A common awkward spot

100BB effective, low (but not micro) stakes

Standard ABC leaky TAG reg opens to 4BB UTG+1
folded round to me and I call on the button with

the blinds fold

Flop comes :Ah::Kh:


TAG bets the standard amount


What's my play here and why?

Raise - because he doesn't necessarily have anything on this board and if he has a lower pair he will be very scared of this board.

Raise - because if he has a piece, you probably have 12 outs to win! So we don't mind getting 3-bet here because we have good equity to get it all-in on this flop even if he has a strong A or two pair/set.

Raise - because you're in position and if he calls OOP and checks the turn you can check through if you miss

Good timing: http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...oker-63905.htm

You're barely a dog to AK and only a 2:1 dog to AA.

i would probably just call

its pretty difficult to represent much other than a flush draw by raising the flop, and anything you make fold is going to be c/f the turn anyway. In my general overall metagame, im not normally going to be raising this flop, so i choose to just call with any hand i really like, since that would be consistent with the rest of my range.

This spot is v similar to isf's 'cool raise size' post. IMO this is just a poor flop texture for raising a wide range of hands, unless of course theres a crazy metagame with villain where you are raising a ton of flops like this.

Raise because he's not shoving you tards.

So we raise, he calls and we end up on blank turns with pot or so behind.. he checks to us.

Is it still +EV to shove considering that we haven't got too much FE because he's not very good and is getting 3:1?

Originally Posted by Renton

its pretty difficult to represent much other than a flush draw by raising the flop, and anything you make fold is going to be c/f the turn anyway. In my general overall metagame, im not normally going to be raising this flop, so i choose to just call with any hand i really like, since that would be consistent with the rest of my range.

I don't like this. Who cares what you're representing to a tagfish? They don't think about your hand, they think about their hand vs aggression. You want the hand that's going to c/f on the turn to fold on the flop before he improves, however unlikely, on the turn. You want to build a bigger pot should you hit. You want to maintain an aggressive image so you get paid off with your monsters. You don't want to be double barrelled off your hand. And if he pushes you have good odds, it's fun to tilt people when you hit, and gamb00ling is fun.

raise your monster

Originally Posted by gabe

raise your monster

VVVVVVV monster, ldo

Originally Posted by Renton

i would probably just call

its pretty difficult to represent much other than a flush draw by raising the flop, and anything you make fold is going to be c/f the turn anyway. In my general overall metagame, im not normally going to be raising this flop, so i choose to just call with any hand i really like, since that would be consistent with the rest of my range.

This spot is v similar to isf's 'cool raise size' post. IMO this is just a poor flop texture for raising a wide range of hands, unless of course theres a crazy metagame with villain where you are raising a ton of flops like this.

I think I would agree with most of this if we had 56 suited instead of 45 suited. I really think the fact that we have an insider changes this hand a TON.

Would you flat call QJ hearts on this board too? I think both of those hands should play exactly the same. I doubt many ppl would play QJ hearts slowly on this board.

im not at all denying that our hand is very strong, and taht raising is a profitable play.

I'm just saying it seems like we'll make more money in the long run by calling here.

Originally Posted by Galapogos

Originally Posted by Renton

its pretty difficult to represent much other than a flush draw by raising the flop, and anything you make fold is going to be c/f the turn anyway. In my general overall metagame, im not normally going to be raising this flop, so i choose to just call with any hand i really like, since that would be consistent with the rest of my range.

I don't like this. Who cares what you're representing to a tagfish? They don't think about your hand, they think about their hand vs aggression. You want the hand that's going to c/f on the turn to fold on the flop before he improves, however unlikely, on the turn. You want to build a bigger pot should you hit. You want to maintain an aggressive image so you get paid off with your monsters. You don't want to be double barrelled off your hand. And if he pushes you have good odds, it's fun to tilt people when you hit, and gamb00ling is fun.

A. You should always care about what you are representing. Tagfish read hands, albeit poorly.

B. Who cares if he improves on the turn. In fact, we'd probably like that, since we have a hand with a lot of implied odds.

C. Sure we want to maintain an aggressive image, but on this flop texture its incredibly difficult to maintain a balanced and wide raising range. While often times its correct to haphazardly blast money at the pot in hopes of getting a fold, imo this time its not.

D. We have a huge hand, unless he double barrel shoves for like 4x the pot, we aren't getting bet off this on the turn.

E. If he pushes we have good odds, but we aren't ecstatic about it, and we didn't induce a mistake. All we did was take a hand with awesome implied odds and turn it into a coinflip for stacks.

by the way, all advocates of raise, tell me what your raising range is, and then tell me why that range is tough for villain to play against.

umm renton wins guys. call is good

Originally Posted by griffey24

Raise - because he doesn't necessarily have anything on this board and if he has a lower pair he will be very scared of this board.

Raise - because if he has a piece, you probably have 12 outs to win! So we don't mind getting 3-bet here because we have good equity to get it all-in on this flop even if he has a strong A or two pair/set.

Raise - because you're in position and if he calls OOP and checks the turn you can check through if you miss

I think this pretty much sums it up. I don't really think its close either.

raise.

a+ analysis guys.

1. HTERE IS A POT
2. IT CONTAINS MONIES
3. FLOP HAS CARDS
4. WE HAVE CARDZ, THEY ARE KINDA LIKE THOSE ONES
5. WE HAVE MONIES
6. ???????????
7. RAISE (NTO CLOSE IMO)!

Renton, you're worried about balanced hand ranges against a guy that's just not that good. Against more competent players I agree that a call is better. IMO a tagfish is not going to read well enough to call here. I know when I was a shitty(er) tag I would fold this without AK and not consider what he was actually representing.

The only metagame that applies to this guy is "Hey look, he raised with a draw! He crazy! Make a note: Do not fold to this maniac." He's not going to look at how balanced your range is in certain situations.

galapogos, even if you completely remove the range balancing factors from the equation, calling is still the better play for VALUE.

As ive mentioned, if he has air or like 77, he's probably going to c/f the turn anyway, so its the same result, except we got to see if the turn was a 7h (!!!) and we made a cheaper stab at the pot.

Also a huge reason why this is a call instead of a raise imo is that we have a gutshot. 2's are huge implied odds cards for us. By keeping him around (as opposed to blasting him out with a flop raise), we get a chance to reap the benefits of the implied odds provided by the 2's, and at least one heart for us will often result in gin for our opponent.

Fair enough.

I call

Raise

1. If I am calling HU opp with 54s and I hit, I'm raising.
2. If villain is that ABC I assume he doesn't like flop aggresion, so I am also raising any flop with 2 flush cards whether I have them or not.
3. If he is good enough to take the fishies $$ before me or is the only other capable player at my table, I need him to think twice before raising when I have position on him. Make him play nitty or leave.
4. This is not a flop I would normally float.

Originally Posted by Renton

by the way, all advocates of raise, tell me what your raising range is, and then tell me why that range is tough for villain to play against.

Originally Posted by Renton

by the way, all advocates of call, tell me what your calling range is, and then tell me why that range is tough for villain to play against.

Ax Kx AK AA KK 33 22-QQ flush draws gutshots and air.

oh yeah, and that range is tough to play against because its wide and balanced, and im capable of bluff/semibluff raising the turn with parts of the range, value raising, continuing to calldown with marginal hands, continuing to slowplay big hands, and turning decent hands into bluffs.

Originally Posted by Renton

Ax Kx AK AA KK 33 22-QQ flush draws gutshots and air.

How of these hands are you really calling with that you aren't 3betting preflop? I don't think you are regularly calling Ax or Kx, unless maybe when their suited, but again why call pre when 3betting those are probably better? Would you really call your set with the flush draw out there?

I just really don't see anything in our preflop cold calling range, that would float this flop with any regularity.

Also I think villain makes very very few mistakes with his range after this flop.

Originally Posted by Jager

Originally Posted by Renton

Ax Kx AK AA KK 33 22-QQ flush draws gutshots and air.

How of these hands are you really calling with that you aren't 3betting preflop? I don't think you are regularly calling Ax or Kx, unless maybe when their suited, but again why call pre when 3betting those are probably better? Would you really call your set with the flush draw out there?

I just really don't see anything in our preflop cold calling range, that would float this flop with any regularity.

in position i don't auto3bet AK AQ QQ+ first of all. I think its pretty terrible not to be capable of having them in a coldcall scenario, especially vs an abc tag. In fact AQ/AJ/KQ and the like are probably better coldcall candidates preflop.

As far a slowplaying a set here, i'd slowplay AA/AK mostly because ive got the deck beat up, and i'd then consequently slowplay KK/33 often because i don't want my raising range to consist of exactly KK/33/flush draw.

Thats all in a theoretical universe. In reality, i'd often raise this flop with KK/33, because tags don't believe you when you can only have one hand. In the real world unless you have tons of history with the player, you don't really need a balanced range here, because you have the nuts and if he has a decent hand he's not gonna believe you.

That all said, slowplaying 33 here isn't that bad because the flush draw isn't that big of a part of his range anyway, and if it induces continued action from weak hands or air, then that counteracts the free card disadvantage.

As far as hands that would float, how about any pocket pair, JT QJ 54, or even a backdoor flush draw?

The biggest issue I have with calling is that flush draws is obvious and ours is only 5 high.

calling is no more of an obvious sign of a fd than raising is. Also, the fact that its a baby flush draw makes it less of a raise, since if villain has QhJh or JhTh thats a disaster for us.

It's as much of a disaster if we call and he has any higher flush draw. We're not getting away if we hit a lower flush and he's not check/folding the turn.

Originally Posted by Irisheyes

The biggest issue I have with calling is that flush draws is obvious and ours is only 5 high.

True.

What also bothers me a bit is that both the A and K are hearts, which makes that villain can't have one. That also means we won't get value out of them if the turn is a heart. Maybe from AQh and AJh.

I still think raising flop isn't better, because not a lot of villains range will b/f the flop, imo.
Our hand is way too good to fold though, so that leaves calling for me. Especially with that hidden gutshot.

Im with renton. AA/KK/AK are all going to come over us again if we raise and lower PPs are probably giving up on the turn anyway. Why turn a good flop into a coinflip (or worse).

Im with renton. AA/KK/AK are all going to come over us again

Dude wtf guys, opp is never raising over our raise unless he's a weirdo or severely out leveling us. There's clearly FE so raise, make it like a little over min so he thinks you can be doing it with air too (and so if he does threebet you can fourbet all in with FE and show!). We have 40% equity in this pot versus any calling range really, it'd be a shame to not to raise it, i mean hell its close to 50%!!!

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Dude wtf guys, opp is never raising over our raise unless he's a weirdo or severely out leveling us.

I don't get why you're saying that. My experience of abc straightforward tags is that when they hit a good hand on a dangerous board and get action they stick it in. This isn't tricky 400NL this is "low stakes".

Another point is that we only have fold equity against hands like QQ-, and that doesn't go down on the turn unless he hits another Q.

We have 40% equity in this pot versus any calling range really, it'd be a shame to not to raise it, i mean hell its close to 50%!!!

wtf? "close to" 50% but less than 50% doesnt make us money. The only reason we are raising is for FE and I don't see how that goes down on the turn. It also looks like the hands he is folding are check/folding the turn and no hands are check/raising the turn so how is it not safer to take it on the turn. We win the same and lose less. We also sometimes spike a flush/straight when he has AA/KK/AK and would have blown us off it (or made us call with a coinflip/ near dog).

so when we try to take it down on the turn aren't we just giving him a free card? Hands he c/f the turn with would fold the flop anyway and we don't get any more money in the pot...

I am not a fan of minraises but isn't this a good spot for one here? He might call with a hand that he would fold to a big turn bet/shove and we build the pot at least a little.

Originally Posted by Pelion

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Dude wtf guys, opp is never raising over our raise unless he's a weirdo or severely out leveling us.

I don't get why you're saying that. My experience of abc straightforward tags is that when they hit a good hand on a dangerous board and get action they stick it in. This isn't tricky 400NL this is "low stakes".

Another point is that we only have fold equity against hands like QQ-, and that doesn't go down on the turn unless he hits another Q.

We have 40% equity in this pot versus any calling range really, it'd be a shame to not to raise it, i mean hell its close to 50%!!!

wtf? "close to" 50% but less than 50% doesnt make us money. The only reason we are raising is for FE and I don't see how that goes down on the turn. It also looks like the hands he is folding are check/folding the turn and no hands are check/raising the turn so how is it not safer to take it on the turn. We win the same and lose less. We also sometimes spike a flush/straight when he has AA/KK/AK and would have blown us off it (or made us call with a coinflip/ near dog).

If opp has AQ or less i normally see someone call because they don't want to turn their hand into a bluff and are pussies. If they have 33, AK, AA, KK they will never shove over. I'm not talking about tricky 400nl regs, if it was certain tricky 400nl regs you could make a case for not raising, but these are the pussy tight passive regs that you guys all face and if you don't punish them for allowing you to take easy equity edges your lighting money on fire. BTW I raise a gut shot or bottom pair here also, if you find a board where opp is going to play his good hands passively, like this one, use your draw and FE to your advantage.

If he calls the flop I check the turn. Why wouldn't we? We bought a fucking free card anyways, we actually got to see the river for less than if we called two barrels.

Who cares about the small amount of the time he threebets the flop here anyways? Given pot odds we're going to want to shove over anyways.

The only time i think i wouldn't raise a draw with 40% equity+ is if i thought there was absolutely no FE at all.

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Originally Posted by Pelion

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Dude wtf guys, opp is never raising over our raise unless he's a weirdo or severely out leveling us.

I don't get why you're saying that. My experience of abc straightforward tags is that when they hit a good hand on a dangerous board and get action they stick it in. This isn't tricky 400NL this is "low stakes".

Another point is that we only have fold equity against hands like QQ-, and that doesn't go down on the turn unless he hits another Q.

We have 40% equity in this pot versus any calling range really, it'd be a shame to not to raise it, i mean hell its close to 50%!!!

wtf? "close to" 50% but less than 50% doesnt make us money. The only reason we are raising is for FE and I don't see how that goes down on the turn. It also looks like the hands he is folding are check/folding the turn and no hands are check/raising the turn so how is it not safer to take it on the turn. We win the same and lose less. We also sometimes spike a flush/straight when he has AA/KK/AK and would have blown us off it (or made us call with a coinflip/ near dog).

If opp has AQ or less i normally see someone call because they don't want to turn their hand into a bluff and are pussies. If they have 33, AK, AA, KK they will never shove over. I'm not talking about tricky 400nl regs, if it was certain tricky 400nl regs you could make a case for not raising, but these are the pussy tight passive regs that you guys all face and if you don't punish them for allowing you to take easy equity edges your lighting money on fire. BTW I raise a gut shot or bottom pair here also, if you find a board where opp is going to play his good hands passively, like this one, use your draw and FE to your advantage.

If he calls the flop I check the turn. Why wouldn't we? We bought a fucking free card anyways, we actually got to see the river for less than if we called two barrels.

Who cares about the small amount of the time he threebets the flop here anyways? Given pot odds we're going to want to shove over anyways.

The only time i think i wouldn't raise a draw with 40% equity+ is if i thought there was absolutely no FE at all.

Just some thoughts, I'm not sure how right and important they are:

The AQ- hands that call a flop raise and check turn will check turn a lot when we just call the flop bet too imo. We can then bet because villains range isn't as strong as when villain called a flop raise. This costs about the same, but we get to see an extra card and villains action.
We could even check behind and make our flop call profitable without implied odds, but I like betting turn more.

The AK+ hands that call our flop raise will bet the turn I guess and we have an even more expensive call, or have to fold.

Minsim,
I think villain takes the call flop raise check turn like 90% of the time at least when he decides to not fold the flop.

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Minsim,
I think villain takes the call flop raise check turn like 90% of the time at least when he decides to not fold the flop.

Why though? Is this just a common move on Pokerstars or something? Every shitty abc tag I've ever seen that flops a good hand here goes apeshit on the flop if they're shown action.

Originally Posted by Galapogos

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Minsim,
I think villain takes the call flop raise check turn like 90% of the time at least when he decides to not fold the flop.

Why though? Is this just a common move on Pokerstars or something? Every shitty abc tag I've ever seen that flops a good hand here goes apeshit on the flop if they're shown action.

Weird because I'm completely different. When you have an aggro image people get dumb and go into call/call/call mode because they don't want to stop you from bluffing. I never ever see anyone raise me here unless they are tricky or good.

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by Renton

by the way, all advocates of raise, tell me what your raising range is, and then tell me why that range is tough for villain to play against.

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by Renton

by the way, all advocates of raise, tell me what your raising range is, and then tell me why that range is tough for villain to play against.

Do you understand FE and equity???? It has nothing to do with forming a good range.

I'm coming around to Renton's side. We raise this flop with a very small range and only get it AI when we're behind, I'm with you there Renton. However, if we never raise this kind of hand on the flop, or weaker draws, we have zero balance for 33 and A3. You could argue that we don't even need to raise those hands though because flush draws make up an infinitessimal part of his range utg, and I would have a hard time disagreeing. So we may never want to raise this flop. The only downside I see is that we'll occasionally give up on the turn to second barrels from hands we could have gotten to fold on the flop with a raise. Good thread.

edit: If we don't raise 33/A3 on this board and heart hits the turn, we'll lose action from AK, so I think we still want to raise those. So I'm back to the no balance argument. Renton, do you think this is a spot where we don't need balance because villain will always think we're capable of raising a flush draw here and get it in with AK?

I am baffled, if you can be aggressive and not be blown off a draw you should do it. This is one of the perfect examples of this. This is definetely not an exception.

The best argument for raising imo, is that you get hands you're behind, but have no implied odds against, to fold (QQ-66).

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by Jager

Originally Posted by Renton

Ax Kx AK AA KK 33 22-QQ flush draws gutshots and air.

How of these hands are you really calling with that you aren't 3betting preflop? I don't think you are regularly calling Ax or Kx, unless maybe when their suited, but again why call pre when 3betting those are probably better? Would you really call your set with the flush draw out there?

I just really don't see anything in our preflop cold calling range, that would float this flop with any regularity.

in position i don't auto3bet AK AQ QQ+ first of all. I think its pretty terrible not to be capable of having them in a coldcall scenario, especially vs an abc tag. In fact AQ/AJ/KQ and the like are probably better coldcall candidates preflop.

As far a slowplaying a set here, i'd slowplay AA/AK mostly because ive got the deck beat up, and i'd then consequently slowplay KK/33 often because i don't want my raising range to consist of exactly KK/33/flush draw.

There are a few assumptions that don't make sense in this thread.

The first, Renton, is that you say our range for raising here is sooo narrow (pretty much just 33 and FD's) because you don't think we can have any other strong hands. BUT at the same time you say above that you can fully show up here wtih AK/AQ/QQ+ at any time. So if those hands can be in your range for calling, they can certainly fit into our range for raising, which adds even more hands that we are raising with.

The second assumption that a lot of people are making here in favour of calling is that any mid/low pair that bets this flop will be scared and check to us on the turn if we call our draw. At which piont we can steal for cheaper than had we raised.

I don't agree with this assumption. If I raised in EP and you flat called. The board comes AK which kills my range and fully misses yours (with your draw). I don't care what my hand is here (55,78 or AK), I will at least double barrel my entire range here on this flop/turn and possibly even triple barrel. There are tons of better hands you can get me off of by raising the flop, than choosing to call down with this killer draw. Maybe I'm more aggressive than most, but certainly against me and other players that will double/tripple barrel a large part of their range, I don't think calling is best.

Sooo to summarize my ramble: I think calling could be better against a passive player who gives up too easily when called, but not an aggressive player who will barrel here.

Originally Posted by zook

The best argument for raising imo, is that you get hands you're behind, but have no implied odds against, to fold (QQ-66).

they also c/f the turn when we call
they also occasionally turn a set when we turn a flush (rare, but I think the ev this adds is definitely significant).

This thread is tilting me

Originally Posted by griffey24

I think calling could be better against a passive player who gives up too easily when called, but not an aggressive player who will barrel here.

if this dude has more barrels than donkey kong, then we're delighted to call the flop here and allow him to bluff more money to us, ducy?

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

I am baffled, if you can be aggressive and not be blown off a draw you should do it. This is one of the perfect examples of this. This is definetely not an exception.

way to ignore 95% of the factors we base our decisions from, and focus in on one.

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

I am baffled, if you can be aggressive and not be blown off a draw you should do it. This is one of the perfect examples of this. This is definetely not an exception.

way to ignore 95% of the factors we base our decisions from, and focus in on one.

lol

It's not even that calling here is that bad, its the fact that some of you can rationalize that calling could remotely be better than raising means you don't understand poker well enough to beat higher games. Sorry to come off like an arrogant douche, but this thread is ridiculous, I'm not going to post in it anymore, I've given all my arguments.

If anyone is arguing that raising your here is not a profitable play he/she is being ridiculous.

Is calling profitable? yes

Is calling more profitable than raising usually? I don't think so.

I'm usually raising, but i'll call if these conditions are present:

- Villain is a decent hand reader (realizes i'll rarely [ if never] have AA, AK, or KK here)
or
- Villain will never fold an A
and
- Villain has seen me raise a FD in the past

In response to Renton:
- If villain has QJh or JTh were fucked anyway, and i think raising and calling against those hands will fuck us ~ the same amount.
- Villain is folding a lot of hands we're losing too (ldo)
- Villain may let us draw when he has AA, KK, AK because if he shoves it's pretty obvious what he has.
- You have a monster

ISF: Raising small sucks, raise biggish. You don't want him to feel like he has to shove over!

Originally Posted by Massimo

If anyone is arguing that raising your here is not a profitable play he/she is being ridiculous.

Its obviously profitable. Our hand is so good, we'd make a profitable play if we took ANY action on the flop or turn.

Is calling profitable? yes

Is calling more profitable than raising usually? I don't think so.

This is where we obviously differ.

I'm usually raising, but i'll call if these conditions are present:

- Villain is a decent hand reader (realizes i'll rarely [ if never] have AA, AK, or KK here) Most abc tag players to some extent read hands.
or
- Villain will never fold an A No one folds an ace here. Ever.
and
- Villain has seen me raise a FD in the past Yeah i'd hope so.

In response to Renton:
- If villain has QJh or JTh were fucked anyway, and i think raising and calling against those hands will fuck us ~ the same amount.

Debatable but you may be right. I think a medium size pot would get played more often than you think when we both brick though.

- Villain is folding a lot of hands we're losing too (ldo)

One of my principal arguments from the beginning was that he's checkfolding or betfolding most of those hands on the turn. By the way, if it weren't obvious, im advocating that we shove over most turn bets.

- Villain may let us draw when he has AA, KK, AK because if he shoves it's pretty obvious what he has.
- You have a monster

ISF: Raising small sucks, raise biggish. You don't want him to feel like he has to shove over!

Originally Posted by zook

The best argument for raising imo, is that you get hands you're behind, but have no implied odds against, to fold (QQ-66).

finally. however if villain doesn't make big(ish) calls there is rly no reason to raise because we can still represent Ax Kx on turn/river if we don't improve...

Advocates for call: Lets say we call here, and turn blanks for us, and he fires again, whats our plan?

Originally Posted by Alexos

Advocates for call: Lets say we call here, and turn blanks for us, and he fires again, whats our plan?

raise turn mostly

Ok just saw u said we shove over most turn bets...which I like.

I was hoping u didnt say call.

Okay i can't not respond to these new issues brought up.

Raising the turn is bad, in fact its probably -EV, do a simple range its pretty obvious.

"finally. however if villain doesn't make big(ish) calls there is rly no reason to raise because we can still represent Ax Kx on turn/river if we don't improve..."

I think FE wise raising the flop is a little better than floating, and pretty much all other factors are a thumbs up towards raising.

Oh btw i'm fairly sure if we float a low stakes opp isn't folding QQ/JJ for no reason other than its QQ/JJ. TT/99 are iffy.

I think if we call flop and raise turn, we can get some bad aces to fold there for sure.

But I think both these options have good arguments, why not just mix it up we arn't robots. I prefer raise flop because we have 40% equity vs an ace, so this cant be bad wtf.

continued: Whereas if we raise flop with these bad aces, our opponents will mostly put us on flush draws/bluff, and will keep calling us down.

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Raising the turn is bad, in fact its probably -EV, do a simple range its pretty obvious.

I think he folds a very very high % of the time to a turn raise. He probably folds AQ, and if he folds that then thats plenty, not to mention he could be double barreling.

Originally Posted by Alexos

I think if we call flop and raise turn, we can get some bad aces to fold there for sure.

But I think both these options have good arguments, why not just mix it up we arn't robots. I prefer raise flop because we have 40% equity vs an ace, so this cant be bad wtf.

Maybe versus this certain player that can't read hands or something he'll fold an AT-AQ (but note he raised in MP and he's a tagg, i don't think he's going to show up with a bad kicker like A8)

The part bolded is just a poor argument, what does it even mean.

It means that since both options are close in EV there might be situations where you feel one has an edge over another, for any reason. Why are you being a douche though?

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Raising the turn is bad, in fact its probably -EV, do a simple range its pretty obvious.

I think he folds a very very high % of the time to a turn raise. He probably folds AQ, and if he folds that then thats plenty, not to mention he could be double barreling.

1. If we're going to look at this from an optimality standpoint our range hasn't changed since the flop so opp should never fold any hand he was calling a raise with on the flop. I understand this really doesn't have much to do with the hand but its worth pointing out.

2. Do we think opp is dumb and is going to take a turn raise as stronger? Maybe, but as i noted in my post below yours he's a tagg who raised in MP, you're not going to see that many bad Aces here anyways. But truthfully i think there's no way he folds AQ, he'll probably for some reason think we have worse Aces. He probably won't fold AJ either. Maybe AT though.

3. Again, looking at his opening range from MP there's not too many hands that are double barrelling as a bluff, and the hand that is has us crushed (fd), plus this actually isn'ta very good board to double barrel, despite what people may think. Will he think this? Idk, but typically low stakes regs who are described as taggs dont double barrel air.

Do you agree though, that a flop raise will make him less likely to fold AT/AJ than a turn raise (on a blank) ??

deleted double post

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

2. Do we think opp is dumb and is going to take a turn raise as stronger?

Why wouldn't he? It wouldn't make sense for us to show much strength unless we had a hand that beat AQ, or a lot of outs against it. If we thought our mediocre hand was good, we'd just call down with it.

I think weakish tags are going to betfold AQ here very often, at least the first time we do this to them.

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

2. Do we think opp is dumb and is going to take a turn raise as stronger?

Why wouldn't he? It wouldn't make sense for us to show much strength unless we had a hand that beat AQ, or a lot of outs against it. If we thought our mediocre hand was good, we'd just call down with it.

I think weakish tags are going to betfold AQ here very often, at least the first time we do this to them.

I agree with this point, he's more likely to fold AT-AQ to a turn raise. I don't think I denied this in my post.... I just wasn't absolutely sure we're going to see opp fold those hands.

But this of course isn't close to enough of a reason to want to play our hand this way.

So basically, he folds 95% of his double barreling range to a turn raise...he probably doesnt even have odds to call with a flush draw that isnt JhTh,QhJh,QhTh....and this is still less EV than raising flop. hmmm

I'm not saying he always folds big aces, but we agreed he's MORE likely to fold them to a turn raise. And he'll probably stack off with them on flop if he's that type of player.

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

But this of course isn't close to enough of a reason to want to play our hand this way.

I've already established my reasons for calling.

1. Reap the maximum benefits of the implied odds of our hand.
2. Allow villain to take a wide range to the turn, where the pot will be bigger and we'll get to show even more strength.
3. Very consistent with how we'd play almost any hand in our range.

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

But this of course isn't close to enough of a reason to want to play our hand this way.

I've already established my reasons for calling.

1. Reap the maximum benefits of the implied odds of our hand. Wrong, once the flush hits and we suddenly want to play for stacks there's only one hand to put us on, and its not too hard to do
2. Allow villain to take a wide range to the turn, where the pot will be bigger and we'll get to show even more strength. I could say the exact same thing about raising the flop
3. Very consistent with how we'd play almost any hand in our range. This, on its own, isn't an argument. Why do we care? What benefits does this give us?

Originally Posted by Alexos

So basically, he folds 95% of his double barreling range to a turn raise...

If this was true I would agree.