Villain is 21/18/11 with 33 fold to 3bet and 50 flop Cbet

I checked flop expecting a cbet and plan was to call and c/call turn.
When he bets turn i figure it for a one pair hand like 88-JJ, or maybe weak queens so I decide to raise for value. Then he repops me and I'm lost. Can I call down? Am I ever ahead here?


PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $1.00 BB (6 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

Button ($73.20)
Hero (SB) ($100.90)
BB ($116.75)
UTG ($218.60)
MP ($52.75)
CO ($118.05)

Preflop: Hero is SB with Q , A
UTG bets $3, 3 folds, Hero calls $2.50, 1 fold

Flop: ($7) Q , 7 , 6 (2 players)
Hero checks, UTG checks

Turn: ($7) 3 (2 players)
Hero checks, UTG bets $4, Hero raises to $12, UTG raises to $26, Hero ??????



Thoughts on all streets appreciated

well, if thats the case queen thats gross. but meh, it happens.


anyways, if i'm reading the stats properly, this guy is a pretty big TAG for a 6 handed game. am i wrong? its been a while since i've used PT.


with that said, i think this is a safe fold.

looking at his stats and the action that ensued, this is most likely a set or overpair.

his line makes little sense for any hand other than a set, and as we know that's unlikely especially since you block qq. I guess 33 makes sense

so is he the type capable of bluffraising? is he multitabling? if he's just a straightforward TAG then I'd just pitch it

After the flop goes check-check I would lead out at this turn. If I was raised I guess I'd call and c/c the river ui. If He called my flop bet I'd bet most rivers.

Thoughts?

IMHO this is an overpair a lot

Also as played I really like c/c the turn. We have checked twice after flatting his pf raise so I think our hand is under-repped and his bluffing range is super wide but I can't think of any hands we beat that call our c/r; JJ/TT maybe and KQ QJ maybe??

I like the line, but as played I might c/c the turn and do the same on the river. I may be too nitty but he did raise UTG and based on his 21/18 stats I assume he is somewhat competent.

because the board is dry and action is sorta "quiet" until the turn, You really have to look at his stats here.

most important being that its 6handed. he is playing TAG pf. and have a very high river agg.

I like this. Villain will most likely fire the turn with 88-JJ, AK. Check/call turn and judging by his AF, he'll probably fire out a river bluff. You'll also lose minimum if he shows up with a trickily-played QQ-AA with a c/c turn, c/c river line.

This is why its fine to c/r the turn and fold to a 3bet.

because we sorta "know" villain wont be 3-betting us unless he beats TPTK.

You could say he bluffs the river, but I doubt it. If he holds any pair he is probably checking behind. might even check behind with AK if he puts us on a missed draw.

I like the c/r. We allow villain to make a mistake by flatting with hands we beat.

So you think villain will most likely call the turn check/raise a majority of the time with 88-JJ? I might be mistaken, but I think Villain folds out most of the pocket pairs we beat if we check/raise.

So, if all goes to plan in this hand, we c/r the turn and after he calls that, put in a v-bet on the river and hope to get called by his 88-JJ range that we beat, correct?

huh?

No i said, Its safe for us to "fold to a 3bet" on the turn, because this villain wont be 3betting with hands that cant beat TPTK

I really don't think he has an overpair. This is actually a creative line for that holding. It'd require him to check behind on a board which he's SUPPOSED to c/bet, and which we will call relatively light (maybe even as light as ace-high), and then to 3-bet us with KK/AA when we ourselves are representing some strength. Almost it'd turn his overpair into a bluff, because we'd fold out our own air and many of our pair holdings. He'd be hoping, I guess, that we have AQ or KQ exactly?

His line looks a lot like a bluff, to be honest, which is why we need to know if he's capable of running one. Most multi-tabling TAGS cannot which is why I opt to fold here even though his line makes very little sense.

It's true that he could call our turn raise with hands we beat, because our line itself looks FOS

got your @ss trapped it looks like, i don't have a HUD (they really need to make a verison usable on mac's) but those stats look very tight and a big 3 bet here always beats tptk imo, over pair or a set.

btw I love threads like these because of prevailing wisdom. If we were to post it from the perspective of villain, and we were to bluff 3-bet with like A6, and our opponent was aggressive and competent, we'd be lambasted for "not representing anything" when clearly the majority opinion is to disregard our line and to fold TPTK on a benign board.

The difference, I suppose, is that actual poker players, even "handreaders," cannot fold hands as often as they claim to do on their forums.

I agree 100% with the first part,

but for the bold. I dont think villain 3betting our c/r is a bluff.

If we lead the turn and he raised, I could see that as a bluff line.

But his initial small turn bet, followed by a 3bet is strong.

Unless he is thinking on level 4 here, its a pretty easy fold.

I think we're looking into this hand too much. Villain comes across as straight forward so we should play him straight forward

I'm just trying to get straight in my what you're advocating. From the bolded above, it sounds like you're saying c/r the turn. Then if he 3-bets we can safely fold. We can make him make a mistake by flatting hands we beat, ie 88-JJ.

I'm asking, if he flats the c/r on the turn, our plan is to v-bet the river, since he will make a mistake by flatting with worse?

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just trying to get our plan for the rest of the hand set.

well that being ssaid.. You cant ignore the stats. (Its one main reason why I think pokertracker is BAD for poker)

This guy cant run shit on us. Unless he spent the last XXXX amount of hands playing TAG and now decides to loosen up and run plays. well its pretty safe to assume he wont be showing up with A,6 type holdings.

sorry. My bad..

to clarify. Yes, I think if he 3bets our c/r.. then we're behind. If he makes the mistake of flatting our c/r with smaller pairs because he doesnt believe us. Then we can lead the river for value.


** ok. let me back up a bit more before anyone mis-reads.

When we c/r the turn, we have to already start narrowing his range, and start making assumptions on what he would do with what holdings.


So if he flats, and we assign the given range for flatting the c/r Then Yes.. we can lead the river.

But This would mean we fold to a river raise.

My thouhgts on that would be because Villain could potentially flat the turn with a monster hoping we have a strong enough hand to lead the river.

** however@! If villain thinks we have a strong enough hand to lead the river, Then its going to be strong enough to call his turn 3bet.

So an argument can be made that He would 3bet the turn WAY before he flats and raises river.

SOOOO again.. to summ.. if he flats the turn, It says exactly what I think it says. which is AQ,88-JJ.(possibly AA,KK**)
if he 3bets. its a Set, (possibly AA,KK**)


**Note how I added AA,KK in both.. The reason is, Its a Variable IMO.. I think this villain Cbets AA,KK on the flop. In the off chance he is trickier than we think and checks behind.. Then we have to give the possibilty and allow for that to be in his range post flop.

You know what.

The more I think about this hand, the more I wonder if its best to just get to showdown.

How many of you are upset if we call the turn bet of $4. and check down river. and he shows up with JJ?

do we feel like we missed out on value?


If we call the turn bet of $4 and villain has us beat and we c/c the river. We're still losing a similar amount than if we c/r the turn and fold to 3bet.


I dunno.. I think I've spent too much time on these forums lately.

Good discussion! I like it.

I haven't played much 6-max, only in home games. I've not played stakes higher than 5NL online, so I may be off on discussions about proper lines.

So, with that in mind, I like the c/c turn, c/c river line for the simple reason of playing a small pot with a one pair hand, especially since this is a TAGish UTG raiser and we're oop.

One can definitely make the argument that this misses value, though.

c/c turn and river is definitely the safest line but I think it misses too much value as Villian is less likely to bet 88-JJ on the river once the turn has been called so would most likely result in checking down.
c/c turn and b/f river is maybe a slightly better line to get value from 88-JJ or KQ thinking I am FOS.

I guess the big question is whether Villain calls the c/raise on the turn with worse and then calls a value bet on the river often enough or at all??
Probably not in hindsight...

The 3bet is actually quite small so Villain could well be turning his 88-JJ into a bluff or he knows he is likely WA

What stats do we have? We don't even know what sample those stats are over. Besides, basic stats tell us very little about someone's postflop skills.

I agree that this is a fold readless simply because it doesn't matter how narrow someone's range is; he's usually got the goods. But if we had reads that villain was competent, and that he could put us to tough decisions and bluff, then I think I'd call him down. His line's just so bizarre for anything but a set...

I don't ever c/r this turn though. I'd like some history to develop before I started making turn check-raises with top pair against a TAG's EP open...

how many hands do we have on this villian cause that 11 AF looks out of place?

and i think a 21/18 isn't a TAG kinda middle of the road of TAG n LAG. 21/18 are solid numbers though. (mainly cause those are close my stats over 500K hands )

This is the prevailing thought in my head. I've kinda been taught to see this as a leak as I probably take this passive line too often, losing equity when ahead on 5th street, but I prefer to pot control to showdown when available, compared to raise/folding to 3 bet at the same price.

Yea. I'm not pokertracker expert, i just assumed since he didnt put an amount of hands that this was information from multiple sessions?

could be wrong.


hmm. lookin at it again. its saying 50 flop cbet..

I'm starting to think the stats he has on this villain are from a very small amount of hands.

maybe we're all very wrong about this villain.. maybe this villain has only had a couple playable hands, and 1 or 2 of them being Big PP's. which explains the 50% cbet and high AF





well its 6max.. usually the PF range would be closer to 25-30 in 6max. so 21 is on the tight side

Sample size is not great, only about 100 hands from a couple of sessions so take with a pinch of salt although I think they do provide an indicator.

I would say at 6max 21/18 is more loose than TAG but not by a great deal.

25-30 especially the higher would be LAG at 6M

12-17 would be TAG with the low end being extremely TAG at 6M

however the C-bet % is low for a more aggressive player

based on how i play i can have anything here from a set to semi-bluff to air but my C-bet % is a lot higher

Agree with 25-30 being LAG

12-16 is just nit.

17-21 TAG

22-24 tweeners.

I'm surprised. When I played regularly my stats were 19/15 give or take and I thought of myself as a big nit

Also I think this is standard fold or call one street and fold if you've never seen villain 3ball with air before. There's just no reason to suspect he'd be bluffing, sets are in his range, 45ss is there, KK or AA playing oddly is there, we aren't beating any of his value range and we are unsure of whether he has bluffs in his range.

I'd note the odd play and see if he does it again in the future, even if he doesn't get to showdown if I see this happen another time I'd start thinking he could be bluffing and I'd get to showdown with my next top pairish hand in this spot.

u say nit i say TAG lol extreme TAG = nit imo

don't laugh but i was a hardcore nit for a while i prob run closer to 24 over my last 100K hands

Sometimes playing nitty is really profitable. When I first moved to $100nl and was very successful I was playing like 14/11. In general though I think the general way to learn how to play is play really tight and as you get better add hands. It'd be interesting to start out really loose though, I think you'd accelerate through the learning process much faster at the higher stakes, but at the outset there would be a long struggle.

haha, sounds like whats happening to my beginning to 25NL.

i wouldnt say that i started out loose, just aggressive like i was at 10NL

went up 3 buyins first 2 sessions, then dropped 6 buyins over the next 4 sessions..

total of -3 Buyins over 2K hands.

so im back down to 10NL for a little while to build confidence and gain back losses.

I found that I couldn't really help but be nitty because of all the aggression...players 3-betting me and just opening. Lots of hands that I could open from the CO or BTN became mucks because someone had already opened the pot. I really focus on playing "solid poker" and it didn't seem possible, unless I wanted to get out of line, to be more aggro than 19/15 other than throwing in the occassional squeeze or light 3-bet. But I see a bunch of guys playing like 24/20 very profitably, so I always wonder what opportunities I miss or don't even notice.

yep for sure i made a ton of $$ early on mainly at 50NL. but thinking regs became the norm and I soon found myself getting severely outplayed. Folding so much that i probably folded away 10K. can't remember what color line it was from the pokerEV game, but it was non-existent. all my profit came from three hands a session and when i lose those monstrous hands i am constantly in the red cause i make no $ in other pots.

would love to start really loose, maybe i will start a new account and just LAGGGGG it up. now if i could only get that flashy red thing from men in black.

It's very difficult to open up your game a little bit, like I think it's hard to play 22-24ish because you're either playin like in the 18-21 solid range or you open up and get crazy with like all suited connecting and gapping hands, so I went from like 20/17 to 28/20 with not much in between. I try to only play at deep tables so I can profitably play a lotttttttttt more stuff in position. 100bbs does not suit my game well where it's a lot of preflop aggression and just jamming small edges and whatnot, but it's still pretty easy to pl;ay that aggro it's just in squeezing and 4bb a lot more.

For instance every time it folds to you in CO or button and you open ace-rag and a reg 3bets you with a 3bet bigger than like 6% I'd 4ball bluff.

Edit: There's a reason not many people play loose, it's really hard to be good enough to not spew a ton, so I'm sure you guys are playing the right amount of hands for your comfort level. I didn't get too into playing really LAGgy til I talked to Whatgreatis for awhile and saw the unique and creative lines you could take.

agree 100%

i play between 25-30 which is why i said 25-30 but yea.. I'm a laggy donk.

but i still say 21 is TAG for 6max

At full ring, this is decent rate. at 6max, its nit IMO. lol so i agree

Your hand is hidden a lot. i'd call the turn raise and check call the river. Then, I'd take notes.

It's only my opinion, but to help define your opponent's hand, maybe you can think about 3 betting him preflop to tighten his range, if you get 4 bet or shoved on, you can safely fold your hand and saving you tough decisions after the flop.