Should I have 3 bet this? 10+1

If he's raising pretty wide from the button then I'm raising it up, if it's the first time he's raised in years then I like limping and playing it softer as were out of position, but in the heat of the moment I probably raise it whatever.

if he steals a lot then 3bet. As played, why did you bet turn? What's your action on river if you get called on turn?

Bet Fold on the river I think. I bet the turn because the pot had been delcared an orphan, and I thought I could pick it up.

He had been pretty quiet up to this point, but he had raised like 3 hands in a row, just gotten amazingly active...

On a side note, this is my first 10+1 win.

I like ur preflop call, i like ur turn bet. Button raises with nothing, bb calls for value. I might 3bet yeah.. def picking up the pot on the turn. I wouldnt raise river if a heart/9/t/a came

Originally Posted by ZwiFT

def picking up the pot on the turn.

why?

Think carefully about the point Kmind is making here. Think about why you're betting, and possible outcomes. Once you've got your head around that, think about what hands this move makes more sense with.

I know what you guys are thinking here, that 3 of diamonds isnt a good enough scarecard to be betting into 2 people to scare them off. Well, think about it. Betting in to two people represents a good hand, in this case at 10+1 re-steal isnt such a big problem.

Button decides to check his hand instead of cbet. I smell Ax or low pocket pair. Thats why i would rather bet on 3d than any ace on turn.
BB clearly has any2.

Only thing he could be conserned about is a call. But who will call him? low PP? maybe, but a draw could call here.. Ofcourse we dont have position and would have to spill out more chips on the river if they didnt play a draw. again, i wouldnt bet a/h/9/q/. maybe j )))))))))))))))))

No, you're thinking about it all wrong. I'll attempt to steal Kminds thunder here, and this way he can correct me if I'm wrong.

Flop is an easy c/f type situation. We missed our set and we have two overcards on the board. When its checked around though, we now have reason to believe we have the best hand. So why are we betting? We only get value if called by a worse hand. Other than perhaps a FD or some kind of straight draw, its VERY unlikely we're getting called by a worse hand. Its also fairly unlikely we're getting folds from better hands. We're never folding a K, and maybe some weak Js, but probably not. Remember, at this point we believe we have the best hand.

If we get all folds, then we would have won at showdown anyway. We created no extra value. If we get called, we've now put more money into a pot and are likely behind at this point. All we're doing is 'stealing' a pot, that we believe we're winning legitimately. We're turning a good hand into a bluff.

Now, lets say we check and someone bets. What hand do you put him on? Most Ks and even Js would take a stab at the flop 'to find where they are'. Mostly you're up against bluffs. Guess what, you have a great bluff catching hand . We create more potential for value by checking, than we do by betting.

Once you've got your head around that, think about what hands this move makes more sense with.

Ok, so if it doesnt make sense to bet our good hands, what does it make sense to bet? You got it, our bad hands. We bet here to 'steal' the pot. Some kind of semi-bluff is best, 2 hearts or something like QT is great to bet turn with, but even hands like 89s, 33, stuff like that which were marginal PF calls. Now we do want to fold out better hands. Our value comes from taking down the pot uncontested, rather than risking showdown. It also leaves us with an easy decision if we raised, or even called.

bj I don't think you're 'wrong' but you need to consider giving a free card to two opps somewhere in the analysis, especially since you're hoping to pick off a bluff.

Agreed, it does have to come into consideration, but I'd prefer to take that risk and evaluate river if a scare card comes (probably b/f since we're OOP).

I always have mixed emotions when you reply drmcboy. On one hand I cringe because you're probably pointing out an error I've made, but on the other I figure I'm about to learn something to help my game.

Heres a hand from a tourney I posted recently that illustrates my point:


PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t20 (9 handed) Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver Cards)

BB (t2270)
UTG (t1940)
Hero (t1470)
MP1 (t1400)
MP2 (t1460)
MP3 (t1280)
CO (t1460)
Button (t600)
SB (t1620)

Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with , .
1 fold, Hero raises to t60, MP1 calls t60, 2 folds, CO calls t60, Button calls t60, 2 folds.

Flop: (t270) , , (4 players)
Hero checks, MP1 checks, CO checks, Button checks.

Turn: (t270) (4 players)
Hero checks, MP1 bets t160, CO folds, Button folds, Hero calls t160.

River: (t590) (2 players)
Hero checks, MP1 bets t320, Hero calls t320.

Final Pot: t1230

Results:
Hero has Ts Td (two pair, tens and twos).
MP1 has Jh Ah (one pair, twos).
Outcome: Hero wins t1230.


My analysis of the hand:

I really couldnt put him on a hand that beats me here. Checking the flop with Qx doesnt make sense, since I'm the PF aggressor and I've already checked, theres no good reason to not bet it. It felt a lot more like a steal to me. FD makes sense, although to be honest at the time that didnt occur to me, I expected pure bluff. Once I called the turn I couldnt see a reason to fold river.

Now as first to act, if I'd bet turn then a few things could have happenned:

MP1 folds - I get no value.
MP1 calls - I have no idea if he's drawing or has a Q with poor kicker. I dunno what to do on the river if draw doesnt hit.
MP1 semi-bluff raises - Wtf do I do now?

By checking I got value out of his bluffs that wasnt there to be had. The BEST possible outcome of betting turn would have been one street of value if he calls my turn bet, AND he either checks behind if I check river, or he folds if I bet.

If we get all folds, then we would have won at showdown anyway.
We created no extra value.

You're ignoring the value you give up to hands (Ax, Qx, and lower PPs) that will never put a dime into the pot unless they run us down on the river and would fold here - this is to say, the current pot has value. in ToP Sklansky calls this a 'mathematical catastrophe' where you turn a pot you would have won into a pot you lost. You cannot ignore this value. If some of these hands call instead, they are probably making a bad call and we gain value there too.

Further, consider that we set the price here. Leading 125 may be a lot better than calling 250.

We create more potential for value by checking, than we do by betting.

Again, I'm not saying I think betting turn is good/bad, I'm just concerned your equation only has the variables that help your side. If you don't want to put numbers around your statements you shouldn't be nearly so definite. What are the chances we get drawn out on? Chance we get raised off the best hand? Bluffing frequency of opps?

You're ignoring the value you give up to hands (Ax, Qx, and lower PPs) that will never put a dime into the pot unless they run us down on the river and would fold here - this is to say, the current pot has value. in ToP Sklansky calls this a 'mathematical catastrophe' where you turn a pot you would have won into a pot you lost. You cannot ignore this value. If some of these hands call instead, they are probably making a bad call and we gain value there too.

I get what you're saying, but I've been thinking lately that one leak (at least I think it is) common to a lot of STTers is trying to win small pots immediately rather than trying to extract value with strong hands. This is a great example. OP wants everyone to fold (at least thats how I interpreted it), in order to take down the pot, rather than thinking about ways he could make more chips with a strong hand. Thats something that he should at least be considering when deciding what action to take, but a lot of STTers dont.

You are right though, I did only focus on the positives of my line, where there are definite negatives. I tend to be verbose enough anyway, but I'll try to do better in the future .

If you don't want to put numbers around your statements you shouldn't be nearly so definite.

Dunno what to say to that. I'll start sticking "I think" or "I believe" at the start of more sentences. I'm really not even that sure how to come up with the numbers for that kind of thing (other than obvious draws, but even then we dont know if anyone is actually drawing or not). If you've got some pointers in how to analyze it better with numbers I'd appreciate it .

bjsaust

I read your analysis on why check-calling is better then betting the turn here and I do not agree with you for the following reasons:

1. Even if we have the best hand there are too many cards that ca hit our opponents - FD, 2 str8 draws, 2 outers for set etc
2. It is possible that you get better hands to fold - especially Jx
3. It may be possible to get action from weaker two pairs here
4. If you check- call the turn what is your action on the river - check/call again ?

BJ, you do know, you're just either not wanting to or not thinking clearly. This isn't ICM, it's just hand ranges. The complexity level in a way is my point, you're dramatically over simplifying this. A lot of this is guesswork, your posts implied the answer was clear and not debatable

No, you're thinking about it all wrong.

I can answer OP in the same way you did:

People hardly ever bluff three way pots on the turn or river. If they have unpaird cards they will probably check behind on the river if they make a pair worse than TT. If they did not bet a draw on the flop, they will probably want a free river as well. They would have bet a K or J on the flop. Therefore, we are ahead, we won't make much bluff catching, so we bet to charge the draws.


I'll try and get back to this post later but it will just be to post more questions, you can decide whether you want to answer them.

On the hand you posted, the river check is good/standard, the rest is bleh (You didn't think of a draw?!?!). It's also barely related to this hand if at all. The boards, postions, pre flop action are different.

wow.. pretty high-brow analysis/hijacking of my thread. Here was my thought process:

"Ragnar4 bet because Ragnar4 wants monies in his stack"

What I'm not certain of is: Is Kmind pointing out that the bet is a poor play? I will admidt that I had no plan for the river if my opponent called. It would have depended on the river card and whatever I felt about the call the guy calling me.

Should I have a plan for the river on a steal play?

What I'm not certain of is: Is Kmind pointing out that the bet is a poor play?

Let me answer that before I answer TLR and drmcboy. No, I dont think he was. What he was trying to do was to get you to think about what your reasons were for betting, or did you just automatically bet without thinking it through.

Originally Posted by TLR

bjsaust

I read your analysis on why check-calling is better then betting the turn here and I do not agree with you for the following reasons:

1. Even if we have the best hand there are too many cards that ca hit our opponents - FD, 2 str8 draws, 2 outers for set etc
2. It is possible that you get better hands to fold - especially Jx
3. It may be possible to get action from weaker two pairs here
4. If you check- call the turn what is your action on the river - check/call again ?

Ok. I think 1 is the biggest point I ignored. One of my leaks a few weeks ago was that I never thought about how to get maximum value from hands, so maybe I've gone too far the other way and focusing purely on that rather than weighing up negatives as well.

4. Would depend on what river brought. I may decide to b/f, or I may check and if he does bet evaluate the size of the bet.

Originally Posted by drmcboy

BJ, you do know, you're just either not wanting to or not thinking clearly. This isn't ICM, it's just hand ranges.

Yeah, but I'm not sure how we evaluate hand ranges without any action. What are the odds that in a 3-way pot someone flopped a FD on a two tone board? What are the chances of a straight draw? Buttons check on the flop suggests he missed, perhaps just positional steal attempt PF? It could also mean he has a draw and is happy to draw for free. I'd expect if he hit either K or J he'd bet. BB could have almost anything, without reads its not terrible to assume he's calling very loosely there at these stakes.

Originally Posted by drmcboy

The complexity level in a way is my point, you're dramatically over simplifying this. A lot of this is guesswork, your posts implied the answer was clear and not debatable

No, you're thinking about it all wrong.

It probably did sound that way, just the way it came out. That response was to ZwiFTs comment "I know what you guys are thinking here, that 3 of diamonds isnt a good enough scarecard to be betting into 2 people to scare them off.", which to my mind a) assumes we're bluffing, and b) would normally bluff a scare card here. To my mind that ignores the showdown potential of our hand, which was the point I tried to address.

Originally Posted by drmcboy

I can answer OP in the same way you did:

People hardly ever bluff three way pots on the turn or river. If they have unpaird cards they will probably check behind on the river if they make a pair worse than TT. If they did not bet a draw on the flop, they will probably want a free river as well. They would have bet a K or J on the flop. Therefore, we are ahead, we won't make much bluff catching, so we bet to charge the draws.

I'm fine with this thinking, and hidden down amongst my more absolute statements I was trying to make the point that hero should think through and have a plan here. A bet (or check) should be based on some analysis of whats the best play, rather than just "everyone checked flop so I bet to steal an orphaned pot". Not that that is necessarily the wrong play, but it should be considered on its merits v's other options.

Originally Posted by drmcboy

I'll try and get back to this post later but it will just be to post more questions, you can decide whether you want to answer them.

I hope you do, I almost always learn something, or at least get to try to stretch my mind a bit when you ask these questions, its just sometimes my mind literally spins and I'm not sure how to respond.

Originally Posted by drmcboy

BJ, you do know, you're just either not wanting to or not thinking clearly.

I assume this was in reponse to my post:

Originally Posted by bjsaust

If you don't want to put numbers around your statements you shouldn't be nearly so definite.

Dunno what to say to that.

I literally sat there for 5 minutes and wasnt sure if you meant I should only reply if I put a lot of numbers in, or if you're saying I should preface all my statements with statements like "I assume", "I think", "Perhaps", etc.

sorry i left this thread hanging. Good analysis though, very interesting, only glanced through it though. I'll go ahead and say what I was trying to say. This is without any other responses so we may have gone over this but I will just state what I was saying.

First, to OP - i just didn't want you betting the turn hoping to pick it up by turning your hand into a bluff. If a non draw completing rivers come you have to continue with your hand, in which i'd most likely c/c a smallish bet because i don't think we can get a J to fold or any value from some weird smaller PP.

my comment to zwift was just seeing exactly why he was betting turn because it seems people just like to try and pick up pots but we have showdown value and i think we can get more value out on rivers in some situations. However, by checking we give infinite odds which sucks cause there can be a lot of scary rivers with this kind of board.

i don't know, i'm kind of tired, doing a bunch of school shit so i probably messed up somewhere in there. I won't fault anyone arguing me.

why are you playing $10 sng's with your roll?

Originally Posted by uscheese

why are you playing $10 sng's with your roll?

Umm 20+ish Buy Ins feels like enough, and I'm not uncomfortable playing at this level?