So I was thinking about folding for a moment

[Fiksdal]

Full Tilt Poker - No Limit Hold'em Cash Game - $0.10/$0.25 Blinds - 6 Players - (LegoPoker HH Converter (http://www.legopoker.com/hh))

SB: $25.65
BB: $26.95
UTG: $30.50
MP: $19.95
<font color="black">Hero (CO): $83.25</font>
BTN: $25.90

<font color="black">Reads: </font><font color="blue">Villain is careful fish, 23/7/0.8 over 43 hands.

I have been running 20/17/3 over the same sample.</font>

<font color="black">Preflop:</font> Hero is dealt A/images/graemlins/spade.gif J/images/graemlins/spade.gif (6 Players)
2 folds, <font color="red">Hero raises to $1.00</font>, 2 folds, BB calls $0.75

<font color="black">Flop:</font> ($2.10) 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif J/images/graemlins/diamond.gif T/images/graemlins/heart.gif (2 Players)
BB checks, <font color="red">Hero bets $2.00</font>, BB calls $2.00

<font color="black">Turn:</font> ($6.10) 8/images/graemlins/spade.gif (2 Players)
BB checks, <font color="red">Hero bets $5.50</font>, <font color="red">BB raises all-in to $23.95</font>, Hero calls $18.45

I didn't though. Discuss.

[kazana]

Baluga. Not enough outs.

[FreddyT87]

with reads it's a fold

[Suaimhnea]

Fold here. Getting less to 1:1 against a range that has a lot of Q9s, JT and sets in it. You don't see one pair hands that you can beat (99, JQ+) here; definitely less than 15% of the time.

[ama0330]

Uhhh stats? fold.

Given that you dont beat too much after the flop call given the board texture an argument can be made for checking the turn through

[Oasis88]

I think a call is okay if it is the right opponent. How did you build your stack? Did you take a BI from villain? He could easily be fed up with you might see 89 here. You also have the spades if you are wrong.

On the other hand, his passive stats make me believe he is does not know how to build a pot and does indeed have the goods.

Without being at the table myself I lean towards a fold.

[cuQa]

[ QUOTE ]
Getting less to 1:1 against a range ..

[/ QUOTE ]

huh?


I prefer to call this one.. It's NL25. He could do this with AJ,KJ even QJ too aswell as some other hands like pair + draw

his stats doesnt say much with that samplesize

[ActionStan]

Hero checks the turn.

If villain is capable of rational thought, we don't beat much here, but it could be a big draw. I don't think I'd look him up this time.

[Fiksdal]

[ QUOTE ]
Hero checks the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Results oriented much?

[TheyCallMeDonk]

Sweet call, I put him on KT possible suited, and is angry he didn't hit 2 pair, or a str8.

[CaptVimes]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hero checks the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Results oriented much?

[/ QUOTE ]

When to use pot control

Pot control is best applied when you have a hand with good showdown value but can't take a lot of heat. It is also good against tighter opponents who often arent calling with the same crap the fish are. It is best applied in a Way Ahead, Way Behind situation.

Pot Control (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Board=microplnl&amp;Number=7947101&amp; Searchpage=1&amp;Main=7947101&amp;Words=Concept+EMcWilliam s&amp;topic=&amp;Search=true#Post7947101)

[Fiksdal]

The merit to bet the turn here is partly for value, but also for control. Betting for control is a concept that most uNLers don't understand enough. I'm working on a longish theory post on this subject.

[CaptVimes]

Your in position. You have control.

Look forward to reading your post.

[Waingro]

I don´t like to put a villain on a super tight range to justify a fold against an unknown. If we fold here we say that villain has set/straight most of the time, QQ-KK or some funky 2pair like T8 some of the time and we are never in a million years ahead. That doesn´t seem right to me, I usually call in these spots against an unknown and I think the Baluga Theorem is way overrated. This guy doesn´t seem like the nitty type so call.

[That Fish]

Small sample size for hands, but he certainly isn't a maniac. Unless you've been doing a lot of raise/CB and he's been folding and getting pissed I have a hard time believing worse hands from him push this turn.

So if this is 2 pair+:
Board: 5s Jd Th 8s
Dead:

equity
hand 0: 21.901% { AsJs }
Hand 1: 78.099% { JJ-TT, 88, 55, Q9s, JTs, T8s, JTo }

.78 x 18.5 = 14.4
.21 x 35.5 = 7.4 -&gt; net -$7


With any piece:
Board: 5s Jd Th 8s
Dead:
equity
Hand 0: 72.253% { AsJs }
Hand 1: 27.747% { JJ-88, 55, AJs-ATs, KJs-KTs, Q9s+, J9s+, T8s+, 98s, 6s5s, AJo-ATo, KJo-KTo, QTo+, J9o+, T9o, 98o }

.72 x 35.5 = 25.6
.27 x 18.5 = 5 -&gt; net $20.6

7/21 = 1/3. So as long as he does this with just about any piece 1/3 of the time it's neutral EV.

[Dr_Mabuse101]

You played it fine. I would call here too.

[Lego05]

Looks like a pretty standard fold to me. He either has you beat or he's bluffing a draw and which do you suppose is more likely.

I don't think either checking behind or bet folding is a lot better than the other.

[ActionStan]

No, not really. You have a really marginal hand. I prefer to control the pot. So, I would check the turn there most of the time.

[ActionStan]

I'm sure betting does have its merrits. I am interested in what you have to post.

But, I think my point is that I am not being results oriented in saying I would check the turn. I would, I do, and I will again. I don't want to build a huge pot with a hand that isn't likely to improve against this board to any great degree. That's the way I roll.

Do I get drawn out on? Sure. Do I induce bluffs? Sure. Are there other ways to play this hand? Sure. But, I check.

[Supwithbates]

[ QUOTE ]
The merit to bet the turn here is partly for value, but also for control. Betting for control is a concept that most uNLers don't understand enough. I'm working on a longish theory post on this subject.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you're merely betting for control a PSB is too big.

That being said, this draw-heavy board definitely merits a double barrel. If your opponent is folding out everything you beat when you double barrel this board then that doesn't mean you shouldn't double barrel this board, it means you should double barrel this board with air a high % of the time if your opponent is going to be such a nit. As I stated in my poobah post a couple weeks back, you should be trying to change opponent's range more than you let him change yours. Make HIM adapt, force HIM to make the mistake.

I don't mind the way you played the hand depending on your table image, history with villain, reads, etc. I think too often uNLers get stuck into this "standard range" mindset because they see opponents' ranges as a given rather than as something they can work to change.

[ActionStan]

[ QUOTE ]


If your opponent is folding out everything you beat when you double barrel this board then that doesn't mean you shouldn't double barrel this board, it means you should double barrel this board with air a high % of the time if your opponent is going to be such a nit.

...snip...

you should be trying to change opponent's range more than you let him change yours. Make HIM adapt, force HIM to make the mistake.

...snip...

I think too often uNLers get stuck into this "standard range" mindset because they see opponents' ranges as a given rather than as something they can work to change.

...snip...



[/ QUOTE ]

Nicely said. Really powerful stuff. Another way I've heard that is to convince your opponent to play predictably and only play back at you when they have a hand. When that happens, you've won.

Back to the hand. If you are actively shaping this villain's response, then bet away. If that's the way you roll, then bet away. I, personaly, would fire the second barrel when I had less hand value. Say, a pair of 9s or something along those lines.