Butchered hand

Van Dice

Villain is 18/6/2.5, not over very many hands though, and no specific reads other than that he 3-bet me with QQ 2 orbits prev when I raised UTG. (donk shortstack shoved so was shown down preflop).

I have absolutely no idea why I didn't bet the turn, but now that I'm here, what's the plan?

Stack sizes:
Van Dice: $495.90
UTG+1: $482.65
CO: $400
Button: $407
SB: $195
BB: $560.20


Pre-flop: (6 players) Van Dice is UTG with Qh As
Van Dice raises to $14, UTG+1 calls, 4 folds.


Flop: 4c 6h 2d ($34, 2 players)
Van Dice bets $30, UTG+1 calls.


Turn: Ad ($94, 2 players)
Van Dice checks, UTG+1 bets $72, Van Dice now finds himself in horrible situation.

cardshark202

I would call and re-eval the river.

AmarilloFats

You promised a butchering??

I like the check on turn. A bet makes him fold worse hands and call/raise with better. A check mite get him to bluff or allow you to extract money from a worse hand with a value bet on river; and generally a check leads to smaller pot which you want here...

I call this turn bet.
plans for river include - check calling, check folding and bet folding

5starpool

You have played it like you don't like the turn card, so I call turn as well probably. The problem is that chances are that you will be left with a horrible situation on a blank river due to the pot size. If you check and he bets how to play that then? You will have checked the A twice, so he can't figure you like it much. Much as I don't like it really, chances are I check call a river bet as well to give him a chance to bluff with a worse hand. I'm not sure how often you can expect to be ahead here though, and whether you have enough EV to call.

Van Dice

cardshark202 wrote:

I would call and re-eval the river.

AmarilloFats wrote:

I call this turn bet.
plans for river include - check calling, check folding and bet folding

You don't need to re-evaluate the river if you call, you have to act first, so what do you do?! There are no cards that can come that change things. So if you call, then on river: Bet/check-call/check-fold? What do people think his range is?

AmarilloFats

Van Dice wrote:

You don't need to re-evaluate the river if you call, you have to act first, so what do you do?! There are no cards that can come that change things. So if you call, then on river: Bet/check-call/check-fold? What do people think his range is?

Default line would be check/fold....
Soo I would check fold to a large bet on river. but it would depend on hisimage his turn/river aggression....


Crucially when you call the turn your hand is very well defined. A large river bet from standar villain basically means "I beat one pair"


btw - in hand above when I have JT or KQ I bet the ace on the turn. When I do have an ace I check it since we have showdown value.

CaptainNemo

I like the check on the turn but having under-represented your hand you then have to call.

I might lead out on the river for half the pot no matter what falls. If you get raised then you can get away from your hand, and some hands that might have given you a dilemma with a pot-sized bet if you checked may just call here.

cardshark202

I would check most rivers, planning to call most bets if hes anyway aggressive

Ste05

I would have thought this was relatively standard, you've checked (correctly IMO) the turn, induced a certain % of bluffs, so naturally call, then based on history with the opponent decide whether to C/C, C/F or Value bet the River (if you think he could have floated the flop with a weaker A value bet the turn and now won't value bet the River, or may make a Hero call, but won't raise us with a bluff).

In this case he seems straight forward having 3-bet the QQ previously and being fairly tight, and so without additional information I could easily C/F this River. Although his 2.5 AF is possibly leaning me towards C/Cing, it would be based on what my image was like.

Theresalwaysone

I like the check on the turn, I would call, and check/call a river bet.

Re: Turn Check.
I was discussing this with conor the other day Jim, and I was saying that if you bet there and he folds, are you not pushing out value? He is only folding worse hands and calling with better While when you check ( knowing you now beat any flop pair or over pair to the flop he mite have ) is letting him think the A doesnt help you and letting him bet with a worse hand?

I could have such unbelievably flawed thinking but I would like yo know why if so?

phantom_lord

if we always bet when we don't have the a, and check when we do, is that not a little exploitable...

Theresalwaysone

Yes if we Always, But Im thinkin in terms of, You raise with AK pre flop, Get a caller from a solid player, flop your Ace and he checks to you.
Now Standard here is to C-bet all the time ( especially live as they fold more often) but if you always bet and they always fold worse hands are you not better off sometimes checking and inducing a bluff or a bet from a worse hand?

I don't know, and to be honest I C-bet nearly 99% of the time but I was just thinking about it recently. Am I losing Value?

Van Dice

Theresalwaysone wrote:

Re: Turn Check.
He is only folding worse hands and calling with better While when you check ( knowing you now beat any flop pair or over pair to the flop he mite have ) is letting him think the A doesnt help you and letting him bet with a worse hand?

Why I think I messed up the hand is that it was against this specific player type. Against a lot of players, checking the A on turn is fine imo, but not here. I don't know enough about the player, but he seems very tight but quite aggressive postflop. When he calls my c-bet, I think he has most pocket pairs JJ and below, or AK.

I think the key is that I don't know how likely he is to bluff a scare card like the ace. Does he turn 99-JJ into a bluff? What about 33/55?

My thinking is v a relative unknown, I'm much better off betting the turn, and folding to a raise or checking the river if called. I know in this specific hand I let him fold out all worse hands, but I think I'd take that to being OOP and faced with this bet on the turn. When I learn a little bit more about him, I'm more likely to check here.

In this hand, I don't know how likely he is to fire again on the river with TT for example. I know I'll be facing bets from sets and AK, and I don't know anything as to what the other hands in his betting range on the river would be. I need to always play straightforward v unknown TAGs!!

Theresalwaysone wrote:

I don't know, and to be honest I C-bet nearly 99% of the time but I was just thinking about it recently. Am I losing Value?

Tbh I think so, not for that reason though. Some hands I just give up, if you have 65 OOP v a very loose stationy type player, flop is QT9/JT8 etc, I wouldn't even bother c-betting. Or if a TAG cold calls and the flop is 678 two to a suit, I won't c-bet a lot of hands their either. When a flop is directly in someone's range, or v a calling station, or multiway, I will just give up some of my nothing hands.
You do need to check some good hands then obviously too, I prefer doing it with hands like A6 on A72 flop etc. With AK you just lose way too much value when someone has a lower ace.
I only bother mixing up my play when directly against a good observant player, and then only if I think it's a very small sacrifice. Against donks I play very straightforward.
C-betting is good obviously but generally I think you are better off c-betting about 75% of the time, and reducing that mostly by not c-betting hands where you are virtually certain you will get called or raised, and you have nothing. You only need to slowplay a little to effectively mix up your play. Or you can even check-raise OOP and not lose any value. For some reason nobody believes anyone when they raise pre and then check-raise the flop, or maybe that's just me

Hectorjelly

phantom_lord wrote:

if we always bet when we don't have the a, and check when we do, is that not a little exploitable...

only if your opponents have noticed.