Baby Steps: 55

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
check the river. Doubt you're ahead 50% of the time that you are called. Check and hope for AQ.

[/ QUOTE ]

that guy never, ever has AQ. he would have raised himself.

[W. Deranged]

I think the only reason we'd bet here would be to get a 7 or other pair to fold here, which I just don't think is happening considering: a) villain called the turn raise; b) villain isn't a known nit; c) the pot is gigantic.

This opinion might be subject to revision if you showed me drastically surprising river stats, but that is not expected.

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the only reason we'd bet here would be to get a 7 or other pair to fold here, which I just don't think is happening considering: a) villain called the turn raise; b) villain isn't a known nit; c) the pot is gigantic.

This opinion might be subject to revision if you showed me drastically surprising river stats, but that is not expected.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, i just threw the river in b/c the chance or perception of a chance might exist that a river bet might not ever be called by a worse hand but it might fold a better one. i do agree with checking behind against this guy since any made hand calling the turn is calling one more on the river as well. add to that the fact that it is conceivable he could bluffraise a missed draw on the river given my image and the pot size and it's pretty easy really.

[James.]

i'm curious as to what range people would give MP? he did after all, call 3 more bets pf. i've yet to see anyone try to put him on a range. what hand will he not raise pf in LP as the first in, but thinks are good enough to call the pf cap?

[W. Deranged]

I think reasonable hands are like AJs-AKs (AKs would be getting cute); 33-99 (most likely in my opinion); KQs-87s; KJs; AKo-AQo

Maybe? Possibly? Who knows?

[cpk]

None of the hands you specify make sense to me other then KQs-87s, KJs, and don't forget about A9s-A8s. I would expect a PFR with AJs-AKs, 99, and I wouldn't expect a flop check-raise with 66-33. But then again, sometimes people make weird plays.

Given all of these ranges, I can't figure out why we would do anything other than check behind.

[The DaveR]

[ QUOTE ]
Daver,

Hmm... That's a good point. If we three-bet without the intention of betting every turn:

-What cards are we checking behind (As and flush cards? Other face cards?)
-How often are we actually making an error checking there? Are we checking behind a non-flush A if it gets heads-up with MP?
-Are we calling a river bet? Are we calling a river bet if it gets heads-up and the turn is a flush card.



I'm intrigued by your line of reasoning, but I want to have a better sense of how you are constructing the turn and river play in order to evaluate it. For the flop three-bet to be correct it seems we need to be realizing a very, very high percentage of our flop equity and in order for that to happen we need to play the turn and the river very, very well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm checking behind only flush cards and I'm not calling a river bet unless something happens that makes me think his range is skewed to something else.

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

James, firstly, i don't know where i got the two limpers in my head from preflop, sorry about that.

This play does make sense against 1 mp limper i guess and i make it all the time with stronger hands, i'm just suprised a hand as week as 55 is ok to do it with. Would you have made this play with 22?

What are your weakest hands for making a play like this against an open limper in middle or late position with tight blinds?

Would you have made this play against 2 limpers 1 standard and the one you were up against?

[/ QUOTE ]

i would probably cut off at about 55(maybe 44)in this spot given the opponent.

against most typical players with one late position open limper i'll raise a fairly wide range. to me players like that want to give their money away unless they hit, and playing in this fashion makes sure we encourage that tendency(not this type of opponent specifically mind you, just in general the types to open limp in LP). so any PP, any ace, decent Kings and Queens, JTo, etc. i'm really playing more my opponents vs. my starting cards so it may be as weak as T8o. now this can be very dangerous territory if you go overboard as it can lead to a crappy image and some pretty high variance. that's why your image is important, as well as the proper frequency, and read on your opponent(s) and their ranges. also, the position from which they are limping is important(i.e. an up front limper will often have a better starting hand).

two limpers i might still raise about 1/3 of the time. at that point i like overlimping because it will be tougher to win UI. it really has to do with the flow of the game at the table at the time it happens. it isn't usually premeditated or anything, it just feels right when the situation presents itself.

[/ QUOTE ]

i read this post and it makes me think i shouldn't try to respond when i'm rushed at work.

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Daver,

Hmm... That's a good point. If we three-bet without the intention of betting every turn:

-What cards are we checking behind (As and flush cards? Other face cards?)
-How often are we actually making an error checking there? Are we checking behind a non-flush A if it gets heads-up with MP?
-Are we calling a river bet? Are we calling a river bet if it gets heads-up and the turn is a flush card.



I'm intrigued by your line of reasoning, but I want to have a better sense of how you are constructing the turn and river play in order to evaluate it. For the flop three-bet to be correct it seems we need to be realizing a very, very high percentage of our flop equity and in order for that to happen we need to play the turn and the river very, very well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm checking behind only flush cards and I'm not calling a river bet unless something happens that makes me think his range is skewed to something else.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think alot of those broadway cards get donked don't you? and most of the time a spade is bet hoping to b/3b as well. so when raising the flop i think they fold less than you think and we get a free card less often than you think based on the turn card. i may be wrong, i don't play the full tilt 8/16 THAT often and most stats were mined. i assume these players have the typical tendencies of the players in the 10 and 15 games. i am still thinking; i really like the decision. like i said earlier, at the table 3betting felt right(and 3handed i 3bet EVERY time), but i really thought these TP's were the type to get semimarried to a good hand and give a little more action given the flop odds in deciding to see the turncard. there is a correllation between calling and folding respectively when someone has already put money in and continues calling more bets and not having invested any money at that point and then being faced with larger bets cold.

[The DaveR]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Daver,

Hmm... That's a good point. If we three-bet without the intention of betting every turn:

-What cards are we checking behind (As and flush cards? Other face cards?)
-How often are we actually making an error checking there? Are we checking behind a non-flush A if it gets heads-up with MP?
-Are we calling a river bet? Are we calling a river bet if it gets heads-up and the turn is a flush card.



I'm intrigued by your line of reasoning, but I want to have a better sense of how you are constructing the turn and river play in order to evaluate it. For the flop three-bet to be correct it seems we need to be realizing a very, very high percentage of our flop equity and in order for that to happen we need to play the turn and the river very, very well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm checking behind only flush cards and I'm not calling a river bet unless something happens that makes me think his range is skewed to something else.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think alot of those broadway cards get donked don't you? and most of the time a spade is bet hoping to b/3b as well. so when raising the flop i think they fold less than you think and we get a free card less often than you think based on the turn card. i may be wrong, i don't play the full tilt 8/16 THAT often and most stats were mined. i assume these players have the typical tendencies of the players in the 10 and 15 games. i am still thinking; i really like the decision. like i said earlier, at the table 3betting felt right(and 3handed i 3bet EVERY time), but i really thought these TP's were the type to get semimarried to a good hand and give a little more action given the flop odds in deciding to see the turncard. there is a correllation between calling and folding respectively when someone has already put money in and continues calling more bets and not having invested any money at that point and then being faced with larger bets cold.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry James, just noticed this. I haven't played much online since July but from what I remember I think you'll get donked on the turn rarely, flopped/turned monsters will often try to cr.