49 replies to this topic

[KingJames]

trystero, on Wednesday, July 8th, 2009, 1:36 PM, said:

I agree w/Vinny. We like a bet/takeitdown result because, OOP,

This, imo

[tskillz187]

Ima let whatgreatis post his thoughts after he finishes his sesh up, I'm not sure what he thinks is optimal, but the way I'm explaining what I believe is the correct play might not be coming off as eloquently as it should. All I do know is when I showed him the HH is he wrote "cbetting is horrible" as soon as he read it.But a few more things, by checking instead of cbetting villain can bet anything in his range, this is good because we can beat his bluffs and his weaker value bets. By betting he is folding his complete air, so we lose the biggest part of his range that we are ahead of.Betting to take it down now is not a winning strategy. It's betting for information. Don't bet for information. The only times we really "bet for protection" are when we have a weak pocket pair that wants overcards to fold or call with the wrong price, so we bet because we don't want them to check behind and get there for free. In this case, villain is never folding over cards because of the board, not only is he not folding over cards on the flop he is likely to turn those into bluffs if the pot gets bigger.

[Syntonic]

tskillz187, on Wednesday, July 8th, 2009, 11:29 AM, said:

I think Ryan will probably come up with a better line or reasoning than I can, but he's apparently high or passed out or something.I'm against betting the flop. I'm slightly against betting the turn, but could possibly be swayed, but I think it's prob a little bad w/o knowing villain is a station puss that won't bluff river.I think betting river is quite a bit better than c/c river because you can prob value bet any pocket pair by that point and definitely hands like 9x and Tx. The river bet should be a little bigger just cuz it's a blocking value bet, and this one is prob a little too small and almost invites some villains to raise. I'd bet river at like $8.Overall I thought the way he played the hand was correct on every street just that his pf raise sizing and river raise sizing were bad. I think villain also shows up with 99/QJ here a tonnnnnn.More importantly, this hand illustrates why being OOP sucks balls and why you should make your pf reraises OOP very big to make people pay for playing weaker hands against you, because they are going to be able to put you in bad spots so often and even though villain literally did nothing in this hand the board puts us in a bad position often too.Edit: I agree, I didn't want to bet for information on the flop, only get called and be just as lost. Hell, people can float there with A high.Edit: Also to OP, I'm wondering why you thought you played it bad? Just because you get a bad result doesn't mean you played it poorly, that's obv results based thinking.

I think it is partially because I lost (I hate losing). Honestly, I usually do bet this flop and shut down if he calls, but I thought about it after the flop came out and figured that he could easily call me with a 10 or QJ or AQ or a K or a FD and I would have to check the turn and fold or make a call on the river to win. When he raised me on the river I asked, "Why would you do that when it's obvious I have KK?" Unfortunately, he didn't respond. That raise on the river, at these limits, is almost never bluff. I do agree, I should have bet more on the river. After I bet I thought it was really obvious that it was a blocker bet - but maybe it was just obvious because I made it.So, to answer your question: I really hated playing this hand because I had no idea what he had, and I just didn't know what to do. So, maybe I didn't play it bad, but I'm definitely flaky in these spots. I should have made it like $7.50 preflop. Do you think it's every ok to flat call in the blinds and then lead the flop? I feel like it would be the same scenario, but it would keep the pot smaller at least.Edit: I agree, I didn't want to just bet for information on the flop only to get called and still be lost in the hand.

[KingJames]

tskillz187, on Wednesday, July 8th, 2009, 2:11 PM, said:

Ima let whatgreatis post his thoughts after he finishes his sesh up, I'm not sure what he thinks is optimal, but the way I'm explaining what I believe is the correct play might not be coming off as eloquently as it should. All I do know is when I showed him the HH is he wrote "cbetting is horrible" as soon as he read it.But a few more things, by checking instead of cbetting villain can bet anything in his range, this is good because we can beat his bluffs and his weaker value bets. By betting he is folding his complete air, so we lose the biggest part of his range that we are ahead of.Betting to take it down now is not a winning strategy. It's betting for information. Don't bet for information. The only times we really "bet for protection" are when we have a weak pocket pair that wants overcards to fold or call with the wrong price, so we bet because we don't want them to check behind and get there for free. In this case, villain is never folding over cards because of the board, not only is he not folding over cards on the flop he is likely to turn those into bluffs if the pot gets bigger.

I like this, and I definitely see the value in itI know I get a little terrified in gray areas oop, but this is good stuff, so thanks

[whatgreatis]

Syntonic, on Tuesday, July 7th, 2009, 10:43 PM, said:

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $0.50 BB (6 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.comBB ($41.30)UTG ($60.95)MP ($63.20)CO ($75.70)Button ($10.20)Hero (SB) ($50)Preflop: Hero is SB with J, J2 folds, CO bets $2, 1 fold, Hero raises to $6.50, 1 fold, CO calls $4.50Flop: ($13.50) K, 10, 3 (2 players)Hero checks, CO checksTurn: ($13.50) 3 (2 players)Hero checks, CO checksRiver: ($13.50) 9 (2 players)Hero bets $6, CO raises to $25.50, Hero foldsTotal pot: $25.50 | Rake: $1.05I think I played this bad. In hindsight I probably should have raised a bit more OOP and maybe bet on the flop.

OP played his hand very well. He made two minor mistakes in bet sizing. His preflop 3bet should be 1-2bb over pot as standard. I would lean towards making it 2bb+pot. His other mistake was in river sizing where he can probably extract more value if he bets 10 because the difference in villains calling range between 6-10 is relatively small given the action on the earlier streets. Bet/folding the river is the best action.Cbetting the flop is bad for a couple reasons:It's hard to get value from worse. When he cbets he's getting value from a smaller range than when he checks. When he bets he's only getting value from 10x hands and his hand can't stand a raise. There's enough draws on the board where villains will be raising this cbet a decent percentage of the time. By checking, you get more value than betting. A lot of villains will autobet a hand like 88 after you check this flop. It's also very common for a villain to bet AQ. By checking it also prevents us from getting raised off our hand by a draw or a bluff. By checking the flop we can play the turn and river easier. When you bet this flop and your called, it puts you in a very bad spot for the turn/river where you will frequently be guessing. When you check flop and he checks back, you can ussually get two streets of value from worse on non-over turns/rivers. This will depend highly on villains calling tendencies. Going for one street of value here, like the OP did, is also fine. But when he only goes for one street he should make his valuebet a little closer to pot.

[BaseJester]

trystero, on Wednesday, July 8th, 2009, 4:36 PM, said:

I agree w/Vinny. We like a bet/takeitdown result because, OOP, it's going to be almost impossible, readless, to extract value from villain's range on this board.

To have that result, we have to be way ahead. We want to be way ahead, but betting doesn't cause us to be way ahead.So, I agree with WhatGreatIs.

[krup24]

whatgreatis, on Wednesday, July 8th, 2009, 7:46 PM, said:

OP played his hand very well. He made two minor mistakes in bet sizing. His preflop 3bet should be 1-2bb over pot as standard. I would lean towards making it 2bb+pot. His other mistake was in river sizing where he can probably extract more value if he bets 10 because the difference in villains calling range between 6-10 is relatively small given the action on the earlier streets. Bet/folding the river is the best action.Cbetting the flop is bad for a couple reasons:It's hard to get value from worse. When he cbets he's getting value from a smaller range than when he checks. When he bets he's only getting value from 10x hands and his hand can't stand a raise. There's enough draws on the board where villains will be raising this cbet a decent percentage of the time. By checking, you get more value than betting. A lot of villains will autobet a hand like 88 after you check this flop. It's also very common for a villain to bet AQ. By checking it also prevents us from getting raised off our hand by a draw or a bluff. By checking the flop we can play the turn and river easier. When you bet this flop and your called, it puts you in a very bad spot for the turn/river where you will frequently be guessing. When you check flop and he checks back, you can ussually get two streets of value from worse on non-over turns/rivers. This will depend highly on villains calling tendencies. Going for one street of value here, like the OP did, is also fine. But when he only goes for one street he should make his valuebet a little closer to pot.

so if i'm reading this correctly your saying check flop and if villian bets call all 3 streets if they are bet? cause that sounds ludacris. villian can easily double barrel a wide variety with a b/f mentality. we'll be playing for stacks by the river. totally on board with this being an mucccccccccccccccch easier hand if it goes check/check on the flop.i don't think there's a right answer to this hand

[gobears]

krup24, on Wednesday, July 8th, 2009, 5:13 PM, said:

so if i'm reading this correctly your saying check flop and if villian bets call all 3 streets if they are bet? cause that sounds ludacris. villian can easily double barrel a wide variety with a b/f mentality. we'll be playing for stacks by the river. totally on board with this being an mucccccccccccccccch easier hand if it goes check/check on the flop.i don't think there's a right answer to this hand

I don't think what is saying that. Since you're checking your entire range on this flop, sometimes you'll have a very strong made hand (e.g. KK,AK) so you could check/call all three streets if villain barreled you. With JJ, it'd be villain dependent on how many streets you would c/c.

[KingJames]

gobears, on Wednesday, July 8th, 2009, 4:40 PM, said:

I don't think what is saying that. Since you're checking your entire range on this flop, sometimes you'll have a very strong made hand (e.g. KK,AK) so you could check/call all three streets if villain barreled you. With JJ, it'd be villain dependent on how many streets you would c/c.

+1

[whatgreatis]

krup24, on Wednesday, July 8th, 2009, 5:13 PM, said:

so if i'm reading this correctly your saying check flop and if villian bets call all 3 streets if they are bet? cause that sounds ludacris. villian can easily double barrel a wide variety with a b/f mentality. we'll be playing for stacks by the river. totally on board with this being an mucccccccccccccccch easier hand if it goes check/check on the flop.i don't think there's a right answer to this hand

If they bet you typically call two streets and then play poker and make a read on what to do on the river. And yeah, you typically play for stacks in 3bet pots. You need to get comfortable with stacking off light sometimes.Yes, there is a right answer to this hand and I just gave it to you.

[tskillz187]

gobears, on Wednesday, July 8th, 2009, 8:40 PM, said:

I don't think what is saying that. Since you're checking your entire range on this flop, sometimes you'll have a very strong made hand (e.g. KK,AK) so you could check/call all three streets if villain barreled you. With JJ, it'd be villain dependent on how many streets you would c/c.

KingJames, on Wednesday, July 8th, 2009, 8:44 PM, said:

+1

I'm pretty sure he isn't checking his entire range on this board. This is a pretty bad board to be checking to trap imo. If we could value bet against a K, then betting would be better than checking, but since JJ obv can't do that checking is better. If we had AK we'd bet because overcards would call, we'd have tptk and be willing to stack and we'd be giving flush draws a bad price.Edit: to balance our checking range of like pocket pairs with showdown value, I'd c/r gutshots with over cards and flush draws. We'd cbet with complete air, or really small pps that we are going to go 3 streets with and turn into bluffs to balance with our sets, AK, KK, AA

[rrumsey]

I don't hate the 3-bet size because it probably accomplishes the goal of weeding out the stone could first in bluffs but because 3 peels the turn, a none scary card because I don't put him on A3 suited or 33 I think a probe bet looks like some sort of K and probably wins the pot if he was drawing to a flush and could insure a check behind if the flush misses. Also, the river bet was kind of small because it just looks like a weak play so that leads me to think villian was just punishing what he saw a weak attempt at winning the hand. IDK weird hand would love to know what villian truly had.

[rrumsey]

oh and c-bet would have been ok too but i see why you checked.

[rrumsey]

whatgreatis, on Wednesday, July 8th, 2009, 3:46 PM, said:

OP played his hand very well. He made two minor mistakes in bet sizing. His preflop 3bet should be 1-2bb over pot as standard. I would lean towards making it 2bb+pot. His other mistake was in river sizing where he can probably extract more value if he bets 10 because the difference in villains calling range between 6-10 is relatively small given the action on the earlier streets. Bet/folding the river is the best action.Cbetting the flop is bad for a couple reasons:It's hard to get value from worse. When he cbets he's getting value from a smaller range than when he checks. When he bets he's only getting value from 10x hands and his hand can't stand a raise. There's enough draws on the board where villains will be raising this cbet a decent percentage of the time. By checking, you get more value than betting. A lot of villains will autobet a hand like 88 after you check this flop. It's also very common for a villain to bet AQ. By checking it also prevents us from getting raised off our hand by a draw or a bluff. By checking the flop we can play the turn and river easier. When you bet this flop and your called, it puts you in a very bad spot for the turn/river where you will frequently be guessing. When you check flop and he checks back, you can ussually get two streets of value from worse on non-over turns/rivers. This will depend highly on villains calling tendencies. Going for one street of value here, like the OP did, is also fine. But when he only goes for one street he should make his valuebet a little closer to pot.

Idk about you c-bet theory because we have a bit of folding equity with 10's, Q's will probably fold. Yes it ios hard to get a ton of value from this hand but if we c-bet flop, check turn, bet river we probably take it down because of all the draws folding. If he spiked a set or a boat we are screwed but we let free cards come off on a draw heavy flop I just don't like that.

[whatgreatis]

rrumsey, on Wednesday, July 8th, 2009, 6:10 PM, said:

Idk about you c-bet theory because we have a bit of folding equity with 10's, Q's will probably fold. Yes it ios hard to get a ton of value from this hand but if we c-bet flop, check turn, bet river we probably take it down because of all the draws folding. If he spiked a set or a boat we are screwed but we let free cards come off on a draw heavy flop I just don't like that.

[krup24]

whatgreatis, on Wednesday, July 8th, 2009, 8:49 PM, said:

You need to get comfortable with stacking off light sometimes.

i don't stack off light

[Syntonic]

Quote

i don't stack off light

Oh snap.

[Vinny_Barberino]

krup24, on Wednesday, July 8th, 2009, 8:42 PM, said:

i don't stack off light

Agreed. I seriously think that was a dumb concept, get used to stacking off light? I am coming to grips with the fact, that there may be no "right" way to play this hand, and a lot of that had to do with whatgreatis's thoughts about getting extra value from the hand. I still think c/b is my way of playing it, because I feel more comfortable not guessing and get the easiest value... But... I did not take JJ into a pot three-bet preflop, OOP, and say "boy, theres a king, I better get in 'stack off light' mode"

[mtdesmoines]

LOLthisshitisgonnablow

[Fade2241]

I understand that people want to be cautious but I haven't heard anyone talk about protecting our hand yet, what gives? I know there are better NL cash players than me here so maybe someone can explain it to me. The logic isn't quite registering in my thick head yet. :)IMO You are ahead of a lot of the caller's range (AQ-A10, QJ, 99 + other random pockets etc) and checking down gives the villain a chance to catch up for free. AK is really the only hand I'm afraid of. My instinct wants me to protect my hand and bet. I dunno, I'm probably way off here and not thinking this thru enough but regardless great thread. Are you checking the flop because you are scared of being check raised with hands in his range you're ahead of? I don't like playing scared, i like to take initiative and bet. Can someone explain why betting is -EV?