@ivanovic - yeah, I realised I would be giving up a bit of equity in this specific hand, but I really felt comfortable with being able to rebuild pretty quickly....
i thought this hand would be contraversial hehe. @ivanovic - yeah, I realised I would be giving up a bit of equity in this specific hand, but I really felt comfortable with being able to rebuild pretty quickly.... Posted by chicknMelt
I just dont get why youd 3 bet with this hand pre, hit your dream flop and check/fold. Id definitely 100% be c-betting here and wouldnt even care if he jams. If he calls and you miss then it becomes trickier but im still definitely taking the initiative on the flop, but yes I think the better line is to peel the button raise unless hes been stealing blinds galore and will barrel most flops.
In Response to Re: Can a chicken go pro? : I just dont get why youd 3 bet with this hand pre, hit your dream flop and check/fold. Id definitely 100% be c-betting here and wouldnt even care if he jams. If he calls and you miss then it becomes trickier but im still definitely taking the initiative on the flop, but yes I think the better line is to peel the button raise unless hes been stealing blinds galore and will barrel most flops. Posted by gazza127
99% of the time I would cbet, but this time, i was 100% sure the villain was going to bet, and I would earn more chips by check shoving. also, I dont think he is ever folding to a cbet, after calling the 3bet and that board, this way, i would maximise my fold equity, and get to see all the cards if he calls.
I dont have a sb flat range vs a button open, I hate flatting in the SB - you have a capped range and it encourages the bb to flat - so your playing OOP vs 2 people with a capped range - not good.
Im actually really disliking the reraise pre now that ive noticed villains stack size. What if he 4 bet shoves? Posted by gazza127
i'm guessing he has always folded to Chickn's 3-bets
so until he fights back still worth a try
but with that flop it has to be a c-bet
or c/r as intended
all his big raise on the flop is doing is telling you that you have given him an opening to take the pot and he is going to make it as hard as possible for you to stop him. would you expect him to raise small with his stack?
Im actually really disliking the reraise pre now that ive noticed villains stack size. What if he 4 bet shoves? Posted by gazza127
I call obv, but reluctantly, and fold to a shove from the BB. if the BB had < 20 bb, I'm just shoving.
**edit** - the 3bet raise was meant to be the minimum to indicate to the button I wasnt folding, whilst not commiting my stack incase the BB shoves over the top
In Response to Re: Can a chicken go pro? : i'm guessing he has always folded to Chickn's 3-bets so until he fights back still worth a try but with that flop it has to be a c-bet or c/r as intended all his big raise on the flop is doing is telling you that you have given him an opening to take the pot and he is going to make it as hard as possible for you to stop him. would you expect him to raise small with his stack? Posted by GELDY
no, i'd just expect him to make a standard raise - something around half pot. its normal at this stage to bet less than half pot, regardless of how big your stack is.
If i did think he was going to bet that big, I would have cbet.
I've been directed here to look at this hand. It is indeed generating conversation.
I think we need to have better reasoning behind our 3-bet sizing than "experimenting". Presumably there's a reason why you thought this sizing was better than smaller or bigger.
I'd agree with Gazza about not wanting to 3-bet against the BTN's stack, though. If we 3-bet, unless we go really small, we're pretty well committed to calling off the rest. That allows the villain to play easy poker against us. Assuming he's not going to level himself into shoving weaker Aces too often, we're never getting it in ahead. I don't mind 3-betting if his opening range is really wide, though, as long as he's going to fold a lot of the time. However, we definitely don't need to be going to this large a size as we can leverage our stack against him with a really small 3-bet.
The flop is tough to understand. The only thing I can think of is that you're overestimating your edge. I don't think an edge can ever allow us to pass up such clearly +EV spots. This isn't a marginal situation with the equity our hand has.
I don't particularly like checking the flop. We have a read that the villain is going to bet every time we check but if that bet can leave us with no fold equity, we don't want to be inducing that bet with just a draw, particularly if we can't always be confident in going with the hand. I think we should be leading.
Even after checking, I think we have far too much equity to just fold, as I said above.
Just want to pick up on something posted while I was typing...
Flatting a button raise from the small blind doesn't need to cap your range. There are really good arguments for flatting the top of our range against a wide open from the button.
I've been directed here to look at this hand. It is indeed generating conversation. I think we need to have better reasoning behind our 3-bet sizing than "experimenting". Presumably there's a reason why you thought this sizing was better than smaller or bigger.
yeah, just added that to another post as an **edit**
I'd agree with Gazza about not wanting to 3-bet against the BTN's stack, though. If we 3-bet, unless we go really small, we're pretty well committed to calling off the rest. That allows the villain to play easy poker against us. Assuming he's not going to level himself into shoving weaker Aces too often, we're never getting it in ahead. I don't mind 3-betting if his opening range is really wide, though, as long as he's going to fold a lot of the time.
he was opening pretty wide, i'm confident of getting folds alot of the time.
However, we definitely don't need to be going to this large a size as we can leverage our stack against him with a really small 3-bet. The flop is tough to understand. The only thing I can think of is that you're overestimating your edge. I don't think an edge can ever allow us to pass up such clearly +EV spots. This isn't a marginal situation with the equity our hand has. I don't particularly like checking the flop. We have a read that the villain is going to bet every time we check but if that bet can leave us with no fold equity, we don't want to be inducing that bet with just a draw, particularly if we can't always be confident in going with the hand. I think we should be leading. Even after checking, I think we have far too much equity to just fold, as I said above.
I agree, its +EV to get it in here. but not by a huge amount - have you considered ICM? if i lose, I have 0% chance of winning the tourney.. but still a pretty decent chance if I fold.
Im guessing that flat just looked too suspect give hes never flatted a 3bet before and isnt closing the betting with the original aggressor still to act. Id be getting it in all day here as we have great equity, but if youre trusting your reads then its ok to change your plan for a hand given new info. As long as you can make a rational justification.
Just want to pick up on something posted while I was typing... Flatting a button raise from the small blind doesn't need to cap your range. There are really good arguments for flatting the top of our range against a wide open from the button. Posted by BorinLoner
they would have to have to be folding to 3bets alot to consider flatting in the sb, like I say, it encourages the BB to come along "for value", so you are playing OOP vs 2 people, and one of them has almost 100% in his range... dont like it.
its almost always more profitable to 3bet your monsters, so we certainly shouldn't be adding it to our flatting range just to balance our range either.
BTW - I accept my play may not have been optimal, after all, there is alot to think about in just a few seconds... but at the moment, I still stand my reasoning...
THis is WAYY above my poker level, BUT, giving the way Chick plays could it not just be a case of a player getting fed up by Chick "stealing" and having the kahoonas to fight back? GREAT diary & nice bink BTW! BE careful of positive tilt tho.. ;-)
THis is WAYY above my poker level, BUT, giving the way Chick plays could it not just be a case of a player getting fed up by Chick "stealing" and having the kahoonas to fight back? GREAT diary & nice bink BTW! BE careful of positive tilt tho.. ;-) Posted by Glenelg
Thanks Glen
I would say that the BB is much more likely RR than flat if making a stand. I hadnt actually been 3betting alot, especially OOP, because I had been able to accumilate chips easily by just raise/cbetting. So overall, I'd think in this case its unlikely. not impossible though.
anyway, as it turns out, I did manage to rebuild my stack and more - thats the part in my report when I said everyone was playing passivley and I got from 20k > 30k before my report started, then from there 30k > 50k, pretty much without seeing a turn card for any of it. it had been like this beforehand too, which is why I was confident of playing lower varience and not risking busting.
I wasn't too worried about getting it in vs the button, because i'd still have 20bb if I lost. obv i'm never ahead when it goes in (maybe racing sometimes - PPs <99 and KQ possibly), but I think he is folding enough to warrant the 3bet
Enjoyed reading your insights to how the table was reacting to you. As for THAT hand. Must say i wouldn't fold with the NFD for reasons Ivan has put succinctly. To be honest i'd probably ship but hey ho? Gl at the tables fella
Comments
I think we need to have better reasoning behind our 3-bet sizing than "experimenting". Presumably there's a reason why you thought this sizing was better than smaller or bigger.
I'd agree with Gazza about not wanting to 3-bet against the BTN's stack, though. If we 3-bet, unless we go really small, we're pretty well committed to calling off the rest. That allows the villain to play easy poker against us. Assuming he's not going to level himself into shoving weaker Aces too often, we're never getting it in ahead. I don't mind 3-betting if his opening range is really wide, though, as long as he's going to fold a lot of the time. However, we definitely don't need to be going to this large a size as we can leverage our stack against him with a really small 3-bet.
The flop is tough to understand. The only thing I can think of is that you're overestimating your edge. I don't think an edge can ever allow us to pass up such clearly +EV spots. This isn't a marginal situation with the equity our hand has.
I don't particularly like checking the flop. We have a read that the villain is going to bet every time we check but if that bet can leave us with no fold equity, we don't want to be inducing that bet with just a draw, particularly if we can't always be confident in going with the hand. I think we should be leading.
Even after checking, I think we have far too much equity to just fold, as I said above.
Just want to pick up on something posted while I was typing...
Flatting a button raise from the small blind doesn't need to cap your range. There are really good arguments for flatting the top of our range against a wide open from the button.
From a Newbie