Live 3/6 TPTK line check.

[johnnybeef]

This is a typical 3/6 live game full of horrible loose passive retirees and a few younger guys (who tend to be more taggish but still cold call too many raises.) The villain in the hand is one of the younger guys. He is somewhat solid but that isn't saying a hell of a lot in this game.


I am utg with AcKd. I raise, get called by villain in ep, an lp retiree calls, as do either one or two of the blinds.

Flop Kh6s7s (10-11 sbs.)

I bet, villain calls, retirees all fold.

Turn 3c (7.5 bbs)

I bet, villain raises, I call.

River 2h (11.5 bbs)

I check, villain bets, I call.


I think that this is a somewhat standard hand, but coming from a nl background, I just wanted to do a check up. Also, fwiw, I think that villain is capable of raising KQ and possibly KJ. I wouldn't imagine him cold calling a raise with any king worse than that (although, I may be mistaken.)

[jjshabado]

Seems like you gave up a little early. I'd have put in a 3-bet on the turn before going to call down mode.

What hands do you put him on? AK, KQ, KJs all make some sort of sense. 67 maybe? Doesn't seem that likely. A set of 6s or 7s? I think you're ahead here way more than behind.

Edit: By call down mode I mean if he 4-bets on the turn, I'm check/calling the river. If he calls I'm leading the river and calling a raise.

[sharpie]

Most standard hand I've seen in awhile.

[BigBadBabar]

totally standard, nh.

jjshabado -- too aggressive against 3/6 live retirees when it's obvious we have ak or a big pair.

[jjshabado]

[ QUOTE ]
totally standard, nh.

jjshabado -- too aggressive against 3/6 live retirees when it's obvious we have ak or a big pair.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, except he's not up against the retirees. He's against a semi-solid young guy. I think this probably means we can rule out any two pair hands (except maybe 67), and we can rule out 45.

That really leaves AK, or a K with a lesser kicker or a set of 6s and 7s. I think we're ahead of this range often enough to 3-bet the turn.

[johnnybeef]

[ QUOTE ]


What hands do you put him on?

[/ QUOTE ]

When he raised the turn, I thought that his most likely hand was 66 or 77, but KQ was certainly possible. In fact, as soon as he bet your river I said, "alright, I'll pay off your set."

edit: I should mention that a lot of my thinking comes from my nl background where call flop, raise turn usually means "I can destroy top pair."

[StrictlyStrategy]

[ QUOTE ]
Seems like you gave up a little early. I'd have put in a 3-bet on the turn before going to call down mode.

What hands do you put him on? AK, KQ, KJs all make some sort of sense. 67 maybe? Doesn't seem that likely. A set of 6s or 7s? I think you're ahead here way more than behind.

Edit: By call down mode I mean if he 4-bets on the turn, I'm check/calling the river. If he calls I'm leading the river and calling a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he had done this on the flop I'd agree 100%.

[sharpie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Seems like you gave up a little early. I'd have put in a 3-bet on the turn before going to call down mode.

What hands do you put him on? AK, KQ, KJs all make some sort of sense. 67 maybe? Doesn't seem that likely. A set of 6s or 7s? I think you're ahead here way more than behind.

Edit: By call down mode I mean if he 4-bets on the turn, I'm check/calling the river. If he calls I'm leading the river and calling a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he had done this on the flop I'd agree 100%.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea when average people don't raise the flop multiway then raise the turn their range is weighted towards monsters, although not enough to fold against an unknown.

[Sanzarc]

I think a turn 3-bet is a good idea in that situation. Sometimes I call the turn and bet the river with AK after a turn raise. It can confuse my opponent. A few times I was able to win the hand without showdown with that unusual river bet. It worth a try.

[StrictlyStrategy]

What do you think villain puts you on when he raises the turn?

Why is not going to showdown important?

I like a river donk, but not in this line.

[Xhad]

[ QUOTE ]
edit: I should mention that a lot of my thinking comes from my nl background where call flop, raise turn usually means "I can destroy top pair."

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't as true in limit because the bet doubling on the turn often makes it correct to play TP this way if it doesn't need to be protected (since you often can't raise more than once postflop with top pair anyway and might as well get your one raise in while the bets are bigger). Although on this board in this size pot top pair does need to be protected on the flop, so your suspicion is correct if villain is aware of such things or is just a chronic slowplayer (as many semi-decent tags are).

[johnnybeef]

[ QUOTE ]


This isn't as true in limit because the bet doubling on the turn often makes it correct to play TP this way if it doesn't need to be protected (since you often can't raise more than once postflop with top pair anyway and might as well get your one raise in while the bets are bigger). Although on this board in this size pot top pair does need to be protected on the flop, so your suspicion is correct if villain is aware of such things or is just a chronic slowplayer (as many semi-decent tags are).

[/ QUOTE ]

I posted this hand because I knew that it was totally standard, but yet on the turn my instinct told me that I was beat. That said, there have been times before that I knew that I was beat and ended up dragging in the pot after the showdown. I really just wanted to see if there was anywhere that I could find a fold. When he raised the turn, I was dead set on him having a set (no pun intended.) After considering how this guy plays a little bit more, he doesn't tend to get out of line too much postflop. Obviously he is a bit too loose preflop (which is debatable given that there were perhaps 2 players who would take it to 3 bets pf, and I had already raised) but he tended to play his hands pretty straightforwardly postflop. Perhaps I am being results oriented, but he turned over 4c5c for the straight which I never would have put him on.

[bravos1]

[ QUOTE ]
I think a turn 3-bet is a good idea in that situation. Sometimes I call the turn and bet the river with AK after a turn raise. It can confuse my opponent. A few times I was able to win the hand without showdown with that unusual river bet. It worth a try.

[/ QUOTE ]

I rarely ever do this, and the times I do is because my hand has improved and I'm afraid villian will check behind.

Why do you want to win without a showdown?

If you have the best hand and he folds, you lose a bet in a won pot if he would of bet the river.
If you have the worse hand and call a river raise, you lose another bet in a lost pot.
If you bet/fold in a spot like this, you are better off just check/calling. There are times for a bet fold, but this is not one of them IMO. In this spot I'm looking to get to showdown as opposed to mucking if it costs me the same price.

Donking the river means you lose the most possible money when every possibility is accounted for.

The one situation where you win money is if you bet w/ the best hand and he calls in a spot where he may check behind. If his hand is strong enough to call your river donk bet after he raises the turn, then his hand is probably strong enough for him to bet the river.

Wanting to win this hand w/ no showdown is just crazy... why would you want this? If you win w/o a showdown, you have the best hand and should want to get another bet from villian.

People should play more "in tempo" and make far less "fancy" plays like these.

[jjshabado]

[ QUOTE ]
... and we can rule out 45....

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess we can't...

I'm thinking over the 3-bet on the turn, but I still like it. I see everyone's point though.

[johnnybeef]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
... and we can rule out 45....

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess we can't...

I'm thinking over the 3-bet on the turn, but I still like it. I see everyone's point though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would like it against a certain type of player. Some of the older players get tired of being pushed around, so they will often raise Kx here. But this guy didn't tend to get out of line in the 100 or so hands that I have played with him. As far as 45 is concerned, I obviously agreed with your first post as from the moment I raised, I never even thought of it being in his coldcalling range.

[Xhad]

Yeah the straight coming in wouldn't change my play; we're drawing dead even if he has "just" a set so really accounting for how often he has 66/77 will cover the bulk of the times he has us beat.

[ QUOTE ]
I think a turn 3-bet is a good idea in that situation. Sometimes I call the turn and bet the river with AK after a turn raise. It can confuse my opponent. A few times I was able to win the hand without showdown with that unusual river bet. It worth a try.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're donking a brick river here you'd better be folding to a raise.

[f97tosc]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


This isn't as true in limit because the bet doubling on the turn often makes it correct to play TP this way if it doesn't need to be protected (since you often can't raise more than once postflop with top pair anyway and might as well get your one raise in while the bets are bigger). Although on this board in this size pot top pair does need to be protected on the flop, so your suspicion is correct if villain is aware of such things or is just a chronic slowplayer (as many semi-decent tags are).

[/ QUOTE ]

I posted this hand because I knew that it was totally standard, but yet on the turn my instinct told me that I was beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think there is a fair number of very passive players that never raise the turn with less than two pair. If you feel very confidently that this is the kind of player you are facing then you can fold.

But even a small probability that he would raise some other hand, plus that you have a decent chance to draw out if he has a two pair makes calldown the standard play.