1/2 weak op hand

phantom_lord

Holdem No Limit - $2 BB

MP ($404.62)
CO ($207.75)
Button ($394)
SB ($89)
BB ($200) [Shane]
UTG ($235.25)

Shane is BB with Jh, Js
Preflop: (6 players, $3)
2 folds, CO calls $2 and raises $6, 2 folds, Shane calls $6 and raises $15, CO calls $15

Flop: Tc, 2c, 7h (2 players, $47)
Shane checks, CO bets $20, Shane calls $20

Turn: 8c (2 players, $87)
Shane checks, CO bets $32, Shane calls $32

River: 7d (2 players, $151)
Shane checks, CO bets $132.75 and is All-In


If I'm going to raise it, it should probably be to 26?

Should I fold the turn?


only 15 hands on the guy so no reads at all. something like 53/33/1.2 over that meaningless amount.

breadmonkey

What can you beat?

phantom_lord

i folded the river, it's the rest of the hand i'm wondering about.

ianmc38

Turn is an easy fold and the reraising preflop and calling flop arfe both marginal IMO.

RasTa

Just wondering why you checked the flop?

Macspower

edited because of misread ( thanks BM )

Firstly your RR pre flop is effectively a min raise. He has to call it. If your going to RR make it more. .he made it 8 i'd make it 25 (what i meant to say in the first place). Do you want him to call or are you just sweetening the pot?

you need to bet out on the flop. about 2/3 of the pot. you have the advantage of betting. why give it to him...

Played as above I would RR the flop. fold to RR


Mac

breadmonkey

Did you read that right? Reraise a $6 to $45!!!!!?

Macspower

edited above. thanks BM for saving my already bad rep...

pok3rplaya

Turn is easy fold, you know what he's repping. I like the way you played it though.

pf is good.

phantom_lord

yeah, I thinking that it was a bad call on the turn as I was making it :rolleyes:

I did have a gutshot tho...

Firstly your RR pre flop is effectively a min raise. He has to call it. If your going to RR make it more. .he made it 8 i'd make it 25 (what i meant to say in the first place). Do you want him to call or are you just sweetening the pot?

I made it 21.

Macspower

sry, thought it was raised to 15... i see now raised BY 15. thats perfect.

phantom_lord

Macspower wrote:

you need to bet out on the flop.

Played as above I would RR the flop. fold to RR

why?

Captain Tom

ianmc38 wrote:

Turn is an easy fold and the reraising preflop and calling flop arfe both marginal IMO.

this is bad advice.

reraising p/f is standard.

c/folding to such small bets on flop or turn is hugely exploitable.

river is a fold.u played this fine imo.

spectre

Against an opponent this loose, 3-betting the flop is good, as is betting the flop, he will most likely call with lots of hands we beat. Against a tight player, I may employ your flop c-c line.
If he calls I'm checking the turn and may fold depending on the villain's bet.

As played, I call the turn. The bet is less than half pot and could easily be JT,QT,KT,AT, 89 with a club. The river is a fold though

Gholimoli

pok3rplaya wrote:

Turn is easy fold, you know what he's repping. I like the way you played it though.

pf is good.

i dont agree with this at all.
i dont like the way this hand was played post flop at all.

you re-raise him prelfop,why are you cheking the flop?
i think you under represented your hand big time by check calling and it looks like a missed AK,AQ .

i think CO would play AT,KT like like this esp if he is aggro.
i would bet that flop and then maybe release if i get raised and maybe i wouldnt depending what i think of him but i would deffo bet it had i reraised pre-flop.

pok3rplaya

I didn't say you liked it, I said I did.

Gholimoli

pok3rplaya wrote:

Turn is easy fold, you know
pf is good.

disagree.
its not an easy fold at all.
why do you think its such an easy fold?

phantom_lord

Gholimoli wrote:

i dont agree with this at all.
i dont like the way this hand was played post flop at all.

you re-raise him prelfop,why are you cheking the flop?
i think you under represented your hand big time by check calling and it looks like a missed AK,AQ .

i think CO would play AT,KT like like this esp if he is aggro.
i would bet that flop and then maybe release if i get raised and maybe i wouldnt depending what i think of him but i would deffo bet it had i reraised pre-flop.

why would u bet that flop?

do u think he folds jj+?

do u think he bet a10/aj+ if I check?

u don;t like it cause i under repped it instead of over repping it?

it's an easy fold cause I beat a10 and a triple barrel

ianmc38

Captain Tom wrote:

this is bad advice.

reraising p/f is standard.

c/folding to such small bets on flop or turn is hugely exploitable.

river is a fold.u played this fine imo.

Thanks Captain Tom. Excellent in depth post there. I particularly like your bit about not folding to half pot bets. I think I'm being exploited way too much.

ianmc38

I'd have led the flop after reraising preflop btw, simply because I do it with air and made hands after reraising preflop from the blinds. I dont like reraising pre and then checking the flop as it makes our hand look more like AQ/AK and encourages a situation like this where you could get triple barrelled. On the turn, I think you have to fold because of the way the hands been played out.

pok3rplaya

Gholimoli wrote:

disagree.
its not an easy fold at all.
why do you think its such an easy fold?

lol ok ok you're right. It's not an easy fold. Given the bet size I guess a call is fine. I do not think we are ahead though and I do believe that fold is better then call.

River is an easy fold.

Flop check is better then flop bet.

phantom_lord

ianmc38 wrote:

I dont like reraising pre and then checking the flop as it makes our hand look more like AQ/AK and encourages a situation like this where you could get triple barrelled.

you wouldn't check the flop cause it might encourage ak to bluff you?

ianmc38

phantom_lord wrote:

you wouldn't check the flop cause it might encourage ak to bluff you?

Not unless I'm using my rng program to see his hole cards and know that he has AK. Also how do you know whether he has AK or QQ+? With your line I'd play all those hands the same way as well as underpairs, AQ etc.

I just hate reraising oop and checking the flop.

breadmonkey

pok3rplaya wrote:

Flop check is better then flop bet.

This contradicts ian's post so could you clarify why? (for my education)

ianmc38

breadmonkey wrote:

This contradicts ian's post so could you clarify why? (for my education)

I would imagine because he rarely calls with a worse hand and if we check we let him bluff with smaller pocket pairs and Ax , KQ.

My line isn't necessarily the right one btw! If I'm reraising from the blinds I'm rarely checking the flop.

Gholimoli

phantom_lord wrote:

why would u bet that flop?

do u think he folds jj+?

do u think he bet a10/aj+ if I check?

u don;t like it cause i under repped it instead of over repping it?

it's an easy fold cause I beat a10 and a triple barrel

no i dont think he will fold QQ+ here if you bet,
but you will force him to defin his hand if thats what he has.
if you bet the flop we will more than likely raise with somehting like QQ+ .(i dont think he has QQ+ anyway )

yes i think he would bet AT,KT,QT here depending on the type of player he is.
checking to induce a bluff from Ak/AQ is also bad.

i think checking the flop is bad cuz you need to protect your hand v AQ/AK,KQ also the way the hand has been played you will know with a bet on the flop whether or not your hand is any good.

Checking to induce bluff here is bad cuz your hand is very vulnerable and there is multiple streets ahead of you to be played.
you will have to check/call on all of them or you will have to fold as you did and often you would be folding the best hand.

ianmc38

Gholimoli wrote:

i think checking the flop is bad cuz you need to protect your hand v AQ/AK,KQ also the way the hand has been played you will know with a bet on the flop whether or not your hand is any good.

Checking to induce bluff here is bad cuz your hand is very vulnerable and there is multiple streets ahead of you to be played.
you will have to check/call on all of them or you will have to fold as you did and often you would be folding the best hand.

Add some punctuation and sentence structure and they're my thoughts in a nutshell.

phantom_lord

I think inducing a bluff is far superior to raising for information. And I'm rarely folding the best hand here.

Gholimoli

phantom_lord wrote:

I think inducing a bluff is far superior to raising for information. And I'm rarely folding the best hand here.

im sure this is what you think but it does not make it correct.

checking to induce a bluff is best on the river when one player has 0 equity and there is no more betting.
not on the flop with two more streets to be played where a bluffing hand could easily turn in to the best hand.

he could be bluffing with AK/AQ and catch one of then on the turn or river.
or he could just keep at his bluff cuz he thinks you are weak as you have represented that you are.

phantom_lord

you think betting and getting ak/aq to fold is gonna have a greater ev than having ak/aq bluff you?

ianmc38

phantom_lord wrote:

I think inducing a bluff is far superior to raising for information. And I'm rarely folding the best hand here.

We're not raising for information. We're doing exactly what we'd do if we reraised oop preflop with AK/88 and the flop was 368. We've got a weak overpair and if he calls/raises we can be pretty sure we're beaten.

What hand are you trying to represent by reraising preflop and check calling postflop? Why did you check the flop?

breadmonkey

phantom_lord wrote:

you think betting and getting ak/aq to fold is gonna have a greater ev than having ak/aq bluff you?

I think the point is that AK/AQ are going to bluff you but you are going to fold because it's so easy for them.

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

Gholimoli

phantom_lord wrote:

you think betting and getting ak/aq to fold is gonna have a greater ev than having ak/aq bluff you?

yes .
AK/AQ is not bluffing but semi bluffing.
they can still improve as there are two more streets to be played.

when you bet the flop you are happy for AK/AQ to fold but you are happy if they call as well as now they are paying to see the turn.

checking is specially bad the more certain you are that he has AK/AQ/KQ as he can easily check behind and then which is really bad for you.
this is rather simple.

phantom_lord

ak semi-bluffing here is fine by me, I don't feel a great need to protect my hand here, if i think i'm beat then I'll fold, big deal. I want ak to put money in this pot, not fold.

I'm not folding the flop, so it's a choice between leading and c/c. If I lead better hands call, if I check worse hands are putting money in.

equity 	win 	tie 	      pots won 	pots tied	
Hand 0: 	28.283%  	28.28% 	00.00% 	           280 	        0.00   { AcKd }
Hand 1: 	71.717%  	71.72% 	00.00% 	           710 	        0.00   { JhJs }

I'm almost never getting triple barrelled here lloyd btw.

You lead out for two thirds of the pot on the flop it is going to be very difficult for him to come back at you with air.

I want him to bluff here.

ianmc38

If you check better hands are also putting money in, not just worse hands. Furthermore, worse hands will often just check behind.

And regarding 3-barrels, I would see this as the perfect spot for a 3-barrel. I still cant see what hand you'd play the way you did. Maybe pocket 9s or AK.

phantom_lord

obviously better hands put money in, the point is that they will too if I bet, while worse ones wont.

you might 3 barrel here, the vast majority of 1/2players wont, most of them will check behind on the turn.

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

phantom_lord

LuckyLloyd wrote:

Why Not?

well at the levels I play at I almost never see it, if ever. esp not in spot like this.

And, if you were ahead on the flop and the turn - surely you are not still good on the end?

no. I expect him to check behind on the turn with aq/ak, I called cause he bet so little and I'd outs.

Maybe you played it to induce a bluff, but he could never fire three times and the fold on the end is correct. Or maybe you just took a really weak and exploitable line that contains no clear plan of how to get to a showdown / win the hand - and just had to fold your weak hand to a lot of heat. :rolleyes:

you completely miss the point of this line lloyd.

Gholimoli

LuckyLloyd wrote:

Or maybe you just took a really weak and exploitable line that contains no clear plan of how to get to a showdown / win the hand - and just had to fold your weak hand to a lot of heat. :rolleyes:

this is exactly it IMO.
this hand had no plans what so ever.

when you try and induce a bluff then you MUST CALL a bet.
if you call the flop and the turn then why not the river?

again check calling here on multiple streets is just bad play.

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

phantom_lord

my line is clearly better than leading the flop, it's just that you and gholi and unable to understand the reasons why I took that approach.

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

ianmc38

I get the point of your line but still dont like it and think leading is far superior.

Gholimoli

i get the point.
but the point is wrong.

phantom_lord

Ok, so pf, I think the guys range is pretty wide, so I think I'm ahead on the flop and he's got nothing, so I take a line that aims to extract the most value from his holding. albeit one that's more difficult to play.

I expect him to check behind the turn, or put in a decent sized bet, he does neither.

Now, if I lead the flop I'm in a sense bluffing and haven't got a clear plan of getting to showdown, u say if I bet and he folds then I know my hand was good, so therefore I take it you mean if he calls then I know it's not good?

So I'm guessing your line is to bet flop, c/f turn if called?

Your line gets us nothing off worse hands and we lose the same amount to better hands as in my line.

the only merits to yours seem to be that "we know where we are", don't get bluffed as much, and don't get outdrawn? and it requires no difficult decisions.

The last one seems to be the only better side to it than my line.

i get the point.
but the point is wrong.

the point is that I want value off worse hands, checking is the only way worse hands put in money. how is that point wrong?

pok3rplaya

phantom_lord wrote:

Holdem No Limit - $2 BB

MP ($404.62)
CO ($207.75)
Button ($394)
SB ($89)
BB ($200) [Shane]
UTG ($235.25)

Shane is BB with Jh, Js
Preflop: (6 players, $3)
2 folds, CO calls $2 and raises $6, 2 folds, Shane calls $6 and raises $15, CO calls $15

Flop: Tc, 2c, 7h (2 players, $47)
Shane checks, CO bets $20, Shane calls $20

Turn: 8c (2 players, $87)
Shane checks, CO bets $32, Shane calls $32

River: 7d (2 players, $151)
Shane checks, CO bets $132.75 and is All-In


If I'm going to raise it, it should probably be to 26?

Should I fold the turn?


only 15 hands on the guy so no reads at all. something like 53/33/1.2 over that meaningless amount.

OK lets look at this hand. Firstly preflop. Guy raises to 8, and we reraise to 21 with JJ. Yeah it's a little small. The guy has 13 to call with implied odds of 190/13 which is more then we'd like to give him. According to the 10/1 rule of pocket pairs (which is wrong but whatever) he can prifitabbly call with any pair and try and hit a set on us. In future you should raise to 26 total or so to try and avoid this situation.

OK after he calls our reraise his range is something like all pairs/AK/AQ and probably some other stuff like AJ/KQ because this is tribeca. I don't play 1/2 tribeca so I'm not sure if ATs is in his range or not but for arguments sake lets say it is.

So flop comes out: Tc, 2c, 7h (2 players, $47)

Now say we lead for 40 here. Lets look at what happens, AA-QQ/77/22/TT all raise and we have to fold = (-40 and more if we continue in the hand). AK/AQ/AJ/KQ and probably all other pairs all fold and we win 0 = 0. ATs calls (if it's even in his range) and we win 40.

OK so someone tell me now where exactly the EV is in this play?



I gotta go, this post isn't finished.

sikes

phantom_lord wrote:

I expect him to check behind the turn, or put in a decent sized bet, he does neither.

What you are trying to convey is making overcards to make a mistake by bluffing. But is it a mistake with a half pot bet? They still have 25% equity in the pot.

Say we lead for 2/3 the pot and overcards fold pretty much always and everything else remains that beats us so we shut down and no more money goes into the pot. In this case its has cost us less that how it occurred in the hand in question, and we havent let overcards make a play at the pot which will be correct for them.

Taking this line, when overcards bet the flop for half pot they are not making a mistake. You call they are getting 3/1 on their money, even if you never fold this is +EV for them. And they can take another card, or bluff you off the pot on the turn.

Gholimoli

pok3rplaya wrote:

OK lets look at this hand. Firstly preflop. Guy raises to 8, and we reraise to 21 with JJ. Yeah it's a little small. The guy has 13 to call with implied odds of 190/13 which is more then we'd like to give him. According to the 10/1 rule of pocket pairs (which is wrong but whatever) he can prifitabbly call with any pair and try and hit a set on us. In future you should raise to 26 total or so to try and avoid this situation.

OK after he calls our reraise his range is something like all pairs/AK/AQ and probably some other stuff like AJ/KQ because this is tribeca. I don't play 1/2 tribeca so I'm not sure if ATs is in his range or not but for arguments sake lets say it is.

So flop comes out: Tc, 2c, 7h (2 players, $47)

Now say we lead for 40 here. Lets look at what happens, AA-QQ/77/22/TT all raise and we have to fold = (-40 and more if we continue in the hand). AK/AQ/AJ/KQ and probably all other pairs all fold and we win 0 = 0. ATs calls (if it's even in his range) and we win 40.

OK so someone tell me now where exactly the EV is in this play?



I gotta go, this post isn't finished.

is this a one street game ?

so all that is relevent to this hand is to bet the flop or not and that's how the best line for the hand is calculated ?

i just have to believe that you didnt have time to finish your post and the rest of would read like:

ignor everything i said in the first part .
here is what im trying to say...