Tickner
01-06-2007, 03:26 PM
In a post (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Number=8646311&page=0&vc=1) made a few days ago by kitaristi0, the following hand was brought up....
Villain is 20/9/2.4 over some hundred hands and seems pretty basic meowchowmeow.
Button ($180.95)
SB ($42.70)
BB ($105.80)
UTG ($70.30)
Hero ($273.75)
CO ($73.35)
Preflop: Hero is MP with Q/images/graemlins/club.gif, Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
1 fold, Hero raises to $4, CO calls $4, Button raises to $12, 2 folds, Hero calls $8, CO folds.
Flop: ($29.50) 2/images/graemlins/club.gif, 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 2/images/graemlins/spade.gif (2 players)
Hero checks, Button bets $20, Hero calls $20.
Turn: ($69.50) T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif (2 players)
Hero checks, Button bets $35, Hero calls $35.
River: ($139.50) 4/images/graemlins/club.gif (2 players)
I think this is an interesting hand and there are a number of ways it can be played. A lot of people suggested that as long as he folds to a river push this hand was played good. While I don't disagree, this certainly is one way to play it, I propsoed another option. What I proposed was more of a "general" guideline to increasing agression and its implications. I want to bring up what I said in a different thread because I've been thinking a lot about this particular post and I hope to get some feedback on it.
[ QUOTE ]
What I meant was that we should play the hand in such a way that gives us a better idea as to weather or not we are ahead. Right now, when we ask, "are we ahead of villians range?" when we check, we don't really know. If he checks behind on the river we are and if he bets we probably aren't right? I agree. But isn't this the same as what you just suggested (except betting all in is much more expensive of course). Instead of checking, I bet all in, and if he calls I am probably beat and if he folds I win. So it comes down to frequencies and such, and we can usually conclude that if he does x so often its more profitable to do y than z. Okay, yes, I see the point, and I agree, and I apply those same concepts when I play. BUT theres still a lot of guess work.
How do we avoid this? Increase agression.
Not spewey, monkey agression. I mean controlled agression for a purpose. If I had realized we were deep stacked I wouldn't have recommeded a push on the turn. But perhaps it's worth the time to at least think about agression. The only time hero raised in this hand was an opening raise. That's it. Lately I've been trying to avoid the check/call mode even with marginal hands by simply amping up the agression on earlier streets to (gasp) "help me find out where I stand".
Since I now realize we are deep stacked, I like a raise preflop. By calling preflop we adknowlegde that we are set mining a very powerful hand that can also get in some sticky post flop situations.
Once we 4 bet preflop, this flop looks nice, and so we bet the flop. Pretty straightforward right? Now, hero instead of showing agression once the whole hand, he has shown a lot of agression in 3 spots. Preflop twice and so far once on the flop. We look very strong (and we are). So villian can ONLY fight back with a hand that beats us. Seriously. He will fold a lot on the flop and when he raises we know its let go time. A 4 bet preflop leads to about a $60 pot on the flop right? We bet $50 or so and win it often and when we DO fold, we lose $80 on the hand. That might seem espensive, but if villian pushes the river in the OP hand, we lose 35+20+12=$67 with NO chance of him folding (since we didnt give him a chance to fold once - but in the more aggro line we gave him 2) and we don't really know weather we are ahead or not. So its effectively the same situation, except WE are in control of the hand, HE is put in the tough spots not us, and the slightly more moeny we lose when we are beat is IMO outweighted by the times we take the pot down preflop and on the flop.
This gets especially fun when we do this a couple of times and then villian starts shoving TT or AK in frustration (and after we do this a couple of times we can, based on our history, etc, start to make some calls because his range is wider - and if he calls a 4 bet and folds the flop he probably sucks anyway - but it does happen).
Let me know if my thinking sucks, but its how I've been playing the last few thousand hands and I've liked it, and also caused a few opponents to tilt stacks to me.
[/ QUOTE ]
Another important thing to add, is that OP said that he didn't like 4betting here because he would only call with AA/KK. I replied and said that he should start 4 betting more if thats the case. So this post is not only based on this one hand, but applying the concepts to your entire game and adjusting to opponents.
Villain is 20/9/2.4 over some hundred hands and seems pretty basic meowchowmeow.
Button ($180.95)
SB ($42.70)
BB ($105.80)
UTG ($70.30)
Hero ($273.75)
CO ($73.35)
Preflop: Hero is MP with Q/images/graemlins/club.gif, Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
1 fold, Hero raises to $4, CO calls $4, Button raises to $12, 2 folds, Hero calls $8, CO folds.
Flop: ($29.50) 2/images/graemlins/club.gif, 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 2/images/graemlins/spade.gif (2 players)
Hero checks, Button bets $20, Hero calls $20.
Turn: ($69.50) T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif (2 players)
Hero checks, Button bets $35, Hero calls $35.
River: ($139.50) 4/images/graemlins/club.gif (2 players)
I think this is an interesting hand and there are a number of ways it can be played. A lot of people suggested that as long as he folds to a river push this hand was played good. While I don't disagree, this certainly is one way to play it, I propsoed another option. What I proposed was more of a "general" guideline to increasing agression and its implications. I want to bring up what I said in a different thread because I've been thinking a lot about this particular post and I hope to get some feedback on it.
[ QUOTE ]
What I meant was that we should play the hand in such a way that gives us a better idea as to weather or not we are ahead. Right now, when we ask, "are we ahead of villians range?" when we check, we don't really know. If he checks behind on the river we are and if he bets we probably aren't right? I agree. But isn't this the same as what you just suggested (except betting all in is much more expensive of course). Instead of checking, I bet all in, and if he calls I am probably beat and if he folds I win. So it comes down to frequencies and such, and we can usually conclude that if he does x so often its more profitable to do y than z. Okay, yes, I see the point, and I agree, and I apply those same concepts when I play. BUT theres still a lot of guess work.
How do we avoid this? Increase agression.
Not spewey, monkey agression. I mean controlled agression for a purpose. If I had realized we were deep stacked I wouldn't have recommeded a push on the turn. But perhaps it's worth the time to at least think about agression. The only time hero raised in this hand was an opening raise. That's it. Lately I've been trying to avoid the check/call mode even with marginal hands by simply amping up the agression on earlier streets to (gasp) "help me find out where I stand".
Since I now realize we are deep stacked, I like a raise preflop. By calling preflop we adknowlegde that we are set mining a very powerful hand that can also get in some sticky post flop situations.
Once we 4 bet preflop, this flop looks nice, and so we bet the flop. Pretty straightforward right? Now, hero instead of showing agression once the whole hand, he has shown a lot of agression in 3 spots. Preflop twice and so far once on the flop. We look very strong (and we are). So villian can ONLY fight back with a hand that beats us. Seriously. He will fold a lot on the flop and when he raises we know its let go time. A 4 bet preflop leads to about a $60 pot on the flop right? We bet $50 or so and win it often and when we DO fold, we lose $80 on the hand. That might seem espensive, but if villian pushes the river in the OP hand, we lose 35+20+12=$67 with NO chance of him folding (since we didnt give him a chance to fold once - but in the more aggro line we gave him 2) and we don't really know weather we are ahead or not. So its effectively the same situation, except WE are in control of the hand, HE is put in the tough spots not us, and the slightly more moeny we lose when we are beat is IMO outweighted by the times we take the pot down preflop and on the flop.
This gets especially fun when we do this a couple of times and then villian starts shoving TT or AK in frustration (and after we do this a couple of times we can, based on our history, etc, start to make some calls because his range is wider - and if he calls a 4 bet and folds the flop he probably sucks anyway - but it does happen).
Let me know if my thinking sucks, but its how I've been playing the last few thousand hands and I've liked it, and also caused a few opponents to tilt stacks to me.
[/ QUOTE ]
Another important thing to add, is that OP said that he didn't like 4betting here because he would only call with AA/KK. I replied and said that he should start 4 betting more if thats the case. So this post is not only based on this one hand, but applying the concepts to your entire game and adjusting to opponents.