Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > PL/NL Texas Hold'em > Medium Stakes
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-26-2007, 06:09 AM
DJ Sensei DJ Sensei is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: pushing it to the limit
Posts: 7,419
Default rethinking a standard bet spot

You open A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] from MP, button and BB call. no particular reads, but assume theyre standard online players. also, stacks are probably 100x or so. standard.

Flop is A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], SB checks.

Pot is like 11x bb, stacks are like 100x bb.

Whats the best move and why? (and like, dont post without thinking about it much, thats useless)

What if remaining stacks are 50x bb?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-26-2007, 06:14 AM
JKratzer JKratzer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: not necessarily stoned, but beautiful
Posts: 3,448
Default Re: rethinking a standard bet spot

easy bet. i contend the burden of proof is on you to say otherwise.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-26-2007, 06:28 AM
dtan05 dtan05 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: whining in MSNL
Posts: 3,112
Default Re: rethinking a standard bet spot

you mean BB checks? and standard as in TAG regs, I'm assuming.
This would eliminate BB's range to suited connectors/small pairs. and therefore he could only have set/draw here. however, you having the NFD means that you have his draw dominated. I wouldn't be worried about him, much. Button, I assume, also has this range. A regular player would 3bet AA, AK, AQ(?), QQ, KK, right?

Assuming this as well, I would go ahead and bet, because 1) they'll shove their draws over you. In which case you'll pwn them. If you give them free turn/riv cards, sure they'll stack if a draw hits, but what if it doesnt? You'll miss the chance to stack em with your A high lololol.

Also, vs a set, assuming you bet pot, pot becomes 33x bb + 86bb to his shove, so you're calling 86bb to win 121bb. And this assumes he's ONLY shoving sets this way - highly unlikely AA or QQ plays this way, so only real set here is 33.


So I bet. ?

lol if this even makes sense.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-26-2007, 06:32 AM
DJ Sensei DJ Sensei is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: pushing it to the limit
Posts: 7,419
Default Re: rethinking a standard bet spot

ok, i guess so...

betting wont often fold better hands, or get called by worse ones. A2 is pretty much KK here in terms of value.

The most common worst hand to be called by is a smaller flush draw. its nice to build a pot against them, but that shouldnt be much of a problem if the flush gets there anyhow.

Free cards arent really that much of a concern here, either. most cards wont take us from first to second in the hand, and its not like we have to play a huge pot if we dont improve.

Plus, checking gets bluffs sometimes too.


And if we bet, we probably have to shove over a raise, and then our stack is in and almost always behind. We may occasionally bluff off a better ace that raises, but the board being what it is, semibluffs are more in our range, so we may be called lighter.


Now i'm not committed to any particular line here, i'm just thinking maybe betting might not be the best although conventional style makes it seem like an insta-bet. I havent thought too much about later actions of either betting or checking now, but seems like checking gives us better options later too.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-26-2007, 06:41 AM
dtan05 dtan05 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: whining in MSNL
Posts: 3,112
Default Re: rethinking a standard bet spot

but you always get monies vs draws, cuz they should be shoving here, right?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-26-2007, 06:44 AM
axioma axioma is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: London, England.
Posts: 1,263
Default Re: rethinking a standard bet spot

dont have time to fully elaborate right now but i also have been considering my play with A/no kicker on A high flops.

[edit] after ive raised pre.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-26-2007, 06:45 AM
all_in_lam all_in_lam is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,006
Default Re: rethinking a standard bet spot

[ QUOTE ]
You open A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] from MP, button and BB call. no particular reads, but assume theyre standard online players. also, stacks are probably 100x or so. standard.

i check as well given the reasons u described. we will almost never get in 100bb here with the best hand. allow others to put in money for ur draw or get a free card with top pair as well.



Flop is A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], SB checks.

Pot is like 11x bb, stacks are like 100x bb.

Whats the best move and why? (and like, dont post without thinking about it much, thats useless)

What if remaining stacks are 50x bb?

[/ QUOTE ]
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-26-2007, 06:49 AM
Phresh Phresh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: I Like Toffifay.
Posts: 3,475
Default Re: rethinking a standard bet spot

[ QUOTE ]
betting wont often fold better hands, or get called by worse ones. A2 is pretty much KK here in terms of value.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, and I'm cool taking down a pot with KK. I'm fine if they fold here, too. I just think a bet makes the hand easier to play (yeah, yeah, easier is worse than most +EV, but I think they're mutual in this instance) with a lead. I don't like a check-call because I hate playing 4th with a newly possible flush out there (usually they do too without one).

And as for later +EV situations created by this play, I can't think of any. Although a B3B situation will obviously help us in the future when we're B3B'ing our monsters. I'm not too keen on the whole metagame thing apparently. What does this show? That we check-call with draws OOP? So we can check-call OOP with good hands and hope they abuse us? I don't get it. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Also, if we narrow their ranges of raising hands which give us no FE, why can't we call their flop raise and fold a blank turn (assuming he isn't massively overbetting)?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-26-2007, 06:52 AM
DJ Sensei DJ Sensei is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: pushing it to the limit
Posts: 7,419
Default Re: rethinking a standard bet spot

I don't like a check-call because I hate playing 4th OOP with a turned flush.

better than playing 4th oop with a bigger pot and a turned not-flush (or deuce)?

note: said response is another reason betting isnt as good. turn always sucks when you are called, and you dont get there.

Also, if you check and turn a flush, they never expect you to have it.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-26-2007, 06:56 AM
DJ Sensei DJ Sensei is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: pushing it to the limit
Posts: 7,419
Default Re: rethinking a standard bet spot

but you always get monies vs draws, cuz they should be shoving here, right?

we probably get more from draws by betting, sure.

however, what percentage of their ranges have a draw on this board? not many. we should be playing optimally against their entire range, and the great majority of their range has no draw here.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.