floating air vs air at 10nl?

SB villain is 14/14/25 (VP/PFR/3b) over 14 hands. BB is 17/15/4 over 60. this is my third dealt-in hand at the table. on the flop i can't see a typical 10nler seeming-reg raising anything for value. i feel like this is incredibly weighted toward flush draws and air. so the plan is to float most non-heart turns, and to either bet small on the river to fold out his air, or maybe jam over a river lead if he decides to fire 3. upon review i'm somewhat confident this is FPS but i felt pretty confident in my read/plan at the time. thoughts?

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (6 handed) - PokerStars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com
saw flop
SB ($18.44)
BB ($10.39)
UTG ($5)
MP ($10.45)
CO ($10.15)
Hero (Button) ($18.17)
Preflop: Hero is Button with 3:spade:, 8:spade:
3 folds, Hero bets $0.20, SB calls $0.15, 1 fold
Flop: ($0.50) 6:heart:, 6:spade:, 9:heart: (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $0.25, SB raises to $1.10, Hero calls $0.85
Turn: ($2.70) 2:diamond: (2 players)
SB bets $2, Hero calls $2
River: ($6.70) 2:club: (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $3.40

Your hand has really fucking shitty equity so fold flop unless you can credibly raise spade and 7 turns and expect him to give up a fucking tonne on top of cfing a tonne on the turn anyway. If you expect him to continue betting(I expect he will) then floating flop is just really lighting money on fire with almost no chance of ever binking a hand yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Icanhastreebet

Your hand has really fucking shitty equity so fold flop unless you can credibly raise spade and 7 turns and expect him to give up a fucking tonne on top of cfing a tonne on the turn anyway. If you expect him to continue betting(I expect he will) then floating flop is just really lighting money on fire with almost no chance of ever binking a hand yourself.

---

i suspected something like this would be the case. i was aware that my hand had effectively 0% pot equity. however i felt his range was so un-balanced and weak that this wouldn't matter. like you, i also expected him to keep firing at a really high frequency, which is why i decided on the flop that i had to be willing to float at least one more street and maybe jam over a third barrel for calling flop to have any chance of being > just folding vs the C/R

edit: i also felt, at the time, like his flop and turn sizing weighted his range more towards bluffs because people who seem remotely like regs don't just bomb the shit out of this board with their full houses or quads. most players these days seem to have cottoned on to the trend of sizing bets smaller on drier boards. though that logic could be out?

edit #2: and i never expect people at these stakes to be C/Ring some de-polarised range for "thin" value. i'd be incredibly surprised to see TT/JJ/T9s/98s type of hands here.

Off-topic: Why are you playing so low?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EasyPoker

Off-topic: Why are you playing so low?

---

didn't play a hand for 4-5 months until last saturday due to work and other things in life which don't involve a computer. so being at probably the worst i have been in the last 2 years, i decided i'd just start near the bottom and grind my way up from scratch again.

I'd fold this pre without a second thought, not just because it's 83s, but because it's first button against this villain's bb and I don't want a laggy image on the button straight away. So I'd fold this pre then if the exact same happens next orbit on the bu then I'd probably raise.

Continuing with this hand after the c/r is pretty alien to me, I can cold call bluff sometimes but I prefer to have some bink equity, like Ax with runner flush draw or something. That's not to say I hate this play, it's just a weapon I don't have in my arsenal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

I don't want a laggy image on the button straight away.

---

wat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d0zer

wat

---

Well, I'm quite happy to be told my logic is flawed, but if villain sees me fold the button when it's folded round to me, then next time I raise the button, I have more fold equity.

What has an 'h' in it.

lol wat it doesn't really matter how LAggy you are viewed, 83s is going to be a profitable open anyway unless BB is crazy etc. There's a reason nanonoko opens 100% OTB unless he has a reason not to and it's not cause "he doesn't want to appear LAggy"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Icanhastreebet

lol wat it doesn't really matter how LAggy you are viewed, 83s is going to be a profitable open anyway unless BB is crazy etc. There's a reason nanonoko opens 100% OTB unless he has a reason not to and it's not cause "he doesn't want to appear LAggy"

---

Thanks for more than "wat"

No thanks for pointing out an issue with your thought process that led you to this game-improving revelation? Last time I help you with anything you f'n ingrate :x

Yeah you should be thanking d0zer you ungrateful splonker!

can't expect common courtesy from a filthy brummie I suppose...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

I'd fold this pre without a second thought, not just because it's 83s, but because it's first button against this villain's bb and I don't want a laggy image on the button straight away.

---

i take the inverse approach to this. as far as i'm concerned, these guys dont' yet have a clue that i'm going to be opening 100% of buttons vs them (and i basically am, because i know it's profitable). so i treat each street in the very early stages of my history with players as being played basically in a vacuum and just seek to maximise my EV with my whole range, ignoring what they could (probably won't) do to exploit me if they knew what i was up to.

as for postflop, i doubt you're losing much money by not having the "double float with intentions of jamming air over a river bet" in your arsenal at the microstakes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d0zer

No thanks for pointing out an issue with your thought process that led you to this game-improving revelation? Last time I help you with anything you f'n ingrate :x

---

Haha ok sure, thanks for the wat, it really helped me understand where my logic was flawed.

Dozer, you do very often make comments that I find incredibly enlightening. I might not have a high opinion of you but I do respect your game a great deal, along with ican and bikes, which is why I wish you'd slap me down with a little more than "wat". I don't care how much of a dick you guys think I am, most people here are dicks so I'm in good company. I'm slowly getting better at poker, so I'll say honestly to you, ican, bikes and everyone else here who posts quality advice that helps me and others understand poker better... thanks a bunch. But please don't expect honest thanks when you're just being an arse to me, which is pretty often.

Also, I find your filthy brummie comment racist and hurtful. I prefer dirty brummie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rpm

as for postflop, i doubt you're losing much money by not having the "double float with intentions of jamming air over a river bet" in your arsenal at the microstakes.

---

At micros, sure, but do you think this is necessary at higher levels? Do I need to be making these kind of moves at, say 50nl? Because if that's the case, then I'd probably want to bring it into my game at lower stakes so I'm comfortable. I mean, I do get the raising any two thing, and I accept I'm passing off on +ev spots so I don't look too laggy, which I realise is retarded ongbonga logic, but is this kind of line really sound against regs at higher stakes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

At micros, sure, but do you think this is necessary at higher levels? Do I need to be making these kind of moves at, say 50nl? Because if that's the case, then I'd probably want to bring it into my game at lower stakes so I'm comfortable. I mean, I do get the raising any two thing, and I accept I'm passing off on +ev spots so I don't look too laggy, which I realise is retarded ongbonga logic, but is this kind of line really sound against regs at higher stakes?

---

i wouldn't expect a very high % of the regs i played against at 50nl (the highest stake i've played with any real regularity) to be making plays like this against me, no. though, that said, inability to come up with/assess the EV of nonstandard lines and strategies is one of the main reasons ok regs tend to get to a certain point and stagnate imo (myself very definitely included). tbh there's a good chance this hand is probably just FPS and spewy. although villain did fold his hand on the river within 0.0005436 of a second,

looking back over your post, regarding the first point, it doesn't matter what stakes you play. when you come up with a play/line which, as best you can tell, has the highest EV then you should do that imo. in this case, any strategy which i think is +EV is better than folding, which is always 0EV. though upon my own review and reading others' comments, my plan to float this guy over multiple streets could well have been -EV. but i tried to play the hand in most +EV way i could and i got the chance to play a marginal spot i never otherwise would have, and so maybe (hopefully) i got slightly better at poker in the process. or something.

Thanks rpm, enlightening. I think my main problem is that my game is pretty basic, suitable for a half decent profit at 10nl but not good enough to show a winrate at 25nl and beyond. I understand the basic concepts pretty well, like pot odds, implied odds etc, but the advanced lines and strategies kinda go over my head, so I appreciate your comments. I think I need to have a solid plan in place before I put money into the pot, rather than a vague plan, such as trying to steal and see what happens. Truth be told I think this is a key difference between a micro grinder like myself and those who've moved onwards and upwards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

I think I need to have a solid plan in place before I put money into the pot

---

indeed. you and me alike.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rpm

i can't see a typical 10nler seeming-reg raising anything for value.

---

The whole logic behind the line you took boils down to this statement. You are basically saying they would almost always either lead out or check-call.

Could you try to explain why you are so sure of it?

in my experience (barring certain dynamics) people don't raise nut hands versus weak ranges heads up on dry boards. that and there are just so few possible hand combinations in his range which connect with this board.