NL25 - river play

[CesareBorgia]

In this hand, MP2 and I see the flop just the two of us and the flop is fairly ragged. There are no possible flush draws nor are there any possible open enders or double gut shot straight draws. I have top pair, top kicker. So either I have the best have and will be highly like to keep having the best hand on both the turn and the river or I have the worst hand and will keep it on the last two streets. That's why I think a bet of just below half the pot is appropriate. The bet was intended as a value bet. If the board texture were such that there was a possible flush draw, for instance, I would have bet a larger amount: about 3/4 of the pot, as you proposed. However, there is no flush draw possible here.

On the other hand, I am more often criticised on the 2+2 forum for not betting enough and like everyone on this forum, I'm trying to learn something here. So do you think that, if MP2 would hold, say, K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], he would have proper odds on the flop to call? If so, you may convince me to bet more in similar situations in the future.

Your opinion appears to be that MP2 would play his hand in a very different way if my bets were larger. Why do you give most of the NL25 players credit for considering bet sizes? The fact that you and I consider bet sizes does not mean that our opponents, who do not study the game as well as we do, also do so.

[Chargers In 07]

I bet this river 1000% of the time. The board was not drawy on the flop and he may check behind worse aces on the river. I want value out of this hand. As was said already, bet more everywhere including preflop.

[LearningCurve]

[ QUOTE ]
In this hand, MP2 and I see the flop just the two of us and the flop is fairly ragged. There are no possible flush draws nor are there any possible open-enders or double gut shot straight draws. I have top pair, top kicker. So either I have the best have and will be highly like to keep having the best hand on both the turn and the river or I have the worst hand and will keep it on the last two streets. That's why I think a bet of just below half the pot is appropriate. The bet was intended as a value bet. If the board texture were such that there was a possible flush draw, for instance, I would have bet a larger amount: about 3/4 of the pot, as you proposed. However, there is no flush draw possible here.

On the other hand, I am more often criticised on the 2+2 forum for not betting enough and like everyone on this forum, I'm trying to learn something here. So do you think that, if MP2 would hold, say, K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], he would have proper odds on the flop to call? If so, you may convince me to bet more in similar situations in the future.

Your opinion appears to be that MP2 would play his hand in a very different way if my bets were larger. Why do you give most of the NL25 players credit for considering bet sizes? The fact that you and I consider bet sizes does not mean that our opponents, who do not study the game as well as we do, also do so.

[/ QUOTE ]

I [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] a good debate, so let's Gogogogogogogogo! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Seriously, as I think about what suggestions to make it helps me clarify my thoughts, and your questions and skepticism allow me to flesh out my thoughts and ideas. It's definitely a win-win participating on the forum.

Okay, so back to the hand...

I figured the reason why you bet so low was exactly what you said. I also agree 100% that it is easy to begin to think about a hand and then realize that you are so far above what the villain is thinking that it just becomes frustrating. All too often the villain isn't thinking anything at all. However, while I play in the micros part of what I'm doing is trying to get ready for the higher levels. Doing this includes trying to give the villain credit for 1/2 of a brain, even though he likely isn't using it.

In my analysis of this hand I noted that there was no FD here, so I agree that this flop is drier than some. However, villains are fairly used to larger c-bets. When they see smaller I think it suggests that we are weak. Then we run the risk of not only being outdrawn but also of having villain try to bluff us off of our hand on a later street. You are the pfr'er, are OOP, and want to keep control of the hand. Betting smallish like this is probably borderline with actual odds since, although I think KT is a very likely possibility, villain only has like 16% of hitting a GSSD. If we throw in the BDFD then he has more but it's still not too huge. OTOH, villains do like to call. They know you only hit about 33% of the time on the flop and a weaker A or MP often does call. We want to be able to extract the most out of these hands without having them turn around later and bite us with a bluff.

So, IMO this means betting a bit more than you did. If you'll look back at my suggestion you'll notice that I actually said 2/3 pot on the flop was fine on this board. Generally I do bet 3/4 but this board is a rainbow, so I feel like 2/3 is sufficient. Doing this absolutely charges villain an incorrect price to call with any draw, gets maximum value from a weaker holding, and it doesn't beg a more savvy villain to raise you somewhere along the way with a lesser hand. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Cry Me A River]

You want to bet more on the flop and turn to extract value from donks who will call you all the way with A2.

There's really only a couple reasons to exercise pot control with a hand like TPTK - Villain is aggro and will raise or checkraise you with worse hands and you won't know where you are if he does (particularly OOP if he likes to float or raise a wide range against PFR's). For example, if you think villain is the type to raise you on the flop with AT but you don't want to play for stacks then you should consider pot control.

Or if you've been raised or bet into (donked) and you're not sure where you stand (ie: by a normally passive player or a tight/good player). Like if you had position in this hand and villain donked into you on the flop. Or if you'd bet $2.50 on flop and villain had raised you.

Otherwise, value bet, value bet, value bet. Particularly against all those players who can't fold aces.

If you want to exercise pot control (I don't) then I'd suggest just checking that flop and evaluating from there. If it's checked through on flop then bet 3/4 pot on both turn and river. If villain bets flop then call and hope he keeps betting. If not retake the lead in the hand.


Oh, and I raise preflop 4XBB+1 pretty religiously unless I have a good reason to do otherwise and then I usually only go bigger (ie: very loose limpers who will call bigger raises with crap).

[Specialwon]

You should get pokertracker and PA HUD, if you don't have it already, and start using. That way you have a better idea of what to do in these kinds of situations and you can post reads that help the rest of us.

The point about betting large on the flop (or at all) is simply this. You want to make as much money as possible with what is most likely the best hand. So, you should usually make the largest bet that you think someone will call.

If you read No Limit Holdem Theory and Practice, there is lots of discussion about expectation in this sort of situation. It boils down to this: if in doubt, bet bigger.

In sizing, don't worry about trying to keep in hands that have nothing and no draws, they will probably fold to any bet anyhow. You should be pitching at a good second best hand, because that hand is the one that will likely pay you a lot of money. Here, you should be fixing your eyes firmly on the weaker aces.

If you bet too low, 2 bad things often happen:

1) you encourage weak hands to stay in and make things like 2 pair later in the hand that you will not be able to spot. Strictly they may not have had the correct odds to stay in, but at NL25 that never stopped anyone. In this hand, I would not be surprised if villain showed up with 34 on the river and took you for most of your stack.

2) you look weak. Someone with a bit of nerve and aggression may raise you up and you will probably have to fold. In doing so you will often fold the best hand.

I often reraise weak bets like yours on the flop with nothing because your bet says either "I have a draw", or "I have a hand but I am a bit scared, please just call and pay me off".

[CesareBorgia]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In this hand, MP2 and I see the flop just the two of us and the flop is fairly ragged. There are no possible flush draws nor are there any possible open-enders or double gut shot straight draws. I have top pair, top kicker. So either I have the best have and will be highly like to keep having the best hand on both the turn and the river or I have the worst hand and will keep it on the last two streets. That's why I think a bet of just below half the pot is appropriate. The bet was intended as a value bet. If the board texture were such that there was a possible flush draw, for instance, I would have bet a larger amount: about 3/4 of the pot, as you proposed. However, there is no flush draw possible here.

On the other hand, I am more often criticised on the 2+2 forum for not betting enough and like everyone on this forum, I'm trying to learn something here. So do you think that, if MP2 would hold, say, K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], he would have proper odds on the flop to call? If so, you may convince me to bet more in similar situations in the future.

Your opinion appears to be that MP2 would play his hand in a very different way if my bets were larger. Why do you give most of the NL25 players credit for considering bet sizes? The fact that you and I consider bet sizes does not mean that our opponents, who do not study the game as well as we do, also do so.

[/ QUOTE ]

I [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] a good debate, so let's Gogogogogogogogo! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Seriously, as I think about what suggestions to make it helps me clarify my thoughts, and your questions and skepticism allow me to flesh out my thoughts and ideas. It's definitely a win-win participating on the forum.

Okay, so back to the hand...

I figured the reason why you bet so low was exactly what you said. I also agree 100% that it is easy to begin to think about a hand and then realize that you are so far above what the villain is thinking that it just becomes frustrating. All too often the villain isn't thinking anything at all. However, while I play in the micros part of what I'm doing is trying to get ready for the higher levels. Doing this includes trying to give the villain credit for 1/2 of a brain, even though he likely isn't using it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not fully agree. In my opinion, you should try to sort out which of your opponents are the highly exploitable players and which of your opponents are to be treated with more care. At a table with eight or nine other players, that's usually more than enough of a challenge for me. Playing deceptive poker against a player who clearly is too loose or too tight regardless of how you play yourself is just a waste of energy.

[ QUOTE ]
In my analysis of this hand I noted that there was no FD here, so I agree that this flop is drier than some. However, villains are fairly used to larger c-bets. When they see smaller I think it suggests that we are weak. Then we run the risk of not only being outdrawn but also of having villain try to bluff us off of our hand on a later street. You are the pfr'er, are OOP, and want to keep control of the hand. Betting smallish like this is probably borderline with actual odds since, although I think KT is a very likely possibility, villain only has like 16% of hitting a GSSD. If we throw in the BDFD then he has more but it's still not too huge.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't consider appearing to be weak a bad thing in this spot. Do you? If so: why so? At NL25 most players are not capable of pulling off a huge bluff raise on the flop and if they are, they do it too often, making it identifiable.

I am worried about the odds I give my opponent, though. Let’s assume he would play K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] the following way:

He would call the $1.25 on the flop.

If a J comes, he would, on the average, win an additional bet of $2.25 on the turn and another $6.50 on the river, giving him $13 to shoot for. This happens 4/45 times.

If a non-J [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] comes, this would add a flush draw in addition to his straight draw. I would bet $2.25 into a $5.50 pot.

Let’s say he would call in this spot. On the river another [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] appears. MP2 would then extract another $6.50 from me. This would happen (9/45)*(8/44) of the time and would also give him $13 to shoot for.

On the other hand, let’s assume I would win the $5.50 pot on the turn if neither a [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] nor a J comes on the turn and I would win the $10 pot on the river if a non-J [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] comes on the turn, but no [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] comes on the river.

EV(MP2)=4/45*$13+(9/45)*(8/44)*$13-$1.25*(45-(4+9))/45-($1.25+2.25)*(9/45)*((44-8)/44)=$0.52

I did not take into account the rake, the fact the if MP2 makes a flush, I can make a full house, or the fact that I can make a back door (straight) flush if a J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] comes. I possibly overlooked some other things. Please do not hesitate to let me know if you consider some of my other assumptions and simplifications unrealistic.

[ QUOTE ]
OTOH, villains do like to call. They know you only hit about 33% of the time on the flop and a weaker A or MP often does call. We want to be able to extract the most out of these hands without having them turn around later and bite us with a bluff.

So, IMO this means betting a bit more than you did. If you'll look back at my suggestion you'll notice that I actually said 2/3 pot on the flop was fine on this board. Generally I do bet 3/4 but this board is a rainbow, so I feel like 2/3 is sufficient. Doing this absolutely charges villain an incorrect price to call with any draw, gets maximum value from a weaker holding, and it doesn't beg a more savvy villain to raise you somewhere along the way with a lesser hand. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I did say that I don't give my opponents credit for considering bet sizes very much, which means that MP2 would call a $2 bet if he would call a $1.25 bet. And since a $2 bet on the flop would render MP2's EV negative in the above calcutation, I am convinced that indeed a $2 bet on the flop is better, at least better than a $1.25 bet.

I will bet more in similar situations in the future. You convinced me in that respect.

[LearningCurve]

[ QUOTE ]
I do not fully agree. In my opinion, you should try to sort out which of your opponents are the highly exploitable players and which of your opponents are to be treated with more care. At a table with eight or nine other players, that's usually more than enough of a challenge for me. Playing deceptive poker against a player who clearly is too loose or too tight regardless of how you play yourself is just a waste of energy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, you make a good point. My plate is also full trying to play the player in a 9-handed game. This is probably one of the primary areas where I should concentrate at this stage in my game.

What I was more referring to though was that a little tiny bet like the flop here isn't a good habit to get into with any player as it won't serve you well as you move up. I prefer to practice and hone skills which will.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't consider appearing to be weak a bad thing in this spot. Do you? If so: why so? At NL25 most players are not capable of pulling off a huge bluff raise on the flop and if they are, they do it too often, making it identifiable.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure this is true. I think many players (myself included) will look you up with a raise on the flop since you've appeared weak. Worse, you really can't call the raise as you have no idea whether the villain is playing you or actually has a hand.

Moreover, I much prefer to have an aggressive image at the table rather than a mousy one. An aggressive image will allow you to have more respect at the table, your c-bets will garner you a wider berth, and you will therefore pick up more pots even when you have little or nothing. All of this is good.

[ QUOTE ]
I am worried about the odds I give my opponent, though. Let’s assume he would play K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] the following way:

He would call the $1.25 on the flop.

If a J comes, he would, on the average, win an additional bet of $2.25 on the turn and another $6.50 on the river, giving him $13 to shoot for. This happens 4/45 times.

If a non-J [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] comes, this would add a flush draw in addition to his straight draw. I would bet $2.25 into a $5.50 pot.

Let’s say he would call in this spot. On the river another [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] appears. MP2 would then extract another $6.50 from me. This would happen (9/45)*(8/44) of the time and would also give him $13 to shoot for.

On the other hand, let’s assume I would win the $5.50 pot on the turn if neither a [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] nor a J comes on the turn and I would win the $10 pot on the river if a non-J [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] comes on the turn, but no [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] comes on the river.

EV(MP2)=4/45*$13+(9/45)*(8/44)*$13-$1.25*(45-(4+9))/45-($1.25+2.25)*(9/45)*((44-8)/44)=$0.52

I did not take into account the rake, the fact the if MP2 makes a flush, I can make a full house, or the fact that I can make a back door (straight) flush if a J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] comes. I possibly overlooked some other things. Please do not hesitate to let me know if you consider some of my other assumptions and simplifications unrealistic.

[/ QUOTE ]

I looked at this a bit and don't see any glaring errors. I can't state definitively that it is correct, but I think we pretty much agree that the bet is fairly borderline strictly from an odds perspective.

[ QUOTE ]
I did say that I don't give my opponents credit for considering bet sizes very much, which means that MP2 would call a $2 bet if he would call a $1.25 bet. And since a $2 bet on the flop would render MP2's EV negative in the above calcutation, I am convinced that indeed a $2 bet on the flop is better, at least better than a $1.25 bet.

I will bet more in similar situations in the future. You convinced me in that respect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, I think your reasoning is sound -- particularly since we ultimately agree. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]