HEPFAP's 'double free card play'

Reading through and intently studying hepfap this thanksgiving since I'll be away from the tables - I've got three different color highlighters, and two different color pens ;p

I came across a play I really think I love.

Double Free Card
Hero has KT from the button
three folds, LP limps, hero raises, blinds fold.

Flop AT2
LP 'checks to the raiser'
hero checks behind

Turn 7
LP bets (betting any two - maybe an ace)
hero raises
LP calls (he'd be retarded to threebet here.)

River 9
LP checks
hero checks behind.

I really think I love this play, particularly against opponents you know will stab at the turn (and bonus points if you know they'll fold.) but will often call down TPWK. You know you're probably behind, since you can put LP on an ace - but you're representing a MONSTER by checking behind on the flop and raising the turn. Who does that? People who flop trips and want action, and really, no one else. So now we've represented an insanely strong hand and A) might get a fold from TPWK or B) I might hit the river.

Look at it the same example again, lets say I have A:club: , 4:club: (which I believe is the example in the book)

Flop is J:heart: 4:spade: Q:club: and we use the same play (since we're very likely behind). Check behind on the flop and the turn comes 3:club: oo, i've picked up a backdoor flush draw. Villain bets out his J or Q, and we raise. Villain might fold, and if he doesnt, we have 8 outs to the flush (though the J or Q of clubs MIGHT give someone a boat - but thats unlikely), and three to the aces (which may or may not be good AJ or AQ would suck.) AND two outs to trip 4s. You really have a lot of outs!

I really see this as an excellent play.

I am tempted though, to contrast its value vs the standard free card play.
In the double, we raise preflop (1 bet) and check behind the flop. We raise the turn (2 bets) and check behind on the river. Total of 3 bets.

The standard free card play is, we raise preflop (1 bet) bet the flop (.5 bets) check the turn, and the river is debateable - often auto called (1 bet) against a tricky player but often folded against a non tricky player. This gives you the option of paying 1.5 bets total (folded river) or the extra bet to call the river (2.5 bets).

Note that both of these are cheaper than the 'double' free card play, however for that extra bet in the 'double', we have a LOT of folding equity because we've represented a HUGE hand. Add in that sometimes we will hit on the river and gain an extra bet, and add in that rare sometimes that we will win unimproved with second pair, I'm very up in the air as to which is more profitable.

But I don't think i have EVER seen an opponent play the double free card against me. What a great way to mix up your game!

Thoughts?
-Euph

In the first example I don't understand how this line is better than betting the flop. You said "You know you're probably behind, since you can put LP on an ace - but you're representing a MONSTER by checking behind on the flop and raising the turn." but I don't think the tens are probably behind, I think the pair of tens is most likely the best hand on the flop and I'd want to make my opponent pay to see the next card.

I'd like this play if I thought there was a decent chance my opponent would fold an Ace but:

- Most players don't make this fold.
- Very few players who open-limp in late position will make this fold.

I prefer betting which lets them make the mistake of calling which they are much more likely to do.

However, I like the second hand where it's more likely that Hero's hand is behind and the chance of villain folding a better hand is much higher.

Just some thoughts...

the second is the books example, the first is mine. Theyre obviously much better. :]

So can we say that you might consider the double free card when you've flopped third pair, rather than second? What are the qualifications for this being a viable play?

My options...
A) You have to think you're beat on the flop, otherwise betting out is obvious.
B) You think your opponent can/may fold to that turn raise.
C) You think your opponent is weak, but you are weak as well
D) You have outs to improve on the river.

This is pretty interesting, I have this book as well (guess i'd better go back and study!)

but yeah I think i'll use this in flops where
1. the flop hit me, to give me a good, but not great holding
2. the flop is relatively coordinated (flush/straight draws on board)
3. no more than 4 ppl in the hand on the flop

I think this works well for getting more value out of your mediocre holdings becuase sometimes you will win (top pair out kicked, draw out, etc...) and many players (especially at low limits) will fold to the BB on the turn.

I was thinking of using this play HU as an alternative to the standard continuation bet when isolating loose, tricky EP players or stealing from the blinds against an aggressive thinking opponent who will checkraise a wide range of hands (bluff or not) or calldown any paired board (assuming I whiff the flop in all cases).

Thoughts?

Ltrain - Its perfectly suited to HU play.

Ayodej: No, you really cant do this with 4 people in the flop, it really HAS to be HU. Giving free cards to people who probably need them is a bad idea.

My limit play is basically exclusive to 5 or 6-handed, so a lot of my play is heads up. I used to use your play a lot (the second one seems more standard to me with all those outs). I liked to use it as a chance to win an extra bet when I was planning on just calling down anyways (which often happens with seond pair GK in a low handed game) - against some tight players you will often get a fold on the turn. If the river hits and he called, more often than not I pick up another bet.

But I have stopped using it as much lately because I think Phyl is right - guys who are open-limping so much are also the guys who aren't going to let go of their TPWK. So in the end the only real benefit of the play is catching one of your 5 outs and getting another bet that way. But if that's your goal against this type of player you might as well just call the turn and fold a river miss and raise a river hit.

Ok, what if we change it to a 6max setting?

MP raises, BTN 3bets
flop
MP checks
BTN checks
turn
MP bets (could very well be stabbing)
BTN raises

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by euphoricism

Ok, what if we change it to a 6max setting?

MP raises, BTN 3bets
flop
MP checks
BTN checks
turn
MP bets (could very well be stabbing)
BTN raises

---

Reasonably if we are the button:
If MP has a monster, he 3bets and we fold:
If MP has a pair or draw, he calls and either donks river, we fold UI or checks river, we check through UI
If MP was stabbing, he likely folds

Assuming no improvement or say MP has a small or medium pair and we lose to a calldown, we lose 1SB less versus standard aggression continuation bet flop, bet/call turn, checkthrough river. The risk is that we give a free card on the turn to help MP beat us when MP may fold a C-bet on the flop.

Its hard to speak here without specific hands (which I will attempt to cull from todays session, maybe at my own demise), but "in general" what do we conclude? Is this a useful enough play to add to the repetoir?

When?

I just dont get it, Id rather put in a bet on the flop, bet the turn and check behind on the river and save 1/2 a bet. Plus you give them 2 opportunties to fold. Discuss.

As soon as you bet the flop the whole dynamics of this approach has just been shot to hell because then if your opp bets the turn it has turned into a donk bet rather than what might just be a "aha hero checked the flop, doesn't normally try to get ultra-tricky with made hands, so has nothing and I will steal this pot" bet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by euphoricism

Ok, what if we change it to a 6max setting?

MP raises, BTN 3bets
flop
MP checks
BTN checks
turn
MP bets (could very well be stabbing)
BTN raises

---

I've done this before at a casino, it's profitable for both players. If you know the opponent is trying to steal then its a good raise. You check behind the flop because you really dont want to get checkraise and you'd have to fold if your opponent tried to take control of the hand. However, by raising the turn you completely screwed up any read your opponent thought he had on you. Whether or not this answers your question I dunno.

E.g.:

I am button in 6 handed game with :Th: :Kh:

It is folded to me and I raise, the guy who defends his blind every single time calls.

Flop comes :Ac: :Ts: :2h:

Turn is :7c:

River is :5s:

There are two very conceivable ways this hand could be played.

1) Flop - check, check
Turn - bet, raise, ?.
River - check(if he called) - check.

I have spent 2BB and 2SBs (preflop)

2) Flop - check - bet, call
Turn - check - bet, call
River - check - check

I have spent 1 BB and 3 SBs (a savings of 1 SB).

In both cases you are unsure if your T is actually good or if he has the A (but in the first on with a call you are expecting to lose with a call). The reason I think the play has some value is that you are more liable to get a fold out of your opp in play 1 than in play 2 and those times that you are ahead or do catch a river you get paid off a little extra.

Except for metagame and balance, Id rather have the folding equity.

In the hand example, I am using Option 2. Villian as described will call down low pair or mid pair with a worse kicker, I want to get in my value. As I posted earlier, I can see using Option 1 to mix it up against a tricky aggressive player who will checkraise the flop/bet the turn if he senses I am only continuation betting. Otherwise, you lose too much by not getting the fold with one bet on the flop when villian misses the flop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ihategnomes

Except for metagame and balance, Id rather have the folding equity.

---

Where exactly do you exhibit the most folding equity?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by elipsesjeff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ihategnomes

Except for metagame and balance, Id rather have the folding equity.

---

Where exactly do you exhibit the most folding equity?

---

On the streets where your opponent HASN'T bet into you lol.

This is an especially bad play at 5/10 6 max IMO, FWIW.
Much better play at a full table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by elipsesjeff

Where exactly do you exhibit the most folding equity?

---

On the flop, checking the flop and raising the turn just baffles them and they call down anyways. At least they do @ 3/6-6max.

In that hand I prefer option 2 as well. Youre most likely ahead, and giving free cards (to maybe let the bastard hit is J or Q) is going to hurt you.

The way hepfap states it, is that the raise comes when you pick up (or already have) a good redraw. So if the flop was instead..


K:heart: T:heart:

Flop
A:spade: T:club: 2:heart:

Turn
7:heart:

River
(either hits or misses flush card)


The added flush possibility makes you want to get that extra 1/2 bet in on the turn. However, hepfap does not distinguish really "what to do" if that turn card does not give you a redraw. It doesn't state to just call, though I couldn't see a call being 'bad'.

What if the flop was two to your suit? Conventional wisdom would be to pound it...

If the flop had 2 hearts, then I would be going to the mattresses.

You guys are talking about more than the double free card play. Raising on the turn is more of a semi-bluff situation that you hope to get the guy to fold without hitting.