Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

This hand happened last night and was a couple of hours into the session. The villian in this hand an older guy who is a little loose and kind of laggy in terms of his open raising standards, but like most live players has a fairly tight 3-betting range (ie JJ-AA, AK). At the time this hand takes place the table had been playing fairly tight. I had also been running well and showing down winners.

I open JT [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] in MP2, folds to sb who 3-bets, I call

Flop (7.5 sb) 8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]
bet, call

Turn (~5 bb) 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
bet, I raise

Thoughts on the turn raise? Also any comments on preflop welcome as well.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

ummm...i don't play 20/40 but this seems kinda standard to me [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

ive never played 20/40 at the woods, but what percentage of the time do you estimate he folds AK or AQ on the turn or river ui? you have a decent amount of pot equity against any non-heart hand, but your fold equity should be one of the ctirical factors tipping whether you semibluff or call the turn.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

I like it as long as you think you can get him to fold AK

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

I think this hand is much easier to play if you raise the flop.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

That's a good turn raise. At the same time, though, we may also fold AQ and AK by raising the flop and then betting the turn.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

I sort of hate this raise.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

Nobody has mentioned the percentage of times he has AA-QQ and 3bets you. Also, even if he has AK, he is likely to call your turn raise and then fold the river UI if you fire again(if he is the type that can fold AK on a rag board). So, in that case it would leave you in an uncomfortable spot on the river. If you miss, the only way you can win is to bet, but a lot of times he has just resorted to calling you down and you are wasting a bet since he wont fold.

So, Id just call. You've got a ton of outs. Wait until you hit one to put in multiple bets.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I sort of hate this raise.

[/ QUOTE ]
why?

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
Nobody has mentioned the percentage of times he has AA-QQ and 3bets you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am going to very rarely get 3-bet by an over pair in this game. Live games tend to play more passive on big streets.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
I sort of hate this raise.

[/ QUOTE ]
why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Given his hand range, you open yourself up way too much to a 3-bet.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I sort of hate this raise.

[/ QUOTE ]
why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Given his hand range, you open yourself up way too much to a 3-bet.

[/ QUOTE ]
This guy was the type of live player that wouldn't put in 3 bets with less than two pair.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

why not just do the freecard raise?

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

do you think you're picking up any fold equity here?

cuz I don't.

whatever you gain you lose the times you're wrong about your "never get 3-bet" theory.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I am going to very rarely get 3-bet by an over pair in this game. Live games tend to play more passive on big streets.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what is your plan if you don't get 3-bet, and he checks to you on the river when a blank falls?? Are you taking a stab at the pot since J high is surely no good??

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
do you think you're picking up any fold equity here?

cuz I don't.

whatever you gain you lose the times you're wrong about your "never get 3-bet" theory.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I actually do have some FE against AK, but I was unsure how often he leads the turn with AK UI here. Considering my equity in this pot I only need to get him to fold AK some small portion of the time to make this profitable.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am going to very rarely get 3-bet by an over pair in this game. Live games tend to play more passive on big streets.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what is your plan if you don't get 3-bet, and he checks to you on the river when a blank falls?? Are you taking a stab at the pot since J high is surely no good??

[/ QUOTE ]

I was planning on giving up UI on the river if called on the turn.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody has mentioned the percentage of times he has AA-QQ and 3bets you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am going to very rarely get 3-bet by an over pair in this game. Live games tend to play more passive on big streets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Two other things to consider (I like Hobb's idea here...):

1. Hobbs was playing like the Foxwoods 20/40 version of the DERB, and couldn't possibly miss his draw here... (the kid made like 7 racks or something...)

2. [Serious] The hands that Hobbs is likely to get three-bet by (the overpairs primarily) are hands that Hobbs has at least 13, and usually 15, outs against. Since he's hitting so much of the time here, getting three-bet is not nearly as bad as it would be if he had only a flush draw or something like that. Each bet that goes in is costing him like 1/6 of a BB, which is not a particularly steep price considering the size of the pot at this point. If we realize that Hobbs is risking somewhere between 1/6 and 1/3 of a BB on his raise here (depending on whether he get's three-bet), I think it's safe to say on average the "cost" of Hobb's raise is something like .2-.25 BB (remember, villain is passive). In a pot that has reached 5 BB already, Hobbs only needs to be right here like 1 in 20 times or even less to make this raise correct. Hobbs is likely to be up against AK at least some significant portion of the time here, and if villain folds even reasonably often I think it's clear we'll get a fold at least the necessary 5% of the time. Add in the metagame value and so on and I like this a lot.

3. I kind of prefer this line to the "raise-the-flop-for-a-free-card" line because that line is very unlikely to get us to defeat AK unimproved. A loose passive opponent like this will probably call the flop raise, and then if we take a free card we're going to have a very hard time getting our opponent to lay down anything, including AK unimproved, on the river. (Indeed, a river bluff at that point on our part would be very imprudent in what would be small pot). We're almost certainly getting three-bet on the flop by if villain has an overpair, and so most of the time raising the flop does nothing.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think this hand is much easier to play if you raise the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think raising this flop is bad as I will get 3-bet on this street by overpairs a lot of the time. Also AK is not going to fold to a flop raise and thus I'm commited to putting a turn bet rather than taking a free card (this is of course the times I am not 3-bet).

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

but sometimes you get 3-bet. believe it or not. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

nice analysis.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody has mentioned the percentage of times he has AA-QQ and 3bets you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am going to very rarely get 3-bet by an over pair in this game. Live games tend to play more passive on big streets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Two other things to consider (I like Hobb's idea here...):

1. Hobbs was playing like the Foxwoods 20/40 version of the DERB, and couldn't possibly miss his draw here... (the kid made like 7 racks or something...)

2. [Serious] The hands that Hobbs is likely to get three-bet by (the overpairs primarily) are hands that Hobbs has at least 13, and usually 15, outs against. Since he's hitting so much of the time here, getting three-bet is not nearly as bad as it would be if he had only a flush draw or something like that. Each bet that goes in is costing him like 1/6 of a BB, which is not a particularly steep price considering the size of the pot at this point. If we realize that Hobbs is risking somewhere between 1/6 and 1/3 of a BB on his raise here (depending on whether he get's three-bet), I think it's safe to say on average the "cost" of Hobb's raise is something like .2-.25 BB (remember, villain is passive). In a pot that has reached 5 BB already, Hobbs only needs to be right here like 1 in 20 times or even less to make this raise correct. Hobbs is likely to be up against AK at least some significant portion of the time here, and if villain folds even reasonably often I think it's clear we'll get a fold at least the necessary 5% of the time. Add in the metagame value and so on and I like this a lot.

3. I kind of prefer this line to the "raise-the-flop-for-a-free-card" line because that line is very unlikely to get us to defeat AK unimproved. A loose passive opponent like this will probably call the flop raise, and then if we take a free card we're going to have a very hard time getting our opponent to lay down anything, including AK unimproved, on the river. (Indeed, a river bluff at that point on our part would be very imprudent in what would be small pot). We're almost certainly getting three-bet on the flop by if villain has an overpair, and so most of the time raising the flop does nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]

The cost of being 3-bet by TT is .434BB. The cost of being 3-bet against the other overpairs (JJ-AA) is about -.7BB.

What this comes down to, for the most part, is a question of how often BB leads a non AhKh-based AK into hobbs again on the turn. We're describing him as passive, relatively unable to 3-bet one pair on the turn, but at the same time, relatively likely to continue leading the turn with AKo. There isn't a huge discrepancy here but there is one worth considering.

Since we think we're very unlikely to be 3-bet on the turn, our raise needs to have the effect of villain folding about 16% of the time here for a raise to be good. So if the ratios seem to be pointing to the fact that villain would lead with an unhearted AK intending to fold to a raise frequently (only has to be about 25% of the time)), then I think I like it.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

This might be a leak of mine, but somthing that folks seem to be ignoring is the amount of time your turn raise gets called, you miss, and you bluff the river and get called. I'm not sure you could quantify it, but seems possible, no?

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

I was thinking about doing an EV calculation for the turn raise in class today so I'll try to step through things below. I don't do these that often so feel free to correct me if things are wrong.

Opponents Range:

AK: 16 combos
AA-TT: 27 combos

In general our EV calculation will be the following:

EV = Equity*(bets invested + implied odds) - (1-Equity)*(bets invested) + Other

In this current example the other term will be represented by our fold equity. For the case with no fold equity we can see that our EV is negative.

EV(no FE) = 15/46*(+3BB) - (1-15/46)*(2BB) = -0.37 BB

No lets try and quantify FE.

Assume FE = F(x,y)*15/43*(6BB)

F(x,y) represents a function that will be dependent on both the percentage of times villian bets AK unimproved on the turn as well as the percentage of times he folds to our raise. For this problem let F(x,y) = x*y (with x equal to percentage villian leads with AK and y equal to percentage of times he folds AK). the ratio 15/43 represents the number of combos that he will potentially fold to a turn raise (it is 15 and not 16 because he will not fold AhKh). The 6BB represents the number of bets we stand to win the times we get our villian to fold the best hand.

Lets now look at the neutral EV case:

0 = x*y*(15/43)*(6BB) - 0.37BB

Limiting Cases:
1) villian bets AK on the turn 100% of the time:
This implies he needs to fold to our raise
y = 18% of the time.

2) villian will fold to our raise with AK 100% of the time
obviosly he then needs to only bet the turn 18% of the time.

Of course villian is not going to do either of these things 100% of the time, but Entity's estimate of villian folding AK to our raise around 25% of the time probably reflects a realistic situation.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
This might be a leak of mine, but somthing that folks seem to be ignoring is the amount of time your turn raise gets called, you miss, and you bluff the river and get called. I'm not sure you could quantify it, but seems possible, no?

[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry for the bump. I came across this thread today and realized this went unanswered.

My plan in this hand was to not bet the river UIed because I didn't think, even in a pot that big, I would have a profitable bluff because his calling basically meant he had an overpair that he wanted to SD.

Results of the hand: dude called my turn raise, river bricked, it went check check and he showed QQ and scooped.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

This is old, but I just want to say that I love this turn raise. My standard line is call/call/ fold unimproved, but I try to mix it up like this from time to time.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

good bump, for the simple fact that this thread had some good discussion.

As for betting the river, I think when the villain calls the turn raise, he's not prob not gonna fold this river unless he has exactly A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] K [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think this hand is much easier to play if you raise the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think raising this flop is bad as I will get 3-bet on this street by overpairs a lot of the time. Also AK is not going to fold to a flop raise and thus I'm commited to putting a turn bet rather than taking a free card (this is of course the times I am not 3-bet).

[/ QUOTE ]

This is so intuitive but at the same time giving away so much.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think this hand is much easier to play if you raise the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think raising this flop is bad as I will get 3-bet on this street by overpairs a lot of the time. Also AK is not going to fold to a flop raise and thus I'm commited to putting a turn bet rather than taking a free card (this is of course the times I am not 3-bet).

[/ QUOTE ]

This is so intuitive but at the same time giving away so much.

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you in favor of a flop raise?

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think this hand is much easier to play if you raise the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think raising this flop is bad as I will get 3-bet on this street by overpairs a lot of the time. Also AK is not going to fold to a flop raise and thus I'm commited to putting a turn bet rather than taking a free card (this is of course the times I am not 3-bet).

[/ QUOTE ]

This is so intuitive but at the same time giving away so much.

[/ QUOTE ]

This post is unclear.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

I don't like the turn raise not so much for fear of getting 3 bet but for the river action. When you hit one of your draws, you want him to bet into you so you can raise. This way you pick up at least one bet on the river when he's bluffing and two bets when he's got a pair.

If you raise the turn even if you think your chances of getting 3 bet by a better hand are slim, he will certainly check call the river if he has a pair, and check fold if he misses. I don't think its likely that you have much FE with this raise on the turn. You are losing money on the turn raise when your opponent is ahead and losing one big bet on the river both when he is bluffing and you hit, and when he bets for value and you can raise.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like the turn raise not so much for fear of getting 3 bet but for the river action. When you hit one of your draws, you want him to bet into you so you can raise. This way you pick up at least one bet on the river when he's bluffing and two bets when he's got a pair

[/ QUOTE ]

unfortunately this is live where everyone misses river value bets. if the river is a heart, villain will likely check/call. if it's a 7 there are four to a straight on board and he'll almost surely check/call. you're only really getting bet into on a non-heart queen.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think this hand is much easier to play if you raise the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think raising this flop is bad as I will get 3-bet on this street by overpairs a lot of the time. Also AK is not going to fold to a flop raise and thus I'm commited to putting a turn bet rather than taking a free card (this is of course the times I am not 3-bet).

[/ QUOTE ]

This is so intuitive but at the same time giving away so much.

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you in favor of a flop raise?

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely not. I think this is the ideal line in that game. By giving away, I mean that it reveals a lot of information.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

If you can fold an AK here some of the time I think it's worth it.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

Remeber if we get 3-bet here we're going to pick up 1-2 BBs on the river when we hit, which is like +30% of the time.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I sort of hate this raise.

[/ QUOTE ]
why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Holy crap, I just read this as if I ddin't read it before and I def don't hate this turn raise at all. Fine. If he calls are you firing again? With live guys I haven't played with lots, I just dont' know who calls with Ace high and who doesn't

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

I like it. If called, you're firing at any non-A or K river, right? Or would you check a J or a T if it hits?

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I like it. If called, you're firing at any non-A or K river, right? Or would you check a J or a T if it hits?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd be way more likely to bet a J or T than a blank.

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I like it. If called, you're firing at any non-A or K river, right? Or would you check a J or a T if it hits?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd be way more likely to bet a J or T than a blank.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then I guess I don't really see the point of the turn raise. You're trying to get AK or AQ to fold, right? A lot of times these hands will call the turn looking to improve, then fold the river when they don't. Or do you think that if AK is folding, he's going to fold to the turn raise?

Re: Foxwooods 20/40: JTs hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I like it. If called, you're firing at any non-A or K river, right? Or would you check a J or a T if it hits?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd be way more likely to bet a J or T than a blank.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then I guess I don't really see the point of the turn raise. You're trying to get AK or AQ to fold, right? A lot of times these hands will call the turn looking to improve, then fold the river when they don't. Or do you think that if AK is folding, he's going to fold to the turn raise?

[/ QUOTE ]

If he calls the turn raise with AK, which he probably will a portion of the time, he is probably going to showdown with it unless he is tight and has specificly AhKh.