NL400 - OTB vs CR - is this Std?

Ok, villain is SNE and is one of the few of them that actually wins something besides rakeback. Nothing overwhelming, but 1.5 BB/100, so not bad considering number of tables.

He folds 50% to CB. Check-Raise 31% on flop over 1.4k hands and 31 flop hands facing CB. So he has to be doing it with all sorts of crap. Considering position and board, it stands to reason that he is CR here even more than average because the total figure has to include how often he CR say UTG CB. So, is this standard versus stats like that, or am I getting overexcited here?

Submitted by : phexac

PokerStars Game #40829912876: Holdem No Limit ($2/$4 USD) - 2010/03/07 20:24:53 ET
Table Lampetia III 6-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: blackize ($400 in chips)
Seat 2: willybeer22 ($400 in chips)
Seat 3: Hero ($400 in chips)
Seat 4: AndrewBoccia ($950.90 in chips)
Seat 5: koonz1530 ($400.45 in chips)
Seat 6: lunaquin ($42.40 in chips)
AndrewBoccia: posts small blind $2
koonz1530: posts big blind $4

Holecards
Dealt to Hero
lunaquin: folds
blackize: folds
willybeer22: folds
Hero: raises $8 to $12
AndrewBoccia: calls $10
koonz1530: calls $8

Flop (Pot : $36.00)

   
AndrewBoccia: checks
koonz1530: checks
Hero: bets $27
AndrewBoccia: raises $43 to $70
koonz1530: folds
Hero: calls $43

Turn (Pot : $176.00)

   
AndrewBoccia: bets $122
Hero: raises $196 to $318 and is all-in
AndrewBoccia:

his turn aggresion% or something letting us know how often he actually follows through on the turn is fairly relevant here i think

On March 07 2010 23:11 rockman255 wrote: his turn aggresion% or something letting us know how often he actually follows through on the turn is fairly relevant here i think

40-50%.

looks good. he should never have a set here. probably has a lot of draws in his range.

good shove brosef.

Id say standard but if he really has a lot of air in his range on the turn as well as all the possible draws, cos i mean what your losing to sets? I dont think given what you have said you can fold here
Any chance that if you just call turn he shoves river with air (that you have said he may have in his range) or with draws that he is firing with that he misses? If he has you beat you are stacking off here. Possibility of calling means if he is drawing you let him get there but cheaper but may make more if he is always firing and misses X % of the time, guess it depends on your read on villain for river play, maybe he is never bluffing considering what he has left, the pot size and your line but worth considering. It also might mean you could consider calling once to fold in other spots using this line, again depending on opponents river play.

Yea this seems as standard as it can be.

On March 08 2010 01:51 Stim_Abuser wrote: looks good. he should never have a set here. probably has a lot of draws in his range.

..?

I'd be more inclined to flat a draw on the flop and raise a set than the other way around.

Anyway because it's 3way I usually call flop fold turn :/ if the guy decided to bluffraise with total air on the flop they usually don't follow through. Maybe a leak but when shown this much strength I don't like my chances of my hand being good, and even if it's good I'm never dominating anything; i.e. they always have boatloads of equity against me with their range.

well played

I'm not a NL400 reg but I'm gonna talk about this cause I remember reading Ryan's NLHEM 6max Guide where he talks about a hand between eric liu and krantz where eric raised UTG krantz called in MP the flop came Kxx, peachy c/r flop, krantz shoved and peachy called. eric had AK and Krantz KQ. Ryan says in the guide that this kind of agression level war is not standard even up to NL400 ou NL600, he says that those two players had a lot of history therefore the hand played itself. So given that looks like you guys dont have much history and villain is a SNE winner, this might be a turn fold?

hope I'm not saying nonsense

andrewboccia is a supernit. i would fold.

On March 08 2010 09:31 JohnnyBologna wrote: andrewboccia is a supernit. i would fold.

x100

On March 08 2010 09:31 JohnnyBologna wrote: andrewboccia is a supernit. i would fold.

Then how do we account for over 30% CR over a good sample? I mean that's the main reason I am doing this... 30% CR is like I duno...a lot??

On March 08 2010 11:10 phexac wrote: Show nested quote + On March 08 2010 09:31 JohnnyBologna wrote: andrewboccia is a supernit. i would fold. Then how do we account for over 30% CR over a good sample? I mean that's the main reason I am doing this... 30% CR is like I duno...a lot??

amazing that so many people like you think 1.4k (and less) is a good sample... in any given 1.4k sample i'd say its just as likely for him to have a flop c/r of <10%

so yes, he could actually c/r flops a ton... but we don't have enough information to assume that

On March 08 2010 05:52 Twisted wrote: Show nested quote + On March 08 2010 01:51 Stim_Abuser wrote: looks good. he should never have a set here. probably has a lot of draws in his range. ..? I'd be more inclined to flat a draw on the flop and raise a set than the other way around. Anyway because it's 3way I usually call flop fold turn :/ if the guy decided to bluffraise with total air on the flop they usually don't follow through. Maybe a leak but when shown this much strength I don't like my chances of my hand being good, and even if it's good I'm never dominating anything; i.e. they always have boatloads of equity against me with their range.

you set mine oop vs button raises? maybe 66 but i thought the general consensus is that set mining & just calling small pairs oop vs button & CO is unprofitable in most situations. especially if you have a tight image like this guy supposedly does ( no history with him ). cuz he will be getting paid off a lot less than average.

On March 08 2010 11:25 CirCa wrote: Show nested quote + On March 08 2010 11:10 phexac wrote:   On March 08 2010 09:31 JohnnyBologna wrote: andrewboccia is a supernit. i would fold. Then how do we account for over 30% CR over a good sample? I mean that's the main reason I am doing this... 30% CR is like I duno...a lot?? amazing that so many people like you think 1.4k (and less) is a good sample... in any given 1.4k sample i'd say its just as likely for him to have a flop c/r of <10% so yes, he could actually c/r flops a ton... but we don't have enough information to assume that

yea i wouldnt pay much attention to stats like C/R flop. id be more concerned with his SB calling range here. if he calls with SCs or Small Pairs or can he flat with AK. if he calls small pairs oop but not so much SCs then this because a quick fold. you say you got a large sample on this man you should have some decent reads.

boccia's pretty spewy in 3b pots imo, but in single raised pots he's pretty nitty. and this being 3way, its prob just a fold.

insta fold flop, if he does have 30% of c/r on the flop (and most likely jusy HU pots, not 3 way like this) it's probably because hes also pretty nitty preflop and just has a very strong range to work with on any flop

Well, I can certainly see the point of 3-way CR being stronger than HU (though if he is set on CRing his FD, would 3-way really stop him? I mean--people go overboard with FD in so many spots where it's not merited). But as far as sample goes, yes 1.4k is not that big a deal. But specifically check-raise 11/34 times is pretty telling and likely reliable imo. Or is that not enough as well?

Boccia has two gears. He's either super super aggro or super nitty. You either played this perfect or made a bad call to flop craise.

On March 08 2010 11:10 phexac wrote: Show nested quote + On March 08 2010 09:31 JohnnyBologna wrote: andrewboccia is a supernit. i would fold. Then how do we account for over 30% CR over a good sample? I mean that's the main reason I am doing this... 30% CR is like I duno...a lot??

Boccia has had a strong nit history. Hes played like a crazy monkey past few months though.

On March 08 2010 12:58 phexac wrote: Well, I can certainly see the point of 3-way CR being stronger than HU (though if he is set on CRing his FD, would 3-way really stop him? I mean--people go overboard with FD in so many spots where it's not merited). But as far as sample goes, yes 1.4k is not that big a deal. But specifically check-raise 11/34 times is pretty telling and likely reliable imo. Or is that not enough as well?

like mentioned he could be flatting a lot of strong hands pf here and c/r for value rather than 3betting pre... he could also have just run really hot over this small sample hitting a lot of hands... he could have also tilted really hard one session really skewing the numbers

the point is you can't just assume he is getting out of line here based on that 30% c/r number over such a small sample... now if you had been paying close attention to his game and seen him c/r fold to shove... c/r and give up on later streets... or c/r get to showdown with marginal hand etc etc... we would have much more reason to back up theory he is getting out of line

On March 08 2010 11:25 CirCa wrote: amazing that so many people like you think 1.4k (and less) is a good sample... in any given 1.4k sample i'd say its just as likely for him to have a flop c/r of <10% so yes, he could actually c/r flops a ton... but we don't have enough information to assume that

this X100

On March 08 2010 12:58 phexac wrote: Well, I can certainly see the point of 3-way CR being stronger than HU (though if he is set on CRing his FD, would 3-way really stop him? I mean--people go overboard with FD in so many spots where it's not merited). But as far as sample goes, yes 1.4k is not that big a deal. But specifically check-raise 11/34 times is pretty telling and likely reliable imo. Or is that not enough as well?

stats other than vpip/pfr and a few others really take a much much longer time to converge so use them but don't give them much credit until you really do start getting big big sample sizes. 11/34 gives an indication that he may c/r light but thats about it, he could just as easily be raising only sets.

One thing thats not being acknowledged is that he would probably expect you to stack off on the flop with AK+ or a good draw, given how drawy the board is, so if your range is a weak tp or a weak draw (that bricked the turn) why wouldnt he follow up on his bluff/semibluff¿? Im not saying this is a fist pump get it and I dont have a ton of reads on andrew but Im pretty sure hes not the nit ur making him out to be.

On March 09 2010 09:45 EvilSky wrote: One thing thats not being acknowledged is that he would probably expect you to stack off on the flop with AK+ or a good draw, given how drawy the board is, so if your range is a weak tp or a weak draw (that bricked the turn) why wouldnt he follow up on his bluff/semibluff¿? Im not saying this is a fist pump get it and I dont have a ton of reads on andrew but Im pretty sure hes not the nit ur making him out to be.

-100

Another issue I have with people saying this sample is not significant is that then you are saying, well we have this info, but it's not reliable, so let's act in opposition to what it seems to be telling us, which is that villain is CR flop like it's his job. Then we are actually actively going against the stats we know, which seems like even more shaky logic than relying on stats that we have but that may not be 100% reliable. I mean if we are not using the stats to make our decision, what are we using?

how big is a solid sample size if 1.4k hands is small?

On March 09 2010 13:06 phexac wrote: Another issue I have with people saying this sample is not significant is that then you are saying, well we have this info, but it's not reliable, so let's act in opposition to what it seems to be telling us, which is that villain is CR flop like it's his job. Then we are actually actively going against the stats we know, which seems like even more shaky logic than relying on stats that we have but that may not be 100% reliable. I mean if we are not using the stats to make our decision, what are we using?

the stat should raise alarm bells no question...

but the real question is how has villian seemingly been check raising like crazy "with all sorts of crap" at your tables yet you have given us no single read on the player or situations it has happened in

for example after he raises and is playing oop he could be c/ring a lot of flops rather than cbetting which would greatly influence the stat yet really doesn't apply to this situation the way you might think it does (him calling from blinds and c/r "with all sorts of crap" )

so yes we should definitely take note of the number, and if possible use it to our advantage... but we need to understand why it is what it is... not just assume... this takes paying close attention to your tables

Our sample size here is 34 not 1.4k.

After 1.4k hands his VPIP/PFR have probaly converged quite well, but other stats not. especially stats with only like 34 observations.

Would you feel comfortable making a decision based on 34 hands on a guy that show he is 12/9? after 1000 hands he could be 30/28.

Same applies even more so for stats like CR flop %. You really do need BIG sample sizes to get any kind of accurate representation for them.

To try and give an answer to how big, i dont really know, i guess you would need like 10k+ hands overall before CR% stats start to converge nicely.

edit: and even then its not enough to say with any kind of statisical certainty.

Basically his stats INDICATE that he MAY raise flops light, its up to you to notice spots where he does,to back up the "theory" that the stats show.

So even with bad sample sizes stats can still help, but the smaller the sample size the more you need to rely on your own observations of how he plays.

On March 10 2010 11:58 Critterer wrote: Our sample size here is 34 not 1.4k. After 1.4k hands his VPIP/PFR have probaly converged quite well, but other stats not. especially stats with only like 34 observations. Would you feel comfortable making a decision based on 34 hands on a guy that show he is 12/9? after 1000 hands he could be 30/28. Same applies even more so for stats like CR flop %. You really do need BIG sample sizes to get any kind of accurate representation for them. To try and give an answer to how big, i dont really know, i guess you would need like 10k+ hands overall before CR% stats start to converge nicely. edit: and even then its not enough to say with any kind of statisical certainty. Basically his stats INDICATE that he MAY raise flops light, its up to you to notice spots where he does,to back up the "theory" that the stats show. So even with bad sample sizes stats can still help, but the smaller the sample size the more you need to rely on your own observations of how he plays.

Well my point here is that our stats ARE our observations...