Pot control or protection? Discuss this texture

[Genz]

I've been playing a little 20NL to work on my game and implement new concepts. Esp. manipulating the pot size. This is a spot that I have been in pretty often and I'd like to have feedback. Please elaborate your responses.

Villain is running 17/7/oo over a very small sample. So as a default I assume that he is nittish and won't call light. So I don't want to play a big pot against him with a single pair, because I feel he won't go far in a hand oop without solid values. So I'm not pot/pot/pushing my overpair here ever.

There is no converter for the site I play on. So bear with me.

Game is 20NL 6Max.
Villain has $21.67 and is sitting UTG
Hero covers and is sitting in MP

Hero is dealt A /images/graemlins/heart.gif A /images/graemlins/spade.gif

Preflop:
Villain opens with a raise to $1, Hero reraises to $3.10, it's folded around, Villain calls.

Flop: 9 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif J /images/graemlins/spade.gif K /images/graemlins/club.gif
Villain checks, Hero???

I don't like this board. Many big pairs that a nitty villain might raise but not 4bet preflop with have made a set here. Many broadways have a draw. Those are mostly gutshots and since I suspect nittiness on villain's side, I might not be supposed to worry about those too much, but since villain could also be aggressive, I'd hate a c/r or a float here. And since I want to keep the pot small, I certainly want to check one street. In the best case he's holding AK and it doesn't matter if I bet this street or the next, because he prolly won't stack off with it so there is only a limited amount of money that I need to get into the pot. So the question is:

Why is this flop the right one to check and get closer to showdown? Or why is it the wrong one?

[CrustyFace]

In your explanation you are using alot of "could"s and "might"s about the opposition which tells me you simply don'y know him, except that he is a bit nitty. This isn't a criticism, he just hasnt been around long. But my question to you is:

What is the only way to find out where you stand against an unknown?

[Genz]

Yep, you are right, I don't know him. So people are free to add their own interpretations of his stats and/or give their reasoning for a line against a confirmed nit with those or similar stats.

And betting out to see where I stand with a pair is something that you should stop doing like the 2nd day after your first deposit.

[CrustyFace]

Why is betting out wrong here?

[Genz]

I'm not saying that it's wrong. If it's wrong or not is the topic of the discussion. But betting or raising for information is almost never correct, ESPECIALLY against an unknown. You can only do that if you can rely on his reaction so that it's worth the money. If I'm raised or called here, according to my interpretation of his stats, he could have a made straight or AK. So I don't get reliable information. So betting for the reason to see where I stand is a waste of money. This kind of information should only be seen as an additional goody when you raise for other reasons like protection or value.

[TheDoubleA]

I hate a check here for the exact reason you stated in the OP. "Many broadways have a draw" There is no way I let AQ draw to there straight for free. Also, if a person has AK here, you should be getting as much money in here as possible. Sure, you could be CR'd, and then you would have a fine idea of where you stand: beat. I think that checking here might keep the pot small, but I also think that it can lose the pot for you plenty of times.

Also, lets think about this; what does the villian put you on? You 3 bet the flop, so I would think that in many minds that is AA, KK, AK, QQ, and maybe 1010 and JJ. AA, KK, JJ, AK probably has his range crushed, so I think you could just take this pot down with a c-bet. This is a good thing imo because of the drawy board.

[ QUOTE ]
Why is this flop the right one to check and get closer to showdown? Or why is it the wrong one?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think checking the flop to get closer to showdown is wrong because you are letting a villian who you have no read on with no solid 3-bet calling range in mind draw a free card on a very drawy broadway board.

[CrustyFace]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying that it's wrong. If it's wrong or not is the topic of the discussion. But betting or raising for information is almost never correct, ESPECIALLY against an unknown. You can only do that if you can rely on his reaction so that it's worth the money. If I'm raised or called here, according to my interpretation of his stats, he could have a made straight or AK. So I don't get reliable information. So betting for the reason to see where I stand is a waste of money. This kind of information should only be seen as an additional goody when you raise for other reasons like protection or value.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok that makes sense.

[monkover]

you´re in position so you obviously can´t bet you.
There difenitely are merits in checking but also in betting
why i would advise checkign:
- controls the size of the pot --> villain is not likely to play big pots oop
- villain will prob think hands like KQ are good on the turn and bet them for value
-if villain has a draw and the turn blanks his equity drops a lot

merits in betting:
- you prevent villain from drawing for free.
- if villain has a hand like AK (def in his range) there are many scare cards that can come on the turn and prevent any more money from going in
- if you check behind villain can easily push you of your hand if a scare card comes ( see villain´s high aggro factor)

ok i hope i helped a bit...
tried to stick to ama´s request of not answering in a 1 liner which obv wouldn´t be possible here anyways.

[CobraGoat]

this is a value bet all day every day. you crush villains range of hands. since you are ahead of villains range you have to approach this as a value spot until villain does something to change his worse range. villain is 4 betting KK and probably QQ but he may have called with QQ. He is likely flat calling with AK, KQ, AQ, AJ, JJ, TT, 99, 88, 77. If villain is a nit, i think KJ raising and calling 3bet is unlikely. The only hands you are likely behind here are JJ and 99.

not betting this flop is bad because you are losing value on your hand and allowing your opponent to potentially catch up.

[danny8]

how many hands is the sample? if it really is tiny, like 10-20 then i dont think you can assume hes tight, basically a complete unknown.. if its 35+ even though obv the samples still tiny assuming hes somewhat tight seems reasonable.

first off i'd raise a little more pf, a possible tight player opeend UTG, its likely the only place you're going to get value from him so make it a bit larger ~$4

against a very tight range of AK, JJ+ you're a 60/40 favourite

what hands does a tight player call/shove over a cbet: AK, AA, KK, JJ

you're 50/50 vs that range, so betting and getting ai is never a mistake.

the only downside to betting is possibly folding out QQ and other crap he might have called pf with. downside to checking is letting QQ hit his 6outer. either option seems fine, i'd just mix it up but on the whole im betting

if his range is wider, say: AcAd,KK-TT,AQs+,KQs,AQo+ then betting becomes better than checking since theres more hands you beat and a couple GS's he might make a mistake by calling or shoving.

basically default is to cbet, but once you get a better idea of the range hes calling 3bets with then cehcking can be better. either way you should mix it up a little from time to time

[TheDoubleA]

Oh I also want to add, you should not be looking at his stats really at all. I dont like this part here:
[ QUOTE ]
Villain is running 17/7/oo over a very small sample. So as a default I assume that he is nittish and won't call light.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why put him on any kind of style when its over a very small sample?

You know what they say about assuming right? Assuming makes an ASS out of U and ME.

[Genz]

[ QUOTE ]
I hate a check here for the exact reason you stated in the OP. "Many broadways have a draw" There is no way I let AQ draw to there straight for free. Also, if a person has AK here, you should be getting as much money in here as possible. Sure, you could be CR'd, and then you would have a fine idea of where you stand: beat. I think that checking here might keep the pot small, but I also think that it can lose the pot for you plenty of times.


[/ QUOTE ]

The straight draw is only a longshot with 4 outs. Does this make protection so important that I want to play a big pot on this board?
Consider! It's a 3bet pot, i.e. villain has less than 2 pot sized bets left. So when I bet the pot here and he pushes, I'll be getting better than 2:1. Do I want to be in that position?

As I said, I suspect villain to be nitty, so I think that he won't go all the way with AK. So when I can only win maybe a 3/4 pot or full pot more from him, why shouldn't I try to get closer to showdown?

When I have his range crushed, why do I want to take the pot down? As I said, draws are more or less longshots. So why shouldn't I try to induce a bet by a second best hand?

[Genz]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh I also want to add, you should not be looking at his stats really at all. I dont like this part here:
[ QUOTE ]
Villain is running 17/7/oo over a very small sample. So as a default I assume that he is nittish and won't call light.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why put him on any kind of style when its over a very small sample?

You know what they say about assuming right? Assuming makes an ASS out of U and ME.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. Nice line. But the thing is that the sample size doesn't matter in this case. I'd like to discuss how to play these spots against nits or tags where it's a little difficult to chose between protection, value and pot control.

[monkover]

well genz as i stated in my post above it´s close and it depends if you want to play itsafe or not. it´s both +ev and the difference imo is very marginal.

[TheDoubleA]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I hate a check here for the exact reason you stated in the OP. "Many broadways have a draw" There is no way I let AQ draw to there straight for free. Also, if a person has AK here, you should be getting as much money in here as possible. Sure, you could be CR'd, and then you would have a fine idea of where you stand: beat. I think that checking here might keep the pot small, but I also think that it can lose the pot for you plenty of times.


[/ QUOTE ]

The straight draw is only a longshot with 4 outs. Does this make protection so important that I want to play a big pot on this board?
Consider! It's a 3bet pot, i.e. villain has less than 2 pot sized bets left. So when I bet the pot here and he pushes, I'll be getting better than 2:1. Do I want to be in that position?

As I said, I suspect villain to be nitty, so I think that he won't go all the way with AK. So when I can only win maybe a 3/4 pot or full pot more from him, why shouldn't I try to get closer to showdown?

When I have his range crushed, why do I want to take the pot down? As I said, draws are more or less longshots. So why shouldn't I try to induce a bet by a second best hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well then I think the question should be this:
Should I check here to induce a bluff, or cbet and try to build the pot now?

How about this; you check behind. Turn comes a 10, Q, or 8, and villian pushes on you with AK. Or turn comes Q and villian pushes on you with 88.

Now what?

You just are opening this pot up to be taken away from you when in all likelyhood you have the best hand. I hate a check.

[monkover]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I hate a check here for the exact reason you stated in the OP. "Many broadways have a draw" There is no way I let AQ draw to there straight for free. Also, if a person has AK here, you should be getting as much money in here as possible. Sure, you could be CR'd, and then you would have a fine idea of where you stand: beat. I think that checking here might keep the pot small, but I also think that it can lose the pot for you plenty of times.


[/ QUOTE ]

The straight draw is only a longshot with 4 outs. Does this make protection so important that I want to play a big pot on this board?
Consider! It's a 3bet pot, i.e. villain has less than 2 pot sized bets left. So when I bet the pot here and he pushes, I'll be getting better than 2:1. Do I want to be in that position?

As I said, I suspect villain to be nitty, so I think that he won't go all the way with AK. So when I can only win maybe a 3/4 pot or full pot more from him, why shouldn't I try to get closer to showdown?

When I have his range crushed, why do I want to take the pot down? As I said, draws are more or less longshots. So why shouldn't I try to induce a bet by a second best hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well then I think the question should be this:
Should I check here to induce a bluff, or cbet and try to build the pot now?

How about this; you check behind. Turn comes a 10, Q, or 8, and villian pushes on you with AK. Or turn comes Q and villian pushes on you with 88.

Now what?

You just are opening this pot up to be taken away from you when in all likelyhood you have the best hand. I hate a check.

[/ QUOTE ]


I don´t think you got the point of this whole thread! what we exactly don´t want is to inflate the pot.

[Genz]

[ QUOTE ]
since you are ahead of villains range you have to approach this as a value spot until villain does something to change his worse range.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a 3bet pot. We are not deep enough to have much room for maneuvering. As I said in another reply, villain has less than 2 pot bets left. So when I bet here, the next bet is a shove. Do I really want to invest 30% of my stack here already or do I want to delay the betting so that draws have less value and weaker hands might become overconfident?
Or would you make smallish bets like $2 to get villain pot stuck? That kind of bet could result in villain attacking a perceived weakness. And do I want to stack off with one pair against a tight player in a 3bet pot on this board?

[TheDoubleA]

[ QUOTE ]
I don´t think you got the point of this whole thread! what we exactly don´t want is to inflate the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not trying to be a jerk, I promise.

[ QUOTE ]
Why is this flop the right one to check and get closer to showdown? Or why is it the wrong one?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is the wrong flop to check because we are opening up this pot to be taken away from us by letting a drawing hand draw a card for free, and/or opening up the pot to be taken away from us by a strong bet/push by villian on turn.

I would bet 2/3s pot here and see what happens. If villian pushes, maybe we lay it down. If villian calls and checks the turn, then I would check behind.

[danny8]

i think trying to fold out AK TPTK in a 3bet is a very futile attempt, even from nits.

obv you're not trying to fold out AK, but i think worrying about folding it out is a little redundant unless you have a very significant read... which we dont seem to have

[Genz]

[ QUOTE ]
How about this; you check behind. Turn comes a 10, Q, or 8, and villian pushes on you with AK. Or turn comes Q and villian pushes on you with 88.


[/ QUOTE ]

I actually pondered the following during the hand: the board is already very coordinated, so the huge majority of turn cards that can come off are going to be blanks, esp. because villain is more likely to hold broadway cards than something like a small connector.

Thoughts?

[Genz]

[ QUOTE ]
I would bet 2/3s pot here and see what happens. If villian pushes, maybe we lay it down. If villian calls and checks the turn, then I would check behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

The interesting thing about this spot, I think, is, that you need to put it all together. I forgot to state the pot size on the flop in my OP. But it's obv. about $6.40 (not sure about the rake). Villain has approx. $18 left.

So your line would mean betting about $4 which would make a $14.4 pot on the turn and villain having only $14, i.e. a PSB left. I would have invested $7.10 into the pot which is 30% of villains effective stack, i.e. folding the best hand here would be a major mistake. So the "maybe we lay it down" in your post is actually a big factor to consider here.

[TheDoubleA]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How about this; you check behind. Turn comes a 10, Q, or 8, and villian pushes on you with AK. Or turn comes Q and villian pushes on you with 88.


[/ QUOTE ]

I actually pondered the following during the hand: the board is already very coordinated, so the huge majority of turn cards that can come off are going to be blanks, esp. because villain is more likely to hold broadway cards than something like a small connector.

Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well imo we dont want to see Qs, 10s or 8s. That is 12 of the remaing 47 cards, or 25%ish. I would not want to let them to draw to that for free.

[0524432]

You gotta bet it man, check/folding a scary turn is too weak. While this board is not the best for AA, the villain has to know you have a strong hand to 3b then cbet that flop. If you are met with a large c/r, IMO it's +eV to muck. Most of the time though, I think you'll get a fold or get called down by a weaker hand, just play accordingly.

[Genz]

[ QUOTE ]
You gotta bet it man, check/folding a scary turn is too weak. While this board is not the best for AA, the villain has to know you have a strong hand to 3b then cbet that flop. If you are met with a large c/r, IMO it's +eV to muck. Most of the time though, I think you'll get a fold or get called down by a weaker hand, just play accordingly.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are contradicting yourself. When he "has to know" that I have a strong hand when I bet this flop, why would he call down with a weaker hand? And you need to consider stack sizes more. I will get 2:1 if he pushes which isn't bad, considering that he might play hit or miss with AK.

[Smilin']

Disclaimer: You're a much better player than I am.

That said, are you sure you want to avoid a big pot here? First off, your read seems weak, so basing your play too much on it doesn't sound solid. Secondly, if Villain has you beat and you check one street, he'll probably use the other two streets to get ai or close to it. So (usually) the only way you avoid playing a big pot if you're beat is to fold at some point. If you fold to his first bet after checking the flop, I think you get bet off the best hand often. If you call one bet but fold to a push, you'll be folding getting 2:1 odds, and I'm not sure your read is solid enough to make that +EV.

IMO, this is a spot where you'll be unhappy to get all in but you should still be willing to do it (because the alternative lines are worse). So I see 3 possible routes:

1) Bet flop and commit the rest of your chips on a future round no matter what.

2) Check flop and bet turn, bet river no matter what comes (unless Villain bets or raises, in which case you call).

3) Check flop and get it all in when the turn card is safe, check/folding if it's dangerous.

Given the (weak) read on Villain, I think I kind of like #3, but I'm not too sure on that. I just don't like folding without a bad turn card, given pot and stack sizes.

[Genz]

[ QUOTE ]
Well imo we dont want to see Qs, 10s or 8s. That is 12 of the remaing 47 cards, or 25%ish. I would not want to let them to draw to that for free.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, you have to consider that villain probably holds at least 1 of the high cards when I'm ahead. That doesn't change much. But since a bet of mine will easily put me to a decision for all my chips later in the hand, wouldn't I want to make sure that I'm in one of the 75% spots?

Two additional thoughts: I don't think that folding a pair when there are 4 to a broadway straight on the board and villain is likely to have high cards is a weak play.
You guys actually want to bet because you want to take that pot down. Admit it! /images/graemlins/wink.gif A tight player won't call on a gutshot alone in a 3bet pot so he won't make a bad call there. And honestly, I doubt that he will bluff a lot in this spot when one of the scare cards comes. After all, he has to consider that I could be slowplaying a monster when I check behind on the flop.

[0524432]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You gotta bet it man, check/folding a scary turn is too weak. While this board is not the best for AA, the villain has to know you have a strong hand to 3b then cbet that flop. If you are met with a large c/r, IMO it's +eV to muck. Most of the time though, I think you'll get a fold or get called down by a weaker hand, just play accordingly.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are contradicting yourself. When he "has to know" that I have a strong hand when I bet this flop, why would he call down with a weaker hand? And you need to consider stack sizes more. I will get 2:1 if he pushes which isn't bad, considering that he might play hit or miss with AK.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well you are right about stack sizes, I didn't look. I'm in MCSE class on 2p2 all day =) i miss some things .... As for the contradiction, ummm, you don't think AK/KQ or worse puts all the $ in here and worse on certain ocassions? That's where I seem to make the most $ with AA, 3bet PF or not. Everyone wants to think their hands are good in a big pot. Consider the % of villains who are thinking (2p2, CR, PXF) players, it's a very small sample.

There will be PLENTY of times where a worse hand gets all their $ in.

[Genz]

EVERYBODY PLEASE ASSUME FOR THE SAKE OF DISCUSSION THAT VILLAIN IS RUNNING 17/7/2.8 OVER 150K HANDS!

It's not about the specific read in this specific hand but about the spot, about commiting, about value, about pot control and protection and putting it all together.

[netstorm]

*grunching*

This flop is the right one to check behind.

Lets assign a range for an unknown. Nit villain open UTG, and calls a 3bet. ding ding ding ding, alarm! UTG, calls a 3bet OOP... JJ+, AKo for me.

to the flop. 9JK rainbow. What do we beat? AK and QQ. What hands call our bet? AK, AA, KK, JJ. QQ folds here about 95% of the time.

By checking behind, we allow villain to take a stab at the pot with AK and perhaps QQ. We like to keep this pot small, because we dont like this flop. I dont worry about draws, because the only draw here could be AQs, and I'd be surprised if a nit calls that.

In short: I check behind, and will call a bet UI (either turn or river) If 2 blanks hit, I will fire on the river.

[Rythm]

I'd need a way better read than those stats (assuming that they're over a reliable sample) to not try to get all the money in here. People play bad in 3-bet pots and even a total nit will have a really hard time getting away from AK, which is also a pretty big part of his range here. It just doesn't seem worth it to let cards that scare him off his AK show up just to get some value from QQ, and hands that beat us are too small a part of his range to worry much about here IMO. I'd bet the flop and then call a shove/shove over a c/r, or shove most turns if he just called.

A 3-bet pot with 100 BB stacks and an overpair is rarely the time to worry about pot control, and I don't think this is an exception. If you really want to check a street, do it on the turn. That way you don't have to worry about potential scarecards as much and you'll get at least 1 street of value from AK before something hits that makes him think he's beat. He's a nit, so I think draws having less equity on the turn is a pretty minor consideration and actually a reason to bet the flop rather than check it. You probably won't get any value from those hands while you have them beat, so you might as well make him fold them before they hit. Also, if he will in fact pay you off with a draw, it's much more likely to happen on the flop when his hand has more equity.

Edit: I think he has TT-QQ and AK here a large majority of the time, with TT possibly being a bit less likely than the other hands. If he has TT he's not putting any more money in the pot unless we let him improve and the same may be true for QQ. That leaves AK and JJ, with AK being twice as likely.

[Genz]

[ QUOTE ]
Disclaimer: You're a much better player than I am.

That said, are you sure you want to avoid a big pot here? First off, your read seems weak, so basing your play too much on it doesn't sound solid. Secondly, if Villain has you beat and you check one street, he'll probably use the other two streets to get ai or close to it. So (usually) the only way you avoid playing a big pot if you're beat is to fold at some point. If you fold to his first bet after checking the flop, I think you get bet off the best hand often. If you call one bet but fold to a push, you'll be folding getting 2:1 odds, and I'm not sure your read is solid enough to make that +EV.

IMO, this is a spot where you'll be unhappy to get all in but you should still be willing to do it (because the alternative lines are worse). So I see 3 possible routes:

1) Bet flop and commit the rest of your chips on a future round no matter what.

2) Check flop and bet turn, bet river no matter what comes (unless Villain bets or raises, in which case you call).

3) Check flop and get it all in when the turn card is safe, check/folding if it's dangerous.

Given the (weak) read on Villain, I think I kind of like #3, but I'm not too sure on that. I just don't like folding without a bad turn card, given pot and stack sizes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't jump to conclusions because I have more posts than you /images/graemlins/wink.gif

I like what you wrote a lot. Sums up the problems pretty nicely. From my starting point, I favor a line like #3 myself, while I'd be hoping that I might bet the turn for a free SD. When I pet in position on a safe turn and villain calls, I don't have to bet the river if he checks to me.

[danny8]

Genz,

the bottom line is you cant fold this hand on this board to this player in this pot. the pot is too big, your 50/50 vs his legitimate calling/shoving range, foldings a big mistake. add in the times he does something mental or called you a little lighter pf and you have an obvious +EV situation betting the flop and gettin ai.

you should check sometimes just to mix up your play. checking is still +EV, but i dont htink its as good a play as cbetting. if this wasnt a 3bet pot or stacks were deeper then ithink we could have a better discussion, but as is its a pretty simple hand with very little room for manoeuvring

[Smilin']

The more I think about this, the more I like check flop, commit on a safe turn. Reasons:

1) If you check flop and a scare card comes, the chances that you were beat already on flop + chance you were outdrawn + Reverse Implied Odds if you are still ahead make it a fold. A solid fold, I think.

2) Suppose you bet flop and are called, then a scare card comes on the turn. That puts you in a crappy spot. I guess I fold if Villain donks the turn all in (despite pot odds), knowing a bluff is possible but unlikely. If Villain checks turn and you check behind, I have no idea what to do if he pushes river--calling and folding both suck.

[Unknown Soldier]

you don't want to be controlling the pot here, you want to be building a big one. You arent folding anywhere

[NL Newbie]

[ QUOTE ]

Game is 20NL 6Max.
Villain has $21.67 and is sitting UTG
Hero covers and is sitting in MP

Hero is dealt A /images/graemlins/heart.gif A /images/graemlins/spade.gif

Preflop:
Villain opens with a raise to $1, Hero reraises to $3.10, it's folded around, Villain calls.

Flop: 9 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif J /images/graemlins/spade.gif K /images/graemlins/club.gif
Villain checks, Hero???


Why is this flop the right one to check and get closer to showdown? Or why is it the wrong one?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not read other replys.

We should bet here, for value and protection.

Range:22-QQ, AQs, AKo/AKs.
Value: AK
Protection: QQ/TT - 12% a card(T or Q) hits and we go behind/scare him away/have a tough time.


Since TT/QQ almost always fold our hand won't be getting much value even when we check the flop.

So bet, fold out the gutshots and bet/fold turn.

If AK raises us here it makes it alot tougher to play.

[netstorm]

[ QUOTE ]


Range:22-QQ, AQs, AKo/AKs.


[/ QUOTE ]

he is 17/7 and UTG... How can you put him on such a loose range?!

[Smilin']

Here's a question (assuming read is over a reliable sample size): If this kind of Villain has AK, is he more likely to get all in if we bet flop/check turn/bet river, if we check flop/bet turn/bet river, or if we bet flop/bet turn/nothing left for river? (It's possible that AK is more likely to get all in in the last scenario because a scare card--for him--could come on the river.)

Similarly, is QQ more likely to put one bet in if we bet flop, or if we check flop and bet turn?

I don't know the answers, but I think those are very relevant questions. I also often find that I'm wondering whether bet flop/check turn or check flop/bet turn looks weaker when I'm holding a marginal hand that wants to extract from worse, so I'm very interested in the answers.

[Smilin']

[ QUOTE ]
So bet, fold out the gutshots and bet/fold turn.

If AK raises us here it makes it alot tougher to play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Notice pot and stack sizes--no room to bet/fold turn. I'm not sure there's even room to bet/fold flop.

[NL Newbie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Range:22-QQ, AQs, AKo/AKs.


[/ QUOTE ]

he is 17/7 and UTG... How can you put him on such a loose range?!

[/ QUOTE ]

Because its a small sample size, he may not be positionally aware and could stick to this range from UTG up to button.

Which gives him this range, but it doesn't matter much anyway what his raising range is - Its what calls/folds/raises us here, so its fairly irrelevent.

Actually, i'd remove AQ from that - So my concern is Sets/AK really.

Uhh its NL$20, my bad - $6pot, $3 flop bet, $12 pot on turn. $14 left each.

Hmm - We beat/lose 6(sets)/6(AK).
Villan doesnt always stack off with AK to a reraise, 2:1 if he shoves turn or river.

Umm - Does he call a reraise w/JJ or 99...does he stack off with AK.

Gem - Whats your image? History?

[Genz]

[ QUOTE ]
you don't want to be controlling the pot here, you want to be building a big one. You arent folding anywhere

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not looking for a fold. I was wondering if I should be looking for a safe turn before commiting.

[NL Newbie]

Bet flop,
Check behind turn,
Call or bet river.

This way you protect on the flop and get value from AK.
Then you entice AK to bluff/value bet river plus have odds to call anyway since 50/50 vs Sets/AK and youve encouraged a bet.

/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Zen_Approach]

I think you have to cbet this flop most of the time.

Villain will turn up with AK, QQ, AQs, JJ and throw in a couple other weird hands here and there.

I understand the desire to control the pot, but even this villain is going to have a very hard time getting away from AK here. If he raises it will at least allow you to make a judgement call here on the flop. If you give a free card, you will still be faced with the same difficult decision on the turn.

I don't like checking this flop. There are a lot of scare cards that can come up on the turn, both for you and also for an AK if he has one. I think this is a situation where you protect the pot and bet.

[panda]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you don't want to be controlling the pot here, you want to be building a big one. You arent folding anywhere

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not looking for a fold. I was wondering if I should be looking for a safe turn before commiting.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're not going to fold this hand in a 3-bet pot then why are you waiting for a safe turn?

[TheDoubleA]

Jesus I have so much work to do but I keep reading this thread. wtf?

Anyways, now I thought of this line: Villian holds KQs. He checks. You fire out 2/3s pot. He calls. Turn is a blank. You bet pot. He feels like he has to call with top pair. You get paid.

I think building a pot on the flop is a great idea, and when you get raised, then you can worry about the board being really scary.


After the thread has run its corse, I would be interested to see the rest of the hand history if you would mind.

[bozzer]

i don't care about gutshots, so if you feel like a turn bet will tell you enough about what he has to fold (???) or get him to pay you with QQ you can check and fold to reduce your variance.

I can't fold though, so I commit here. Its pretty thin but aggressiveness is good for meta game. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Most of his calling range is AK - 6 combos of AK, 3 combos of JJ, and max 3 of KK (should be adjusted down for some chance of 4bet). I think we should assume 99 and KQ cancel out.

That said a check behind, planning to get it all in on the turn might maximise your expectation. i get it in on all turns however - we might as well bluff the scare card as be bluffed by it IMO.

[Genz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you don't want to be controlling the pot here, you want to be building a big one. You arent folding anywhere

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not looking for a fold. I was wondering if I should be looking for a safe turn before commiting.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're not going to fold this hand in a 3-bet pot then why are you waiting for a safe turn?

[/ QUOTE ]
It increases the playability of my hand. Or it could. If he has a funny draw, he has less equity with one card to come. If he has a mediocre hand, he might widen his range because he thinks it's good.

As a summary: I see that almost all of you want to bet the flop. There has been a good exchange of arguments and what it boils down to - as always in marginal spots - is, how you weigh the risks against each other.

For those who care, here are the results:

I checked behind. The turn was a blank 2 /images/graemlins/club.gif or 3 /images/graemlins/club.gif. Villain checked again. I bet $3.5 and he folded. So looks like QQ, AQ or AJs maybe. I'll never know.

So thanks everyone for participating. Really good discussion. I think everyone could take away something from it since a lot of fundamentals were ventilated here.

Feel free to discuss further if you want to. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Rythm]

I'm really glad you posted this hand because I agree that there was some really good discussion. This is probably the most interesting thread I've seen since I started reading uNL more frequently. I think I could be convinced that NL newbie's bet, check, bet is better than my bet, bet, but there's still no way I'm checking this flop behind.

As you said it's a matter of weighing the risks against each other, and I just can't see how the risk of losing value from QQ while we're ahead of it outweighs the risk of not getting value from AK because a scarecard hits or getting outdrawn by QQ/TT.