AKs in SB Early 2$ - Folded!

[black666]

[ QUOTE ]
It seems as though you weren't sure and just bet to bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hero didn't bet the turn, he check/called

I like the c-bet ... on the turn I would check-raise

[black666]

[ QUOTE ]
Furthermore why would you shove when the price to call and draw is perfect?

[/ QUOTE ]

The board is so scary that it is very unlikely that we will get paid off once the draw hits. You also want to give better hands like QT, KQ, AJ,... a chance to fold.
The draw is only the backup plan, we want to take the pot down NOW.

[BarryLyndon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Furthermore why would you shove when the price to call and draw is perfect?

[/ QUOTE ]

The board is so scary that it is very unlikely that we will get paid off once the draw hits. You also want to give better hands like QT, KQ, AJ,... a chance to fold.
The draw is only the backup plan, we want to take the pot down NOW.

[/ QUOTE ]

90 into 560
More than 5:1 plus implieds.
Great gamble.
No way villain is ever thinking you are on a spade flush draw when you hit.
Villain looks like the type, given the action, that is setting things up for a "big play."
Your FE blows so badly in a $2. If you play these, you really need to take advantage of these players giving you tremendous implied odds, and not FE (at least, early).

[MJBuddy]

Also remember this is very early in a 2.20. This is about readless. I'm taking his call to mean he has something, and I really don't think I have FE on any street regardless of what cards fall.

[supair]

Personally, Im never cbetting that flop. If we get raised were getting taken off a semi decent (emphasis on semi decent) draw, and all we are folding (that we want to fold of course) are the small pairs, which are checking behind anyway and folding to a delayed cbet on the turn, which is my play if he checks behind.

Were only getting called by hands that beat us, so were not making any money with this bet unless he has an underpair which we can fold on the turn anyway, at a massively reduced risk.

The only time Im betting is when I know the villain, and I know he'll make a bet I cant call if i check to him, but my bet will slow him down and allow me to see the turn on my terms (I think that might be what your motives were MJ, I dont think this is a standard cbet at all) as I really want to see the turn in a hand like this.


What Im looking for here, is for me to check to him and him to either make a weak bet, or check behind. Ill call anything up to half PSB's here all the time, as the board represents such value if we make our nut hand on the turn (non club 10) or turn a spade giving us the nut flush draw. I make no bones about the fact that were probably a way behind here, and an ace or king might not put us ahead, and also that we are not getting the expressed odds we need to draw at the gutter and backdoor FD, but I also feel in spots like this that if we make our nut hands theres no way were not stacking the villain, and we are plenty deep enough for this to make up for the EV lost with the loose flop call.

So the plan for the turn is to make our straight or FD, and check again 100% of the time. If we make our straight we CRAI and always get called, and if we make our FD we check call any bet. Im not CR'ing AI (unless of course he overbets the pot and makes us so pot committed itd be daft not to shove, in which case I dont mind getting it in) because we can walk away with t650 or whatever and still be fighting fit. If the turn blanks Im obviously still checking (and folding to a bet), but if he checks behind me I now think I might have aces and kings as outs again, and Ill probably muster a check call if I hit one of my overs on the river.

If he pots/overbets the flop I instafold, so what, we lost t120.

Id love a critique of my way of thinking and playing this, as in the past I would have always just led out without really thinking about it. Im not saying at all thats what you did Mj, as i mentioned above I personally think you just really want to see the turn and dont want to have to fold if he makes a decent sized bet. Id like to hear your way of thinking through the flop.

matt

[BlueEcho]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Furthermore why would you shove when the price to call and draw is perfect?

[/ QUOTE ]

The board is so scary that it is very unlikely that we will get paid off once the draw hits. You also want to give better hands like QT, KQ, AJ,... a chance to fold.
The draw is only the backup plan, we want to take the pot down NOW.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok I hear ya, but really that bet of 90 on the turn reads to me as a hand that's not laying down most of the time. I'm sure it could be interpreted differently but any draws or weak hands are checking behind us most of the time. I'm still in the camp of taking my perfect odds and just calling the the turn bet.

Also we don't have to get paid off after our draw hits as we are getting the proper odds to draw now they are not implied.

[Sherman]

It's a tough spot on the flop, but I think you have to go ahead and bet at it. Here is why:

What hands in your PF range are you checking on this flop? Are you ever checking AA? Are you ever checking AQ? Are you checking a set? No never. The board is too scary. You are always betting those hands to protect your hand. So if you check this flop, you should look real weak. A good opponent will put you squarly on AK or a lower pair and fire a PSB every time and you will have to fold.

Of course our villain in this hand is probably terrible. But if you want to think about how to play against good opponents, I think you have to c-bet.

After he calls, checking the turn seems ok and everything after that seems good.

[MJBuddy]

[ QUOTE ]


Were only getting called by hands that beat us, so were not making any money with this bet unless he has an underpair which we can fold on the turn anyway, at a massively reduced risk.


matt

[/ QUOTE ]

I somewhat disagree here. CBets aren't about making worse hands call and best hands fold. They're pretty much semi-bluff bets, regardless of whether or not you hit the flop. I don't think they fall into value bet town often :P. Also if I'm holding a pair, under, over, etc. I'm going to fire if a preflop raiser checks to me. Normally I'm firing a much larger bet than half pot.

This is actually on the weak side of my CBet range. I did so because a) It's early and I don't want a huge pot on an iffy turn b)I did miss this flop and it's early and there's no reads on me, so reading weakness here isn't 100%. I got a lot of information by his call here.

[supair]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Were only getting called by hands that beat us, so were not making any money with this bet unless he has an underpair which we can fold on the turn anyway, at a massively reduced risk.


matt

[/ QUOTE ]

I somewhat disagree here. CBets aren't about making worse hands call and best hands fold. They're pretty much semi-bluff bets, regardless of whether or not you hit the flop. I don't think they fall into value bet town often :P. Also if I'm holding a pair, under, over, etc. I'm going to fire if a preflop raiser checks to me. Normally I'm firing a much larger bet than half pot.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes but your a good player MJ. How many typical $2 players are going to fire at a preflop raiser with a pair of 7's here, and for more than half the pot? Maybe Im just too used to the battlegrounds I occupy, but we are gna get called down so often here that I think its just spewing bigtime. I think the value in this hand is to get to the turn as cheaply as possible and evaluate. If your bet is some kind of blocking bet, then I think thats fine, but if this is a c-bet I just think its a really low equity play. Its a dangerous flop, which hits most of the hands in his range, only the weakest tightest opponents are gna fold to this bet (2$ tournies dont = tight oppos [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img])and we have a draw to a monsterous hand/draw that we dont want taking off of.


[ QUOTE ]
It's a tough spot on the flop, but I think you have to go ahead and bet at it. Here is why:

What hands in your PF range are you checking on this flop? Are you ever checking AA? Are you ever checking AQ? Are you checking a set? No never. The board is too scary. You are always betting those hands to protect your hand. So if you check this flop, you should look real weak. A good opponent will put you squarly on AK or a lower pair and fire a PSB every time and you will have to fold.

Of course our villain in this hand is probably terrible. But if you want to think about how to play against good opponents, I think you have to c-bet.


[/ QUOTE ]


Agree, checking here against a strong opponent is passive, but over aggression is gonna cost you a lot of chips here in the long run. What about the (hypothetical) skilled villains calling range. He only folds a lower pair or AK (unlikely holding) and calls with any part of the flop or draws. Then we check the turn (unless we hit a ten of course) and he bets and we loose our c-bet. You dont have to win EVERY pot, if its a dangerous board, and were against a strong opponent, sometimes playing passively is +EV.

I know thats hard to accept [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] but if his range includes more hands that are gna play back at us if we c-bet than hands that are gna fold (very likely), surely its a -EV play?

[MJBuddy]

I think his range has more folding hands, however. Though a lot of his range falls here, more PP are folding than are calling.

I mean, what PP are flat calling? TT? 22-88 should be scared of this flop. 99 hit a set. JJ and QQ aren't in his range.

Then we have A2+. Of which all but AQ, AJ, and AT are folding. But all of these are very discounted in his range because he didn't raise pre. A9 is possible.

SCs. 56, 67,, 78, 89 folding. 8T, 9T, JT, QT, QJ, KQ calling. Loose players underplay KQ, so it's in his range.

Any SC that might make a flush is calling here.


Point is, I'm making some weaker holdings that are beating me fold (pairs of 8s, low pps) and some hands beating me calling. But the aggression image that might pay off later gives me implied odds on the bet. Just a long way down.