NL50, well...my AA got raised on the turn...

[turbojunge]

Villian is 21/4/6 in 370 Hands.

Ultimate Bet
No Limit Holdem Ring game
Blinds: $0.25./$0.50.
6 players
Converter (http://www.neildewhurst.com/hand-converter)

Stack sizes:
Hero: $52.10
UTG+1: $59.65
CO: $38.30
Button: $51.90
SB: $9.70
BB: $102.45

Pre-flop: (6 players) Hero is UTG with A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif A/images/graemlins/club.gif
<font color="#cc0000">Hero raises to $2</font>, 4 folds, BB calls.

Flop: 8/images/graemlins/spade.gif 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif 7/images/graemlins/club.gif ($4.25, 2 players)
BB checks, <font color="#cc0000">Hero bets $3.5</font>, BB calls.

Turn: 4/images/graemlins/spade.gif ($11.25, 2 players)
BB checks, <font color="#cc0000">Hero bets $9</font>, <font color="#cc0000">BB raises to $38.25</font>, <font color="#cc0000">Hero ???

[b2l_cricket]

I think this is a fold unless you have some kind of read on villain. No hand you beat can do this for value with the preflop and flop action.

[carnivalhobo]

fold

[spacetime]

yeah i think pretty standard fold

[Lordy]

Turn check-raise = monster almost always.

[elmopoker]

fold, probably a set

[TheGrifter]

Sometimes he has a combo draw here. Much more often he has a set. Fold.

[derosnec]

if we change one of the flop cards to a Q or K, are we calling the turn c/r?

[gumpzilla]

So, if this is a standard fold, how many people are checking behind here on the turn instead?

[TheGrifter]

[ QUOTE ]
if we change one of the flop cards to a Q or K, are we calling the turn c/r?

[/ QUOTE ]

For me it is still a fold.

[TheGrifter]

[ QUOTE ]
So, if this is a standard fold, how many people are checking behind here on the turn instead?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're giving up significant value by checking the turn here. You can extract money from TP hands, small overpairs, hell 2nd pair. But once he pushes I think it's a fold. A smaller bet for pot contorl isn't a bad idea as well.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So, if this is a standard fold, how many people are checking behind here on the turn instead?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're giving up significant value by checking the turn here. You can extract money from TP hands, small overpairs, hell 2nd pair. But once he pushes I think it's a fold. A smaller bet for pot contorl isn't a bad idea as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think overpairs that pay off 3 streets here are also capable of c/r'ing the turn. I think that if you want to bet this turn for value, you need to be willing to call at least some of the time.

[TheGrifter]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So, if this is a standard fold, how many people are checking behind here on the turn instead?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're giving up significant value by checking the turn here. You can extract money from TP hands, small overpairs, hell 2nd pair. But once he pushes I think it's a fold. A smaller bet for pot contorl isn't a bad idea as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think overpairs that pay off 3 streets here are also capable of c/r'ing the turn. I think that if you want to bet this turn for value, you need to be willing to call at least some of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm referring to a standard line without reads. There are definitely opponents I'd be willing to get it in against here but in general micro-stakes players aren't pushing with less than 2 pair here.

That doesn't mean you should'nt bet for value. The #1 mistake people make in uNL is calling too much. The #2 mistake is not betting for value often enough.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So, if this is a standard fold, how many people are checking behind here on the turn instead?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're giving up significant value by checking the turn here. You can extract money from TP hands, small overpairs, hell 2nd pair. But once he pushes I think it's a fold. A smaller bet for pot contorl isn't a bad idea as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think overpairs that pay off 3 streets here are also capable of c/r'ing the turn. I think that if you want to bet this turn for value, you need to be willing to call at least some of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm referring to a standard line without reads. There are definitely opponents I'd be willing to get it in against here but in general micro-stakes players aren't pushing with less than 2 pair here.

That doesn't mean you should'nt bet for value. The #1 mistake people make in uNL is calling too much. The #2 mistake is not betting for value often enough.

[/ QUOTE ]\

You don't think A8 or TT are betting the river if you check turn? They're almost certainly calling a river bet, but won't necessarily call turn and river. It seems to me that checking behind and getting a little money in on the river is going to accomplish the same things here, a lot of the time, and you don't get blown off your hand by JJ going bananas.

[ama0330]

As much as I would like to make excuses and justifications I just cant see you being good here. I have to fold this.

[TheGrifter]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So, if this is a standard fold, how many people are checking behind here on the turn instead?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're giving up significant value by checking the turn here. You can extract money from TP hands, small overpairs, hell 2nd pair. But once he pushes I think it's a fold. A smaller bet for pot contorl isn't a bad idea as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think overpairs that pay off 3 streets here are also capable of c/r'ing the turn. I think that if you want to bet this turn for value, you need to be willing to call at least some of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm referring to a standard line without reads. There are definitely opponents I'd be willing to get it in against here but in general micro-stakes players aren't pushing with less than 2 pair here.

That doesn't mean you should'nt bet for value. The #1 mistake people make in uNL is calling too much. The #2 mistake is not betting for value often enough.

[/ QUOTE ]\

You don't think A8 or TT are betting the river if you check turn? They're almost certainly calling a river bet, but won't necessarily call turn and river. It seems to me that checking behind and getting a little money in on the river is going to accomplish the same things here, a lot of the time, and you don't get blown off your hand by JJ going bananas.

[/ QUOTE ]

These hands, at these stakes can easily call a turn/river bet. As I said there is merit to betting less on the turn, maybe 1/2 pot instead of closer to a PSB. Then another 1/2 pot on the river.

You also have to remain mindful of giving a free card to 1-pair hands that would fold the turn. In this situtation you have no reason to believe your hand isn't best on the turn and I have my doubts as to how often a worse hand is going to move on you here.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

These hands, at these stakes can easily call a turn/river bet. As I said there is merit to betting less on the turn, maybe 1/2 pot instead of closer to a PSB. Then another 1/2 pot on the river.

You also have to remain mindful of giving a free card to 1-pair hands that would fold the turn. In this situtation you have no reason to believe your hand isn't best on the turn and I have my doubts as to how often a worse hand is going to move on you here.

[/ QUOTE ]

It just seems to me that a lot of opponents that are likely to value A8 highly enough to call 3 sizable bets are also likely to value it high enough to occasionally want to get all the money in on the turn. Certainly there are those who won't.

[avfletch]

No one appears to have commented on his aggression factor of 6 (which clearly isn't coming from preflop play due to his pfr of 4). Over 370 this is quite significant imo.

Given you have a reasonable sample size I'm willing to bet your PTDB holds the answer.

[ama0330]

Yeah you know what given that the draw hasnt really hit yet (villain needs to use both hole cards to beat you) and villains propensity for aggression you could make an argument for a push here. But its really difficult and I dont know what the most EV play is.

[monkover]

[ QUOTE ]
if we change one of the flop cards to a Q or K, are we calling the turn c/r?

[/ QUOTE ]


I also think its still a fold! As already said the turn check raise usually is monster... i know you get married to a hand like AA quite easily but it defenitely is a fold!
The question is what do we really beat that´s part of villains range?! Imo its not a lot maybe a combo draw but that´s about it...

[Keys Myaths]

[ QUOTE ]
Villian is 21/4/6 in 370 Hands.

Ultimate Bet
No Limit Holdem Ring game
Blinds: $0.25./$0.50.
6 players
Converter (http://www.neildewhurst.com/hand-converter)

Stack sizes:
Hero: $52.10
UTG+1: $59.65
CO: $38.30
Button: $51.90
SB: $9.70
BB: $102.45

Pre-flop: (6 players) Hero is UTG with A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif A/images/graemlins/club.gif
<font color="#cc0000">Hero raises to $2</font>, 4 folds, BB calls.

Flop: 8/images/graemlins/spade.gif 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif 7/images/graemlins/club.gif ($4.25, 2 players)
BB checks, <font color="#cc0000">Hero bets $3.5</font>, BB calls.

Turn: 4/images/graemlins/spade.gif ($11.25, 2 players)
BB checks, <font color="#cc0000">Hero bets $9</font>, <font color="#cc0000">BB raises to $38.25</font>, <font color="#cc0000">Hero ???

[/ QUOTE ]

Grunching here...

What is he doing this with that we beat?

Possibly 99-JJ, but even then, wouldn't he have raised on the flop?

[Check_The_Nuts]

[ QUOTE ]
You don't think A8 or TT are betting the river if you check turn? They're almost certainly calling a river bet, but won't necessarily call turn and river. It seems to me that checking behind and getting a little money in on the river is going to accomplish the same things here, a lot of the time, and you don't get blown off your hand by JJ going bananas.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand how a villian with stats of 22/4/6 could ever have JJ here. Why would he check call the flop then check the turn with JJ?

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You don't think A8 or TT are betting the river if you check turn? They're almost certainly calling a river bet, but won't necessarily call turn and river. It seems to me that checking behind and getting a little money in on the river is going to accomplish the same things here, a lot of the time, and you don't get blown off your hand by JJ going bananas.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand how a villian with stats of 22/4/6 could ever have JJ here. Why would he check call the flop then check the turn with JJ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Who knows? If you don't think he's c/c, c/c'ing anything we beat, then the bet seems like bad news to me. Either he can do this with hands we beat, in which case it seems like a call is probably in order, or he doesn't, in which case checking behind for pot control/counterfeit chances seems like it's probably better. EDIT: In other words, bet/fold is the option I like least.

[Marshall28]

this is almost never a hand worse than AA unless you know the player to be a constant bluffer.

most of what TheGrifter said is pretty much right on.

assuming that villain does this w/ a weaker hand than AA thinking its a value push is a pretty ignorant assumption.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
this is almost never a hand worse than AA unless you know the player to be a constant bluffer.

most of what TheGrifter said is pretty much right on.

assuming that villain does this w/ a weaker hand than AA thinking its a value push is a pretty ignorant assumption.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what is a player with an AF of 6 going to c/c, c/c here? I'm just saying that I think this is either a call, or a check behind in the first place.

[Marshall28]

i think its kinda naive to assume that because someones AF is 6 that they arent capable of check/calling ever.

people that play like that anyways tend to bet w/out a hand and to check w/ a hand a lot of times.

it doesnt really even matter what his AF is. its pretty simple, we are betting the turn to get value from 8x and 99-jj and to protect our hand from drawing hands.

what r u gonna do if u check behind, a scare card falls on the river, and he shoves? ... youve just opened yourself up to allow him to bluff u. if thats the case you are put to a really difficult decision w/ your AA. you bet the turn, if he doesnt raise, u can be pretty sure u have the best hand. if he does, its not too difficult to get away from it.

[avfletch]

[ QUOTE ]
i think its kinda naive to assume that because someones AF is 6 that they arent capable of check/calling ever.

people that play like that anyways tend to bet w/out a hand and to check w/ a hand a lot of times.

it doesnt really even matter what his AF is. its pretty simple, we are betting the turn to get value from 8x and 99-jj and to protect our hand from drawing hands.

what r u gonna do if u check behind, a scare card falls on the river, and he shoves? ... youve just opened yourself up to allow him to bluff u. if thats the case you are put to a really difficult decision w/ your AA. you bet the turn, if he doesnt raise, u can be pretty sure u have the best hand. if he does, its not too difficult to get away from it.

[/ QUOTE ]

So checking behind opens you up to being easy to bluff but always folding to a turn CRAI doesn't?

[Marshall28]

well, based on your argument, i guess there's never any point in betting to protect a hand, is there?

[Check_The_Nuts]

Marshall - you are very wrong. To see why consider the case where villian has AF of 0.5. Obviously checking turn is terrible. Therefore AF really matters. High AF either means he bluffs all the time or is a huge nit. Pick which one and decide whether to bet/call or check behind.

[TheGrifter]

[ QUOTE ]
Marshall - you are very wrong. To see why consider the case where villian has AF of 0.5. Obviously checking turn is terrible. Therefore AF really matters. High AF either means he bluffs all the time or is a huge nit. Pick which one and decide whether to bet/call or check behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

You guys lost me when you started talking PT #'s.

Anyway, I think that just because you will likely fold to a c/r AI does not mean you shouldn't value bet.

[Marshall28]

check the nuts ... thanks for telling me im very wrong. i appreciate it when people take a style-based response to a situation and try to show how their style is best. LOL....

u havent really determined what villains AF is on the turn or river, as it is the case sometimes that someone w/ high AF bets the flop a huge amount of the time and tends to slow down on turn and river. i guess you didnt really think of that...

also you seem to think that just because he has a high AF that it means hes GOING to bluff. this isnt necessarily true, however I will give u the benefit of the doubt that it is the case he will bluff more often than other opponents.

you could check behind the turn and induce a bluff, thats fine i guess, but id want to be pretty certain that i was ahead before i did that, if you are the type of player that feels comfortable doing that w/ aces on a draw heavy board thats fine. i guess im a little nittier in that i like to protect my hand in this situation, regardless of villains AF. id feel that on this board my hand isnt particularly strong and im going to be cautious.

[Check_The_Nuts]

Humm ok marshall I'll try explaining it again. Someone with an AF of 6 normally likes to make a lot of leading bets at the pot with his gutshots/blufsf/etc. This is how he manages to get his betting/raising frequency to be 6 times his calling frequency.

If his AF is 0.5, he calls twice as often. Most likely because he check/calls way too often with top pair/gutshots/etc, and doesn't bet for value nearly often enough.

So some guy, who likes to bluff at pots with bets all the time, checks two streets. Well you can pretty well ignore all one pair hands, cuz he's leading with all pairs/bluffs/etc. He's not check/calling two streets with JJ or whatever. He would always put at least one bet in.

Remember he could still have an AF of 6 and still never fold. If he folded exactly 0 percent of the time he's a complete maniac (obviously), but if he folds 90% of the time he's a huge nit. Make more sense?

Ok read your above post. I wasn't sure hwo much you understood PT numbers, so my post is somewhat "yeah duh" to you. But anyways, to get an AF of 6 he's much more likely to put in a ton of bets on early streets than late streets. Mostly cuz its cheaper and you haven't shown any interest in the pot, so its obviously better to bluff in those instances than when you bet flop/turn/river for full pot (obviously a river bluff in such a situation is terrible). If you bet turn your basically hoping he has 78 and semibluff-called the flop. But this guy doesn't semi-bluff call, he semi-bluffs all the time. So yeah, its def. a turn check. See why now?

Humm also consider that guy has a much wider range if he leads turn than if he checks turn. I think I'd rather raise a turn bet than lead to a turn check. Weird eh?

[derosnec]

ok, so we are never getting all in on any board with AA on the turn against this guy when he takes the line he did? (assuming we are drawing to two outs if behind)

[Check_The_Nuts]

I wouldn't say never. Guy could conceivably overcall with KK preflop then play it like a set postflop and it wouldn't change his stats much. At the same time he could do that with 22 on this board and probably win just as much with it versus decent opponents. The only times he may win more money is if you look him up light with JJ-QQ, which is really hard to do.

At the same time this is why calling the river is obviously fine. Guy could have QQ-KK still. I was gunna say something about TT-JJ, but I really doubt those hands are in his range. I think this hand could have an interesting discussino about how big a bet we should call on the river.

[avfletch]

[ QUOTE ]
well, based on your argument, i guess there's never any point in betting to protect a hand, is there?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you missed my point but I'm tired so I'll check back in the morning. Doubt I'd do a good job of explaining right now.

[TheGrifter]

[ QUOTE ]

So some guy, who likes to bluff at pots with bets all the time, checks two streets. Well you can pretty well ignore all one pair hands, cuz he's leading with all pairs/bluffs/etc. He's not check/calling two streets with JJ or whatever. He would always put at least one bet in.

Remember he could still have an AF of 6 and still never fold. If he folded exactly 0 percent of the time he's a complete maniac (obviously), but if he folds 90% of the time he's a huge nit. Make more sense?

Ok read your above post. I wasn't sure hwo much you understood PT numbers, so my post is somewhat "yeah duh" to you. But anyways, to get an AF of 6 he's much more likely to put in a ton of bets on early streets than late streets. Mostly cuz its cheaper and you haven't shown any interest in the pot, so its obviously better to bluff in those instances than when you bet flop/turn/river for full pot (obviously a river bluff in such a situation is terrible). If you bet turn your basically hoping he has 78 and semibluff-called the flop. But this guy doesn't semi-bluff call, he semi-bluffs all the time. So yeah, its def. a turn check. See why now?

Humm also consider that guy has a much wider range if he leads turn than if he checks turn. I think I'd rather raise a turn bet than lead to a turn check. Weird eh?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think I would trust this number enough to not bet AA on the turn here, but if you do that's fine. Different styles.

Still looks like a set to me.

[Marshall28]

check the nuts ... maybe i just dont understand PT numbers, but i still have one problem with your argument. you are basing everything you do on villains mean style of play. he may do what u say fairly often, but it doesnt mean he will do it every time, its just an average of what he's done in the past. i dont see how u can possibly argue with that, and how either of us could be "wrong" in this instance.

i still stand by my initial claim that checking the turn gives a wide part of his range a free card. u still seem to want to "prove" u r right though ... so, whatever i guess.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
check the nuts ... maybe i just dont understand PT numbers, but i still have one problem with your argument. you are basing everything you do on villains mean style of play. he may do what u say fairly often, but it doesnt mean he will do it every time, its just an average of what he's done in the past. i dont see how u can possibly argue with that, and how either of us could be "wrong" in this instance.

[/ QUOTE ]

If we aren't supposed to be making generalizations based on past experience, then the whole thread (and poker analysis in general) is pretty pointless. Your generalizations that he isn't playing this way without 2 pair or better are of the same category, obviously.

[TheGrifter]

You have to make sure when commenting on hands that we don't use backwards logic. Remember, when we bet on the turn we don't KNOW we're getting c/r, I'd say it's not even real likely on this board.

Once the c/r actually happens you have that additional information and can change your opinion regarding his preflop/flop actions accordingly.

[Ryan2009]

Fold. He's not doing this with just a pair given his stats and the action so far.

[Check_The_Nuts]

grifter - the point is that a villian with those stats isn't checking the turn to check/call ever. He's either check/raising or check folding, and he is way off his normal play with a draw, so he's probably not check folding very often (and with many better hands). Basically bet/folding is going to get you blown off the best hand some of the time, other times he'll fold the worst hand.

I really think making arguments about "mean stats" here is pretty circular. his 6 aggro factor represents how he normally plays. If you treat him like a 0.5 AF you probably won't make money off him.