back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

villain is a TAG regular, well known and considered solid by the forum.

he's 19/16/5.5 btw

Full Tilt Poker, $1/$2 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 6 Players
LeggoPoker.com - Hand History Converter

MP: $328.30
CO: $198.70
BTN: $93.65
SB: $192
Hero (BB): $440.35
UTG: $265

Pre-Flop: J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] dealt to Hero (BB)
UTG folds, <font color="red">MP raises to $7</font>, 3 folds, Hero calls $5

Flop: ($15) 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 Players)
Hero checks, <font color="red">MP bets $12</font>, Hero calls $12

Turn: ($39) 2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 Players)
Hero checks, <font color="red">MP bets $30</font>, Hero calls $30

River: ($99) J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 Players)
Hero???

thoughts on flop/turn plays? briefly considered folding preflop (being oop vs good tag w/ AJ isnt that exciting) but we're semi-deep so figured ehh [censored] it it cant be that bad.

whats up with river play?

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

whats up with pf. this is a tough hand to play OOP even on a TP board. and its situations like this that make it tough.

b/f or c/c

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
whats up with pf. this is a tough hand to play OOP even on a TP board. and its situations like this that make it tough.

b/f or c/c

[/ QUOTE ]

yea folding is definitely a solid option preflop. but its not like I'm afraid to make some moves on raggy board or dry flops that likely missed him, so I figured I could take a flop and if I hit something huge like 2 pr, we're 150bbs deep so its not that bad, is it?

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

well we both agree c/f is out of the equation. so it leaves b/c, b/f, and c/c

the river hasnt really changed the strength of our hand because hes not going to be likely to overvalue Ax or AK given the broadways out. so betting for value seems good because we get calls from worse and save against hands we beat with a b/f line.

c/c is also ok too because we took such a passive line that if he has a really good hand he needs to get value from it so we get to showdown, with added info of seeing his hand if we are behind. also he may lead a worse hand thinking you are on a draw and the board is scary enough that even if you hit a pair while on a draw a triple barrel isnt horrible here so we may get him to bluff if we check call.

id have to really know that he ALWAYS has worse here to bet call. seems spewy but he may be a player who overvalues hands





so no as long as you can figure out the line you will take when you put urself in this spot then its ok. its ok if you play it well postflop, given ur line so far and the added fact that i dont feel our hand value has improved greatly, i lean towards c/c

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

check-call. there might be a little merit in a bet-call, but I just think he ends up with the goods too much and i don't think he value raises with AK. And if i bet I'd make it a small blocking bet.

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

played fine.

c/c seems like he doesnt bet very much worse except a bluff, which I assume is ~ never since he is a solid tag and its not a great board to 3 barrel, but who knows, even tags will bluff off when they know they cant win at SD sometimes.

he seems very aggro, any idea how he would respond to blocker? I would love to induce bluff raises if it would work here.

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

I lied I think its kinda deep to induce a bluff, guess we c/c, but mostly expecting him to check worse behind.

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]


also he may lead a worse hand thinking you are on a draw and the board is scary enough that even if you hit a pair while on a draw a triple barrel isnt horrible here so we may get him to bluff if we check call.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think he'll value bet because he puts us on a draw.

[ QUOTE ]

id have to really know that he ALWAYS has worse here to bet call. seems spewy but he may be a player who overvalues hands


[/ QUOTE ]

We don't ALWAYS need to be ahead for this to be the correct play.

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
check-call. there might be a little merit in a bet-call, but I just think he ends up with the goods too much and i don't think he value raises with AK. And if i bet I'd make it a small blocking bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

paul, curious why you'd make it a small blocking bet rather than something for straight up value.

I expect him to just call w/ all worse 2 pairs, AK and maybe some worse aces but I doubt there are that many in his range.

problem w/ betting as I see it is my hand is virtually face up and should be pretty easy for him to deduce what I have by the river.

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

If he recognizes you as a decent TAG, I really don't like c/c because he's checking behind some hands he may make a crying call on the river with. B/f.

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
check-call. there might be a little merit in a bet-call, but I just think he ends up with the goods too much and i don't think he value raises with AK. And if i bet I'd make it a small blocking bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

paul, curious why you'd make it a small blocking bet rather than something for straight up value.

I expect him to just call w/ all worse 2 pairs, AK and maybe some worse aces but I doubt there are that many in his range.

problem w/ betting as I see it is my hand is virtually face up and should be pretty easy for him to deduce what I have by the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your most likely hand hand when you take this line and bet river is AJ. Just hope that he thinks you may try to rep that with a draw, or may make a crying call with AK or Aces up or something like that.

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
check-call. there might be a little merit in a bet-call, but I just think he ends up with the goods too much and i don't think he value raises with AK. And if i bet I'd make it a small blocking bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

paul, curious why you'd make it a small blocking bet rather than something for straight up value.

I expect him to just call w/ all worse 2 pairs, AK and maybe some worse aces but I doubt there are that many in his range.

problem w/ betting as I see it is my hand is virtually face up and should be pretty easy for him to deduce what I have by the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

sorry i just looked at stack sizes, but let's assume that we were 100bb deep to begin the hand. I'd bet 45-50 on the river, trying to induce a bluff push from a worse hand. So the point of the small bet on the river is to look to the Villain that we bet small with a missed draw or a weak hand on the river leaving us room to fold if Villain pushes.

Given the actual stack sizes, I kinda hate betting 3/4 of the pot and having to call a push. The reason being is that some Villain's will raise with A9 (weaker 2-pair) and others will just call with AK. But I think most Villain's are raising with us with all the better hands.

So I'd lean even more toward check-call.

However, if you really thinking you're losing value by not betting...I'd lean toward a pot size bet on the river because Villain's stats suggests that he's decent and our line is really suspect in the sense that our range should be polarized as nuts or air and given our line up to the point, it'll look like air. So our bet size on the river should try and induce the Villain into making a mistake by changing his calling range. Also, since we'll have to call a push, we'll be getting better odds (even though this isn't a good reason to bet large by itself on the end...just happens to be a bonus.)

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

who is villain?

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
who is villain?

[/ QUOTE ]

scom bridae

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

don't know him.

This is a good spot to bet/fold river. He'll look us up a little lighter since the FD missed and I doubt he ever raises worse.

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

scom bridae is solid but not great, and will likely call with AK if you lead river even if he does think you very well may have AJ

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
don't know him.

This is a good spot to bet/fold river. He'll look us up a little lighter since the FD missed and I doubt he ever raises worse.

[/ QUOTE ]

yea, I led out for $59 I think? thoughts on that size? and he thought for a couple secs before shoving.

right after he raised I hated my bet cause I was like "omfg it's so obvious I have AJ..." and thought he might have the balls to try and bluff me off it.

I think overall bet/fold is pretty solid w/ this hand but against a good tag I'm not sure.

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

Dude, no way he's trying to bluff you off AJ here. I don't even try to bluffs regs I think are good off that, because really, even good regs at 200NL seem to generally be semi-stations and have leaks.

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
Dude, no way he's trying to bluff you off AJ here. I don't even try to bluffs regs I think are good off that, because really, even good regs at 200NL seem to generally be semi-stations and have leaks.

[/ QUOTE ]

yea, maybe I'm overthinking things lately.

thanks for the reality check spivey

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

nobody is trying to get you off AJ here.

Just skimmed all the replies...bet/fold is much much better than c/c imo.

Re: back into 2 pair vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]

I think overall bet/fold is pretty solid w/ this hand but against a good tag I'm not sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well you can't bet/call really, your hand isn't strong enough, so it just comes down to your read on his river play. I think c/c is fine, betting is solid but somewhat thin against hands you beat, and you are far from guaranteed to be ahead here. But it just comes down to your Spidey-sense at the time.