|
kfaess
|
03-19-2009, 09:35 PM
Post subject: 10NL Rivered set
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 556
|
|
Villain is 29/11/2.5 over 39 hands.
No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (6 handed)
BB ($9.65)
UTG ($10.60)
Hero (MP) ($10.40)
CO ($10.15)
Button ($7.80)
SB ($10.15)
Preflop: Hero is MP with 7 , 7
1 fold, Hero bets $0.40, CO calls $0.40, 3 folds
Flop: ($0.95) 4, 2 , 8 (2 players)
Hero checks, CO checks
Turn: ($0.95) J (2 players)
Hero bets $0.70, CO calls $0.70
River: ($2.35) 7 (2 players)
Hero bets $2, CO raises $6, Hero ???
Total pot: $6.35
Will he do this with hands that I'm ahead of with enough frequency to call? Getting approx. 2.5 to 1 doesn't he need to be doing this with about 30%+ hands I'm ahead of? His AF isn't super high so I just gave him credit here.
From a hand reading perspective he checks behind on the flop so maybe this discounts FD's a little, and with JJJ he would prob raise the turn (although I don't have reads on how he plays at this point)?? The only hand I can really think of that fits with every action in the hand is T9. Also our hand is somewhat disguised so that may have prompted some aggression.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
JKDS
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Chandler, AZ
Posts: 1,024
|
|
flush draws are easily in his range. not everyone bets out and if his aggression is low he isnt likely to be betting them out. im thinking that this is often a flush here, T9 is a good possibility as well. I cant really think of any hand other than those that he would raise the river with here. TP type hands likely just call, even AJ, two pair doesnt seem likely unless he has 87 and checked top pair...idk. tough spot.
actually, i think he might do this with 22, 44, and 88 as well. Do you see him taking this kind of line with a set? If we call i think its pretty much because we think he has 22, 44, and might be bluffing a bit here, but im more inclined to fold without further info.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
But no, jkds is lolvillager and anyone who wants to string him up is sighbad.
|
|
|
Ragnar4
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Billings, Montana
Posts: 1,284
|
|
UGh, I like check with the intention of calling a PSB so much better.
56 and any 2 diamonds hit it big. Worse Sets might play here too 2 pair also.
Ugh. Choke and call IMO but I think it's close.
|
The older I get, the more I start wondering; Just what in the hell is going on here? 
|
|
St8ofN8
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 60
|
|
I agree that his range covers any number of hands that have you crushed. The right move is a fold imo. I feel like all you can beat is a bluff here and I don't like those odds.
|
|
|
|
AFchung
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UCLA
Posts: 1,179
|
|
Quote:
|
His AF isn't super high so I just gave him credit here.
|
you need a bigger sample to be able to use AF as an effective read. 39 hands is no where near what you should have
i like your river line here. some jacks and 2 pair hands can find a call. i dont see the raise ever being a bluff so nh
|
|
|
|
bigspenda73
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pwnsylvania
Posts: 7,545
|
|
cool
|
|
|
|
Ragnar4
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Billings, Montana
Posts: 1,284
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bigspenda73
cool
|
Insightful and amazingly helpful.
|
The older I get, the more I start wondering; Just what in the hell is going on here?
|
|
bigspenda73
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pwnsylvania
Posts: 7,545
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ragnar4
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bigspenda73
cool
|
Insightful and amazingly helpful. |
was this sarcasm? if so, damn, burned me hard.
|
|
|
|
daven
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: soaking up ethanol, moving on up
Posts: 5,805
|
|
you should only be betting river with a plan.
I like check-call river cos unknowns and fish like to bet when checked to, and it will cost the same as bet-folding.
|
|
|
|
bigspenda73
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pwnsylvania
Posts: 7,545
|
|
check calling is just not good at all, the reasons should be obvious
|
|
|
|
clvacva
|
|
Straight
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 200
|
|
why not bet the flop?
and check/calling the river is bad because we loose value if the opponent has TPTK, Two Pair, slowplayed 44/22 and let him check behind with hands that we crush. is my guess i
|
|
|
|
Pig_Vomit
|
|
Straight
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 165
|
|
Lets say its not obvious. Wanna let us in on y?
|
|
|
|
Ragnar4
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Billings, Montana
Posts: 1,284
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bigspenda73
check calling is just not good at all, the reasons should be obvious
|
The reasons are probably not obvious to me, unless my first post was a level. I'm not to big on leveling in the BC when it IS obvious that I'm prone to making mistakes.
This is my reasoning: I have a hard time wanting to bet much more than something the size of the pot, but I really can't stand a re-raise on this board, with this play. I have a hand with showdown value, so I'd like to show down as cheaply as possible considering this board. So my instinct is to check with the intention of calling
anything reasonable, and folding anything unreasonable.
Not entirely certain why that is wrong, but that's probably because I'm too close to the project.
|
The older I get, the more I start wondering; Just what in the hell is going on here?
|
|
Ragnar4
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Billings, Montana
Posts: 1,284
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bigspenda73
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ragnar4
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bigspenda73
cool
|
Insightful and amazingly helpful. |
was this sarcasm? if so, damn, burned me hard. |
hah.. wasn't trying to burn you.
|
The older I get, the more I start wondering; Just what in the hell is going on here?
|
|
bigspenda73
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pwnsylvania
Posts: 7,545
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by clvacva
check/calling the river is bad because we loose value if the opponent has TPTK, Two Pair, slowplayed 44/22 and let him check behind with hands that we crush. is my guess i
|
shhhhhhhhhhh don't give it away!
|
|
|
|
Ragnar4
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Billings, Montana
Posts: 1,284
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bigspenda73
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by clvacva
check/calling the river is bad because we loose value if the opponent has TPTK, Two Pair, slowplayed 44/22 and let him check behind with hands that we crush. is my guess i
|
shhhhhhhhhhh don't give it away! |
What about any 2 diamonds, and 56, and 88 and JJ. Areyou saying that the number of combinations we beat here is so much larger that this is a bet/call... I just can't imagine that.
|
The older I get, the more I start wondering; Just what in the hell is going on here?
|
|
bigspenda73
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pwnsylvania
Posts: 7,545
|
|
I didn't say bet/call, I already agreed with OP who obviously bet/folded
|
|
|
|
KeeKoLy
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 78
|
|
I'd like to know the reasoning behind not cbetting this flop.
|
|
|
|
derekvsmith
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 41
|
|
looking at the hand i would have to say that you are most likely behind and you should fold although i know its real hard to do so, but i kinda think he either has the flush or hes on a straight bluff
|
|
|
|
S1x
|
|
Two Pair
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 44
|
|
After that kind of raise I would probably wince and fold. The bet on the end is fine; there's a lot of stuff they would likely call with, and if they raise like they did here, it's probably only something that beats you... unless this is ever done with something like 2 pair or an oddly-played over pair? I would think they'd just call with it, though.
At those stakes the chances it's a pure bluff are so slim I'd give them a cookie if they were bold enough to push me off that hand with air.
|
|
|
|
bjsaust
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ballarat, Australia
Posts: 5,842
|
|
We bet/fold because his raising range smashes our set and we smash his calling range. c/c loses all kinds of value from his medium hands and the few times he turns something into a bluff here dont come close to making up for it.
b/f is a good line. Learn to use it. Folding isnt the terrible action you seem to think it is.
Lots of people will take free cards with their draws, dont discount the FD because of the flop action too much.
|
|
Just playing to improve.
|
|
kfaess
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 556
|
|
wow got quite a few responses already, thanks guys.
Quote:
flush draws are easily in his range. not everyone bets out and if his aggression is low he isnt likely to be betting them out. im thinking that this is often a flush here, T9 is a good possibility as well. I cant really think of any hand other than those that he would raise the river with here. TP type hands likely just call, even AJ, two pair doesnt seem likely unless he has 87 and checked top pair...idk. tough spot.
actually, i think he might do this with 22, 44, and 88 as well. Do you see him taking this kind of line with a set? If we call i think its pretty much because we think he has 22, 44, and might be bluffing a bit here, but im more inclined to fold without further info.
|
Yea I think flushes are a big part of his raising range on the river but maybe just slightly less likely than every FD in his preflop range (at least some of the time hes gonna bet a flush on the flop). Forgot about sets but I'm assuming he would either bet flop or raise turn with a set most of the time.
Quote:
|
you need a bigger sample to be able to use AF as an effective read.
|
excellent point sir.
The river bet is a value bet for all the hands that he can convince himself to call with, which I think is many many hands since this guy appears to like to call and I haven't shown much strength in the hand. I bet the river not expecting a check raise at all and wasn't sure I made the right decision during the hand but now I'm convinced.
|
|
|
|
daven
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: soaking up ethanol, moving on up
Posts: 5,805
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bigspenda73
check calling is just not good at all, the reasons should be obvious
|
you;re assuming villain is smart enough to know that he should check behind here with hands that have showdown value - fair assumption?
|
|
|
|
bigspenda73
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pwnsylvania
Posts: 7,545
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by daven
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bigspenda73
check calling is just not good at all, the reasons should be obvious
|
you;re assuming villain is smart enough to know that he should check behind here with hands that have showdown value - fair assumption? |
not a fair assumption, it's not b/c he'd be smart enough to check back hands, it's that he sucks at poker and his river betting range is polarized to nuts/nothing and the frequencies we can weight to those two categories are grossly skewed towards the nizzles.
Ragnar said it himself, everything got there on the river, yet we want to c/c? He won't bet thinly enough or bluff (or have bluffs) enough in his range to make that line profitable. However, there are a decent amount of hands that will call a river bet that otherwise would have gladly taken a free showdown.
|
|
|
|
daven
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: soaking up ethanol, moving on up
Posts: 5,805
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bigspenda73
[ it's that he sucks at poker and his river betting range is polarized to nuts/nothing and the frequencies we can weight to those two categories are grossly skewed towards the nizzles. .
|
well, if this assumption holds then bet-fold is the only river line.
I guess i think of the aggressive fish like me rather than the passive fish like 10nl randoms. Against aggro randoms at FT 100nl check-call makes sense to me - although even that may be flawed. I'll go away and think about it.
|
|
|
|
Outlaw
|
|
03-20-2009, 02:17 PM
Post subject: Re: 10NL Rivered set
|
#26 (permalink)
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,033
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by kfaess
Villain is 29/11/2.5 over 39 hands.
No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (6 handed)
BB ($9.65)
UTG ($10.60)
Hero (MP) ($10.40)
CO ($10.15)
Button ($7.80)
SB ($10.15)
Preflop: Hero is MP with 7 , 7
1 fold, Hero bets $0.40, CO calls $0.40, 3 folds
Flop: ($0.95) 4 , 2 , 8 (2 players)
Hero checks, CO checks
Turn: ($0.95) J (2 players)
Hero bets $0.70, CO calls $0.70
River: ($2.35) 7 (2 players)
Hero bets $2, CO raises $6, Hero ???
Total pot: $6.35
Will he do this with hands that I'm ahead of with enough frequency to call? Getting approx. 2.5 to 1 doesn't he need to be doing this with about 30%+ hands I'm ahead of? His AF isn't super high so I just gave him credit here.
From a hand reading perspective he checks behind on the flop so maybe this discounts FD's a little, and with JJJ he would prob raise the turn (although I don't have reads on how he plays at this point)?? The only hand I can really think of that fits with every action in the hand is T9. Also our hand is somewhat disguised so that may have prompted some aggression.
Thoughts? |
C-bet the flop... what are you scared of here? Make overs and draws pay for 2 streets.
Easy fold on the river.. unless he is a complete idiot (which is possible) he only raises with a flush.. the majority of the time he called your turn bet with something other than a FD and will pay off your $2 bet often enough to make betting profitable. Since you know the majority of his raising range here is flushes, flushes, and more flushes.. bet/fold is the most profitable play by far imo.
|
|
|
|
kfaess
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 556
|
|
Quote:
|
C-bet the flop... what are you scared of here? Make overs and draws pay for 2 streets.
|
Several people have brought up this point and honestly I have no idea why I didn't c-bet the flop. At the time I may have been trying for pot control since I'm oop. I also may have been picking up a lot of pots recently without going to showdown, not really sure.
It does look like a good board to c-bet though.
|
|
|
|
Carroters
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Da Amberlamps
Posts: 2,216
|
|
I'd only check this flop in one sort of situation: Vs regs that like to c/r this type of board as a bluff or with draws have seen me c-bet a lot.
Villain here doesn't seem to be ths type of player so I think this is an easy c bet to protect our hand and keep the initiative. There aren't many good turns for our hand remember, so to win this pot here is certainly a good result.
|
|
|
|
Erpel
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 605
|
|
I'm not saying cbetting the flop is bad - but I'm tempted to consider that it might not be good. Do this:
List the entire hand range you would make the pre-flop bet with and for each hand in the range consider if it hits the flop. For each hand list what kind of hand it makes (set, overpair, underpair, TPNK, TPGK, TPTK, two par, flush draw, gutshot, OESD, combinations of the above). Consider how big a percentage of your hand range hits the flop. Basically do an ABCD range analysis of your range on the flop.
I suspect that your opening range in this position only quite rarely hits this flop. This would suggest that you need a relatively low ratio of bluffs to value bets. This brings me to the question: What would a bet with 77 be here? A bet for value? A bet as a bluff? A bet as protection? Do you want to build a big pot OOP with a hand that has bad reverse implied odds? I don't think a bet with 77 on the flop is for value, simply because I don't see many hands that 77 beats that would call you. It would be something of a bluff, and I'm not sure I agree with putting a bluff out when you cannot realistically represent having hit the board and when the opponent hasn't indicated to you yet whether he has. What you have on the flop is naked showdown value imo.
Because you're OOP and not hitting your set - and because I think the flop doesn't hit your range so you cannot realistically represent it - I think checking the flop is just fine. When the villain checks back he reveals weakness and in view of that the turn bet I think is ok. You are representing a random J (like AJ, KJ, QJ, JT, J9) that just hit and any weak hand that is not a J would be inclined to fold.
In the absence of the 7 on the river a flop plan of c/f, b/f, c/f seems sensible. Given the 7 on the river changing river action to b/f seems sensible. After the flop I don't want to put too much money in on a weak made pair.
|
|
|
|
Carroters
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Da Amberlamps
Posts: 2,216
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Erpel
I'm not saying cbetting the flop is bad - but I'm tempted to consider that it might not be good. Do this:
List the entire hand range you would make the pre-flop bet with and for each hand in the range consider if it hits the flop. For each hand list what kind of hand it makes (set, overpair, underpair, TPNK, TPGK, TPTK, two par, flush draw, gutshot, OESD, combinations of the above). Consider how big a percentage of your hand range hits the flop. Basically do an ABCD range analysis of your range on the flop.
I suspect that your opening range in this position only quite rarely hits this flop. This would suggest that you need a relatively low ratio of bluffs to value bets. This brings me to the question: What would a bet with 77 be here? A bet for value? A bet as a bluff? A bet as protection? Do you want to build a big pot OOP with a hand that has bad reverse implied odds? I don't think a bet with 77 on the flop is for value, simply because I don't see many hands that 77 beats that would call you. It would be something of a bluff, and I'm not sure I agree with putting a bluff out when you cannot realistically represent having hit the board and when the opponent hasn't indicated to you yet whether he has. What you have on the flop is naked showdown value imo.
Because you're OOP and not hitting your set - and because I think the flop doesn't hit your range so you cannot realistically represent it - I think checking the flop is just fine. When the villain checks back he reveals weakness and in view of that the turn bet I think is ok. You are representing a random J (like AJ, KJ, QJ, JT, J9) that just hit and any weak hand that is not a J would be inclined to fold.
In the absence of the 7 on the river a flop plan of c/f, b/f, c/f seems sensible. Given the 7 on the river changing river action to b/f seems sensible. After the flop I don't want to put too much money in on a weak made pair.
|
I agree we're not repping much here Erpel, but this 29/11 guy here may not be thinking on this level.
I think we can bet for value because we are ahead of his range. He'll still call a bet with worse here (draws, A4, A2, 33, 55, 66,) and given his stats his range looks reasonably wide. A lot of this is obviously 2 overcards and I don't like giving him a free card here when we are so far ahead of his range on this flop.
So we can get value from some of his worse hands and fold out overcards - this isn't instinctively a great thing, however, sicne a lot of turns are going to be awkard and hard to play oop, I like trying to win this pot here while we have the chance and when he can still call us with worse.
Say a Q rolls of on the turn. Now his 55 etc is likely to fold, where as we could have got 1 street of value on the flop had we not checked.
|
|
|
|
Erpel
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 605
|
|
I'm not really saying that cbetting the flop is bad - I just don't think the flop is a clear-cut cbet opportunity. And if we're generally cbetting monkeys who are looking for the occasional flop to check to bring our stats a bit more in line and make our bets more believable this could be one situation where we could do it.
The main thing I'm worried about is building a pot with a hand that gets easily outdrawn while we are OOP.
I don't feel I'm on particularly stable ground commenting on what flops are good to cbet though. Still processing the factors.
|
|
|
|
surviva316
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Confusing people with my liberal biblicisms
Posts: 1,625
|
|
this isn't a very poker-sophisticated comment, but i'd like to point out that raising exactly three times your bet would be a point of concern for me. people at this level usually only min-raise (either as the cheapest bluff possible or to avoid scaring you off the hand) or they push (either to assure that they bluff you off the hand or because they're too lazy to think of a good value bet when they have it made). the fact that he actually made a thinking man's raise makes me think that he made a hand that was worth his attention.
again not a very educated point or anything, but i tend to get worried when lower limit players don't play like lower limit players because that means they're either good so they're bets should be respected or they're trying to get creative in order to extract your chips
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BooG690
I just wanted to share singing vaginas.  |
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska
05-26-2012, 03:08 PM Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
Linear Mode
