Top Pair 2nd Kicker vs. huge floater

[wildzer0]

Villain is pretty laggy and a huge floater. His fold to cbet over several hundred hands is something like 25. I've seen him make a few moves like this, but he hadn't shown down a hand when he's taken this line. His stats are around 35/17/2.5

Poker Stars - No Limit Hold'em Cash Game - $0.25/$0.50 Blinds - 6 Players - (LegoPoker HH Converter (http://www.legopoker.com/hh))

SB: $29.50
BB: $55.20
UTG: $7.65
Hero (MP): $50.00
CO: $64.60
BTN: $32.55

Preflop: Hero is dealt Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif A/images/graemlins/club.gif (6 Players)
UTG folds, <font color="red">Hero raises to $2.00</font>, 3 folds, BB calls $1.50

Flop: ($4.25) A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 6/images/graemlins/club.gif 2/images/graemlins/club.gif (2 Players)
BB checks, <font color="red">Hero bets $4.00</font>, BB calls $4.00

Turn: ($12.25) 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif (2 Players)
BB checks, <font color="red">Hero bets $9.00</font>, <font color="red">BB raises all-in to $49.20</font>, Hero...

[mugatu668]

I would fold here. This looks like any two pair, 45cc, etc.

[Vyse]

I'm really tempted to call this. Board is quite drawy, and although Ax that made 2p make up a large part of his line, if you believe A8+ do too, you have enough equity to do this. The straight would be my main worry.

[monkover]

If he really does take this line that often I´d call here. you will loose quite often though

[BevillTheDevil]

tough spot...against typical villian id fold the turn but sounds like this guy is BS. How often does villian c/r turn??? if we have several hundred hands that should give us a good idea of his c/r turn frequency. You said he has taken this line a couple times w/ success so he probably thinks he can keep doin it with crap (if thats what he has) and just keep stealin. Orr he could actually have a hand obv....If you think villian is capable of bluffin a draw or air here or does this w/ Ax then i like a call here. But from my experience a c/r on turn is usually the nutz but obv villian dependent...

[Jamougha]

[ QUOTE ]
I've seen him make a few moves like this

[/ QUOTE ]

Can't flop the nuts every hand; call.

[ActionStan]

You should have checked behind on the turn. Your bet sized the pot to allow the villain to move in and put you to the test with a marginal hand.

As played, I tend to fold here. You don't beat much.

[BevillTheDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
You should have checked behind on the turn. Your bet sized the pot to allow the villain to move in and put you to the test with a marginal hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

"His fold to cbet over several hundred hands is something like 25"

Im value bettin the [censored] out of this villian.

[Jamougha]

[ QUOTE ]
You should have checked behind on the turn. Your bet sized the pot to allow the villain to move in and put you to the test with a marginal hand.

As played, I tend to fold here. You don't beat much.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah this is nonsense. Hero should have bet pot on the turn so he can value-shove a blank river.

[ActionStan]

Fair enough.

My contention is that if this guy is that sort of aggressive player, why do you want to play for your whole stack on the turn? You don't have a "play for your stack" kind of hand. You have position, use it. To me, that is what position is for. If you're going to play for your whole stack, let him bluff the river and move in. You get to put in the critical bet.

Given the way it played out, betting lets an aggressive villain make the critical bet. The pot is sized such that the villain can put in a big bet that you don't want to call on a draw heavy board. You let him use all of the tools in his laggy bag while you are forced to call and hope he doesn't have a hand. Putting yourself on tough decisions with aggressive players is a tough road in NL.

If the stacks were differently sized, I would be much more inclined to bet. Particularly, if shorter the villain can't bluff because you're priced into pretty much everything.

[BevillTheDevil]

draw heavy board

another reason to bet??

[ActionStan]

For sure it is draw heavy and there is value in protecting your hand.

I do think there are times to protect your hand and times to protect your stack. In this case, I'm looking at the structure of the pot, my hand and what I want to get out of it. When I flop top pair with AQo, I am looking to play a medium sized pot. If I get all-in for 100BB, then I generally think I have misplayed the hand, particularly if I wasn't the one moving in.

With aggressive villains, I generally tread very lightly. Not because I don't think my hand is good, but that I want to betting sequence to favor me. I want the pot structured so I leave myself in position to put in the last bet. I don't want to give the villain his full range of preferred tools. Calling off 80BB with AQo is exactly where he wants me. When I plan out the hand, I don't want him to have that opportunity. For this, I let him draw favorably sometimes.

This means that sometimes I check behind on the flop, sometimes I check behind on the turn. Sometimes I get drawn out on, for sure. But in my overall strategy it lets me keep control of the hand.

[Jamougha]

You are massively out-thinking yourself. Much of the time on the turn he has a worse A and will stack off with it. Control the pot by forcing him to play big pots when you're ahead and accept that occasionally he will win a big pot too.

Not value-betting aggressively enough is almost certainly the number one reason that small stakes players stay small stakes players.

[wildzer0]

Interesting discussion, and this is an area I have problems with - playing against opponents who are very bluff-happy and floaty. It's a pretty simple math puzzle that basically boils down to "what % of the time does he do this with Ax or total air". Or as a more general question, when assigning ranges, what techniques do you guys use to assign the "air" percentage to various villains?

[ActionStan]

I would put playing raised pots out of position at the top of my list, but not value betting enough is certainly in the top 3.


...snip...
Much of the time on the turn he has a worse A and will stack off with it.
...snip...

I am willing to accept that I fall on the nitty side of the pot control spectrum and I think he has air or a draw a fair amount of the time. I really don't buy that the villain is stacking off with a bad A all that often after you've bet 2 streets. I am willing to believe your experience is different, but I'm not all that willing to hang my stack on the notion that he's over playing AJ. I don't play 6-max all that much and that game is more wild west than full ring, so this may not be as valid here.

Also, please don't mistake checking somewhere with checking it down or a squeamishness about playing big pots or a squeamishness about stacking off and reloading. My experience is that if I put 90-100BB into a pot with AQ, then I am losing more pots than I am winning.

...snip...
Control the pot by forcing him to play big pots when you're ahead and accept that occasionally he will win a big pot too.
...snip...

We aren't forcing him to play a big pot here. He is forcing us.

[ocdscale]

[ QUOTE ]
With aggressive villains, I generally tread very lightly. Not because I don't think my hand is good, but that I want to betting sequence to favor me. I want the pot structured so I leave myself in position to put in the last bet. I don't want to give the villain his full range of preferred tools.

[/ QUOTE ]

I ended up typing a long post, but figured I could shorten it to a few sentences. If Villain is LAG, we want him to be the one who shoves first. His shove range is much wider than his calling range. When we have a legitimate hand, we don't want aggressive villains to fold.

As for OP, given your previous reads, I call this one time and take down a note. I wouldn't be surprised to see A6 here or JTs.

[goforall]

yes. But 9§ in a 12$ Pot? this is may be enough to get crap to fold but the board will often look like villiant has made his draw so he comes out bettin wether he improved or not. Check!! Keep the pot small!!

[ActionStan]

Nice post ocd. I'm sure I would have enjoyed the longer one. Much more useful than you stink or you're weak.

So, it is your contention that this is the sort of villain that is going to show up in a pot without a hand more often than not. Honestly, I have a difficult time visualizing how a villain plays from a couple of numbers. There are aggressive players that harrass you a lot and surprise you with a hand when the pot gets big and there are aggressive players who are in a lot with air. I have a hard time telling the difference without watching them play a bit.

You are saying that this villain is the latter. Given that, then top pair is a pretty good one to get all in with. I would also say, that this AQ hand isn't much different than 99 or TT and that you are really just looking to pick off his bluffs when he overcommits himself. It's slightly weak against his range, but not remarkably so. Thoughts?