Right Conclusion?

Reads:
Player is a fish. I dont have many hands but here is our first hand encounter. From this I have gathered that preflop he likes to slowplay monsters.



$0.25/$0.5 No Limit Holdem

8 Players
Hand Conversion Powered by

Stacks:
UTG ($10.75)
Hero ($51.80)
MP1 ($9.10)
MP2 ($39.95)
CO ($18.50)
BTN ($48.45)
SB ($19.20)
BB ($8.25)

Pre-Flop: ($0.75, 8 players) Hero is UTG+1
1 fold, Hero raises to $2, 2 folds, CO calls $2, 3 folds

Flop: ($4.75, 2 players)
Hero bets $3.50, CO raises to $8, Hero goes all-in $49.80, CO goes all-in $8.50

Turn: ($71.05, 2 players, 2 all-in)

River: ($71.05, 2 players, 2 all-in)

Final Pot: $71.05
CO shows

Hero shows


CO wins $35.90 ( won +$17.40 )
Hero wins $33.30 ( lost -$18.50 )


2nd hand: Based on this read can I draw the conclusion that this min 3 bet in the bb is a hand that is ranged from mid PP to AXs and connected BW? From that I felt I crushed his range so I was ready to 4 bet get this in. Once he calls I assume I can narrow down hands but I still believe that I am ahead here. Is this a call for you?

$0.25/$0.5 No Limit Holdem

8 Players
Hand Conversion Powered by

Stacks:
UTG ($48.45)
UTG+1 ($18.45)
MP1 ($7.50)
MP2 ($10.75)
Hero ($54.30)
BTN ($29.80)
SB ($35.45)
BB ($35.90)

Pre-Flop: ($0.75, 8 players) Hero is CO
4 folds, Hero raises to $2, 1 fold, SB calls $1.75, BB raises to $5, Hero raises to $15, SB folds, BB calls $10

Flop: ($32, 2 players)
BB goes all-in $20.90, $20.9 to Hero ($39.3)?

I think you're misapplying the information a bit. The first hand is an early position raise and a lot of players including regs slowplay big pairs here. The second hand is a late position squeeze spot... Even this villain will be 3betting KK+ here a fair bit, and the raise size is small enough to be consistent with the slowplaying read.

However, we have a hand that is far ahead of his range, even if we give him KK+ some of the time. 4betting preflop/getting it in is fine with his stack size. Clearly we're not 4betting to fold on these flops so obv snapcall. nh.

Originally Posted by badgers

I think you're misapplying the information a bit. The first hand is an early position raise and a lot of players including regs slowplay big pairs here. The second hand is a late position squeeze spot... Even this villain will be 3betting KK+ here a fair bit, and the raise size is small enough to be consistent with the slowplaying read.

However, we have a hand that is far ahead of his range, even if we give him KK+ some of the time. 4betting preflop/getting it in is fine with his stack size. Clearly we're not 4betting to fold on these flops so obv snapcall. nh.

Thanks badgers. Glad I found FTR. I was not getting any responses on cardrunners and 2+2 I was not sure about alot of the advice.

I really threw away position of the villain here since I didn't believe he was positionally aware. However, I will start to take positions into consideration regardless of skill level. I do have a question for you. Do you believe your analysis of the positions and the hands they are limp call with come from experience at the table? Or did you read an article? I am having a hard time with hand reading since I dont really understand the range a player limp call with from utg or mp. etc.

I don't know if it's right to consider position regardless of skill level.. I'm just going on the information that you gave which is that he is a fish, but villain played fine the hand 1 imo. If he's terrible then he may well not consider position but from the information provided I can only assume he is positionally aware some percentage of the time.

As for limp/calling, I think it comes down to stats, notes and experience. There are some players that will limp/call all suited aces, SCs and small pocket pairs, and this will show up in their stats and you can also note what they have limp/called when they get to SD. Bad regs tend to be more easy to read when they limp/call, in that it is very frequently small PPs at low stakes. However, for instance there is one reg in my games who I know limps AQ/AK as well as small PPs and monsters in early position as part of a limping strategy that involves a fair bit of limp/reraising. The more tables you play the more you will have to rely solely on stats to work out their limping ranges.

Hey Badger. I assume you are looking at the limp stats. Do you take the range from the total or position? Thanks.

I just look at the difference between VP$IP and PFR. Bigger difference = more limping.