#1
|
|||
|
|||
20/40 foxwoods passive 88 vs LAG
Villain has been pretty lag postflop, playing his made hands really hard and making some stupid bluffs. Hes missed a couple easy value bets on the river however, and as far as I recall, this is the first time hes 3 bet since ive been at the table which was about 2 or 3 hours.
Preflop Hero raises UTG with 8 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 8 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], folded to villain in late middle who 3 bets, everyone else folds, I call Flop 2 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Hero c/c Turn J [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Hero c/c River 5 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Hero c/f |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 20/40 foxwoods passive 88 vs LAG
If this is in fact the first time you have seen him 3 bet, I am fine with the flop play, but the turn might be an easy fold...most people don't fire again with nothing, unless they are a good and tricky player.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 20/40 foxwoods passive 88 vs LAG
i would have done something different either bet to 3 bet flop or check raise it then bet turn, and check fold the river. the way you played it i dont mind betting out the river if you think theres a chance he folds with no heart. pretty tough hand that i think could be play a number of ways.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 20/40 foxwoods passive 88 vs LAG
Doesn't everyone 3-bet AK pre-flop now? When unknowns 3-bet preflop I put them on AK first. So my gut here was to bet-out the flop. But, then again I also know that there are 30 combos of TT,JJ,QQ,KK,AA, and only 16 of AK.
Despite the combo logic, i'd probably bet out the flop. And then I'd wonder why I did it later. I think the only situation where betting out the flop is good is if villain just calls. Because then if the turn card is a non-A or K, non-heart, then I think you can bet/fold the turn with confidence. But, in general I really hate bet/folding the turn when you have 88 or 99 HU OOP. (Maybe some of the more experienced posters can explain why I'm wrong here, but I hate it.) I think you are just in a spot where you have to be passive cuz you don't wanna get raised, and you don't want to fold, especially vs. a laggy player. So the turn is a clear check/call to me. (It just about always in with 88 or 99 HU OOP.) On the river I think you can fold becuase you are now killed by his range. I assume you were going to call any non-broadway heart, and for that matter, just about any non-heart? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 20/40 foxwoods passive 88 vs LAG
River is an easy call.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 20/40 foxwoods passive 88 vs LAG
[ QUOTE ]
River is an easy call. [/ QUOTE ] WTF? No way is it an easy call. I mean, I'd put in more bets here somewhere because my hand is as vulnerable as it is, but I wouldn't c/c c/c c/c on this board. Rob |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 20/40 foxwoods passive 88 vs LAG
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] River is an easy call. [/ QUOTE ] WTF? No way is it an easy call. I mean, I'd put in more bets here somewhere because my hand is as vulnerable as it is, but I wouldn't c/c c/c c/c on this board. Rob [/ QUOTE ] Well, I would def. not play it this way either. However, as played on the previous two streets, the river is an easy call. 7:1 against a bad LAG when we have done nothing to narrow his hand range postflop is a more than enough, imo. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 20/40 foxwoods passive 88 vs LAG
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] River is an easy call. [/ QUOTE ] WTF? No way is it an easy call. I mean, I'd put in more bets here somewhere because my hand is as vulnerable as it is, but I wouldn't c/c c/c c/c on this board. Rob [/ QUOTE ] so your contention is that villian has played 2 hours without 3 betting and his first 3bet of an UTG raise is something like AQs/AK/77 vs. AA/KK/QQ/JJ/TT/99 that is very wishful thinking imo. 26 vs. 36 w/o any weighting changes. betting the flop is not good since you'll end up putting in more money w/o any more info and you'renot protecting anything. c/c flop is fine. turn it goes down quite a bit on the AK/AQs/77 once he bets. i'd be fine folding the turn w/o the heart. with the heart it is a little more interesting and you probably have to call and check call the turn and if the heart falls either bet/fold or check call. in this river i'd fold. how would you play this hand if you had 99 no heart or TT no heart? Barron |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 20/40 foxwoods passive 88 vs LAG
[ QUOTE ]
i'd be fine folding the turn w/o the heart. with the heart it is a little more interesting and you probably have to call and check call the turn and if the heart falls either bet/fold or check call. [/ QUOTE ] Check calling on the end with a heart can't be correct. The only thing we're beating is 77 with a heart. If you're check calling with a heart, you may as well check call with out one as you're almost always only beating a bluff in both situations. OP, I think you played it fine especially against a LAG. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 20/40 foxwoods passive 88 vs LAG
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] i'd be fine folding the turn w/o the heart. with the heart it is a little more interesting and you probably have to call and check call the turn and if the heart falls either bet/fold or check call. [/ QUOTE ] Check calling on the end with a heart can't be correct. The only thing we're beating is 77 with a heart. If you're check calling with a heart, you may as well check call with out one as you're almost always only beating a bluff in both situations. [/ QUOTE ] so you're saying the villian never bets higher pairs without a heart as a "bluff" or a value bet? i can see AA/KK/QQ/JJ/TT/99/88/77 no heart all betting that river for various reasons. plenty enough to give a check call getting 8:1 (this is assuming you have 8h8x and the board 4 flushes hearts on the end). further (and fairly insignificantly), if the last card is a card that gives the villian a set, he is almost certianly betting given info we have. the decision is then whether they call more than they bet and the possibility of being raised of the best hand or folding a winner to the raise. thats where the read of that player comes in. but saying check calling cannot be right is imo definitely wrong. [ QUOTE ] OP, I think you played it fine especially against a LAG. [/ QUOTE ] it isn't a normal lag. it is a lag who is a lag postflop but hasn't 3 bet pf in 2-3 hours. that last bit is very significant info you have ignored here. Barron |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|