NLHTP#27 Concepts&Weapons: 17-18

[wallenborn]

Concept #17: If a preflop raise is called behind you, check a lot of flops.

You should usually check if you don't have very much, and you should check a lot of your good hands as well. Don't be afraid every once in a while to check-raise bluff.

Concept #18: Don't get trapped with a fourth street top pair in multiway checked pots.

You limped, missed the flop, and it's checked around. The turn gives you top pair. Unless you have an ace kicker, you should often fold if someone bets more than half the pot.

[Landlord79]

Does Concept #17 mean that we are the PFR? If so, it could shore up a probable leak in my game.

Concept #18 is interesting, it will be a good one to remember, but I'd like to hear what others think about it.

[D.L.M.]

yeah once again 2p2 wisdom has caused alot of leaks in everyone game here..... dont always cbet.... even if your hand is uip........ that makes you predictable..... predicatble is bad...........
the 2nd concept is not nessecarily true... but its decent advise.

[wallenborn]

[ QUOTE ]
Does Concept #17 mean that we are the PFR? If so, it could shore up a probable leak in my game.


[/ QUOTE ]


Yes. In position, c-betting is obviously way more powerful than out of position. So if your raise is called, usually you will be out of position. You should tread lightly here, and if you think you'll fold at some point to aggression, you'd better do it early, and there is no shame in check/folding now if your AKo missed a T74 flop.

Obviously, as soon as your opponents see that they can donkbet you out of the pot sometimes, this opens floating and checkraising opportunities for you. A line that sometimes works here is: you open-raise from MP3 with AKo, button calls, flop comes 942r, you check, he bets, you call, turn is a Q, you bet, he folds. Situational and read dependent, but better than: you bet the flop, he calls, turn is a Q, you check, he bets, you fold.

I think, at least for small stakes, getting called from a blind should be treated as a separate case. In 25NL, the following line works surprisingly often: You open-raise from cutoff, folds to the big blind who calls you "because of the pot odds", flop comes Jack-high rainbow, he checks, you bet the pot, he folds. At higher stakes this is probably different, but at 25NL i check behind in these situations only sometimes "just to mix up my play".

[LearningCurve]

[ QUOTE ]
Does Concept #17 mean that we are the PFR? If so, it could shore up a probable leak in my game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very interesting. I'm reading as we go, but I pulled out my book and it is referring to times when you are the pfr'er. This one might come in handy when you have one of those annoying lags to your left who seems to call every pfr, float your c-bet, and always leaves you wondering what in the heck he has.

[effang]

#17 is very, very, difficult to execute when playing against people who can't/won't fold. especially when OOP. when in position, players utilize this concept all the time.

checking ANY flop, as the PFR, gives an excuse to the position player to make a bet. if were were better players (higher stakes), perhaps you could understand what he was representing, and act accordingly. but at these stakes, that turns your AK into such a limited hand.

[LearningCurve]

[ QUOTE ]
#17 is very, very, difficult to execute when playing against people who can't/won't fold. especially when OOP. when in position, players utilize this concept all the time.

checking ANY flop, as the PFR, gives an excuse to the position player to make a bet. if were were better players (higher stakes), perhaps you could understand what he was representing, and act accordingly. but at these stakes, that turns your AK into such a limited hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gotcha on the first part, but I'm not sure exactly what you are saying in the second paragraph. Think you are stating that the micros and my limited experience are a poor combination to try to put a Laggy villain on a hand. That's definitely true! I've finally found it's better to move to another table when I have a villain to my left who just incessantly looks me up with any two cards, but maybe this idea would help save me a little money while I'm looking for that new table. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[Landlord79]

I had a situation come up the other day at a B&M casino where I raised pf w/ JJ and got called in 2 spots. One by a LAG who was taking pots away from people and the other by a donk. It's $1/2 NL and I have position after raising to $10 pf. The flop hits K,x,x and they ck to me. I CB and get ck-raised by the LAG and immediately release.

Should I just ck behind in this spot?

[Bianculli]

I think the 2nd concept is very true. The example he gives is that it is a multiway checked pot on the flop and the bet on the turn comes from someone in early position with several people left to act and the board is scary and draw heavy and all you have is TPMK. The specific example is you with Qh-Jh on a 7s-5s-4c board and then a Qd hits on the turn. If a person were going to semi-bluff, the flop would have been a better time to do that. He doesn't say that you're definitely behind, but that it is very difficult to know where you are at and if you are ahead, you won't win any more money, but if you are behind (or become behind on the river) you could lose more -- you could also be bluffed off the best hand on the river. His point is that too many things can go wrong with so many people left to act when you have to decide to call to make this +ev. I usually instafold in these situations. You have litte invested + nothing real good can come from this hand + something bad can come from this hand + you have no idea where you are at + there are several people left to act = fold.

[CalledDownLight]

I play pretty laggy (21/12 at NL50) so I am raising a lot of stuff from MP. Also, I cbet over 85% of the time (a lot of the times I don't it is because I get donked into). If I was to start checking some flops it seems to me that I should be checking my AK and AQ type hands on low flops more than my 78s hands on 49K flops because the first hand has a chance of improving to the best hand if it isn't good on the flop. Thus, it would be worse to get blown off that hand by a float or raise. However, the second hand has no showdown value so a cbet is my only hope at the pot. Is thiscorrect logic or is it faulty somewhere? Let me know if you see a problem with it.