SCOOP $2K 6-Max

There were a lot of interesting hands from this, more than I have time to post here (keep an eye out, though, TPE members!). This was probably the most critical. Thanks to more than a bit of good luck, I’d run up quite a stack, good at my high point for 2nd out of 580 remaining players.

Prior to this hand, I’d really been hammering on the player in the CO. Mostly it was out of the BB, where I basically never folded to his button min-raises, sometimes 3-betting, sometimes calling and getting stubborn post-flop, but definitely not making it easy for him just to raise and take pots from late position.

It’s not that I think the BB’s cold 4-bet is weak exactly, just that there’s a little more room for it to be light than you might otherwise expect. My pre-flop and flop calls seem pretty unambiguous to me.

The turn is where it gets interesting. On the one hand, it’s a dicey spot for him to barrel. On the other hand, I’m getting 4:1, and he’s repping a really narrow range. I don’t see him betting AA here, with or without a heart. Even against that narrow range, I’m drawing pretty live. So basically on the turn I’m worried but don’t think I can fold.

In retrospect, I think that’s a reason to fold the river. Of course he’s still repping a really narrow range, and my hand is a decent bluff-catcher in that I block a couple things like AhQh, QhJh, and KQ that could play this way. However, I probably have enough trips, flushes, and boats in my range that I don’t really need to call with pure bluff-catchers like this.

My thinking is that even though my turn call is actually pretty strong Villain may just desperation shove the river with all his air once he gets that far. Probably that would be more plausible in a random $100 rebuy or something, but not so much in a $2K SCOOP event. Not to mention that I didn’t really think he had that much air in his turn range, though admittedly that was a weak read.

PokerStars – $2000+$100|250/500 Ante 60 NL (6 max) – Holdem – 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4:

CO: 67.91 BB
BTN: 59.46 BB
Hero (SB): 113.82 BB
BB: 91.59 BB
UTG: 24.84 BB
MP: 14.75 BB

6 players post ante of 0.12 BB, Hero posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 2.22 BB) Hero has Qc Qh
fold, fold, CO raises to 2 BB, fold, Hero raises to 6 BB, BB raises to 14.4 BB, fold, Hero calls 8.4 BB

Flop : (31.52 BB, 2 players) Kc 4h 8h
Hero checks, BB bets 11.11 BB, Hero calls 11.11 BB

Turn : (53.74 BB, 2 players) Kh
Hero checks, BB bets 17.78 BB, Hero calls 17.78 BB

River : (89.29 BB, 2 players) 5d
Hero checks, BB bets 48.19 BB and is all-in, Hero calls 48.19 BB

BB shows Ac Ks (Three of a Kind, Kings) (Pre 43%, Flop 87%, Turn 77%)
Hero shows Qc Qh (Two Pair, Kings and Queens) (Pre 57%, Flop 13%, Turn 23%)
BB wins 185.67 BB

25 thoughts on “SCOOP $2K 6-Max

  1. What a tough hand! I was actually sitting and watching that one go down. i was trying to do some hand-reading for both of you and at some point during the turn I thought to myself “I’d probably call here with QxQh, I wonder what Andrew would do…I wonder how different JxJh would be” etc. etc. Then you called turn and he sticks it in on the river and… all I knew was that you had a pretty narrow, pretty strong range with a tough decision, and also that I did not envy you at that moment.
    Very interesting to hear your thoughts after the fact.

    • Ha! I was also sweating Andrew for this one and wondering what to do with QQ, JJ, QhQ, and JhJ. I think I considered most/all of those calls, though I like Andrew’s argument above for folding…

      One very obvious thing to say is that for him to be bluffing the river, he has to have bluffed or semibluffed the turn with that sizing. I can say something about what I imagine pure theory would dictate about 1/3-pot pure bluffs there, and I can say a lot about what I’ve seen people do and how I’d think through the question, but I can’t say a lot from experience about what people in online $2k’s do there.

  2. I’m curious…

    When you say you probably have enough trips/boats and flushes in your range to not need to pure bluff-catch combos of JJ-QQ for example, I’m wondering how many sets you really expect to show up with here. Are you mostly really referring to AK combos or possibly some other Kx combos? Or are you counting in 3b-calls with combos of 88 and 44. And if so are you giving yourself all 6 combos or kind of discounting them since you wont always get to the flop with your 88 and 44 combos here?

    I can see FDs making it to the flop and obviously to the turn, so that’s not so difficult. Makes sense even without a lot of 88 and 44 that QQ-JJ wouldn’t be as close to the top of your range as it can apparently seem.

    • Definitely not all combos, but I can certainly see myself playing 88 or 44 this way. Certainly AK and maybe even down to KTs. It’s really just a question of what my 3b range will be, as I’m never folding to the 4b. So yeah, that’s why QQ probably doesn’t belong in the river calling range… 🙁

      • If we call the 4bet with 88 or 44, we have the 10 to 1 stack to price odds to purely set mine. But, we also think BB could be light. Given this, are we also looking to play our 88 or 44 as a bluff catcher on the flop? If so, it seems like this should loosen the 10 to 1 requirements since we can win without a set. So now I’m wondering if we can call the 4bet with these hands if stacks were so short that we were only getting say 7 to 1?

    • Played 7 tournaments: Both $27 SCOOPs (6max and full ring), both $215 SCOOPs, and both $2100 SCOOPs. Also the Sunday $500. Currently 0/7.

      • Good idea Keone. I would love to see this daily as well. I saw him cash in one last night, so we’re on the board! gogogo

        *If your luck is so cursed that you keep getting sucked out on or coolered in tournaments, congratulations! You’re a very good player. This is what I try to keep telling myself. Good to see that pros likes AB go through the same crap.

        That one time’s a comin.

  3. Overshadowed by the baller… no one in thinking poker land sweated me bubbling day 2 of the 6 max -M??

    Actually I sweated this as well during my grind, very interesting hand with 43ss in a 3bp early! Hopefully we get to hear about that for free!

    • I knew the dude was really wide and I had a good floating hand. I jam turn if I make a pair or flush draw. On that particular card, obviously better to let him barrel off.

      Sorry for the missed sweat, I basically ignored Twitter once I was done for the night.

      • Nothing to see on twitter anyways. I was just grinding away peacefully and didn’t actually get that deep (finished ~100th of 5k or whatever).

        Yeah once you hit that turn everything is clear to me. Shoving a pair turn, boy, you follow up some reads eh. That is the interesting point for me. Not having sizings in front of me I assume pre was defensible actually without too much quibble.

        But if villain thinks like me then you ever having a shove range on any turn after seeing that flop (AK2 right?) or AK5. Either one, I don’t think in theory you should have a turn shoving range because of your perceived cappedness. So if I am villain double barreling non-air or QJ I am going to be pretty skeptical of your turn shove. Actually, hero calling with QJ would end badly most often if you had a pair :).

        Anyways, what I was thinking about was how well can you fight on an AKX texture where X < T when villain three-bet and you didn't four. That isn't a particular tough concept to get so even if he isn't great I would worry about it.

        • I’m not cool enough to already know you guys’ stars names, what are they so I can sweat y’all?

          • GarethC23 for me
            Foucault82 for him

            not exactly the most creative submissions, in retrospect. Not like a mister Wally Shlongmeister!

        • I was railing you G, but admittedly I was captivated by the higher buy-in mostly because of the other big names on the tables.

          I see your point about the shove turn line. I think I could call with an ace, but I snap fold all pairs 55-QQ and all unpaired hands. It seems like one of those “Yeah, I’m full of shit, but what are you gonna do about it?” spots. Hero calling has to be infinitely harder in four figure buy-ins. Just the thought of it tends to cause shrivelage.

  4. I get that he has an awkward stack size for you to 5b (either jamming, or small re-raise with obvious call), but I still think that he will be wide enough (given dynamics/position) that it may be unexploitably +ev. Considering that you are OOP, it would be interesting to consider whether calling is even more +ev.

    I think you overestimate your “blocker” concept for bluff catching. The fact that you have QQ slightly skews his 4-betting range to having a higher proportion of AK, which is already the largest candidate. We’d have to do some math, but it’s at least worth taking into account conceptually that it may offset (entirely?) the value of having blockers to some of his other value hands.

    • Realized that that last post may have come off short/snarky and definitely did not intend that. I think the concept of considering blockers in relation to bluff catching is clearly a valuable topic that has been raised on the podcast.

      To put a little more math behind the point I made earlier, if villain had a hypothetical range of {AA-99, AK-AQ} , he would have AK 16/68 times, or 23.5%. Given that you have QQ, he now has only 1 combo of QQ and 8 combos of AQ, meaning that he has AK 16/59 or 27.1%

      I’m not sure this is significant enough to change pf or decisions afterward, but I think it merits consideration. Also, I think the fact that you are the chip leader and have this individual covered should probably factor into the discussion, even if the considerations that result end up cutting both ways.

      I think I’d strongly consider 5b pf (but would need to run the math against the above range), but calling may be most +ev. I think flop/turn are correct. I agree that river is a fold. He probably doesn’t turn JJ or worse into a bluff, and if we don’t think he’s getting too out of line preflop, there just aren’t that many combos of hands for him to 3 barrel with.

      I haven’t played or analyzed the theory of a hand in several months, but have recently started listening to all of the old podcasts that I’ve missed in my hiatus. Great work as always, and overall, definitely an interesting hand. Thanks to you and Nate for the great work.

  5. Raise-call, check-call, check-call, check-call. Hero takes a passive line in a blind battle, with predictable results. This just looks like a miserable spot for Hero. Chip leader at the table, second biggest stack on our left, @ 250/500 60. The CO and BTN have the most vulnerable stacks (in part no doubt to Hero’s position), and we should continue to exploit them. Instead we overplay a one pair hand OP against the stack that presents the most immediate threat. I hear Nate’s voice (from the WSOP premium series I think – happy to contribute BTW): “… yeah, cash games are about winning stacks – tournaments are about winning pots.” How is it that a doctoral candidate starts every other sentence with “yeah”? Anyway, is it possible that Hero was so focused on winning the pot that he temporarily neglected to account for his tournament equity? Was Hero using a HUD? I wonder if he would have played the hand differently in a live 2K? When the BB lays 4:1 on the turn Hero suspects he’s beat, but continues with a “worried” call. Yes, villain’s range is polarized, but the nonzero chance that he has bluffs/air does not offset Hero’s marginal EV in this spot.

    • How is it that a doctoral candidate starts every other sentence with “yeah” ? Perhaps because Nate, despite his expansive, and occasionally obscuring vocabulary (no fault of his own, surely), isn’t playing the game most PHD candidates practice their whole lives. I call it the “appearing smart” game, but maybe better would be “constructing a veil of intelligence-iness” …

      One of the things these drains upon society’s resources engage in often is the unsolicited judging of others based on what they find to be unrefined colloquialisms or speech patterns. Signalling, I think is a term that has appeared in TP podcast cannon before. Avoid their fate.

        • Actually I have to disagree… that fishing hat freaks me out!

          Having met Nate once in real life, I recall him as borderline freakishly tall. So yeah, that plus lanky and fishing hat… it all adds up to a survivalist vibe.

          Yeah dont much into my comments here. I have to be pretty tight lipped with my language and stuff in other parts of the internet, so I just usually go stream of consciousness round these parts

          • I like the idea of the rest of the Internet getting Fair Trade Gareth and the Thinking Poker blog getting the other byproducts of a differentiated Gareth product.

            • Two very good potential screen names right there:

              No way anybody ever bluffs into those monikers.

Comments are closed.