PokerStars 2/4 Hold'em (10 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

Preflop: Hero is UTG+2 with J:club:, J:spade:.
2 folds, BB calls.

Flop: (8.50 SB) 9:diamond:, K:club:, 6:spade: (4 players)
BB checks, Hero bets, MP1 folds, MP3 calls, BB folds.

Turn: (5.25 BB) 5:heart: (2 players)
Hero checks, MP3 bets, Hero calls.

River: (7.25 BB) 6:heart: (2 players)
Hero checks (I'm calling)

I'm trying to take a new line with pairs like JJ-88 when overs flop and I get called on the flop. I don't know if this is the proper time to apply it or not, but checking seemed harmless enough with only an ugly straight draw out.

Better to induce bluffs than bet/fold or too passive?

Jeff

I think it's too passive in this spot.

Bet for value. If raised, you generally lose less money by taking the bet/fold line on the turn. This board is very semi-bluff unfriendly, so I don't think you have to worry about folding the best hand.

I'm really not a fan of this line at all. I think check/fold is preferable to check/call, as MP could easily have a K. Even so, I think I continue to bet/fold here. Incidentally, I say that c/f may be better than c/c, but I still think c/f is probably a little too weak. I like B/G the best here.

Man, you guys... with the bet/folding turns all the time!

If I had a hand like TT in the villian's situation, and I planned on getting to showdown with it, I'd probably call the flop, raise the turn, and check behind.

Wanna know why?

Because TOO MANY PEOPLE BET/FOLD! This is becoming an epidemic that's making rent easier and easier to make every month.

Wang

Ok, it's entirely possible that I bet/fold too much. Do you have a preferrable line?

You know, to be perfectly honest, I really don't mind the OP's line at all... I play like this all the time against aggressive opponents in situations like this.

He's definitely betting a king behind us.

He's probably betting a nine behind us.

He's probably betting 88 77 TT.

He's often betting something silly like AQ or AJ.

He could bet a gutshot like TJ.

And the board's draw light, so giving a free card is very bad only when he has an ace or a queen, or a five/six that won't be calling a turn bet.

Also, if it gets checked through, we're going to pick up an extra bet quite often when he calls a river bet when he was dumping the turn UI.

Just a few thoughts from the Wang man.

I wang you.

Well it depends on the player. Is he one to just call down top pair, or one to bet it out? I mean if you played it that way against me, Id bet any pair if checked to on the turn.

You could've gotten tricky, and c/r on the turn, but if hez passive he'd just call you with a K regardless.

My line is bet till shown aggression.

Based on what you said about how YOU would play the hand as villian (bet any pair), why is leading the turn correct? Why is betting until you're shown aggression correct?

Wang

After re-reading your post Wang, I guess letting an opponent bet his weaker holdings for you isnt bad either, instead of leading out and allowing a weaker hand to fold.

Shimmering Wang, you reason hands exactly like akishore.

you are way off on this line.
not betting the turn here is a huge mistake passive limit players make. and playing like this is severely -EV. its the reason so many smart LAG players kill these games.

you are correct in people overuse the bet/fold line. its the same way people raise for a free card too often and in bad spots.

but the bet/fold line on the turn here is standard and necessary.
theres no alternative.

With only one caller I'm still betting this turn. He raises a king/set, he calls all weaker hands (unless you ahve notes on him...b/f sucks against smart players) on the turn.

I wouldn't advocate this play unless the entire table is folding hands on the turn too frequently.

Maybe...



That's the thing... I think I do have to worry about folding the best hand. If you look at it from villain's perspective, if he knows I'm a bet/folder, then his bluff has to be successful only 1 time in 8 (if he was calling anyway) to be successful.

Let's say on average that I lose 1BB/hand with this line (and I honestly think that's too high, but whatever) over a bet/fold line. If I get bluffed off the best hand even 12.5% of the time then bet/fold is -EV. Right?

I really believe I've been abused as a bet/folder and I'm looking for alternatives.

Jeff

Wang,

You bring up some good points. Raising with mid pp's on the turn in these situations is something I'm going to work on more.

But the players who use this approach at 2/4 are few and far between. Also, if we notice an opponents raising too many turns, we can start calling down more, especially if he's taking a free sd most of the time.

One thing about this hand is that JJ is not as vulnerable as say 88. With 88 we absolutely have to bet here. It may get our opponent to incorrectly fold a hand like QT. At the same time, we don't have to worry about sneaky ****s like you raising with mid pp's, because those hands will usually have us beat and we can safely fold.

Glad you brought those points up. There's a lot more going on in this hand (and others like it) than I intially thought.

The thing is, most opponents aren't good enough at this level to exploit that. And if you notice him start taking shots at you or other players on the turn, you can just start calling him down more liberally. He adjusts, you adjust. You start calling him down more, you make money until he realizes to stop taking shots at you. And round and round it goes.

Being OOP sucks. The thing is, you really don't want to be giving free cards with these types of hands. I think it's safe to fold here until you notice someone raising too many turns. Then you start calling down.

Another thing you can do, is throw in some random call downs against players who you aren't really sure if they're taking shots like this at you. Obviously, if you call down every turn raise, you'll lose money. Mix it up.

I agree with that. On the flip side, many of them are so terrible they think bluff raising the turn with any two is profitable. I admit though, this villain hadn't yet shown me that tendancy.



That would be great if it weren't for a couple of things:

1) He's more likely to remember me than I am him since I'm 5-tabling

2) I now have to worry about not just him but everyone else at the table who paid attention and saw I'm a bet/folder

Even Sklansky said the line encourages people to take shots at you so use it sparingly, yet oddly I see the line advocated very frequently here.



I definitely agree giving free cards sucks. But again, this board isn't particularly draw heavy, so I don't think a check here is so bad. If there's a flush draw or a more likely straight draw I'd be more inclined to bet it.

I'm on the fence, certainly. I see your point about QT, etc but I have a strong feeling I'm being outplayed with hands like this on the turn entirely too often and it's costing me money.

Jeff

I really like that line. I typically raise the flop with something TT and position and take a free card on the turn, but I think I like your line better because of the fold equity.

What do you do if you get 3-bet with a hand like TT with overs on the turn? Fold?

Jeff

Glad to see you back posting after a long hiatus. Wait a second; no I'm not. Don't disagree with my line....

First off, my "I don't mind the OPs line" wasn't exactly a strong endorsement of it. "I play like this all the time against aggressive opponents in situations like this." Kind of a conditional play for me. When I think bet/folding is gonna get taken advantage of too often, I'd rather call down when I'm ahead, or my opponent is drawing to 6 or fewer outs almost 100% of the time.

Why do you think this is necessarily a bet/fold turn? I think a lot of people on this forum could do a better job of looking for ways to deviate from easily exploitable "standard" lines, especially if they don't know WHY they're standard.

OP might decide to bet/fold this from now on. As long as he knows WHY, and to WHAT END, that's fine. But just demanding someone take that line, and suggesting it's severely -EV doesn't help anyone.

Cheers,

Wangitty Wang Wang, III

If you're afraid of being outplayed, then definetly go with this line if you're pretty confident villian will bet for you anyway. I guess you gotta weigh the chance that a bet would get your opponent to fold a hand with outs vs the chance that he might try and push you off the best hand.

Well, we bet here because it's for value. JJ is usually good here and will get called by worse hands often.

There is a case for bet/calling against certain players or if you are trying to mix it up and show down against someone who has been making too many moves on you.

Not betting it sucks hard.

Yeah. But almost all worse hands that would have called go ahead and bet when checked to, anyway. Or am I wrong? And as I said before, giving a dangerous freecard involves a big parlay:

1) He must have a hand with legitimate outs, including (but not limited to) something like A9, A5, A6, AQ, A7, A8

2) He must check behind, which is unlikely with almost all of his 5 out one pair holdings

3) He must have been folding to a bet, which is very VERY unlikely with almost all of his pair cards


The value we lose on the turn from gutshots that would have wrongly called but won't often bet is, in part, recouped when we earn a river bet from hands that decide to "pick off a river bluff" by calling after check/check turn action.

And we show JJ down for 2 bets (max), when we could have erroneously folded it when we took a bet/fold line on the turn.


If you believe this line to be a mistake- which I grant may be the case in many circumstances- you can't say it's really SIGNIFICANTLY -EV vs. taking a bet/fold line.

Now, I'm'a have a drink.

Wang

Maybe half of them do. These games are full of checking and calling stations. Lots of hands that will call a bet will check behind here.

When they check, they have 5 outs to improve. Of the half that would have checked behind on the turn, like half of those (likely more) weren't calling our turn bet NEway, and are more likely to payoff on the river.

Wang Rules, Absolute Drools. That should be your new handle: AbsoluteDrools

Wang