- Call all-in
- Fold
----
A#11: You might think that calling is correct because of the pot odds you're being offered. After the MP player shoves, the pot is up to ~$1600, and it will cost you $750 to make the call. You're getting about 2.1:1 on your money. Not bad when you're holding an overpair to a fairly dry flop. You have to be right only about 33% of the time to break even.
Unfortunately, when you put the "solid tight-aggressive" MP player on a range, and then adjust it relative to his action on the flop, I think you have to put him on QQ+ and possibly 88. (I don't think semi-bluffing or bluffing is in his range here, given your show of strength, your perceived pot commitment, and the multi-way nature of the hand). Anyway, if we run this range against our cowboys in pokerstove, we see that we're way behind at something like 12% vs. 88%. The price is simply too high to continue. Ergo, fold.
All-in for now...
-Bug
Sorry buddy, your calculations of the pot odds are wrong. Its actually 18% you have to contribute. 1000 pre flop+ your 300+ 300 first caller + 1050 all in = 2650-750
ReplyDelete3,5-1
I still agree that its a fold because there is very little possibilities that we are facing other than a set.
In which case we would have little more than 9% to win at showdown. I still think its a veery close call with these odds.
I would like to take your analysis further and ask you this:
If you are going to fold KK in situations like this, wouldnt that make you exploitable, since your opponent would know that bluffing you is clear +EV. I think you should.
Don't get me wrong, in my little experience in poker, I rarely saw any bluffs in a mw pot with a raiser and a caller behind, and a third opponent that probably hasnt spoken yet.
But the authors say that when you are only losing to an specific hand then you should call. In this case you are only losing to 88 and 33 since qq would have been 3bet for most players, not to say all.
I would rule out any combinations of q8, q3, 83 since those hands will hardly call a raise, much less a 3bet. Plus they are all solid tag players.
In conclusion, I say its a fold, but then you are forced to call with more marginal hands to deny equity from constantly bluffing you.
The number of callers likely rules out AA unless it is badly played and a person that had AA and was happy to see 3 others see the flop is unlikely to suddenly want to scare everyone off on a dry flop.
ReplyDeleteQQ should be calling on this dry board, shouldn't it? Making everyone fold when you were getting so much action on the rainbow flop is a horrendous mistake. Sets will still be happy to get it all in on the turn, and the only real fear is KK or AA hits a set on the turn.
If we rule out AA and QQ, then 88 or 33 seem most likely. They would want to reduce players in the hand because if 2-3 of them have pairs, which is likely, the chance of being outdrawn is much higher than with QQ. They are hoping to be called by AA or KK and maybe AQ.
You are getting about 2:1.
Do bluffs, and AQ account for 33%?
It seems reasonable to play AQ like this as calling with AQ would leave an SPR of around 1:2, so shoving seems most profitable. Sure, you might be up against AA or KK or a set, but are you going to call AQ pre, hit a Q then fold? If so you should fold pre.
At first this looks like a horrible place to bluff, but on second thoughts, only sets seem like good calls, and even then 33 and 88 aren't happy. AQ seems like a fold to an all in, because we even think KK is a fold. And therefore AA is also a fold. So, who can call? Only sets and I wouldn't be surprised if 33 folded, although I would call. So a bluff is not horrible and should work more than 50%, certainly, medium pairs apart from 88 are snap folds.