Is this always a fold?

mattless

Following raise and re-raise is this a fold in sb. x is reg, bit passive. y is good aggressive reg for this level.

mattless	Small blind		£0.05	£0.05	£11.55
liamboi11	Big blind		£0.10	£0.15	£9.38
	Your hole cards	7 7
x	Raise		£0.30	£0.45	£7.84
y	Raise		£1.10	£1.55	£8.55
BLUFFA360	Fold
pennys	Fold
mattless	?

percival09

with the stacks def

grantorino

Yeah, unless you wanna raise

rancid

this hand looks familar

yeah fold

liamboi11

I fold unless we are playing a lot deeper

The_Don90

if we're sure x will just call we can maybe flat but thats just to risky imo. Just fold safest. Cold 4betting would be overplaying our hand imo

BorinLoner

In Response to Re: Is this always a fold?:

if we're sure x will just call we can maybe flat but thats just to risky imo. Just fold safest. Cold 4betting would be overplaying our hand imo
Posted by The_Don90

I think grantorino wasn't suggesting 4-betting as a value bet. If we 4-bet we're bluffing, since that cold 4-bet is going to look super-strong.

The 4-bet here is the sort of thing we have to do occasionally and 77 isn't the worst hand in the world to do it with. It's as much about balancing our range as it is about this particular hand. If we want to always 4-bet in these situations when we have AA, KK, etc. then we have to also 4-bet sometimes with other hands.

percival09

4b bluffing with 77 is pretty bad imo, esp 100bb deep

if you 4b with 77 you're 4betting with the intention of getting it in

BorinLoner

In Response to Re: Is this always a fold?:

4b bluffing with 77 is pretty bad imo, esp 100bb deep if you 4b with 77 you're 4betting with the intention of getting it in
Posted by percival09

I don't agree. You'd have to believe that you were being 5-bet very light indeed to call off your stack with 77. If you're not going to 4-bet bluff with mid-pairs, then you should never be 4-betting as a bluff at all. It's much better in my thinking to 4-bet bluff with 77 than QT, for example, because there will be occasions when you will actually be called. At least if we flop a set with 77 we can have some confidence in our hand and that's highly unlikely to be the case with QT, 72 or any other hand that we might 4-bet with as a bluff.

We're not playing the strength of our hand, but at least with 77 we'll have something to hope to hit if we are called.

mattless

In Response to Re: Is this always a fold?:

this hand looks familar yeah fold
Posted by rancid

Dont think you were on table, you're defo not x or y

percival09

In Response to Re: Is this always a fold?:

In Response to Re: Is this always a fold? : I don't agree. You'd have to believe that you were being 5-bet very light indeed to call off your stack with 77. If you're not going to 4-bet bluff with mid-pairs, then you should never be 4-betting as a bluff at all. It's much better in my thinking to 4-bet bluff with 77 than QT, for example, because there will be occasions when you will actually be called. At least if we flop a set with 77 we can have some confidence in our hand and that's highly unlikely to be the case with QT, 72 or any other hand that we might 4-bet with as a bluff. We're not playing the strength of our hand, but at least with 77 we'll have something to hope to hit if we are called.
Posted by BorinLoner

I'll reply to bold bit by bold bit lol...

Yes, which is why I'd only do it vs opponents who 3b high %, obv I'm not going to do this often but occasionaly in late position if I feel I'm ahead of somebodys range I might 4b with the intention of getting it in with 77-99.

Lol at that comment. Why not? Yes, don't 4b bluff vs opponents who don't fold to 4bets, what's the point in that? If you're going to 4b bluff, do it with potential blockers to villains hand, i.e. Ax and Kx, but usually rag Ax and rag Kx... hands that aren't too strong to 4b fold, and I think mid pocket pairs come into that category.

BorinLoner

In Response to Re: Is this always a fold?:

In Response to Re: Is this always a fold? : I'll reply to bold bit by bold bit lol... Yes, which is why I'd only do it vs opponents who 3b high %, obv I'm not going to do this often but occasionaly in late position if I feel I'm ahead of somebodys range I might 4b with the intention of getting it in with 77-99. Lol at that comment. Why not? Yes, don't 4b bluff vs opponents who don't fold to 4bets, what's the point in that? If you're going to 4b bluff, do it with potential blockers to villains hand, i.e. Ax and Kx, but usually rag Ax and rag Kx... hands that aren't too strong to 4b fold, and I think mid pocket pairs come into that category.
Posted by percival09

Well, of course it's all read dependent. I didn't say you should 4-bet bluff versus any old fool. You've got to have some idea that the initial raiser is opening wide and that the 3-better is doing so frequently. It's also better if you believe your own image is reasonably tight.

The issue between us is obviously that you seem to think that mid-pairs are too good to 4-bet/fold. My thoughts on the matter are that not many players are going to 5-bet a cold 4-better with less than a premium hand - we can rule out KQ, AJ, probably AQ and 66 and below from almost all players ranges here. Basically that's going to mean AK, AA, KK, QQ and possibly JJ. Against that range of hands we're obviously going to need about 3.5/1 pot odds to call as a break-even. That's not likely unless our 4-bet is very big. So now mid-pairs to my mind are certainly not too strong to fold.

As for the talk of having our 4-bet called, well that's not something that's going to happen very often if we pick our opponents well. Even so, it will happen occasionally.

I wasn't referring specifically to this hand, I was really just trying to explain what I thought grantorino was getting at and trying to explain why you might 4-bet with 77. Our position won't usually make a huge difference, since we're not likely to see too many flops when cold 4-betting but it would certainly be a better move in position. I'd probably fold about 95% of the time and not give it another thought. I would never, ever call and would 4-bet the rest of the time intending to fold to a 5-bet.

percival09

agreed, not many players will 5b a cold 4b with less than a premium hand, and yes there range will probz be AK,AA, KK, QQ and poss JJ. So why not cold 4b an aggressive 3better with cards which block their potential range, Ax and Kx. I'm never 4b folding vs an aggressive 3better with a mid pocket pair, that just doesn't make sense to me. 

BorinLoner

In Response to Re: Is this always a fold?:

agreed, not many players will 5b a cold 4b with less than a premium hand, and yes there range will probz be AK,AA, KK, QQ and poss JJ. So why not cold 4b an aggressive 3better with cards which block their potential range, Ax and Kx. I'm never 4b folding vs an aggressive 3better with a mid pocket pair, that just doesn't make sense to me. 
Posted by percival09

I don't really understand why you think it doesn't make sense. I think, unless you have a really good read that the guy is super-aggro and believes that you could be cold 4-betting light, then you should still assign him a very tight range to 5-bet shove with. Aggro players can 3-bet wide but few can 5-bet equally wide, meaning you'd need really good pot odds to call off the rest of your stack, which is probably around 3.5/1. Even if I have those reads I'd be tempted to just fold and let them have it alot of the time unless I was getting reasonably close to the right odds.

When I'm saying 4-bet bluffing with 77 is good, I'm not saying it's necessarily better than 4-bet bluffing with Ax or Kx, I'm just saying it's probably not worse. The whole blocker thing does make sense but if you have your opponent's on a wide 3-betting range anyway I'm not convinced that it makes a huge difference that a single Ace or King is accounted for, though clearly it makes some difference. On the other hand, on those occasions when we are called, I'd rather be holding a hand like 77 than a hand like A3. Again, that's not going to make a huge difference because we won't be called often but it will happen.

percival09

There's our difference, I wouldn't even think about making a cold 4b with a mid pocket pair without a really good read that the guy is super aggro and believes that you can cold 4b light!

BorinLoner

In Response to Re: Is this always a fold?:

There's our difference, I wouldn't even think about making a cold 4b with a mid pocket pair without a really good read that the guy is super aggro and believes that you can cold 4b light!
Posted by percival09

There's a difference between being aggro - a player who would 3-bet with a range including hands such as KJ, 88 - and a player who is super-aggro - a player who can 3-bet with any two.

It's still a reasonable play to 4-bet as a bluff against those "aggro" players because they will lay down a fairly wide portion of their range. Obviously, it's going to be better to 4-bet the "super-aggro" players but only if they're going to believe that you're not 4-betting light.

The way you're talking is that you would consider only 4-betting for value against these super-aggro players with 77. If you believe that you may be perceived to be weak when they see your 4-bet, then why do it with 77? If that's how you think they perceive you, then you can use your image to really hit them for value and only make these moves with bigger hands. Surely, by 4-betting with 77, if they perceive you to be weak they'd be right. 77 is not that big a hand to catch them out with. I can't imagine calling the 5-bet and saying "Haha! You thought I was 4-betting light but I actually had the mighty 77!"

So when I'm talking about 4-betting here, I want to know i) the opener and 3-better are reasonably laggy ii) I will be perceived as reasonably tight. If my 4-betting range is going to be perceived as being very loose, then I'm not going to 4-bet without a strong hand.



(Sorry if that's little hard to follow. I've tried to tidy it up.)

DrSharp

Read dependent situation. Table dynamics are very important. If this has been going on quite a bit then a 4-bet bluff is ok sometimes but mostly its a fold.

AMYBR

fold without even thinking bout it

MeloPete

For me it's always a fold (but I am tight). You're not closing the action and if you call how can you be sure the initial raiser doesn't raise again, then you really will have to fold.