Players CO (in cutoff) and BB (on big blind)are sat at a .50/$1 NL table, both holding a chipstack of $75.

Folded around to CO who is holding:



and makes a raise to 3BB

Folded to BB who makes a minimum reraise to 5BB holding



CO calls

Flop (you guessed it):



Pot is now 10.5BB ($10.50)

BB bets out $25

CO reraises all in

BB calls and crys

Do you think the CO made a mistake at any point in the hand?

Shouldn't this be in glory corner?

No, I agree with everything CO did. The BB could use some work in a coupla places though.

I don't think so. You've already paid 3BB, did he really think you were going to fold for another 2?

I didn't say I was even involved in the hand, or that it was a genuine hand. I am just thinking whether you would justify calling the minimum reraise on a very speculative hand. Obviously you are getting 4.25-1 on your money, but is that enough?

You will want to hit 2 pair, trips, straight or flush to be happy, and if your opponent has reraised on JJ and the board comes down 86A, you aren't getting much from him anyway.

Is it long term +EV to call or not?

Originally Posted by WotaWaster

I didn't say I was even involved in the hand, or that it was a genuine hand. I am just thinking whether you would justify calling the minimum reraise on a very speculative hand. Obviously you are getting 4.25-1 on your money, but is that enough?

You will want to hit 2 pair, trips, straight or flush to be happy, and if your opponent has reraised on JJ and the board comes down 86A, you aren't getting much from him anyway.

Is it long term +EV to call or not?

EV isn't something I've learned much about yet (still a new player) but I do know that the worst he could have been was a 4 to 1 dog (as he was) and he was already getting 4.25 to 1 on his money WITHOUT even considering the impied odds. I know I would be making the call.

There are a number of possibilities to consider to call that raise.

BB could be on a resteal. In that case, seeing if you hit on the flop can easily win you the money in the pot, and quite likely at least one more bet.

BB could have a monster hand. In that case, you have huge implied odds to make the call... 36-1? If you assume you hit a hand big enough to play with once every ten times, you would have to average winning his stack only once ever three times you make 2-pair or better to justify the call. It gets tricky when you consider that there are hands you may lose with here to fudge the math, but it sounds reasonable.

BB has something in between... AQ, TT, something like that. Against that range you're not that big of a dog, and you're only going to pay him when you actually have a hand, wheras he will often pay you when you hit but he doesn't.

I think it's a VERY easy call.

I dont know if I would be raising preflop to 3x more than 20% of the time. Its not a wrong play, but one that must be varied. From that point its the BB who muffed this hand. If I have AA and get raised preflop, I'm coming back 2-3x the raise to make sure that the player in position has legit cards. This avoids the the mess the BB got into on the flop.

Unless I'm using poker stove wrong I don't see this as being a long term +EV. Not that the play was horrible it looks to me like a steal attempt that was played back at weakly and got lucky on the flop.




1,712,304 games 0.010 secs 171,230,400 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 79.3425 % 79.14% 00.20% { AhAs }
Hand 2: 20.6575 % 20.46% 00.20% { 8h6h }

I think if you know you are up against AA, it is a very easy call. You are almost certain to take most - all of his stack if you hit 2 pair or better.

Don't forget Poker Stove calculates chances of each hand winning if played to the river. If you miss you are giving him nothing so you would have huge implied odds. His implied odds are pretty much zero.

Yeah but isn't it calculating the amount of times that hand will win PF? Again I think it was an easy call like other have said becasue the reraise was pretty weak by BB. But with it being a winner about 29% of the time I can't see that it makes money in the long haul. Any 2 cards have the possibility of beating pocket aces in a hand but again the odds are against it winning.

Isn't +EV (which is what I'm assuming you were asking originally about from your second post) about getting your money in when the odds are in your favor? If that's the case than I say no this isnt a long term +EV. I wouldn't want to be playing this hand eveytime I got it up against packet aces.