Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Didn't play this one either. How's our play so far? What's our next play?CryptologicLimit Holdem Ring gameLimit: $1/$26 playersConverterPre-flop: (6 players) Hero is Button with K :club: A :D UTG folds, UTG+1 calls, CO folds, Hero raises, 2 folds, UTG+1 calls.Flop: 6 :D 9 :D K :) (5.5SB, 2 players)UTG+1 checks, Hero bets, UTG+1 calls.Turn: 7 :D (3.75BB, 2 players)UTG+1 bets, Hero raises, UTG+1 re-raises, Hero...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ugh, I hate the ****in bet/3-bet line by villains.I don't know if you should raise this turn. I probably do, but I think we'd need to fold at somepoint if 3-bet... I'm not good at that... =/

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ugh, I hate the ****in bet/3-bet line by villains.
heh. i love using that line. one of the things about raising bets like that on the turn, you should only do it if you know what to do when you get three bet.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem with the line hero took. I think there is value in a turn raise here. When you get 3-bet I don't see any line other than call down being realistic. This can easily be an overplayed KQ/KJ by villain IMO, or even a hand like 78/89.I would like it to be known, however, that the last LHE I played was I think in October during a quick HORSE session, so I'm not as well versed in this game as some of the other posters here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I's like to buy a read, please?It's one of these hands where there is no hand that he has that is rationalHow loose is game playing?Can he limp in with suited connector/one-gappers or mid pair, profitably?FWIW, I don't raise this turn without read.Zach will attest to that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's one of these hands where there is no hand that he has that is rational
That was my problem looking at it. I just figure that since it's an odd line, he could easily have an odd hand like Kx or 78.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had similar hands where I've raised preflop, then on EVERY street the villain has lead into me and I have raised back and he calls. He has TP bad kicker or smaller pair. I have never been 3-bet in that situation. We are beat here almost always. Normally, I would fold quickly, but as actuary stated, almost every hand that has you beat doesn't make sense. If that 7 made him a big hand, why wouldn't he c/r the turn. I would think it would take a read on his part that you would raise the turn to may his play correct?So, in this instance, I would probably call down. But, I still think we're beat by something strange.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had almost this exact same hand happen to me the other day on an A 5 9 4 boardthe BB had 23o im with the calldown until you get a better read. i think it's often 2 pair

Link to post
Share on other sites
You can't Raise the turn and call a 3-bet and a River bet, profitably, can you
by the time he 3-bets it's about 10 BB to us, and it'll cost 2 more to call down, i dont think so, without a read on villaini meant dont raise the turn, just call it down.
Link to post
Share on other sites
that's Actuary's line often too, as noted above.What about charging the worse hands though?
i dont know how many worse hands are donking this turn.it is a possibility, though. I think if the K was an A it'd be more likely someone had a worse hand, just because more players will play any A but not any K
Link to post
Share on other sites

Short handed :)So I'll reply.

one of the things about raising bets like that on the turn, you should only do it if you know what to do when you get three bet.
This is my favorite line of the thread.And I don't think people are in the habit of following this advice.The decision of what to do when 3bet is certainly a debatable one.But it should always be determined before we decide to make the turn raise in the first place.My play:I rarely just call down after this funky donk-bet.So I like raising it up.But before making this raise, I make a decision.Do I believe that a 3bet from Villain always means that I am behind?If it does, then i call the 3bet and fold the river unimproved.But realistically, I rarely have a strong enough tight-read on an opponent in one of these loose games to make that play very often.So I usually don't go this route.My normal play is actually to CAP the turn!Because with my logic, there are very few reasons not to.Assumption: I do not know a player that will donk bluff into me on the turn AND bluff 3bet the turn AND call my turn cap AND donk bluff the river again.If this assumption is true, then I can fold to another donk-bet on the river with full confidence that my 1 pair is no good.And seeing showdown after that much counter-aggression is absolutely not necessary.If checked to on the river, I can take a free showdown.And even if I am behind, it cost me the same as calling down.So the turn cap has very little negativity at all.But it does have some positive attributes.Obviously, if we improve on the river, we can choose to bet it.And thus we gain an extra bet that may not have otherwise been there.And if Villain is on some sort of aggressive semi-bluff, we gain max value on the turn while we can.Because it is possible that when Villain sees us call his 3bet on the turn, he realizes that we won't be folding the river.So if he misses, he very well may pull up and simply check-fold rather than spew another river bluff.Thus capping the turn squeezes out another bet of value.Summary: I don't necessarily think we are ahead here.When we are 3bet on the turn, it sure looks like an oddly played 2-pair or set.But because it was an oddly played hand, my read is not strong enough to lay my good hand down.And if I am going to continue, I think capping the turn is better than just calling down.Because you can potentially gain value from the cap.And you give up hardly anything with the play.--CM
Link to post
Share on other sites
CM,Spending 4 bets on the turn and not seeing showdown is ludicrous here.
My logic is based on my stated assumption:
Assumption: I do not know a player that will donk bluff into me on the turn AND bluff 3bet the turn AND call my turn cap AND donk bluff the river again.If this assumption is true, then I can fold to another donk-bet on the river with full confidence that my 1 pair is no good.And seeing showdown after that much counter-aggression is absolutely not necessary.
If this assumption is false, then my play is bad.If it is true, then the play must be good.--cm
Link to post
Share on other sites
My logic is based on my stated assumption:If this assumption is false, then my play is bad.If it is true, then the play must be good.--cm
by bluff you mean?What about K + draw?And in general, when you are 3-bet on the turn, you are behind most of the time. (as you stated)So see SD, for 2 more bets or fold right there (if you even raise at all)Villain that is behind on the turn might still lead the riverTo your "if assumption is true, then play is right"Here's my take: You are paying too much to find out that you are beat. I agree you are almost never ahead when he calls cap and leads river.I'd like your play IF you put us ahead more often after the 3-bet.But you seem to be applying this without regard to likelihood we are beat.gloves off?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pot will be 11.75 BB after a turn 4 betNow you fold for 1 more.I agree, you can fold correctly here.But was that 4th BB you put in on the turn a +EV bet?It so much seems that you are over-charging yourself to make the correct final fold or bet

Link to post
Share on other sites
CM,Spending 4 bets on the turn and not seeing showdown is ludicrous here.
if we are going to call down the three bet i think his play might be a little better, but not by much since we are behind to the three bet so often.
Link to post
Share on other sites
And in general, when you are 3-bet on the turn, you are behind most of the time. (as you stated)So see SD, for 2 more bets or fold right there (if you even raise at all)
With my assumption, capping the turn and being led into on the river = seeing showdown.They are the same.In both cases, we discovered who had the better hand.Capping turn and folding to river donk = 2 bets.Calling down to see showdown = 2 bets.Thus we lose nothing with my play (if we buy into my assumption).
To your "if assumption is true, then play is right"Here's my take: You are paying too much to find out that you are beat
We are paying the same amount for the same information.
What about K + draw?Villain that is behind on the turn might still lead the riverI agree you are almost never ahead when he calls cap and leads river.
Your point: Villain may be 3betting the turn with a worse hand.And if we only call the turn, he could lead again on the river.This gains us 2 bets if he decides to lead the river. And 1 if he does not.But if we cap the turn, Villain isn't going to fold with a hand he likes this much.So we are guaranteed the 2 bets when we are ahead.And we may win 3 if we improve on the river.Thus, in this example of Villain 3betting the turn with a lesser hand (K+draw?), we gain more by capping the turn.
I'd like your play IF you put us ahead more often after the 3-bet.But you seem to be applying this without regard to likelihood we are beat.
Let me clarify.It is possible to make a case that being 3bet on the turn definitely means that our TPTK is beat.I don't believe that, but with a great read, I can accept it.I would still want to see the river for a chance to improve.But we would then fold the river.And this would save us 1 bet .So when talking about the liklihood that we are beat,the decision of whether or not to play this way would be made before we ever raise the turn.But if we don't fully believe the 3bet, and we insist on playing on...when deciding whether to cap the turn (my idea) or to call down (your idea),the odds of us being ahead or not are completely irrelevant. --cm
Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly think the way CM plays (read: Maniac) makes players play differently vs him, and his advice is not always applicable to the rest of us.I can't remember the last time someone bet/3-bet the turn, without me having a solid, solid read, with less than TPTK.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't remember the last time someone bet/3-bet the turn, without me having a solid, solid read, with less than TPTK.
Then you would advocate calling the 3bet and folding the river UI?
I honestly think the way CM plays (read: Maniac) makes players play differently vs him, and his advice is not always applicable to the rest of us.
Opponents' reads on us will affect what we think their bet/3-bet line means, yes.So it could sway our decision of whether or not to "play on" in the hand.But my point is not whether or not we should play on.My point is that IF we decide to play on, then capping the turn is a better option than passively calling down.And IF we decide to play on, then the read that our opponents have on us is irrelevant.--cm
Link to post
Share on other sites
Then you would advocate calling the 3bet and folding the river UI?
No, I'm sure it happens, especially due to selective memory focusing on hands I lose, but I think it happens about enough to call down.
Link to post
Share on other sites
No, I'm sure it happens, especially due to selective memory focusing on hands I lose, but I think it happens about enough to call down.
Ack.
Link to post
Share on other sites
With my assumption, capping the turn and being led into on the river = seeing showdown.They are the same.In both cases, we discovered who had the better hand.Capping turn and folding to river donk = 2 bets.Calling down to see showdown = 2 bets.Thus we lose nothing with my play (if we buy into my assumption).We are paying the same amount for the same information.--cm
Yeah, I kept realizing this as I was typing. Your idea seems to work in theoryIt works better when you parse my posts up, :club: . but it also relies entirely on this idea:We are ahead often enough to charge a worse hand the max on the turn; but we can (for one more bet from Villain) realize we are beat.If you never raise the turn., you see SD and pay 2 less bets than your idea.Essentially, if you think he is drawing/behind often enough, raise once.When he 3-bets, your read has to shift. BUT you raised figuring it was an aggressive draw enough to justify a raise.You still should see SD. And, probably UI. Finally, imo, having a chance to Win (see SD) for 4 BB's > Folding for the 5th after paying 4 BBWe agree it's the same price.Only risk "my way" takes is not charging the draw 1 more BB, for the benerfit of seeing SD.You think, given we are almost always behind after the 3-bet, that charging 1 more is worth much?I'd say seeing the 10BB pot > Charging the draw
It is possible to make a case that being 3bet on the turn definitely means that our TPTK is beat.I don't believe that, but with a great read, I can accept it.I would still want to see the river for a chance to improve.But we would then fold the river.And this would save us 1 bet .So when talking about the liklihood that we are beat,the decision of whether or not to play this way would be made before we ever raise the turn--cm
But you say we save a bet by not capping and then folding river UI.So it seems that is an option, along with never raising and seeing SD, or raising and calling down
But if we don't fully believe the 3bet, and we insist on playing on...when deciding whether to cap the turn (my idea) or to call down (your idea),the odds of us being ahead or not are completely irrelevant. --cm
huh?Well, it doesn't matter true, Because you set the premise that a Villain 3bet is not enough info to stop raising; but a cap call and lead river is enough to foldIt certainly matters if your read is off ever.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...