yea im really in two minds on leading the river for that specific reason - and the point is readless we really dont know what villain is thinking
i honestly think ppl are veiwing this hand in reletive hand streghth and jus think OMG we have a set - but for us to really get value on this board is always going to be difficult ESP OOP - the only way i see us getting it in good is if someone has Kx and pings trips ott and goes to town with it value owing themselves or is BLUFFING -
I'm quite happy to play for stacks unless my opponent gives me a reason to suggest I'm behind. (which getting shoved on after 3betting the turn would suggest)
As Borin has said I think where we differ is our opinion on what villain's turn min-r meant. Before we even saw results I said that I think a lot of players WHEN DEEP will make this play with a hand that they want to get to cheap showdown with as well as 2 pair hands they think are good. I really don't see it being used as a cheap bluff too often by many players. Obviously if we think villain has a lot of bluffs in his range then calling turn and checking river would be better. That being said we have a lot of worse hands we can "bluff catch with" 22 is not a bluff catching hand here it's a strong value hand so we have to be pretty certain that villain has a bluff AND that he will continue on the river a lot for slow playing 22 here to be good.
Think I did mention donking river in my first post? Anyway again we differ on what we think villain's range is here. I think it's full of 2 pair hands and weak hands that tried to get to cheap showdown. If we bet big here I don't think villain is going to raise with his worse 2 pair hands (but might be more likely do so than shoving OTT over a 3bet since our range is much stronger when we 3bet the turn.
Also there are some villains that like to represent hands even after we've shown aggression. This is because if they are aggressive a lot and do stuff like min-r bluff the turn with garbage, we will want to occasionally play back at that. Best way to go about that would be to 3bet the turn. So if we're doing that as a bluff we absolutely must put value hands in there. If we don't have enough 3bet value hands OTT then when we 3-bet villain will assume us to be bluff heavy and could very well go for a re-bluff. (obviously then we wouldn't fold 22 if we thought that was likely)
I was watching the skypoker cash game the other day where Yong was happy to bluff a lot and noticed that too many players were taking a passive line vs him just to give him some rope. Yet Neil channing took an aggressive line OTR when he min-3bet river with a straight and got Yong to put in a massive 4-bet. (we'll not talk about neil then deciding to fold!!) but the point is that even against really aggressive players you can still play your strong hands strong. Instead you bluff catch with your weaker range (even if that means having to make hero calls with 2nd pair or worse!)
100bb deep obviously just getting it in here. This deep I dunno - I think my standard would be to 3bet/fold to without any more reads. I want to 3-bet to get value from their draws/weaker 2 pair hands. But I think if villain reshoves I think we'll be against a better set far too often. Posted by F_Ivanovic
this is your 1st post - and the one i have massivley different veiws on than you
and with the rest i wish i could say i agree but think were on a totally different page mate..
your now taking about balancing your 3bet range on OTT - of course we can be bluffing here but imo 22 would be a bluff catcher too in this spot- (if im 3betting for value im going with the hand) this would be my 3bet GII range - the polar opposite would be my 3bet bluff range and everything in between inc 22 would be my bluff catch range- and obvs we have different veiws on that too
unless now ofcourse you think that 22 is going to ever be good enough to 3bet call???
Ah forgot that was my first post, been so many since then! When I first saw it that's what I thought but after thinking about it more I liked the option of donk leading the river.
I kind of went off on a tangenet when talking about bet/3bet bluffing the turn. I think without any reads bet/3bet bluffing the turn would be spew. My point was in regards to players that like to bluff and that they will:
a) get it in lighter (because they know they're bluffing a lot in this spot
b) re-bluff us if they think we're capable of rebluffing them.
How is 22 just a bluff catcher? It's the 4th nuts - sets are hard to come by!!! It only becomes a bluff catcher when we have good reason to suspect it is. Until we do we should treat it as the best hand and not be turning it into a bluff catcher which is how we've played it. This is why I was talking about playing scared because it seems baffling that 22 is a bluff catcher here and that you seem to think his range is made up of complete bluffs and better sets!
You haven't said yet how you play the higher sets in this spot either btw
ok so now donk leading the river is your prefered option- does this mean we now agree that 3betting the turn is not the best??
i actualy dont mind donking as i said before ( i think it may be close ) but still feel myself that it holds little value - if we think about how our hand looks in that spot- we bet call turn, then lead the river - ok we get value from 2pairs (but they bet anyway) we (should) lose value from anything less - i mean how can this line ever be worse than KQ
imo instead of making the assuption that villain is looking for cheap showdown and i know going chck chck is horrible - we should keep his entire range inc bluffs in..
if i was to 3bet theturn it would for value meaning im 3bet calling - or im 3bet folding with air-
once i know the villains tendancies you could even de-polarise your 3bet calllng range to K9 etc etc- so as im never gonna 3bet call it off here with 22 - its gonna sit in the middle as part of my bluff catch range and becomes the equivalent as K9-
surley you can understand this?
again 77 oot becomes very similar - i mean your gonna really have to cold deck someone for you to ever extract max value OOP in these spots - everyone so worried about losing all this value that in reality is hardly there- were oop on the driest board ever- unless its specifically KK vs 99 i dont think the money will ever get in -
I don't know whether calling turn and donking river would be better. Against villains particular hand it would have been. It probably seems less strong to play a hand like this then bet/3betting the turn so it might get more stubborn calls from villain (whereas if we 3-bet the turn he will only continue with sets/draws and 2 pair hands)
Again part of our difference of opinion comes from the fact you percieve villain to have air in this spot quite a bit where as I think his range is more sets/2pairs/hands wanting to get cheap showdown.
Also I don't see why we can't have a bet/3bet fold range here that we 3-bet initially for value. It's like when we raise flop with an overpair for value against TP hands/draws but when we get re-raised we can narrow villains range to 2pairs/sets and very strong draws. Here I 3-bet turn with 22 to get value from all his 2 pair hands and hands trying to get to cheap showdown. I think these make up a much bigger part of his range than sets - AND if he does have a set I think he'll show his hand strength too often by shipping the turn (ofc when we 3-bet the turn it seems like we are never folding!) - whereas anything worse than a set I think will just call (or fold) - but I reckon someone taking this line will not then want to fold 2 pair to a 3-bet.
its the fact i dont want to ever be bet folding a set- having a 3bet folding hand becomes too exploitable imo -
its abit different in this context than value betting OP's on the flop ..
what 2 pairs can villain really have- yea i agree sumwhat on the cheap showdown part but thats how the hand gonna go most the time on the board- ot K72 rainbow when were oop
We're 3-bet folding bluffs aren't we? :P I'm not sure how villain would exploit us 3-bet/folding 22. I don't really know how loose villain calls pre-flop but K9, K7s and 79? Probably has 6 combos of K9, 4 of K7s and maybe 8 of 79? Whereas villain only has 3 combos of 77 and 22 of maybe 2 of 99 (assume he 3bets 99 some of the time) and 0 combos of KK (3-bets KK nearly always) - this might be less as well because sometimes he prob raises flop with his set and then he raises more with his set OTT anyway. But we'll stick with 5 combos.
Then there's all the one pair hands KQ/KJ/KT trying to get cheap showdown. Has 25+ combos of them hands. So in total villain has almost 40 combos of hands (that aren't bluffs) that 3-bet the turn that we beat and just 5 combos of hands that we lose to.
I know we can't be results orientated but villain did in fact have a hand trying to get cheap showdown. OK, so he may have folded the hand to a turn 3-bet but if we see villain do this regularly we can start to massively exploit his tactic by 3-bet bluffing the turn a lot. And with our value hands we can just flat turn and then donk river (this might be a better way to get value out of the KQ type hands as it seems more of a bluffy line)
if i knew someone could 3bet fold here i would exploit them all day long and twice on sundays--
obviously in this instance as OP you can be results orientated and can say what his range is but thats cos we've now seen his hand.. its easy to now have a plan one we've seen result but readless i think it was played correctly
one last thing is that calling turn and donking river doesnt look bluffy to me? hahaha another disagreement
How exactly are you going to exploit me by 3bet folding 22? If you decicde you're going to 4-bet bluff me then the majority of the time you will run into higher sets that will definitely not fold. Also this spot doesn't come up frequently but if it did I'd soon realise if you were trying to somehow exploit that and I'd adjust by no longer 3-bet folding 22.
Again we're playing readless on our opponent but we can still make reads based on the population. You think his range is made up of bluffs, BL thinks it's monsters and I believed it to be a mixture of one pair hands looking for cheap showdown and 2 pair hands with some sets. I also gave a range of hands and combinations of each one to prove that we're still by far ahead of his range here OTT. And when we're ahead of their range (that is more value than bluffs - KQ is still value even if looking for cheap showdown) then we want to be putting more money in!
Going back to the river - so what, if you min-r the turn with K7 and are 3-bet by a random, what do you think their range is? Personally I think K7 is a bluff catcher at this point. But if villain just calls and then donks a blank river I'm thinking wtf can they have here? Any value hand wants to get more money in on the turn. All the draws missed... therefore I call.
Readless we got to assume that if we 4 bet we dead, so your 3 bet folding a set
If villain flats, they can flat with a better hand and what worse hands call – I think most will fold
Your really only 3 betting turn for value against Kx hands
With no reads, no level’s, no meta, no nothing – how can you be so certain with population reads that villain has Kx and will call - what else are you value raising against ? range please ?
OK thing is I don't believe villain will flat with a better hand. 90%+ of the time I think if villain only flats the turn we are ahead with 22. Lots of villains love to slow play but when they min-r and then get 3-bet on the turn and they're holding a set they think "Hero obviously has a hand he wants to get it in with, lets just get it in now just in case a diamond falls on the river or a straight hits" It's the same with AA pre-flop - 90%+ of villains if they get 3/4bet when holding AA they assume Hero has a value hand and is never folding so will happily stick it in.
Another hand similar to this was even on TOTPs. Think it was style vs someone. Style had bottom set and villain had raised the turn with 2 pair. Style then 3-bets and villain just flat calls! (and then calls river) He didn't overvalue 2 pair but he knew his hand was only a bluff catcher by now. Same with 2 pair here - you can raise for value but when your 3-bet you know your hand is almost always a bluff catcher so it makes no sense to shove.
I love how you say that I'm only 3 betting turn for value against Kx hands without thinking of how many combos of Kx hands there are (whether it be 2 pair or a pair). Answer: A LOT more than better value hands and random cheap bluffs.
we may just disagree on range/combis but hey.... lets do some math yo!
edit: So your saying this - only issue I have is the inclusion of K7/K9 hands that happily call pre I don't think we can extend the Kx beyond KQ, any weaker Kx and sure vill folds to the 3 bet and i don't think vil would raise turn with KJ/K10
I posted them before. 4 K7 combos, 6 K9 combos and 8 79 combos. 18 hands that are going to raise/call the turn but not shove. Then if he's block/bet raising with KT-KQ hands he might still calls a couple of them combos (also I didn't see this first time round but he could have KQ/KJ/KT with a flush draw) - So that's at least 21 hands that we beat that are calling a turn 3-bet. If not more. As opposed to only ~ 5 combos of sets that beat us.
I posted them before. 4 K7 combos, 6 K9 combos and 8 79 combos. 18 hands that are going to raise/call the turn but not shove. Then if he's block/bet raising with KT-KQ hands he might still calls a couple of them combos (also I didn't see this first time round but he could have KQ/KJ/KT with a flush draw) - So that's at least 21 hands that we beat that are calling a turn 3-bet. If not more. As opposed to only ~ 5 combos of sets that beat us. Posted by F_Ivanovic
yh I removed K7/K9 but we still going to be facing biggers sets 26% of the time so I see the math of 3 betting set 2's.
Still think it heavily rests on knowing villian is capable of raising turns like with that range.
Would still prefer to see in my notes that villian has done this before, but I guess how we gonna find out right.
Comments
If you could sum up your findings in bullet point form thatd be great!
So if we 3 bet turn what happens
Readless we got to assume that if we 4 bet we dead, so your 3 bet folding a set
If villain flats, they can flat with a better hand and what worse hands call – I think most will fold
Your really only 3 betting turn for value against Kx hands
With no reads, no level’s, no meta, no nothing – how can you be so certain with population reads that villain has Kx and will call - what else are you value raising against ? range please ?
what combis are calling
what combis are shoving
we may just disagree on range/combis but hey.... lets do some math yo!
edit: So your saying this - only issue I have is the inclusion of K7/K9 hands that happily call pre
I don't think we can extend the Kx beyond KQ, any weaker Kx and sure vill folds to the 3 bet and i don't think vil would raise turn with KJ/K10
call
K7
K9
KQ
K10dd
79
Fold - bluffs
67o
99
KJ<
Call or 4 bet
77
99
Still think it heavily rests on knowing villian is capable of raising turns like with that range.
Would still prefer to see in my notes that villian has done this before, but I guess how we gonna find out right.
Blonde or =4?