In Response to Re: What to do? nl100 - 270bb deep : You seem to be on the same page as me. I didnt really think too much about check on the flop, I think cbet and check both have their merits. Interesting that many would cbet 100 percent of the time here. But was really wondering if river could be a fold, even though it looks like an obvious call. I couldnt put him on a lower set too often, unlikely when he checked flop and turn. A lot of players wouldnt even raise with the lower set anyway, may feel only better will continue. I couldnt see him raising with two pair because he would not see me continueing with any worse. Would be a really odd bluff. In the end I called reluctantly, feeling sure he had jq. Kind of ruled out AA due to preflop play and check on flop and turn. But, he had AA. Posted by Spad3s
makes sense pre i spose, doesnt want to fold out the lower pairs of your 3bet range, 100bb deep obv he 4bet gets it in but played well by him tbh
In Response to Re: What to do? nl100 - 270bb deep : betting 100% of the time in a 3bet pot is a big leak.. it depends how well balanced u are, but depending on history and dynamics i would never be betting 100% in a 3bet pot.. especially this deep.. Posted by LnarinOO
really, intresting - after we 3 bet then what hands would we check flop with - what are the reasons for checking flop in a 3 bet pot
also why is flatting with AA this deep good play, surely the deeper we are the more we want to put in pre
pot controlling with these hands pre/flop just seems really strange
maybe it's just me but it seems a bit odd to 3 bet pre and then check flop, may aswell wave a flag above your head and shout "I have a hand"
suppose they both playing very deceptive, only plus point I can see from this example
plus I think this deep, implied hands alwasy come along to 3/4 bet
Its not just you ranny, lot of backward logic here imo.
Cant think of 1 real reason to check that flop IP.
Hero's logic is based on fact he didnt want to build a big pot, reinforced by fact oppo had A's. Playing hand putting oppo on maybe 2 nut hands on flop, then we have the stone cold nuts on turn which is irrelevant apparently, then two better nut hands on river.......
Forgetting that though: Dynamic lvling war pre 6betaipf snap call sigh.......fist pump ........ .. .... ............................. ...sighhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
In Response to Re: What to do? nl100 - 270bb deep : really, intresting - after we 3 bet then what hands would we check flop with - what are the reasons for checking flop in a 3 bet pot also why is flatting with AA this deep good play, surely the deeper we are the more we want to put in pre pot controlling with these hands pre/flop just seems really strange maybe it's just me but it seems a bit odd to 3 bet pre and then check flop, may aswell wave a flag above your head and shout "I have a hand" suppose they both playing very deceptive, only plus point I can see from this example plus I think this deep, implied hands alwasy come along to 3/4 bet Posted by rancid
I would just about always 4bet there too with aa, especially since were out of position. Unless the other guy in pot was fishy and I wanted to keep him in.
But the check on flop is pot control....we dont want to play for 270bb stacks with just overpair and the opponent is not going to give us three streets with much that we beat. Not only that but he could take make us fold on turn or river when we are still beating him. Not sure whats strange.
In Response to Re: What to do? nl100 - 270bb deep : I would just about always 4bet there too with aa, especially since were out of position. Unless the other guy in pot was fishy and I wanted to keep him in. But the check on flop is pot control....we dont want to play for 270bb stacks with just overpair and the opponent is not going to give us three streets with much that we beat. Not only that but he could take make us fold on turn or river when we are still beating him. Not sure whats strange. Posted by Spad3s
Still don't get the pot control with KK on that flop, tons of hands give us value here and who said we have to play for 270bb effective. Why can't we get three streets of value, more is better than less Think of how much value we lose versus all other hands. Because oppo has AA, it would seem your justifying what a good play it was to be honest
In Response to Re: What to do? nl100 - 270bb deep : really, intresting - after we 3 bet then what hands would we check flop with - what are the reasons for checking flop in a 3 bet pot also why is flatting with AA this deep good play, surely the deeper we are the more we want to put in pre pot controlling with these hands pre/flop just seems really strange maybe it's just me but it seems a bit odd to 3 bet pre and then check flop, may aswell wave a flag above your head and shout "I have a hand" suppose they both playing very deceptive, only plus point I can see from this example plus I think this deep, implied hands alwasy come along to 3/4 bet Posted by rancid
just because we 3bet pre doesnt mean we have to cbet weather we hit or miss.. dependant on the board texture and our hand strenth vs oppos range, dynamics and villains tendancies will be the deciding factors.. specific to this hand i would prefer to get last 2 streets as the flop is dry, this will get us more value from worse imo, im use to playing with a HUD so i would no how often villians call cbet in a 3bet pot, calls twice 3bet pot, folds flop in 3bet pot.. this is irrelevant on here as u cannot have HUD but u still should have a good feel for villains tendancies
i dont think ppl maxmise value enough in hands and it's only saying 'i have a massive hand' if your not balanced..
and as for playing AA like this, how can you not say it wasnt played well LOL.. why would he want to 4bet and turn his hand face up?? rather than try to get value from worse or crushed hands.. again ppl not maximising value in a given situation where they would jus let someone 3bet fold JJ QQ AQ..
100bb deep YES 4bet AA and get money in asap.. 300bb deep why 4bet? ppl will 3bet ridic wide ranges and call 4bets jus to outplay u because its deep enough to do so.. this is not backward logic.!! rethink youown imo..
In Response to Re: What to do? nl100 - 270bb deep : Still don't get the pot control with KK on that flop, tons of hands give us value here and who said we have to play for 270bb effective. Why can't we get three streets of value, more is better than less Think of how much value we lose versus all other hands. Because oppo has AA, it would seem your justifying what a good play it was to be honest Posted by rancid
ur not understanding here..!! what hand is gonna call us down flop turn and river that we beat..??
A10..?? how often do one pair hand get 3 streets from worse, not that often most ppl no how to fold nowadays..!
vs utg calling range, Ax, pairs and broadway... we bet th flop like u say.. get called by Axcc, some pairs, and all hands better, then cbet a good turn card.. worse pairs wil mostly fold giving us only 1 street of value, draws still come and better hands come.. if the river bricks better hands have always been ahead and draws fold but what value do we get ???? not alot
im not saying we check back flop all the time but on dry boards and deep i see this a a better line..
In Response to Re: What to do? nl100 - 270bb deep : just because we 3bet pre doesnt mean we have to cbet weather we hit or miss.. dependant on the board texture and our hand strenth vs oppos range, dynamics and villains tendancies will be the deciding factors.. specific to this hand i would prefer to get last 2 streets as the flop is dry, this will get us more value from worse imo, im use to playing with a HUD so i would no how often villians call cbet in a 3bet pot, calls twice 3bet pot, folds flop in 3bet pot.. this is irrelevant on here as u cannot have HUD but u still should have a good feel for villains tendancies i dont think ppl maxmise value enough in hands and it's only saying 'i have a massive hand' if your not balanced.. and as for playing AA like this, how can you not say it wasnt played well LOL.. why would he want to 4bet and turn his hand face up?? rather than try to get value from worse or crushed hands.. again ppl not maximising value in a given situation where they would jus let someone 3bet fold JJ QQ AQ.. 100bb deep YES 4bet AA and get money in asap.. 300bb deep why 4bet? ppl will 3bet ridic wide ranges and call 4bets jus to outplay u because its deep enough to do so.. this is not backward logic.!! rethink youown imo.. Posted by LnarinOO
I understand the logic of deception to maximise value from worse Just think this is very transparent play to 3 bet pre and check flop - I still think you can just bet/bet/bet and still maximise from worse
The whole hand is just a cooler, would have more intresting if no K on turn or A on river
Would seem to me that playing this way is playing scared of being outplayed or not having the best hand
In Response to Re: What to do? nl100 - 270bb deep : I understand the logic of deception to maximise value from worse Just think this is very transparent play to 3 bet pre and check flop - I still think you can just bet/bet/bet and still maximise from worse The whole hand is just a cooler, would have more intresting if no K on turn or A on river Would seem to me that playing this way is playing scared of being outplayed or not having the best hand Posted by rancid
So what if we bet flop, and he check raises. Yes were calling. But what if he bets turn.....then river....
All of a sudden we are playing a massive pot and we are guessing where were at. He could have a set, he could have draws, he could have air and we dont know what turn or river cards are good for us...our hand rarely improves on turn or river.
The check is to stop us getting into these tricky spots, possibly folding the best hand or having to pay off a massive pot with just kk.
We also get good value from hands we beat, with river and turn bets.
wp. I would lean towards folding because of the raise size. Lower sets usually would lead or raise turn and his raise on the river doesnt really suggest AK to me.
*grunch* wp. I would lean towards folding because of the raise size. Lower sets usually would lead or raise turn and his raise on the river doesnt really suggest AK to me. Posted by offshoot
Yeah, the more I look, I think it should have been a fold. Cant see any hand hes raising for value that I beat the way the hand played. And can never see him bluff there.
Was one of those I couldnt bring myself to click fold with.
In Response to Re: What to do? nl100 - 270bb deep : So what if we bet flop, and he check raises. Yes were calling. But what if he bets turn.....then river.... All of a sudden we are playing a massive pot and we are guessing where were at. He could have a set, he could have draws, he could have air and we dont know what turn or river cards are good for us...our hand rarely improves on turn or river. The check is to stop us getting into these tricky spots, possibly folding the best hand or having to pay off a massive pot with just kk. We also get good value from hands we beat, with river and turn bets. Posted by Spad3s
I see why u check behind now, but if oppo has set then we face c/r on turn or donk lead anyway - does it make it easier to get away from as oppo doesn't c/r or lead turn w/draws If oppo has worse, do we end up loosing value from one street though :S
In Response to Re: What to do? nl100 - 270bb deep : I see why u check behind now, but if oppo has set then we face c/r on turn or donk lead anyway - does it make it easier to get away from as oppo doesn't c/r or lead turn w/draws If oppo has worse, do we end up loosing value from one street though :S nh Posted by rancid
I would expect him to donk lead turn a lot, with all kinds of hands, value, air and draws. We can just call because raising makes no sense....then call pretty much any river expecting to win most of the time.
If he check raises I think it looks very strong, Id call and then decide on river based on how much he bets.
Still seems a bit daft to me tbh. We talk of pot control yet still find 200bigs across the line on river. Plus if we had such a strong read in hand there is just no way we ought to be opening river, seems very counter intuitive.
We are beat here on flop and river, but hold the nuts on the turn, which really isnt immaterial. All I think we achieve is to lose value over volume.
Still seems a bit daft to me tbh. We talk of pot control yet still find 200bigs across the line on river. Posted by AMYBR
Well, obviously more money was going in when I hit the set......but if I had folded river like a felt I should 200 bbs wouldnt have gone in I suppose.
Plus if we had such a strong read in hand there is just no way we ought to be opening river, seems very counter intuitive. Posted by AMYBR
What read is this now, I was obviously pretty confident I was ahead when I opened the river......once he raises of course that changes my read on the situation.
We are beat here on flop and river, but hold the nuts on the turn, which really isnt immaterial. All I think we achieve is to lose value over volume. Posted by AMYBR
I'm in the pot control on flop camp, think this was well played. Barring the cooler you'ld have been congratulating yourself for losing minimum. Posted by simonnatur
I'm in the pot control on flop camp, think this was well played. Barring the cooler you'ld have been congratulating yourself for losing minimum. Posted by simonnatur
The remaining significant portion of volume we are obv annoyed at ourselves for losing value IMO.
I do see where you are coming from opting to go for some pot control so deep, but its simply not a choice I personally would make. But even if I were to, the flop would not be the street I would elect to do so.
I'd be looking to generate a big pot vs fellow deep stack with K's, rather than going into the hand being afraid to do so.
Cant really look at this hand in isolation. If we play this set up 10000 /> times we are just burning money (obv with oppo holdings and T & R varied.)
I ignored this thread because when I spotted it, it already had about 20 responses. Having read it I'm left with one question in my mind for you Spades:
Did you think you had the best hand on the flop?
Pot controlling with the best hand would seem bad to me. In this spot - I've 3-bet pre-flop, been called and the flop has come down Ten-high with a flush draw - I would be fairly convinced that my hand was best. Apart from sets I can't see any hand that beats me, as AA is very rarely going to be in my opponent's range.
I'm reading talk of "Three streets of value". I wouldn't be thinking about that. I would be thinking about what hands are going to call me on the flop. What hands am I getting value from on the flop? I have one-pair, not a monster that I know is always going to be the best hand on the river, but I believe it's the best hand now. If it's the best hand now and money goes into the pot, that's good for me. The turn could change things and then I might have to change tack, but right now getting money in is good.
Value bet your hand when it figures to be ahead. You can get called by flush draws, AT, KT, QT, JT, 9T. These hands haven't called a pre-flop 3-bet to just fold top-pair or a flush draw to a standard c-bet.
You might be check-raised but it's up to you to figure out what hands are doing that. I'd suggest there would be more Tens and Flush draws in his check-raising range than hands that beat us. That's going to make it fairly easy to play subsequent streets - Clubs are bad for us, bricks are good. Of course, if he fires on blank turns and again on blank rivers, then perhaps we can assign him a stronger made hand anyway.
So, I'm c-betting this flop and, if I would c-bet it with all of my pre-flop bluffing hands, I think it is a mistake to not c-bet it.
On the river his range is so polarised. You're getting roughly 2/1 on your money, so is a third of his range a bluff or an overvalued and strangely played underset or two-pair? I'm going to avoid answering that as I think it's close and fairly player dependent, though I would hardly even spare a thought for a set of Aces as it was played so atypically...
Incidentally, to whoever it was that thought that the guy with the Aces played it well I would simply point out that the way he played it he could have been sat looking at top set on the river with only 32BB in the pot. What makes it worse is that his opponent has KK. This hand should have been a cooler in his favour. Across your poker career you don't make money from coolers but if you don't get fully paid when it goes in your favour, you can lose money from these coolers. This guy is going to lose money.
Comments
really, intresting - after we 3 bet then what hands would we check flop with - what are the reasons for checking flop in a 3 bet pot
also why is flatting with AA this deep good play, surely the deeper we are the more we want to put in pre
pot controlling with these hands pre/flop just seems really strange
maybe it's just me but it seems a bit odd to 3 bet pre and then check flop, may aswell wave a flag above your head and shout "I have a hand"
suppose they both playing very deceptive, only plus point I can see from this example
plus I think this deep, implied hands alwasy come along to 3/4 bet
Cant think of 1 real reason to check that flop IP.
Hero's logic is based on fact he didnt want to build a big pot, reinforced by fact oppo had A's. Playing hand putting oppo on maybe 2 nut hands on flop, then we have the stone cold nuts on turn which is irrelevant apparently, then two better nut hands on river.......
Forgetting that though: Dynamic lvling war pre 6betaipf snap call sigh.......fist pump ........ .. .... ............................. ...sighhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
But the check on flop is pot control....we dont want to play for 270bb stacks with just overpair and the opponent is not going to give us three streets with much that we beat. Not only that but he could take make us fold on turn or river when we are still beating him. Not sure whats strange.
Think of how much value we lose versus all other hands.
Because oppo has AA, it would seem your justifying what a good play it was to be honest
Just think this is very transparent play to 3 bet pre and check flop - I still think you can just bet/bet/bet and still maximise from worse
The whole hand is just a cooler, would have more intresting if no K on turn or A on river
Would seem to me that playing this way is playing scared of being outplayed or not having the best hand
So what if we bet flop, and he check raises. Yes were calling. But what if he bets turn.....then river....
All of a sudden we are playing a massive pot and we are guessing where were at. He could have a set, he could have draws, he could have air and we dont know what turn or river cards are good for us...our hand rarely improves on turn or river.
The check is to stop us getting into these tricky spots, possibly folding the best hand or having to pay off a massive pot with just kk.
We also get good value from hands we beat, with river and turn bets.
wp. I would lean towards folding because of the raise size. Lower sets usually would lead or raise turn and his raise on the river doesnt really suggest AK to me.
Was one of those I couldnt bring myself to click fold with.
If oppo has worse, do we end up loosing value from one street though :S
nh
I would expect him to donk lead turn a lot, with all kinds of hands, value, air and draws. We can just call because raising makes no sense....then call pretty much any river expecting to win most of the time.
If he check raises I think it looks very strong, Id call and then decide on river based on how much he bets.
We are beat here on flop and river, but hold the nuts on the turn, which really isnt immaterial. All I think we achieve is to lose value over volume.
What read is this now, I was obviously pretty confident I was ahead when I opened the river......once he raises of course that changes my read on the situation.
Not sure what youre trying to say here.
I do see where you are coming from opting to go for some pot control so deep, but its simply not a choice I personally would make. But even if I were to, the flop would not be the street I would elect to do so.
I'd be looking to generate a big pot vs fellow deep stack with K's, rather than going into the hand being afraid to do so.
Cant really look at this hand in isolation. If we play this set up 10000 /> times we are just burning money (obv with oppo holdings and T & R varied.)
Did you think you had the best hand on the flop?
Pot controlling with the best hand would seem bad to me. In this spot - I've 3-bet pre-flop, been called and the flop has come down Ten-high with a flush draw - I would be fairly convinced that my hand was best. Apart from sets I can't see any hand that beats me, as AA is very rarely going to be in my opponent's range.
I'm reading talk of "Three streets of value". I wouldn't be thinking about that. I would be thinking about what hands are going to call me on the flop. What hands am I getting value from on the flop? I have one-pair, not a monster that I know is always going to be the best hand on the river, but I believe it's the best hand now. If it's the best hand now and money goes into the pot, that's good for me. The turn could change things and then I might have to change tack, but right now getting money in is good.
Value bet your hand when it figures to be ahead. You can get called by flush draws, AT, KT, QT, JT, 9T. These hands haven't called a pre-flop 3-bet to just fold top-pair or a flush draw to a standard c-bet.
You might be check-raised but it's up to you to figure out what hands are doing that. I'd suggest there would be more Tens and Flush draws in his check-raising range than hands that beat us. That's going to make it fairly easy to play subsequent streets - Clubs are bad for us, bricks are good. Of course, if he fires on blank turns and again on blank rivers, then perhaps we can assign him a stronger made hand anyway.
So, I'm c-betting this flop and, if I would c-bet it with all of my pre-flop bluffing hands, I think it is a mistake to not c-bet it.
On the river his range is so polarised. You're getting roughly 2/1 on your money, so is a third of his range a bluff or an overvalued and strangely played underset or two-pair? I'm going to avoid answering that as I think it's close and fairly player dependent, though I would hardly even spare a thought for a set of Aces as it was played so atypically...
Incidentally, to whoever it was that thought that the guy with the Aces played it well I would simply point out that the way he played it he could have been sat looking at top set on the river with only 32BB in the pot. What makes it worse is that his opponent has KK. This hand should have been a cooler in his favour. Across your poker career you don't make money from coolers but if you don't get fully paid when it goes in your favour, you can lose money from these coolers. This guy is going to lose money.