50NL...set play - ill c/r him on the turn... - Page 3

VegasRunner · #21 10-13-2007, 02:02 AM

I think both hands are played fine and I'm going to disagree and say that my favorite part of the first hand is the weak lead on the flop. Great bet.

Brunson writes about this in the super system. Leading into the raiser is better than the standard checking to the raiser as it builds a pot and really puts him in a bad spot when he raises you. He's more committed than he would have been had you simply called his c-bet. The weak lead perfectly induced the bluff you were looking for.

I like the check on the turn too, because the flop was so dry. Yes, he won, but only because he literally caught perfect runners. Don't be angry about this one, you played it fine.

I assume you lost the 33 hand, too. That sucks, but to be honest, there isn't enough behind for you to get off either of these hands.

You played both of them fine.

apefish · #22 10-13-2007, 03:03 AM

I think the line taken in the JJ hand is a mixed one.

Also there's a strange dichotomy going on where people like the line taken but hero loses to most of the range he is up against on that river as played.

That's not results oriented at all. It's range oriented.

AlexB182 · #23 10-13-2007, 01:41 PM

Wait, nobody simply preferring 3 betting the flop? villain raised PF and is raising now, we have a good chance to get it in right here against an overpair.

P.S.: Sorry, haven't read the whole thread. If I'm saying something stupid just ignore me...

rachkane · #24 10-13-2007, 04:08 PM

This used to be a big leak of mine. The river is not a blank, and we bet anyway.

Definitely bet out that turn and win the pot there.
The river re-raise looks sketchy with all the draw possibilities out there that just made their hand on the river. I've lost so much $$ this way.

Mike Kelley · #25 10-13-2007, 04:22 PM

Not betting that turn is criminal. Give infinte odds to the inside straight draw that beats you.

VegasRunner · #26 10-13-2007, 06:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Not betting that turn is criminal. Give infinte odds to the inside straight draw that beats you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, but I just don't get why so many people are saying this. It sounds too results oriented for me to take it seriously.

The villian repopped our weak flop lead and based on that, why is everyone claiming that it was obvious that he had two overs and that checking the turn is giving him a free draw?

On one hand, we have some people getting mad about leading the flop because it forces AK to fold correctly and it seems like a lot of these people are the same ones who are claiming the AK was a likely holding of the villian's on the turn.

I really don't think the line is bad at all. The hero had every reason to expect a bet from an overpair on the turn. It sucks that it didn't come, but doesn't anyone else think this is a cooler? The villian caught a runner runner straight after bluff raising the flop.

Three betting the flop would have worked fine, but given how dry the board was, 60% of the time, I'm going to take the hero's line EXACTLY as is on the flop and turn.

Mike Kelley · #27 10-13-2007, 06:39 PM

The hand was butchered in many ways, no I'm not being results oriented.

It was a big pot and he should of bet, if for no other reason it would make it easier to get the rest of the money in on the river.

The way this hand was played is a joke. He limp called preflop. bet/called the flop? Give me a break. You are begging for a cooler.

Protect your hands.

VegasRunner · #28 10-13-2007, 07:30 PM

I'm happy to argue this further. I hope we can all keep it civil. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

On the flop, the hero is over 98% to win the hand. The only way for the villian to win is to catch a queen AND a ten. I just don't think this is likely enough to worry about, because it basically never happens. This hand is an anomoly and that's why it's dangerous to draw conclusions from it.

If I'm the hero, i'm not going to three bet this flop because even if I knew he had overs, I want to give the villian the opportunity to draw because he is much more likely to hit one of his single overcards than BOTH of the runners that give him a straight.

Once we get to the turn, I still don't find it likely that given the play on the flop (raising our lead) that we could put him on two overs, but even if we somehow did, the villian is still under 5% to win the hand. PLUS, he is still more likely to hit a pair on the river that will pay us off (6 in the deck) than a straight (4 in the deck).

Don't get me wrong, I'm looking to check raise all in on the turn, but if he checks behind me (worst case scenerio), I STILL think he's more likely to get stacked than us.

(BTW, I'm not condoning the limp call with JJ preflop. I don't think for one second that this should be someone's standard preflop play with JJ.)

apefish · #29 10-13-2007, 08:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]

On the flop, the hero is over 98% to win the hand. The only way for the villian to win is to catch a queen AND a ten.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the dichotomoy I was talking about earlier. We can't take the actual results and then say "well [censored] the other guy got lucky but our line is fine".

Someone give me a range for what our opponent has if he's even semi competent the way this hand played out. I'm going to say it's heavily weighted towards hands we really messed up our line against, and that's why I don't like the line much at all.

onehandfold · #30 10-13-2007, 08:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

On the flop, the hero is over 98% to win the hand. The only way for the villian to win is to catch a queen AND a ten.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the dichotomoy I was talking about earlier. We can't take the actual results and then say "well [censored] the other guy got lucky but our line is fine".

Someone give me a range for what our opponent has if he's even semi competent the way this hand played out. I'm going to say it's heavily weighted towards hands we really messed up our line against, and that's why I don't like the line much at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe that deep down, after the flop play, the hero wanted the villain to have TT,kk,aa,qa...but of course couldnt rule out qq,ak.

The hero did not rr the flop because he sees a greater EV play in extracting SOME bets from TT,AQ,AK vs the times when he can extract a stack from QQ-AA. He believes that stacking QQ-AA will accumulate a substantial amount of bets, if not the whole stack, vs those hands.

This goes in line with the thinking on the 33 vs KQ hand posted midway through this. it was a limped pot preflop, villain limped late he can have any two reasonable cards. because of the nature of the flop, we can probably say that he has 9q-aq something like 10% of the time, a PP 44-JJ something like 20% of the time, and connected random other playable hands 70% of the time. hero sees a lot more value giving free cards to the random other crap range and PP to extract bets rather than opening the flop (to be deceptive and easily stack a reasonable queen). does this make sense?