You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Player | Action | Cards | Amount | Pot | Balance |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
SB | Small blind | £0.25 | £0.25 | £60.58 | |
grantorino | Big blind | £0.50 | £0.75 | £49.50 | |
Your hole cards |
| ||||
BTN | Raise | £1.50 | £2.25 | £85.47 | |
SB | Fold | ||||
grantorino | Raise | £4.50 | £6.75 | £45.00 | |
BTN | Call | £3.50 | £10.25 | £81.97 | |
Flop | |||||
|
Comments
then re evaluate depending on what villain does
I always find flopping tpwk oop when I 3b bluff pre tricky. Obv it gets pretty read dependent, but if anyone had any thoughts that would be great
Do I treat KT the same
what do I do if my flop bet gets called, lets say a blank turn
Anyway, I'd prefer 3-betting with 72 to KT. I probably just fold pre-flop but then I'm pretty nitty myself when I'm in the blinds.
Once we get to the flop, I agree we should c-bet. If we'd c-bet with 72, then we should c-bet with top-pair. If he calls, then I'm checking the turn and looking to check-call, though I don't know if I want to check-call both turn and river... hmmm... Probably need to on the off-chance that he floated the flop. At least we know he'll make it cheap for us if he has a monster. lol
If we check the flop, I think we end up check-calling three streets if the board comes out dry. I don't know if I'd like that either, readless. Do unknowns bluff/value-bet with worse on three streets very often?
vs nitty player if we bet flop i think all worse made hands will fold unless it has equity like FD's.
were oop deep with pretty marginal hand so id want to pot control / induce bluffs
Even s nitty player will open the button with avg+ and call a raise with certain dynamics, esp IP.
We just give away everything by checking. We'ver been happy to inflate the pot pre, now we need (and should) continue that we have flopped top pair - just as we likely would if we had totally missed.
Am not saying we should go broke, but keeping foot on gas and re assessing if we find suspect resistance
I prefer 3-bet bluffing with 72 (obviously an extreme example) simply because you know what you're doing. You're not going to flop top-pair and accidentally make a big pot and 72 is unlikely to be dominated by the opponent's 3-bet calling range as often as KT will be.
I kinda think check-call is a better line now, given a bit of thought and with LOL_RAISE's reasoning making me feel like a bit of a donk... Still, we can't just always be checking when we hit hands and betting when we don't. Maybe with this hand that's better if we don't think we can bet flop, then check-call down or if we don't think there's more value in giving him the chance to bluff.
I don't particularly like the term "protecting your hand" but there's a bit of that in the logic I'd apply to betting the flop: You get some value from those draws but you can also think that if he's got JJ or lower he may call one street with just one overcard on the board, even though it's a King. Check-calling down thereafter would seem best. He probably doesn't bet two streets on underpairs, so we're only calling down to see missed draws if he bets both turn and river, I suppose.
Is that optimal? I dunno.