Clueless on turn... I may have butchered this hand

This was about 2 hands in so I had Zero reads. I tend to give players the benefit of the doubt when I know nothing about them.
I'll post some of my thougts about the hand after.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.02 BB (8 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

Hero (Button) ($3.24)
SB ($6.37)
BB ($2.86)
UTG ($2.40)
UTG+1 ($2.40)
MP1 ($3.30)
Villain (MP2) ($1.66)
CO ($1.20)

Preflop: Hero is Button with Qhttp://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...miles/club.gif, Ahttp://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...es/diamond.gif
2 folds, MP1 calls $0.02, Villain bets $0.06, 1 fold, Hero calls $0.06, 1 fold, BB calls $0.04, MP1 calls $0.04

Flop: ($0.25) Jhttp://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...miles/club.gif, Qhttp://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...iles/heart.gif, 3http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...iles/spade.gif (4 players)
BB checks, MP1 checks, Villain bets $0.20, Hero calls $0.20, 2 folds

Turn: ($0.65) Jhttp://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...iles/spade.gif (2 players)
Villain bets $0.32, Hero ?

I was very tempted to 3 bet this just to isolate him and see how strong he thought his hand was...should I have?

On the flop I had a nice reraise dialed on the screen but at the last second I just flatted him and thought I'd see if he checks turn. Should I have reraised on flop to see where I stood?

On turn, I was clueless. I had 2Pair w/ TK but he didn't seem to care about the Q so I wasn't sure what to do...
Tough to put a range on him but on turn I felt up against KJ+, AJ+, 99+.
If thats the case, using PokerStove, I'm about even on equity. perhaps I'm not generous enough with my range for him? I don't know if he would have raised in MP with KJ....not many do in micro's so I couldn't comfortably put him on a range.

Thoughts??

Hmmm...I may have 3bet this flop, especially with the button. You're ahead of most of the hands raising from MP and we'd have more control of the hand being the aggressor in position.

As for the flop, I may have raised here. You already know the reason why. Proceed with caution if/when he calls that raise.

As for the turn, I proceed with caution. You're getting 3:1 odds...take 'em and see what goes on...

I would of raised him back pre-flop to see where I was. Barring that I would of raised him post flop again to see where I was.
If he came back over the top I would fold here.
Right now as it is going since you know nothing about him, he could have JJ, QQ and leading you along, or just be crazy bluffing trying to get you out since your putting up no resistance.

Thoughts: How about we quit thinking about betting/raising to see: (1) Where we stand, (2) How strong he thinks he is, (3) How much he likes his hand.

Instead, lets start betting/raising for either value (worse calls often enough) or as a bluff (he folds often enough [semi-bluff]). We can even do it for protection some of the time, but value/bluff is the primary reason you will be betting/raising.

Example: Look at the flop. Lets just say we are ahead of his betting range. This automatically makes calling +EV. What if when we raise he only continues with better hands? Then raising for value is obviously incorrect, as we never have worse hands call. So a call becomes the correct play in most cases.

A raise would be silly, even though we are ahead of his betting range. Yes, he might fold often, and we win the pot. However, he would be folding a lot of hands that we beat. And when he calls, we are now behind.

I'm not saying that is the case here, just a thought. I think your logic, and others in this thread, is flawed. And it's more detrimental to your games than misplaying this one hand (if that's the case).

Oh, and my thoughts on the hand. Without reads, I likely call the turn, and fold to most river bets. Possibly value bet river if villain checks. Also, I think your range for villain is skewed. What is the likelihood of villain betting both the flop, and turn with 99/TT? Also remember, villains bluffing frequency here is likely not 0%. He could be 2-barreling with a hand like AK (overs + Gutshot) or KT (oesd), plus other hands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dtamburin

I would of raised him back pre-flop to see where I was. Barring that I would of raised him post flop again to see where I was.
If he came back over the top I would fold here.
Right now as it is going since you know nothing about him, he could have JJ, QQ and leading you along, or just be crazy bluffing trying to get you out since your putting up no resistance.

---

no. you don't raise a cbet w TPTK just to see where you stand. i think that's flawed logic. you call that seeing where you stand, i call that building the pot when you have no idea if you're beat. that doesn't even mention the fact that the only hand that's going to continue are hands that have you beat, so you're turning your hand into a bluff, which is completely unnecessary in position with TPTK.
i probably don't call the raise PF, and this hand is an excellent example of why. this is THE BEST CASE SCENARIO (barring of course an AQx flop but you can flop top two w just about any two cards) w AQo and you're still in a sticky situation and not comfortable playing w a big pot. as played i'm seriously considering raising the turn as a bluff because he's shown weakness/fear of the second jack by betting half the pot. in the end, i'm probably not making that play because many micro players still call raises even when they're scare betting (i.e. KK may be scared of that second jack, but if their half-pot bet gets raised they're still usually continuing). just a thought though.
all in all i definitely wouldn't say you "butchered the hand"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XxStacksxX

Thoughts: How about we quit thinking about betting/raising to see: (1) Where we stand, (2) How strong he thinks he is, (3) How much he likes his hand.

Instead, lets start betting/raising for either value (worse calls often enough) or as a bluff (he folds often enough [semi-bluff]). We can even do it for protection some of the time, but value/bluff is the primary reason you will be betting/raising.

Example: Look at the flop. Lets just say we are ahead of his betting range. This automatically makes calling +EV. What if when we raise he only continues with better hands? Then raising for value is obviously incorrect, as we never have worse hands call. So a call becomes the correct play in most cases.

A raise would be silly, even though we are ahead of his betting range. Yes, he might fold often, and we win the pot. However, he would be folding a lot of hands that we beat. And when he calls, we are now behind.

I'm not saying that is the case here, just a thought. I think your logic, and others in this thread, is flawed. And it's more detrimental to your games than misplaying this one hand (if that's the case).

Oh, and my thoughts on the hand. Without reads, I likely call the turn, and fold to most river bets. Possibly value bet river if villain checks. Also, I think your range for villain is skewed. What is the likelihood of villain betting both the flop, and turn with 99/TT? Also remember, villains bluffing frequency here is likely not 0%. He could be 2-barreling with a hand like AK (overs + Gutshot) or KT (oesd), plus other hands.

---

I don't see how a turn call and a river fold is the line here? I'm assuming he's going to keep betting on the river without a freezer dropping...why would I call the turn if he's going to be betting that river and I'm just going to fold?

As for the raise, I don't see him only folding worse hands and only proceeding with better ones. There are many hands he may proceed with. With our raise, I may just see a free card on the turn. Maybe my logic is skewed...but the raise was not ONLY for information. I've already been told (and now understand why) we shouldn't bet solely for information. Carroters explains that it is a bonus to gain information. I try to avoid situations like these...but as played, I think I would be a bit more aggressive.

Just a fwiw, I wasn't trying to be specific to just this situation with my above response. I was talking in general about theory. However, in this specific situation, I don't care much for a flop raise, and especially not a turn raise. So the turn is either between calling or folding. Without reads, I'm kinda indifferent as to which. But if I call, I'm likely not calling 3 barrels from an unknown villain on this board with this hand.

i wasn't actually arguing for a turn raise, i just think it's something i would consider (i.e. push the pot button, think about it and then just click call).

i'm not folding here, though. I think we can all agree that we still have at least a 25% chance of winning this hand and that's the percentage he's giving us here (and even if he bets 1/2 pot again on the river we still would only need to commit a combined .96 to an eventual 2.57 pot, so i still think we win enough to justify calling all three streets if that's the line he takes). i also don't think that a river bet is so automatic. the turn bet smells like a feeler to me, and he may not want to bet all three streets with his KQ or finally give up on his AK (yes i said AK, it often takes multiple streets for a micro player to shut down with their missed AK)

XxStacksxX Wrote:

Quote:

---

Also, I think your range for villain is skewed. What is the likelihood of villain betting both the flop, and turn with 99/TT? Also remember, villains bluffing frequency here is likely not 0%. He could be 2-barreling with a hand like AK (overs + Gutshot) or KT (oesd), plus other hands.

---

I agree that 99/TT is probably not likely but it is the micros...
I truly felt I was beat except that I had AK in my head (thought he might be 2 barreling with it). If his flop bet was a true cbet, then why lead out on turn? Usually players check if they're passive.
I had no reads so I gave him credit for a good hand (KJ, AJ, QQ+, not JJ b/c he'd prob check his quads or bet very small).
It was a real toss up hand for me....

So XxStacksxX: in laymans terms, why don't you like re-raising the flop? I agree with not re-raising the turn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vinland

So XxStacksxX: in laymans terms, why don't you like re-raising the flop? I agree with not re-raising the turn.

---

because you're turning your hand into a bluff because <50% of the hands that continue have you beat. you'd much rather play for value here

Vinland, you said yourself he's an unknown and you're giving him credit. So let's make a flop range, yes?

AK, AQ, KQ, AA, KK, QQ, JJ, maybe AJ/KJ. If we raise him here, what is he continuing with? TP hands, Over pairs, Sets, Straight draws, So QQ, JJ, AA, KK, AQ, KQ, maaaybe AK. Stove our equity against that range. We need even more equity than we usually do b/c there's a chance we'll be raised if we 3bet. When there isn't enough equity against their continuing range when we 3bet, we cannot.

Start all of your hand analysis with credible ranges for every street! [/i]