Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,291,000 Posts!
Poker ForumShort-Handed NL Hold'em

I Raised then I betted then this happened.

Results 1 to 24 of 24
  1. #1

    Default I Raised then I betted then this happened.

    Villain is a fairly std reg, nothing out of the ordinary from him so far. He calls the flop instantly and his turn timing is pretty quick too. I kind of want to discount sets. I think his range is pretty weak here, mostly weak pairs and busto draws with this timing. c/c river seem okay?

    PokerStars - $1 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 4 players
    Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

    CO: 73.3 BB (VPIP: 55.56, PFR: 11.11, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 9)
    BTN: 102.28 BB (VPIP: 21.11, PFR: 18.89, 3Bet Preflop: 10.28, Hands: 276)
    SB: 100 BB (VPIP: 24.76, PFR: 20.38, 3Bet Preflop: 8.72, Hands: 866)
    Hero (BB): 205.94 BB

    SB posts SB 0.5 BB, Hero posts BB 1 BB

    Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has A J

    fold, BTN raises to 2.5 BB, fold, Hero calls 1.5 BB

    Flop: (5.5 BB, 2 players) 3 7 2
    Hero checks, BTN bets 3.5 BB, Hero raises to 10.75 BB, BTN calls 7.25 BB

    Turn: (27 BB, 2 players) T
    Hero bets 17 BB, BTN calls 17 BB

    River: (61 BB, 2 players) A
    Hero?
  2. #2
    Sometimes it also works to induce by betting small, bet 17 again or something. Not necessarily better but in some spots it seems to works better to make him spaz, because it's more natural to represent a weaker hand. You're not wanting to bet for value with your hand with the read you have or what is the question?
    Last edited by jackvance; 07-23-2013 at 07:48 PM.
  3. #3
    pocketfours's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,765
    Location
    Lighting sweet moneys on fire.
    gotta say I'd rather c/f unless he bets small


  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by jackvance View Post
    Sometimes it also works to induce by betting small, bet 17 again or something. Not necessarily better but in some spots it seems to works better to make him spaz, because it's more natural to represent a weaker hand. You're not wanting to bet for value with your hand with the read you have or what is the question?
    I have a hard time giving him a calling range we do that well against vs a normal bet size. I'm pondering b/c like 14. Might be FPS, but I don't think he can have too much for value if he raises river and this way we can sort of target his busto draws, possibly induce from 88 99 7x and also get called by these sometimes too as well as JJ-KK.

    I don't like c/f river, feels like he just doesn't have enough of a value range here (if my timing tell reads are accurate that is)
  5. #5
    pocketfours's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,765
    Location
    Lighting sweet moneys on fire.
    Well I don't see any good reason to stack off here just because we hit a pair.


  6. #6
    I don't think it's FPS if that is your read. I have used this play succesfully in the last couple of days (1/2 ring + HU), where I think a check wouldn't have gotten the same result necessarily. Some people really like to check to call, sometimes you can actually spot that and not bluff. In general a block bet to induce is more rare to work than a check as it is very situational, but here I think it is a valid play.
  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by pocketfours View Post
    Well I don't see any good reason to stack off here just because we hit a pair.
    The read he posted no?
  8. #8
    y no 3bet pre

    y no c/c flop
  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Micro2Macro View Post
    y no 3bet pre
    So far villains folding 83% to 3-bets and 4-betting 17%, just doesn't seem like the type to flat with too much worse. I don't usually include this in my 3-bet/jam range vs such a guy so it's going to be a call and I'll be 3 betting more polarized, probably TT+ AQ+ and lots of bluffs some of which I can ship over a 4 bet. 44 A5s etc. Does this sound okay.

    Quote Originally Posted by Micro2Macro View Post
    y no c/c flop
    I could do, but I like to have a bluff raising range here as well as sets so I think it's nice to have some good draws in there too especially when I can conceivably get more money in vs a lot of worse draws. You prefer calling?
    Last edited by Carroters; 07-24-2013 at 05:38 PM.
  10. #10
    pocketfours's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,765
    Location
    Lighting sweet moneys on fire.
    Should be pretty obvious that if we like to 3bet small pairs then we c/c, otherwise lead or c/r.


  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by pocketfours View Post
    Should be pretty obvious that if we like to 3bet small pairs
    A bit of a tangent, but I've settled on thinking that it is a pretty bad play to 3bet baby pairs. Would you say you agree?

    Also I standard assume people I play against don't do this, unless I see otherwise.
  12. #12
    Stacks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,015
    Location
    Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.
    Quote Originally Posted by jackvance View Post
    A bit of a tangent, but I've settled on thinking that it is a pretty bad play to 3bet baby pairs. Would you say you agree?

    Also I standard assume people I play against don't do this, unless I see otherwise.
    It's only really ever made sense to me to 3bet small pairs if villain is 4betting often, such that we can then shove them, since they will have around 30% equity against a stack-off range. If getting flatted a lot, it just seems kinda bad to 3bet small pairs, since the times you hit their range is wide, and the times you miss you don't have much equity against a continuing range. If your 3bet is getting a lot of folds, then we can 3bet them as long as they aren't better to call with, then just check/fold postflop often I suppose.

    Not sure if that makes any sense or is retarded. Someone better will clear that up soon I suppose.
  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    1,060
    Location
    St. Shawshanks Infant School
    How many nut hands can you eveb have on the flop? It just doesnt look like you can have more than 77.
    I think you can b/f the river now you got there like this cos hes not gonna bet it for you.
  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Carroters View Post
    So far villains folding 83% to 3-bets and 4-betting 17%, just doesn't seem like the type to flat with too much worse. I don't usually include this in my 3-bet/jam range vs such a guy so it's going to be a call and I'll be 3 betting more polarized, probably TT+ AQ+ and lots of bluffs some of which I can ship over a 4 bet. 44 A5s etc. Does this sound okay.



    I could do, but I like to have a bluff raising range here as well as sets so I think it's nice to have some good draws in there too especially when I can conceivably get more money in vs a lot of worse draws. You prefer calling?
    I think we should default to c/c with this strong of a draw because we have really good showdown value against a button open + cbet range here. We are also very likely to realize our equity, and most players will continue betting on an A, J and heart turn which is really good for us. Check calling also protects the vulnerable pairs in our range that we c/c.

    Given that, I think we are better off having bluffs in our range that have a little less showdown value. Example: 65, XcXc that's not ace high etc. Our value range is narrow too so I don' think we want to c/r every draw combo in our range. So if we are going to be check calling some draws I think we should do it with the strongest ones. Thoughts?
  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Micro2Macro View Post
    I think we should default to c/c with this strong of a draw because we have really good showdown value against a button open + cbet range here. We are also very likely to realize our equity, and most players will continue betting on an A, J and heart turn which is really good for us. Check calling also protects the vulnerable pairs in our range that we c/c.

    Given that, I think we are better off having bluffs in our range that have a little less showdown value. Example: 65, XcXc that's not ace high etc. Our value range is narrow too so I don' think we want to c/r every draw combo in our range. So if we are going to be check calling some draws I think we should do it with the strongest ones. Thoughts?
    Yeah this makes a lot of sense. I sometimes get seduced in this spot by the prospect of getting him to 3/b call off the flop with flush draw w/ 2 overs combos as we do so well vs them. This is a really tiny part of his range though and I think 3-bet calling these hands is pretty bad any way and not something people do too much anymore. Beside lots of good can come of flatting vs them too. I like having AhJh in my calling range to protect the stuff that hates the run outs this hand loves.

    What do you think here about having a wider c/r range on this flop including our good and bad flush draws, a few lower equity bluffs and then sets and stuff like A7s 88-TT for value? I think we get floated here quite a lot given our value range is perceived to be so small.
  16. #16
    This seems to make your c/c'ing range pretty damned exploitable (I struggle to think of combos we'd have that would be better than A-high). Then again, this is probably perfectly exploitative play at these stakes because our perceived range is probably mostly going to be weak pairs because the best bluffing cards are gonna totally monkey fuck our range.

    So yeah, I think I like c/c'ing our elite broadway combos+probably like 76s, and just c/r 87s+ and anything else we want to continue with.
  17. #17
    I'd have to look at hand combinations and their equity (vs a TP-type hand) to figure out how to best balance a c/c and c/r range here.
  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by surviva316 View Post
    This seems to make your c/c'ing range pretty damned exploitable (I struggle to think of combos we'd have that would be better than A-high). Then again, this is probably perfectly exploitative play at these stakes because our perceived range is probably mostly going to be weak pairs because the best bluffing cards are gonna totally monkey fuck our range.

    So yeah, I think I like c/c'ing our elite broadway combos+probably like 76s, and just c/r 87s+ and anything else we want to continue with.
    Yeah it does make our c/c range super unbalanced, but I don't think I care about that since almost all regs will not have any idea this is the case for a long time and might be playing well vs our perceived range but not our actual range in spots where we c/c or c/r. Of course there will come a point where we need to change our strategy if we showdown a c/r'ed 99 etc, but until then let's just be mega exploitable in these games IMO. It's pretty nice that we're c/r lots of our perceived c/c hands. Good broadways with bdfds are actually better hands to c/c the flop with than something like 44-66 and arguably even 88 I think.

    We only need to be unexploitable when our base assumptions lead us to think we are likely to be exploited right?

    Be interested to here what M2m thinks of this strategy.
  19. #19
    I'm less-so talking about how 99 isn't in our c/c range and moreso about how 44-66 isn't. He's basically gonna bluff backwards, thinking that an A is the nut barrel card, whereas it's much better to barrel a blank 2 against our range.
  20. #20
    Good discussion. I find it interesting that M2M seems to want us to 3-bet pre and c/c flop.

    My default BB vs. BTN is to flat AJs and not folding very many flops. I feel we need to have some big suited Aces in our range pre or we'll just get owned on a lot of high boards. Vs. someone who folds too much to 3-bets perhaps we need to include some combos of AA/KK to our flatting range pre, and include those in our flop C/R range.

    I get wanting to c/c this flop...especially if we need to show up with the nuts once in a while vs. villains who like to barrel, and also if we want to bluff rivers.
    Playing big pots at small stakes.
  21. #21
    i reread this thread and further disagree with 'he wont flat much worse'

    suited Ax, J7s-JTs, KJo, QJs etc......

    you have less than 300 hands I wouldnt read too much into his fold to 3bet
  22. #22
    What's your plan vs a standard sized 4-bet here?
  23. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    8,697
    Location
    soaking up ethanol, moving on up
    i prefer donk-shove to check-raise on this flop
    i like check-calling just fine too
    river check-call or check-fold depending on sizing and feel
  24. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Carroters View Post
    What's your plan vs a standard sized 4-bet here?
    You did say earlier you could profitably jam A5s against this player, so def don't fold. If you think his 4b range is polarized, you can probably call and c/shove a lot of flops. That seems like something cool people would do.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •