3000th+ post, OMG! You can manipulate your opponents' cards! - Page 2

TFGoose · #11 08-08-2007, 05:46 PM

Interesting post Sherman. I have a question though, if you don't mind...

In reading your first example hand, by the river I too was suspicious that villain had us beat, and that our bet was questionable. However, what do you say to the idea that widening our opponents range may not always be the best idea?

For example, in the first hand you relate here, we should've been able to determine that we were likely facing a big hand after the villain's call on the turn. We gained that information by seeing his reaction to our bets thus far. However, in the modified example, once we checked the turn and widened his possible range, we lost some perspective on what he might hold. Sure, he might hold an underpair or a weaker ace that he's willing to call a bet with on the river. But he could also still have us beat, and by checking behind on the turn we don't have a solid idea of his holding.

Now, I agree he probably would've bet the river with a set here, instead of springing his check-raise push on us. But what if he does bet? You're certainly going to call a bet on the river, assuming it's roughly the same size as the one you would've made yourself on the turn, right? But now you're taking the more passive approach, calling some of your money into the middle with a hand you're unsure of. You're spending roughly the same amount as you should've spent in the first hand, but isn't it usually better to be the aggressor rather than the caller? If we're spending the same amount of chips to reach the end result, don't we want to be the one betting? Or is it more important to get to showdown by taking a more passive line?

I realize I'm combining a few different concepts here, but it's running through my mind as I read this so I wanted to bring it up. Judging by the general quality of your posts, and those of a few others who have already responded to this one in agreement with you, I'm probably off-base just bringing this up. But I like discussion, and just wanted to toss this out there. Feel free to dismiss this as the wild ramblings of someone who is very much still learning this crazy game of ours (aren't we all).

--TFGoose

Sherman · #12 08-08-2007, 06:07 PM

TFGoose,

You are absolutely correct. When we check the turn to "widen" villain's range, we make a call almost mandatory if he leads the river.

However, in my experience, we have widened his range enough with the turn check to make calling on the river +EV as well, as he now leads the river with worse hands and bluffs. Of course as you said, we now have less "info" on his hand because we have widen his range so sometimes we do lose on the river bet when we would have folded before.

However, I think that most villain's bluff and value bet worse hands enough to make calling a river lead +EV as well.

Good observation.

Sherman

MJBuddy · #13 08-08-2007, 06:28 PM

General counter: Widening someone's range can tend to be overall -EV.

Particularly, it should be done with a smallball style of play, rather than a TAG style, imo.

There are many posts that have people playing badly pre and post flop and don't gather enough information and the range of hands their against is huge, making horrible call technically +EV, but getting more information would be overall more important.

Example would be min-betting a 9sTsAh flop with AJo until the river where an 8s hits and you get reraised by a small stack all-in, etc. Proper play shouldn't be abandoned in order to make bad calls +EV :P.

alwardc4 · #14 08-08-2007, 06:52 PM

nice post

Takshi · #15 08-08-2007, 07:06 PM

Good post, well written.

Sherman · #16 08-08-2007, 07:14 PM

[ QUOTE ]
General counter: Widening someone's range can tend to be overall -EV.

Particularly, it should be done with a smallball style of play, rather than a TAG style, imo.

There are many posts that have people playing badly pre and post flop and don't gather enough information and the range of hands their against is huge, making horrible call technically +EV, but getting more information would be overall more important.

Example would be min-betting a 9sTsAh flop with AJo until the river where an 8s hits and you get reraised by a small stack all-in, etc. Proper play shouldn't be abandoned in order to make bad calls +EV :P.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would never min-bet. And I would never check for value (or to widen his range) on a draw heavy flop. Always bet for value on those. I am talking about good flops for you (notice all of my examples are very good flops for our hand).

Bruut99 · #17 08-08-2007, 07:33 PM

Nice read. If only i would think 5 seconds more sometimes when i make a decision. Anyone else has that problem?

eMbAh · #18 08-08-2007, 07:45 PM

Very good post

Sherman · #19 08-09-2007, 02:13 PM

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t20 (9 handed) internettexasholdem.com

SB (t1480)
BB (t1510)
UTG (t1460)
UTG+1 (t1430)
MP1 (t1750)
Hero (t1470)
MP3 (t1540)
CO (t1430)
Button (t1460)

Preflop: Hero is MP2 with A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
UTG calls t20, 2 folds, Hero raises to t100, 5 folds, UTG calls t80.

Flop: (t230) 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero bets t200, UTG calls t200.

Turn: (t630) 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero checks.

River: (t630) A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 players)
UTG bets t360, Hero raises to t1170, UTG folds.

Final Pot: t2160

This turn check is very questionable b/c of all the draws on the board. I probably should have bet it.