100nl AQs: TP in rr pot - played weak?

[MrMysterious]

while i agree that this is flop that we must bet, why is this river a snap call? i mean, this HAS to be a bluff about 30% to call here.

[bilbo-san]

[ QUOTE ]
Could be but how do we know? OP didn't bet flop and is calling down. If it is a WA situation then why did OP fold the river? Why didn't he raise the turn? If it is a WB situation then why are we calling the turn? So ya. How do we know? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't *have* to know. You just have to know that you are ahead of his range a certain % of the time to call.

Put it this way, if I bet and he folds, I can narrow down his range a lot. Yay! That information isn't very valuable.

[phantom_lord]

fine. call river.

[Adelson]

Here are some of my thoughts on the hand.

Villain appears to be tight and hasn't gotten out of line in the few orbits I've played.

I checked behind on the flop because it is generally WA/WB. If I bet, I am either going to fold out smaller pairs (77-JJ) that I'd like to get value from or get c/r ai by KK/AA. I'm losing value against KQ and QJ, and flush draws, but just like ike, I generally don't worry about flush draws in RR pots. I'm more interested in inducing a bluff from an underpair or losing the least to KK/AA. I feel like a bet here has little value.

On the turn, Villain obliged and bet. I put him on a midpair, an overpair, or air. A raise here has no value, since again, I'd be folding out hands I beat, losing the most to hands I'm crushed by, and preventing Villain from continuing a bluff.

On the river, maybe I picked up a timing tell or something, but the size of the bet really made me think he had me beat, whether he setted up with JJ, had KK/AA or even QJ. I can't see a midpair like 88-TT firing two barrels on a QJxx board. On the river, he has to be bluffing >31% of the time for a call to be correct. I felt that he bluffs here much less often, and has TPTK beat here very often.

I may have made a weak fold, especially considering I induced the bluff by checking the flop. Still, it's rare to see two barrel bluffs against a preflop reraiser, especially at this level. I think this is a pretty good hand to post though, and I like the commentary so far.

Any more thoughts?

[DawnToDusk]

Alrighty. Taking from what bilbo-san said and what you said if we are WA/WB and we can find out how often we are ahead (buy guestimation? Like a percentage) then why don't we bet this flop when we think it is a close call whether we are WA/WB? We might not win more money from weaker hands and just win the pot but at the same time if that means a weaker hands fold on the flop as opposed to us checking and they getting a free card that could beat us then why don't we just bet this flop and win it now then?

[benlj21]

I always bet flop, check turn, call river here. As played I think your hand is way underrepped at this point so I think you should call.

[aufbruch]

You really do have to c-bet this flop.

A major weakness in players at this level is not knowing how to play in 3-bet pots. For a very large number of them, their strategy is to make a loose pre-flop call and shut down to any post flop aggression if they don't hit something miraculous.

You've been at the table for 4 orbits with villain. Has he been 3-bet before? What's he been raising and from where? How has he dealt with c-bets? What's he showndown? How do you think he's playing? How does he think you're playing?

In regards to WA/WB - You need to find an equilibrium between making the most when ahead and losing the least when behind. Best way to do this is to have some idea of whether you are actually WA/WB which it seems like you don't have. Future streets would be simpler if you c-bet. This is without even going into how little action you stand to get if you aren't c-betting your 3-bets as standard...