The villain who raised to $1.10 had 4 bet me light a couple hands ago with A2 suited on the button. I need about 2:1 to call and he's giving me 2.6 on the turn, with FE though is this a spew or a solid semi bluff.

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

3,564 games 0.005 secs 712,800 games/sec

Board: 8h 3d 9h 7d
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 36.728% 35.75% 00.98% 1274 35.00 { KhTh }
Hand 1: 63.272% 62.29% 00.98% 2220 35.00 { 88+, AKs, A9s, K9s, Q9s, J9s, T9s, 98s, AKo, KQo, T9o, 98o }

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (6 handed) - Poker-Stars Hand Converter from HandHistoryConverter.com

CO ($12.70)
Hero (Button) ($10)
SB ($3.40)
BB ($5.65)
UTG ($8.45)
MP ($6.65)

Preflop: Hero is Button with K, 10
1 fold, MP bets $0.20, CO calls $0.20, Hero calls $0.20, 1 fold, BB calls $0.10

Flop: ($0.85) 8, 3, 9 (4 players)
BB checks, MP bets $0.30, CO raises to $1.10, Hero calls $1.10, 2 folds

Turn: ($3.35) 7 (2 players)
CO bets $2.10, Hero raises to $8.70 (All-In), 1 fold

Total pot: $7.55 | Rake: $0.35

Looks OK to me. Lots of equity if called. The turn completes a straight draw, which helps your bluff.

You don't have lots of FE against people who 4bet light. It's not a terrible play but I think it's more profitable to call and get paid when you complete one of your draws. You do have position after all.

Yeah, but will he get paid on the river if he hits? There would either have to be a 4straight on the board, or the flush draw from the flop would get there, and those are the most obvious kinds of draws.

He doesn't have to get paid every time. We need to get paid an average of what on the river to break even? 25 cents? It's something ridiculously low that when we hit we can give 3:1 odds by betting half pot on river and profit fine.

I think this is villain dependent but I hate relying on the cards and hitting a hand when we have this spot and decent FE.

But he's saying we don't have decent FE. Given the circumstances, the guy folded, but I can't figure out a hand he folded except complete air.

Pretty much everything he is raising the flop with and betting the turn with should be calling our shove...

I can see him raising the flop with as weak a 9x. Surly there's somewhat of Fe against top pair no kicker.

So he's folding... 94...?

What about Q9, K9, A9

So there are 3 hands we can conceivably see here that we can get to fold (not counting random bluffs), vs every two pair, set, straights, nut flush draws, combo draws, etc. that won't fold.

Soooooo.... were still shoving?

Is it not even close to being an okay shove?

Just because the shove is profitable doesn't mean calling isn't the far superior move

I.E. Limping with AA preflop is still profitable, but raising is far superior

I think this is probably the proper play at the pot. Unless you fold the turn (eeeew), I think this is the correct use of your position here. It will be harder to get paid off if you flat again on the turn, because when you make, your hand will pretty much be face up. Granted the turn bet will only leave a ~PSB in effective stacks anyways. Even a light 4 bettor should slow it down on the river if the board goes 4 to a straight or flush from the flop comes in I think, making it hard for you to size your bet to get called on the river. Flatting a quarter of your remaining stack on the turn here is bad business I think.

I am inferring in this that if this guy has been seen 4 betting light, he's also the guy more than willing to limp ATC and raise a flop he catches any decent piece of, and then follow through on his betting. I definitely see there being fold equity on this fairly ugly board that is much more favorable for a guy calling with position (you). Then again, I would be cautious as this villain may feel 'priced in' with his flopped top pair, ok kicker, etc. etc. So in that respect, as noted above, it all comes down to if you truly feel FE exists here. The addition of 6 outs on the turn along with the scarier landscape of the board vs. a preflop raiser makes this a good play by you, generally speaking.

IMO

---bolded section---- that kind of what was going through my head and makes me nervous about this hand---


meh it is kind of fringe. I think that we are facing the problem that we very well just get called by weak made hands way to much to get enough fold equity to make this profitable. We need a decent amount of FE to make the numbers work, and frankly it almost sounds like villain is a bad kind of player and is going to stack off pretty easy (top pair, no kicker ect), which when we have draws like this screws up are normal course of action. Against a more normal villain this is a great play because there is so many more folds into you and we have a ton of outs against the strong hands, but against a aggro-tard who is also going to massively overvalue hands i this makes pushing draw a lot harder imo and personally this may not be how we wanna attack this villain, just try and make hands and go to value town on him.
IMO but mine sucks so wanna see what y'all say

I just hate shoving into a guy with a huge draw on the turn when your equity goes wayyyyyyyyy down when the guy is unlikely to fold 95% of his range (or more) and say, "Well I thought I had FE."

You really shouldn't ever have like any FE here. Somehow, and I still don't know how, OP did.

And really, I hate the "calling a quarter of your stack on the turn is bad" idea. If you're getting the right price to simply draw out, you don't even need implied odds. You're getting between 2.5:1 and 3:1 on the turn which is easily all you'll need. I'm not going to do the exact math because I'm lazy, but I'm fairly certain you could get there and he could fold and it's still profitable to call the turn. Any extra money you get on the river when you get there is just for fun.

It is however, totally unprofitable to shove if you think he is sticky with hands and will fold basically nothing and even call you with top pair no kicker occasionally.

True. Except it's really not "easily" all you need. You are getting 3:1 almost exactly on your draw. If you aren't including implied odds, this proposition is veeeeeery thin. I'm not arguing the anti-shove sentiment though, but as I note it's gotta be a villain specific play here.

I don't hate a 3 bet on the button preflop.

***

Turn play has been beaten to death, but what about the flop action? BB checks, could be anything. MP Cbets, CO Raises, and we flat with 2 people behind? Our relative position here is reallllly bad. Say the BB then CRs, MP folds, CO flats... Do we call again?

Even though we are on the button, our position feels weird with this type of hand not closing the action on the flop.

i could see a reraise but with spewbots that will call anything with a naked top pair or worst like it seems they are i think we just wait to make hands and invest as little as possible until we have a hand or a situation we like. If it was heads up im liking a reraise a lot more, but multiway we don't have the nut draw and are turning a draw that is getting ok odds into a bit of an overplay bluff with some outs. I dont think it is as true of a semibluff due to the possiblity of outs possibly being dead in other players hands and the lack of the nut draw. I think multiway thin semibluffing is a messy spot and I would rather not let the pot get too out of hand on the flop.

If we reraise and face another reraise back at us we could be almost drawing dead or up against a set, which is a bit of a cooler and we are getting putting a lot of our stack in, but with ok odds we don't need to raise to make the equity in this hand work on the flop. I just see us going up against AX suited a decent amount, along with sets, and us forcing weaker hands out that these spewbots may or may not pay off with when we hit on later streets

I don't think we're going to see enough cold 3bets from the BB or blockerbet/3-bets from MP often enough to kill the profitability to try to look at the 2nd NFD for a 2:1 pot price plus 8:1 implied with closing action on 2 streets.

It wouldn't be horrible to fold on the flop, but it certainly isn't an unreasonable call.