ATs vs. TAG
 

Villan is a TAG regular. Hero should be viewed as solid. There is no history to speak of. Lost the HH so doing this from memory:

Absolute Poker 200NL 6m

Stacks:
Hero: $390 (Button)
Villan: $400 (UTG)

PF: Villan opens UTG for $8. All fold to Hero who elects to call $8 with A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]. Blinds fold, HU to the flop...

($17) Flop: T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]
Villan bets $15. Your plan?

Notice Stack sizes. All comments appreciated.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

Pretty obvious call imo. I call turn too and fold vs a big river bet. Without history there's no reason to believe he's 3-barrelling bluffing on this board or v-betting big with AQ/KTs. Bet turn if checked to.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

I would call and c/r a non K, J or Q turn

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

dave,
we're in pos.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

I don't like raising any turn here.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

so most people just call/call turn/fold river?

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

agreed with nick.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

Probably... what else is there?

Raise, then fold to a 3bet on flop? What if you raise flop and he flat calls and the turn blanks?

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
Pretty obvious call imo. I call turn too and fold vs a big river bet. Without history there's no reason to believe he's 3-barrelling bluffing on this board or v-betting big with AQ/KTs. Bet turn if checked to.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this line. Theres no need to do any raising as the villain is not getting all the money in unless you're beat.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

alright. just checking up. have to work soon, will post next street in a few hours.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

... fold river ??? Play it like a wuss ??? Yes, we're 200 BBs deep here, but I'm so confused why everyone wants to play this so softly. You do realize we have 2 pair with position right ?

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
... fold river ??? Play it like a wuss ??? Yes, we're 200 BBs deep here, but I'm so confused why everyone wants to play this so softly. You do realize we have 2 pair with position right ?

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you put villain on that will call that we beat?

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

I agree with Carrot. I'm not wanting to play this hand softly, but I think a flop call is best. I wouldn't be looking to fold river tbh.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

I'd call flop, call/check turn, call/bet river.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

If I'm calling its gonna go something like this: call/call/call. I prob raise the flop.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'd call flop, call/check turn, call/bet river.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, please don't check this turn behind if he checks it.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
... fold river ??? Play it like a wuss ??? Yes, we're 200 BBs deep here, but I'm so confused why everyone wants to play this so softly. You do realize we have 2 pair with position right ?

[/ QUOTE ]
When I'm saying I'll fold the river to a big bet, I don't mean I'm folding the river to 2/3ish bet. I fold if he keep bettng close to pot on the river and turn though. There's really no reason to believe a unknown 200nl-tag keeps betting this big with a worse hand without any history.

Our hands relative value on this board vs a tag betting big isn't as great as you think, change the board to ATx and we obv have a monster. I guess you're used playing with a laggy image though, that changes things a lot.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

With position I kind of like to go raise/check/call or value bet.

I raise such a wide range on the flop with position that'd be pretty bad for me not to be raising here most of the time.

It's a pretty transparent line but nobody knows how to c/r bluff the river very well ime and you almost always get two streets of value out of AQ/AJ, as opposed to having those hands c/f the turn.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
If I'm calling its gonna go something like this: call/call/call. I prob raise the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm calling / betting every street that a J or Q doesn't hit ...

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

To all saying call, call, call.

Turn and river bricks. Villain bets 115 in 130, you call? Personally I call ~95 or less. Calling a big bet on the river vs an unknown tag is bad imo. He's almost never bluffing 3 streets in a row on this board and I doubt he's valuebetting this big with a worse hand. Keep in mind villain raised from UTG, there's not a ton of possible lower Ax two pair combos.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

EDIT: deleted original post (misread villan/hero position)

Nvr mind. You are definitely behind this hand if he fires the 2nd barrel. I think call flop fold to another big barrel turn. There's no way he's betting out with AQ vs another TAG that is just calling which screams strength IP.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
Safe to say he doesn't have AJ KK or AA

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
Safe to say he doesn't have AJ KK or AA. So the hands you are worried about are TT QJs or AK (though I think he would reraise another TAG w/ AK some of the time to see where he's at).

[/ QUOTE ]
Villain is the pfr.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

raise the flop. villian is never letting go of AQ/AJ here. We don't want 88 to get a free card and hurt us big. We have no idea where we stand if he fires two bullets. Just raise flop and fold to 3bet.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

ya, sorry about that, I misread villian and hero's position. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

i like raising flop, checking behind turn. you can rep some kind of pair + gutshot hand pretty well and you should get paid on the river by any A-x.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
raise the flop. villian is never letting go of AQ/AJ here. We don't want 88 to get a free card and hurt us big. We have no idea where we stand if he fires two bullets. Just raise flop and fold to 3bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Holy hell this is [censored] aweful

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

I like floating. I doubt aj or aq call a raise.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
To all saying call, call, call.

Turn and river bricks. Villain bets 115 in 130, you call? Personally I call ~95 or less. Calling a big bet on the river vs an unknown tag is bad imo. He's almost never bluffing 3 streets in a row on this board and I doubt he's valuebetting this big with a worse hand. Keep in mind villain raised from UTG, there's not a ton of possible lower Ax two pair combos.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nick I see what you're saying, but you also have to consider what he thinks we may have ... if we flat call flop, our hand could be AT, but it also looks like AJ/AQ/KQ/KJ hoping to hit a 4 outer ...

He could have a set or AK, but I'm not releasing this hand unless things get to like fahrenheit 451 for us

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
I like floating. I doubt aj or aq call a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

floating is calling with qd9d to take it away later.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

Action flop ftw.

I like the call/call line if the turn is a blank.

I'm not stacking off with this hand against a TAG, I'm trying to keep it under control, for the most part.

If he checks the blank turn obv bet and bet the river if he checks.

I'm not exactly looking to build a big pot by raising unless we hit the Ace or turn.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To all saying call, call, call.

Turn and river bricks. Villain bets 115 in 130, you call? Personally I call ~95 or less. Calling a big bet on the river vs an unknown tag is bad imo. He's almost never bluffing 3 streets in a row on this board and I doubt he's valuebetting this big with a worse hand. Keep in mind villain raised from UTG, there's not a ton of possible lower Ax two pair combos.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nick I see what you're saying, but you also have to consider what he thinks we may have ... if we flat call flop, our hand could be AT, but it also looks like AJ/AQ/KQ/KJ hoping to hit a 4 outer ...


[/ QUOTE ]
So you think he'll bet 115 as a bluff? I strongly disagree. He will not vb 115 with AQ hoping for a call from AJ. He'll probably bet 75-90 with AQ if he decides to bet, hoping to get calls from Ax. That's why I'm calling a 90ish or less bet but I fold if he bets 115.

If he bets 115 on the river in my exampe his range should weighted much more heavily towards AA/KK/AK/QJs/TT/other sets then AQ/AJ/KT/ragged 2-pair/bluffs.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To all saying call, call, call.

Turn and river bricks. Villain bets 115 in 130, you call? Personally I call ~95 or less. Calling a big bet on the river vs an unknown tag is bad imo. He's almost never bluffing 3 streets in a row on this board and I doubt he's valuebetting this big with a worse hand. Keep in mind villain raised from UTG, there's not a ton of possible lower Ax two pair combos.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nick I see what you're saying, but you also have to consider what he thinks we may have ... if we flat call flop, our hand could be AT, but it also looks like AJ/AQ/KQ/KJ hoping to hit a 4 outer ...


[/ QUOTE ]
So you think he'll bet 115 as a bluff? I strongly disagree. He will not vb 115 with AQ hoping for a call from AJ. He'll probably bet 75-90 with AQ if he decides to bet, hoping to get calls from Ax. That's why I'm calling a 90ish or less bet but I fold if he bets 115.

If he bets 115 on the river in my exampe his range should weighted much more heavily towards AA/KK/AK/QJs/TT/other sets then AQ/AJ/KT/ragged 2-pair/bluffs.

[/ QUOTE ]

No need to put words into my mouth ... we're still in the abstract here so lets wait and see how the hand plays out ...

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

I think Hero needs to raise the flop here. If this TAG villain comes over the top for a 3-bet, I think Hero has to dump it.
What hands are we beating here that TAG would raise UTG with? QQ, JJ, AQ, 99 and lower. No need to lose our stack with top and bottom pair. Unfortunate flop really.
My question: Why are you calling the TAG UTG raiser with ATs. This is a situation I personally try to avoid because it is so tough to play after the flop.
If we hit a monster hand, a straight or a flush, we probably don't get paid off by the TAG.
Thoughts?

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To all saying call, call, call.

Turn and river bricks. Villain bets 115 in 130, you call? Personally I call ~95 or less. Calling a big bet on the river vs an unknown tag is bad imo. He's almost never bluffing 3 streets in a row on this board and I doubt he's valuebetting this big with a worse hand. Keep in mind villain raised from UTG, there's not a ton of possible lower Ax two pair combos.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nick I see what you're saying, but you also have to consider what he thinks we may have ... if we flat call flop, our hand could be AT, but it also looks like AJ/AQ/KQ/KJ hoping to hit a 4 outer ...


[/ QUOTE ]
So you think he'll bet 115 as a bluff? I strongly disagree. He will not vb 115 with AQ hoping for a call from AJ. He'll probably bet 75-90 with AQ if he decides to bet, hoping to get calls from Ax. That's why I'm calling a 90ish or less bet but I fold if he bets 115.

If he bets 115 on the river in my exampe his range should weighted much more heavily towards AA/KK/AK/QJs/TT/other sets then AQ/AJ/KT/ragged 2-pair/bluffs.

[/ QUOTE ]

No need to put words into my mouth ... we're still in the abstract here so lets wait and see how the hand plays out ...

[/ QUOTE ]
Wow, that's not really interesting. I was creating a scenario in which I think a fold is correct and it seems like many disagree. You responded saying you think he might think we have a gut-shot or TPGK and that's why we sould call a 115 bet in a 130 pot on the river. There's no logic behind that reasoning unless you, a) thinks he'll 3-barrel bluff or b) valuebet big with AQ. I said both are unlikely given our read and the board.

An again, I'm calling down if he bet reasonable ammounts.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

Call the flop and see what the turn brings.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think Hero needs to raise the flop here. If this TAG villain comes over the top for a 3-bet, I think Hero has to dump it.
What hands are we beating here that TAG would raise UTG with? QQ, JJ, AQ, 99 and lower. No need to lose our stack with top and bottom pair. Unfortunate flop really.
My question: Why are you calling the TAG UTG raiser with ATs. This is a situation I personally try to avoid because it is so tough to play after the flop.
If we hit a monster hand, a straight or a flush, we probably don't get paid off by the TAG.
Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

This post blows my mind.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To all saying call, call, call.

Turn and river bricks. Villain bets 115 in 130, you call? Personally I call ~95 or less. Calling a big bet on the river vs an unknown tag is bad imo. He's almost never bluffing 3 streets in a row on this board and I doubt he's valuebetting this big with a worse hand. Keep in mind villain raised from UTG, there's not a ton of possible lower Ax two pair combos.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nick I see what you're saying, but you also have to consider what he thinks we may have ... if we flat call flop, our hand could be AT, but it also looks like AJ/AQ/KQ/KJ hoping to hit a 4 outer ...


[/ QUOTE ]
So you think he'll bet 115 as a bluff? I strongly disagree. He will not vb 115 with AQ hoping for a call from AJ. He'll probably bet 75-90 with AQ if he decides to bet, hoping to get calls from Ax. That's why I'm calling a 90ish or less bet but I fold if he bets 115.

If he bets 115 on the river in my exampe his range should weighted much more heavily towards AA/KK/AK/QJs/TT/other sets then AQ/AJ/KT/ragged 2-pair/bluffs.

[/ QUOTE ]

No need to put words into my mouth ... we're still in the abstract here so lets wait and see how the hand plays out ...

[/ QUOTE ]
Wow, that's not really interesting. I was creating a scenario in which I think a fold is correct and it seems like many disagree. You responded saying you think he might think we have a gut-shot or TPGK and that's why we sould call a 115 bet in a 130 pot on the river. There's no logic behind that reasoning unless you, a) thinks he'll 3-barrel bluff or b) valuebet big with AQ. I said both are unlikely given our read and the board.

An again, I'm calling down if he bet reasonable ammounts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Simmer down a little bit ... in principal we're in agreement, I'm not attacking your reasoning ... my call / call / call line wasn't in direct response to your made up scenario about a ~PSB on the river ...

Wait for Orange to post further streets and then you can bloviate about your river action

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To all saying call, call, call.

Turn and river bricks. Villain bets 115 in 130, you call? Personally I call ~95 or less. Calling a big bet on the river vs an unknown tag is bad imo. He's almost never bluffing 3 streets in a row on this board and I doubt he's valuebetting this big with a worse hand. Keep in mind villain raised from UTG, there's not a ton of possible lower Ax two pair combos.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nick I see what you're saying, but you also have to consider what he thinks we may have ... if we flat call flop, our hand could be AT, but it also looks like AJ/AQ/KQ/KJ hoping to hit a 4 outer ...


[/ QUOTE ]
So you think he'll bet 115 as a bluff? I strongly disagree. He will not vb 115 with AQ hoping for a call from AJ. He'll probably bet 75-90 with AQ if he decides to bet, hoping to get calls from Ax. That's why I'm calling a 90ish or less bet but I fold if he bets 115.

If he bets 115 on the river in my exampe his range should weighted much more heavily towards AA/KK/AK/QJs/TT/other sets then AQ/AJ/KT/ragged 2-pair/bluffs.

[/ QUOTE ]

No need to put words into my mouth ... we're still in the abstract here so lets wait and see how the hand plays out ...

[/ QUOTE ]
Wow, that's not really interesting. I was creating a scenario in which I think a fold is correct and it seems like many disagree. You responded saying you think he might think we have a gut-shot or TPGK and that's why we sould call a 115 bet in a 130 pot on the river. There's no logic behind that reasoning unless you, a) thinks he'll 3-barrel bluff or b) valuebet big with AQ. I said both are unlikely given our read and the board.

An again, I'm calling down if he bet reasonable ammounts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Simmer down a little bit ... in principal we're in agreement, I'm not attacking your reasoning ... my call / call / call line wasn't in direct response to your made up scenario about a ~PSB on the river ...

Wait for Orange to post further streets and then you can bloviate about your river action

[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, because you addressed me and qouted what I had wrote. I don't really like it when people answering my posts using flawed logic, then when I do my best to try to understand your thinking you answer with a one-liner saying we need to be result oriented and not discuss any other possible outcome of the hand.

Re: ATs vs. TAG
 

Min raise!