Sort of Theory Post

[MDMA]

Yes, you can make those kind of hands fold in this spot, and I said that doing it with air has some merit just because of this, but I still don't like it since the raise either pinpoint you on air or monster. E.g raising with AT here is the same as raising with air, because any hand AQ,AJ and worse will most probably fold, hence AT is pretty the same as air.

Only reason I don't like a raise is because I don't think it's credible at all barring like two specific hands, since you would likely slowplay all monsters until turn and just flatcall. I'd raise here with air here very very seldom, to accomodate the fact that I seldom should have one of the few hands that would actually raise here. And, when I do, it will always be either one of these hands or air; never something like AT. Needless to say, you cant flatcall your monsters and raise with air here routinely.

[cero_z]

Hi AB,

Totally depends on your image. If you are seen as TAG, raising here with AT doesn't accomplish much that's good. If you're viewed as LAG-er it makes more sense.

If you have any 2 (that's a bluff), I think raising works for either TAG or LAG; better for TAG.

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi AB,

Totally depends on your image. If you are seen as TAG, raising here with AT doesn't accomplish much that's good. If you're viewed as LAG-er it makes more sense.

If you have any 2 (that's a bluff), I think raising works for either TAG or LAG; better for TAG.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cero, I think raising with any 2 in this spot is v bad.

Here's why

Hero is pfr. He is expected to auto bet the flop.

The flop is ace high and dry, so it is VERY likely a cbet will be performed; no reason for most to check behind (unless hero is vanessa selbst)

A big hand may c/r, but typically a lead in this spot IS a big hand, as a c/r is so powerful on this dry a board - Also, due to the ace, ppl dont (generally) bluff into pfr who generally will have that ace. (and firing all streets into what you expect is top pair or better isnt exactly common practice)

if a big hand check calls it's too easy for an opponenty to exercise pot control (or merely shut down w/o an ace anyway) for the turn, thus losing the (set, 2pair) shot of a big pot

anyway, I interpret a lead in this spot a big hand enough (set or 2 pair) > X% of bluff (like underpair or gutshot etc., which will fold to a raise) not making laying ~300 to pick up the ~200 or so worth it (even with say 2 to 4 redraw outs, it's a v weak semibluff)

imo w/ absolutely nothing I would fold here. I would laugh if they did have a big hand (which i suspect they do often, as said) as I would pretty much fire away, so they lost the chance to win extra money.

when i'm tilting i will raise here, but when I tilt I lose money, so raising is bad!!! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

w/ AT though you're not afraid of a 2 or 4 outer, and allowing them the chance to fire w/ worse is fine

and to james/jablue (i think this hand pertains to the A8 hand) if I call this street I am prepared to call down turn and river; I'm prepared to fold at some point; and I'm prepared to raise for value or a bluff if the situation and cards fall that way. but for the flop, the plan and play is to call w/ AT and fold junk.

[MDMA]

Thank you Bobbo, well put, this is what I was trying to say with my posts, without really suceeding as good as you.

[cero_z]

Hi Bobbo,

Valid points all. However, I still disagree.

You say a lead here is a big hand, mostly. I say it's a draw or a test, mostly. Aggressive players will lead into you on a dry, ace-high board with a draw (or even with air at times), because they know that if you have a hand like JJ, it puts you in a tough spot. They will also do it often with a medium ace like AJ and down, because you are a favorite to not have an ace, and to find out where they're at. Many players will muck that medium ace if you raise. While it's true that you want all of the aces smaller than AJ in, you still will not win much more from them even if you just call. However, and this leads me to the main reason I recommend raising here, you might lose a lot more with it if they make aces up on the turn.

The biggest reason to raise the flop here with AT and with any 2, IMO, is that an opponent who makes this lead into you will often have a hand that can't call a raise, but which will not put another dime in the pot UNLESS the turn card slaughters you. That is, they are leading with a gutshot, or 2nd or 3rd pair, or a baby Ace. If you smoothcall and they hit on the turn, you won't know it, and they'll bet again. If not, they'll probably check-fold, if you don't give them a free card again.

[BobboFitos]

cero, all good points, just a flaw in logic -

[ QUOTE ]
The biggest reason to raise the flop here with AT and with any 2, IMO, is that an opponent who makes this lead into you will often have a hand that can't call a raise, but which will not put another dime in the pot UNLESS the turn card slaughters you. That is, they are leading with a gutshot, or 2nd or 3rd pair, or a baby Ace. If you smoothcall and they hit on the turn, you won't know it, and they'll bet again. If not, they'll probably check-fold, if you don't give them a free card again.

[/ QUOTE ]

IF this holds true, floating with junk is much more attractivc then raising the flop. Because a flop raise will run you into the big hands which dont fold to the initial raise, but still allows you to escape w/o losing that additional money by waiting until the turn

basically, it's options theory..

where we disagree (and upon further thought, I think you're right, but I'm not positive to what degree) is what a lead by a villain into the pfr on an ace high dry board means.

If it was draw heavy, I would weight more semibluffs, marginal hands which dont want to give a freebie, etc. but the fact is there are so few gutshots abound (if we even give opponent credit for being in there oop with a 1 gapper!) makes me think sure, could be a weak top pair testing itself, (which may not even fold to a raise; the same people that lead out "for information" will be the same to convince themselves your raise is what it is, a bluff representing ak+) but most often a big hand which seeks to stack top pair by seizing initiative.

[BobboFitos]

Also, there was a hand in the archives where Limon agrees with what you say it was almost the exact scenario, except full ring; AT is a raise here because if opponent will not put another dime unless they improve, (btw, I dont feel this is ever the case, and thus this stipulation is stupid) the cost of calling a pot bet on turn and river (roughly 9x your initial call of the flop bet) will nto outweighthe "bluff" equity (he didnt put it in the math terms, others did, but this is in essence what he said)

this is NOT the case though; if it was a LIMPED pot I agree totally - what you taught me a while back about overrepping your hand in limped pots is one of the most valuable pieces of information I've learned - but here since we're the raiser, I strongly believe over representing your hand is a bad thing.

furthermore, reason it's bad to do with junk (and this is a secondary point) is that as said I dont think you pick up the pot enough to make the bluff a long term profitable one (even showing it down isnt going to help much, metagame wise)

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
Thank you Bobbo, well put, this is what I was trying to say with my posts, without really suceeding as good as you.

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks md =)

[BobboFitos]

hah, another thing; flop is A 8 3. only gutshots that could be here (for him to be leading) are 45, 24, and 25. I think 24 and 25 are not in his hand range. thus this is one of the most benign (sp?) boards wrt semibluffs. Simply, ti's either a straight out bluff (and here A4 is a bluff relative to our actual hand strength, as we outkick him!) or 2pair +.

If we raise to 300, (lets review the math to bring us back to original point) pot had his 100 bet + 95 inital. So 195, I'm rounding to even 200 for simple terms. so we need to pick up the pot +200prof vs -300loss, or 2x - 3(1-x) = 0 for breakeven.
2x - 3 + 3x = 0
5x = 3
x = 3/5, so we need to pick it up 60%+ (figure is a tiny bit higher given just 95 dead, not 100)

IF he folds to the flop raise (it's too tough to analyze if he ever calls a raise w/ a worse hand, suhc as 45 or A5) - going on the stipulation he calls w/ better folds worse (which I dont agree, but then again you people would all be surprised at what loose calls I can get when I go crazy) he must therefore be "bluffing" 60% of the time.

ON THIS BOARD, since there are basically no semibluffs, he is NOT bluffing 60% of the time!

[cero_z]

Hi Bobbo,

Basically, you disagree with my premise that a bet here is weak much more than it is strong. From there, we don't have many places we can go.

You mentioned that there are few gutshots on the A83 board--2 things: I said in my post that the bet could be a gutshot, a pair, or an Ace. So 45, 89, 99, A7--these are all possibilities IMO. The 2nd thing is that it's a theory post, so I don't think Adam meant to inquire about your action on the dryest board of all time only; I could be wrong about that, but in any case I was thinking of a generic "dry flop".

As far as floating with any two goes, we're dealing with 2 arguments here: what to do with AT, and what to do with dikshit. Detailing my reasons for raising with dikshit would take longer than I want to spend, but basically, it would be to balance the legit raises (such as the AT/AK/top two etc) I'll be making.

Like Strassa, I love it when I know that if I lead a certain flop into a certain pre-flop raiser, he will not raise me NO MATTER WHAT HE HOLDS. He'll call with AT/ JJ to see what I do; he'll call with junk to take the pot away on the turn if I check; he'll call with AA to raise me on the turn. That makes a bet with a gutshot or bottom pair look fairly attractive, especially if you throw in that I can possibly read his bet size/action if I check the turn and still win the pot sometimes.

Anyway, I like where this thread has gone; nice posts Adam, Bobbo, et al.