K3-SB against BB + Limper

Watkins · #1 04-04-2007, 07:34 PM

Villain is stat unknown to me at this time but seems to be playing a solid enough game. Is everyone c/f'ing the river or what? It's a dry flop so it's hard to imagine what he's calling with that I beat but if it is an underpair he's not going to bet it for me.

Ultimate Bet
Limit Holdem Ring game
Limit: $2/$4
9 players
Converter

Pre-flop: (9 players) Hero is SB with 3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]
UTG folds, UTG+1 calls, 5 folds, Hero calls, BB checks.

Flop: 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (3SB, 3 players)
Hero bets, BB calls, UTG+1 folds.

Turn: A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2.5BB, 2 players)
Hero bets, BB calls.

River: 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (4.5BB, 2 players)
Hero bets, BB calls.

Results:
Final pot: 6.5BB

Grease · #2 04-04-2007, 07:38 PM

I complete PF only as long as the BB is passive. If he's more aggro, I'd most likely muck it.

I like B/Fing the river. If he had an A, I think you'd have heard about it by now, and you'd let him check behind with smaller PP's that he would have called with if you check.

If you check, I think you must fold if he bets and you leave yourself open to be bluffed, but if you bet, I doubt he'll bluff-raise you, and you can collect a river bet a lot of the time.

Watkins · #3 04-04-2007, 08:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I complete PF only as long as the BB is passive. If he's more aggro, I'd most likely muck it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an interesting statement and something that I hadn't really considered in any depth until your post. Do you think an aggressive player expands his raising range in this situation or reduces it? What type of PFR %age would encourage you to muck here?

Point Blank · #4 04-04-2007, 08:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I complete PF only as long as the BB is passive. If he's more aggro, I'd most likely muck it.

I like B/Fing the river. If he had an A, I think you'd have heard about it by now, and you'd let him check behind with smaller PP's that he would have called with if you check.

If you check, I think you must fold if he bets and you leave yourself open to be bluffed, but if you bet, I doubt he'll bluff-raise you, and you can collect a river bet a lot of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

the ideal opponent to play this hand is an ABC post flop player ...

with either a passive or aggressive player you'll never know 'where you are'

a passive player may just call down with top pair ....
an aggressive opponent can raise you with a much lighter holding ...

as in this situation (OP lost to a weak Ace - yes?)

you want to play this aggainst a passive player - but yet you hope the passive player will raise the turn when he hits and ace (not really too likely) ...

Goodnews · #5 04-05-2007, 03:40 AM

looks fine to me, fold to any turn or river aggression.

Mustafa · #6 04-05-2007, 09:10 AM

I would go the B/F line. I might even go B/C if I thought BB was tricky, but usually not.

I don't see a reason to C/F the river. I even like C/R better than C/F, but I don't see myself checking here so I haven't thought it through.

bozlax · #7 04-05-2007, 12:12 PM

Posting blind: fold preflop.

Having read the post: oh, you didn't mention it was suited in your subject. With only one limper and no reads at a nearly full table, you should still fold, usually, but completing isn't the worst play as long as you don't go all Old Faithful postflop. (The whole "complete with any two suited in the SB" thing is way over-rated, especially in games where you expect your opponents to be at all better than complete suckery.)

I'd probably check the flop and see what happens. The pot is almost as small as it could possibly be and still see a flop, and if you get any action at all you've got kicker problems. Having led the flop and been called, I'd be fine with c/f'ing the turn.

As played, c/f'ing the river is out of the question. Bet/fold.

Point Blank · #8 04-05-2007, 12:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Posting blind: fold preflop.

Having read the post: oh, you didn't mention it was suited in your subject. With only one limper and no reads at a nearly full table, you should still fold, usually, but completing isn't the worst play as long as you don't go all Old Faithful postflop. (The whole "complete with any two suited in the SB" thing is way over-rated, especially in games where you expect your opponents to be at all better than complete suckery.)

I'd probably check the flop and see what happens. The pot is almost as small as it could possibly be and still see a flop, and if you get any action at all you've got kicker problems. Having led the flop and been called, I'd be fine with c/f'ing the turn.

As played, c/f'ing the river is out of the question. Bet/fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

just a thought on this hand ...

the flop is very close to a 'steal flop' - if BB is slightly aggressive and the limper a slight call station (but will raise OK hands)

how about check raising the flop

if it gets checked through - who cares, it's a small pot and really only a couple of cards are of concern

bozlax · #9 04-05-2007, 12:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
how about check raising the flop

[/ QUOTE ]

This is certainly one of the possibilities encompassed by "check and see what happens." I'd likely c/r a bet from UTG+1, c/f to a bet and a call.

Aaron W. · #10 04-05-2007, 12:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'd probably check the flop and see what happens. The pot is almost as small as it could possibly be and still see a flop, and if you get any action at all you've got kicker problems. Having led the flop and been called, I'd be fine with c/f'ing the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't like "check-and-see" against 2 opponents, especially against BB's random hand. I'll lead out with a lot of things in a full ring game and go from there. (I lead out a little less in 6-max because I get called more often.)