer as the answer is obvious.

It may be obvious to you, but that does not make it obvious to everybody.

Give a little back iano ... give a little back !!

ianmc38

Won't somebody please think of the children? Why does noone ever think of the children? Aaaagggghhhhhh.

jtsuited

Norwich Fan Rob wrote:

his check raise with AK is bad cause it gets AQ and AJ to fold, and it almost pot commits him to call a set, 2 pair etc with tptk in this case.

One of the first holes that i fixed in my game used to be doing this, and one night this very reasoning came to me in a dream.
For some reason, it's the most blindingly obvious play to read.

Bandana boy

fuzzbox wrote:

You can call and see a safe turn if you like, as you know for sure you are going for your stack on a non-pairing turn, and you know he will never fold. This is fine.

If there were more draws you would not like to do that, because a draw could hit, and villain could shut down, so you go for your stack now.

I would call in the situation you described ... because I have position.
If I was OOP, I would push.

Afterwards this is what i was thinking was the better play (the clue was probably that i did not do it in the heat of the game )and actually goes against FTs advice column this morning

ianmc38

I'm not sure its a good play. Its like flat calling when you know someone's on a flush draw. That's bad. You want to put your money in when you're a favourite. Flat calling and hoping to see safe cards is bad surely?

fuzzbox

ianmc38 wrote:

I'm not sure its a good play. Its like flat calling when you know someone's on a flush draw. That's bad. You want to put your money in when you're a favourite. Flat calling and hoping to see safe cards is bad surely?

Think about it - and tell me why.

slians

If i may hazzard a guess - calling to see a safe turn card on a draw free board like that will mean that if a bad card like that 8 does hit then you can get away from it without putting any more money in the pot. It seems likely that the villain is committing his stack here anyway, so you lose less when the bad card hits, but win the same when it doesn't. Am I close?

RoundTower

I would prefer to get it in on the flop, and I really think that Full Tilt "tip" is terrible.

Is there any card other than the three remaining 8s you are worrying about?

Goodluck2me

slians wrote:

If i may hazzard a guess - calling to see a safe turn card on a draw free board like that will mean that if a bad card like that 8 does hit then you can get away from it without putting any more money in the pot. It seems likely that the villain is committing his stack here anyway, so you lose less when the bad card hits, but win the same when it doesn't. Am I close?

surely if you losses are the lessened and your winnings havent change does that not make it a good thing?have i picked this up wrong?

Bozzer

ianmc38 wrote:

I'm not sure its a good play. Its like flat calling when you know someone's on a flush draw. That's bad. You want to put your money in when you're a favourite. Flat calling and hoping to see safe cards is bad surely?

C'mon this is basic. Villain's putting his stack in anyway on this board so why not save money when an 8 hits the turn.

RoundTower

OK I'm still not convinced and I don't think it's "basic".

Fuzzbox is your argument that he will definitely stack off with AK/AQ here regardless of the turn card, and so we are only waiting to see if one of the three 8s comes off before we stick it in? I assume we are calling a K or Q turn, however reluctantly.

In that case why is it important that we have position here? There is not a lot of money left.

fuzzbox

RoundTower wrote:

OK I'm still not convinced and I don't think it's "basic".

Fuzzbox is your argument that he will definitely stack off with AK/AQ here regardless of the turn card, and so we are only waiting to see if one of the three 8s comes off before we stick it in? I assume we are calling a K or Q turn, however reluctantly.

In that case why is it important that we have position here? There is not a lot of money left.

Yeah, we are getting our money in on the turn regardless of the Kness or Qness of it, and villain is pretty certain to open push.

Position is good, just in case villain would check/behind if we check the turn ... and bet/minraise/call ... then open push turn is quite a strong move, and maybe villain will get suspicious.

Position forces him to act first in a big pot with TPTK. He pretty much has to shove.

fuzzbox

btw - I was asking Ian to telll me why its a *bad* thing.

Culchie

Bozzer wrote:

Villain's putting his stack in anyway on this board so why not save money when an 8 hits the turn.

He definitely put his stack in on the flop, as he will have AK ahead, a better player would not necessarily think he's still ahead after the turn with TPTK.

Play the averages, they're in your favour, maximise the edge, stick the stack in, 75% you win, 25% you lose.

Bandana boy

Bozzer wrote:

C'mon this is basic. Villain's putting his stack in anyway on this board so why not save money when an 8 hits the turn.

I like what Bozzer is saying here
If there was a FD or more obvious straight draw then I am fine with push
but thinking back Call only saves money as we know half his outs are an 8
I have to call any Q or K turn and hope he had the other.

Culchie

Bandana boy wrote:

I like what Bozzer is saying here
If there was a FD or more obvious straight draw then I am fine with push
but thinking back Call only saves money as we know half his outs are an 8
I have to call any Q or K turn and hope he had the other.

I see what you're saying, but the 8 could be a scare card for him as well, as is any paired board, he could shut down as well.

I still say stick 'em in when you're 3/1 ahead.

ianmc38

fuzzbox wrote:

btw - I was asking Ian to telll me why its a *bad* thing.

A villain is more lilkely to put everything in now on the flop with TPTK.

A nice turn card for us could be a scary turn card for the villain.

I understand what you're saying, but I don't think necessarily think it's correct. It also assumes that every villain will still commit his entire stack on the turn regardless of the card and that simply isn't true.

Would you flat call if you knew your opponent was on a flush draw and was prepared to call a push, hoping that we don't see a scary turn or river?

fuzzbox

ianmc38 wrote:

A villain is more lilkely to put everything in now on the flop with TPTK.

A nice turn card for us could be a scary turn card for the villain.

I understand what you're saying, but I don't think necessarily think it's correct. It also assumes that every villain will still commit his entire stack on the turn regardless of the card and that simply isn't true.

Would you flat call if you knew your opponent was on a flush draw and was prepared to call a push, hoping that we don't see a scary turn or river?

Remember that this board is A83. This is key. I already advocated pushing on a more draw-heavy board.

Who check/minraises the flop and doesnt push his last 77 into a 120 pot on the turn. What scare cards are there?

The texture of the board is highly important in this spot.

As for flat calling Vs opponent with fd ... if you do some research, I have advocated this precise thing in the past .... in certain spots.

Eg. if I had JJ, on a 9-high twotone baord, and I knew that my opponent had AK of flush, and the action went check/bet/minraise ... then yes, I would call and see a safe turn, before committing the rest of my stack.

ianmc38

fuzzbox wrote:

Who check/minraises the flop and doesnt push his last 77 into a 120 pot on the turn. What scare cards are there?

Well at least you're getting better at rhetorical questions!

fuzzbox wrote:

As for flat calling Vs opponent with fd ... if you do some research, I have advocated this precise thing in the past .... in certain spots.

Lol. I'll get out my A4 pad and start taking notes.

fuzzbox wrote:

Eg. if I had JJ, on a 9-high twotone baord, and I knew that my opponent had AK of flush, and the action went check/bet/minraise
... then yes, I would call and see a safe turn, before committing the rest of my stack

What if you had AA and you knew your opponent had AK of flush?

fuzzbox

ianmc38 wrote:

Well at least you're getting better at rhetorical questions!




Lol. I'll get out my A4 pad and start taking notes.



What if you had AA and you knew your opponent had AK of flush?

Will he go to the felt on the turn?

ianmc38

No but that's exactly the point. A flush draw will put it all in on the flop (good thing) and will drop it on the turn unless he hits a flush or top pair. So surely we'd like to get all his money in on the flop when we're a favourite?

There are of course a few donks who'll get it all-in on the turn with 2 overs and a flush draw.

fuzzbox

ianmc38 wrote:

No but that's exactly the point. A flush draw will put it all in on the flop (good thing) and will drop it on the turn unless he hits a flush or top pair. So surely we'd like to get all his money in on the flop when we're a favourite?

There are of course a few donks who'll get it all-in on the turn with 2 overs and a flush draw.

Ian ... ignoring the action on the flop is a big mistake.

When some1 check/minraises the flop, they very rarely check a blank turn.
Thus, if you are sitting there with KK on a twotone board, and suspect that villain has Ax of flush, or some other combo-draw that you are 50/50 with ... then calling to see a non-flush turn is a great play, as most villains WILL hit it again on the turn, and if not, then thats good too, because we have improved from 50/50 to 75/25, and if they check, and fold, then we win the pot for free.

ianmc38

fuzzbox wrote:

Ian ... ignoring the action on the flop is a big mistake.

When some1 check/minraises the flop, they very rarely check a blank turn.
Thus, if you are sitting there with KK on a twotone board, and suspect that villain has Ax of flush, or some other combo-draw that you are 50/50 with ... then calling to see a non-flush turn is a great play, as most villains WILL hit it again on the turn, and if not, then thats good too, because we have improved from 50/50 to 75/25, and if they check, and fold, then we win the pot for free.

All these diversions are starting to confuse me. In context of AA vs AK. i'd rather stick it all-in on the flop as we won't get paid on a missed turn.

In context of the hand in question if we know this guy goes to the felt 90%+ of the time with TPTK then calling is fine. That's also assuming we can see both his hole cards through a crystal ball so that we know excatly what is and isn't a safe turn card.

If someone check-minraises me on a board like that, i don't suddenly think he has TPTK. Come on, who check min-raises with top pair for gods sake. I'd be more concerned about two pair or a set under those circumstances. we've all seen the check minraise from Joe Donkeys' set a million times at this stage.

And getting it all in if a K or Q hits? Come on, you're advocating flat calling and pusing any non-8 turn. That doesn't seem right to me.

Bozzer

ianmc38 wrote:

A villain is more lilkely to put everything in now on the flop with TPTK.
A nice turn card for us could be a scary turn card for the villain.
I understand what you're saying, but I don't think necessarily think it's correct. It also assumes that every villain will still commit his entire stack on the turn regardless of the card and that simply isn't true.

I'm specifically talking about this hand. Pot will be 159 on turn and villain will have 77 left. Look at the board and tell me what turn card villain isn’t gonna commit the rest of his stack with. I can’t see him folding AK to a Q turn.
We can fold to an 8 pretty safely but must commit to calling a K or Q turn.
Also, if we push the flop we hope villain folds because he has enough equity to make a call correct. If we wait until the turn then villain is incorrect to commit the rest of his stack.

Bandana boy

we have two situations I am already behind and i am going broke or i am ahead and know 50% of his outs (the 8) I think we have to suck up the Q or K turn as 50% of the time we would be right 50% wrong with the knowledge that calling a non 8 turn means i save 77 bills on 25% of the time that i will be outdrawn.
There is to me No scare card for AK except maybe the Q and he is going to push first to speak

Hitman Actual

Bozzer wrote:

I'm specifically talking about this hand. Pot will be 159 on turn and villain will have 77 left. Look at the board and tell me what turn card villain isn’t gonna commit the rest of his stack with. I can’t see him folding AK to a Q turn.
We can fold to an 8 pretty safely but must commit to calling a K or Q turn.
Also, if we push the flop we hope villain folds because he has enough equity to make a call correct. If we wait until the turn then villain is incorrect to commit the rest of his stack.

I'm not doubting anything that's being said here, but I have a question: If your expected value were to decrease when you get the money in on the turn rather than the flop, should you not get it in on the flop regardless of whether the opponent is making a mistake or not.

(Not sure if your expected value does actually decrease, but I think it's close).

Bozzer

lenny_leonard wrote:

I'm not doubting anything that's being said here, but I have a question: If your expected value were to decrease when you get the money in on the turn rather than the flop, should you not get it in on the flop regardless of whether the opponent is making a mistake or not.

(Not sure if your expected value does actually decrease, but I think it's close).

Generally it's fine to get the money in on the flop in these situations. Here's one nice example- you have a good draw(>50% equity vs opp's range) on the flop and know your getting correctly called by an overpair to the board if you push(which has lead into you for full pot the flop), it is still usually best to push because your equity falls so drastically on a blank turn and you cannot guarantee implied odds to call the flop. There are loads of other examples but I don't think this hand is one of them. Most of the time your getting the money in with 80% equity on the turn.
I was really just pointing out that you make more money when your opponent folds his AK/AQ to your flop push than calls.