1 pr raising turn?

[mosta]

I'm a NL dabbler and I feel like this could be a general question but I'll give a specific hand. Basic idea is you have a top pair type hand on turn heads up. Enough left for 2 substantial bets. Is raising bad?

2-5 live. good game. I've just bought in for 400. most cover with 1-2k. I limp QdTd in ep. Limp, not limp, debatable. But I expect a family pot, 50-50 limped or raised once.

Button made it 20 and 4 of us see Ts 7c 2h. I check call button for $50. heads up.

Turn is 9d. I check hoping for a check and call river unimproved. He bets 100. I shove.

It seems clear this makes most worst fold and better call. Which is like the definition of terrible. But it saves me from having to make a big call or fold on river (w/ his 1-pr value, bluff, and outdraws all running together on river often). Is that a good justification? Looking at the situation pretty generally. Or is it terrible? I guess this is pretty basic...

edit: I guess the way to pose it analytically is: while the raise polarizes a lot of his range against you, do you expect enough value from making him read you for bluffs and draws, instead of you making the read on the river?

[ChrisV]

Just fold the turn. No huge read is required, even the turn bet should tell you you're most likely beaten. If he's the type of maniac to bet 4 ways with no pairs and then bet again when called, you should be able to tell that pretty quickly. If you're that worried about him bluffing you out, bet the flop.

In a more general sense, checkraising just because you don't want to make a tough decision on the river is bad. If you're committed to stacking off, the only reason to raise the turn is that the equity loss from him drawing out with hands he would have folded is greater than the equity gain from him bluffing the river. Your hand isn't a good example of these principles because you're just beaten and need to fold.

[mosta]

Thanks, your analysis is helpful.

What I was thinking was, suppose we stipulate that my call would have been fine, easily, if the turn was the last betting round (river had to be checked through). (suppose he would bet any top pr, most 2nd pr, any, like, 7 or more out draw, and a decent amount of bluffs.) Now factor in river action and in addition to all the straights and trips, literally any other card could make him 2 pair, and he can bluff some more. Can you justify ending the betting on the turn? (even though you will be called by all 2-pair and better and will fold out pure bluffs).

[Albert Moulton]

[ QUOTE ]
Basic idea is you have a top pair type hand on turn heads up. Enough left for 2 substantial bets. Is raising bad?


[/ QUOTE ]

I depends on the situation. So, let's look at the hand in question.

[ QUOTE ]

2-5 live. good game. I've just bought in for 400. most cover with 1-2k. I limp QdTd in ep. Limp, not limp, debatable. But I expect a family pot, 50-50 limped or raised once.


[/ QUOTE ]

I sincerely believe that this really isn't debatable. It's a clear fold at a full ring table with only 100bb's in early position. You have a ton of reverse implied odds playing this hand for a limp in EP. You will either win a small pot, or lose a big one to a higher flush, set to your two-pair, lose when you are out kicked with top-pair, etc. Guys that open limp hands like this are generally like free money for solid players in LP.

Occasionally, for deception, open raise 78s or something like that in EP. But QTs is tougher because if you get resistance after spiking a TPWK you often feel compelled to continue. With 78s, if you hit TP and get resistance, it's easier to fold.

[ QUOTE ]
Button made it 20 and 4 of us see Ts 7c 2h. I check call button for $50. heads up.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you limp in EP, then fold to the raise. Playing QTs OOP in a 10bb raised pot is spew. Your SPR is going to be 4.5. But your hand is a drawing hand that would play better with a very large SPR of at least 10 or more. If you had position and you wanted to occasionally try to steal on the turn from villain then an SPR of 13+position might be good. But here, you end up putting yourself at the stack committment threshold preflop by calling off over 10% of your stack. Unless you flop QQT or a 89J or a royal flush, you will be in trouble OOP playing for your stack with little information everytime you hit this flop. And with such a low SPR, if you flop TPWK vs an overpair, you have very little fold equity post flop.

You have bad position. You have a bad SPR for your hand and position. You have bad implied odds. You have a mediocre drawing hand. You need to fold preflop to the raise.

As playd, c/c for $50 puts 25% of your starting stack in OOP without any good information. What's your plan? Let's see.

[ QUOTE ]


Turn is 9d. I check hoping for a check and call river unimproved. He bets 100. I shove.


[/ QUOTE ]

Your plan was to check/call the river. But because he bets, what makes you change the plan such that a shove will give you much fold equity? Sure, you might get missed overcards to fold, but you won't fold out any overpairs at this point, given the size of the pot relative to remaining stack sizes. In fact, if he 2-barrels with missed overcards, and you think he'll 3-barrel push with missed overcards at the river, c/c the turn and c/c a non-J,K,A river might even be more +EV for those few times that you are actually ahead in this hand. As played, you fold out the missed overs, but lose your stack to overpairs or better.

[ QUOTE ]
It seems clear this makes most worst fold and better call. Which is like the definition of terrible. But it saves me from having to make a big call or fold on river (w/ his 1-pr value, bluff, and outdraws all running together on river often). Is that a good justification?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you have hit on a good point. c/c then c/c is probably better if and only if this guy is a habitual 3-barrel bluffer. I really don't think you have any fold equity vs overpairs or even TP-better kicker hands.

I think the root cause of the problem here is that you didn't fold preflop. Getting in this spot with TPWK and no redraw is a direct result of playing this hand in the first place. You needed to fold preflop, or at least limp/fold.

[ QUOTE ]
Looking at the situation pretty generally. Or is it terrible? I guess this is pretty basic...

edit: I guess the way to pose it analytically is: while the raise polarizes a lot of his range against you, do you expect enough value from making him read you for bluffs and draws, instead of you making the read on the river?

[/ QUOTE ]

You really need to fold preflop with 100bb effective stacks, a mediocre drawing hand, bad position, and a huge 10bb raise from behind you. Everything else really isn't as significant.

Honestly, the crai on the turn is probably as good as c/c the turn and c/c the river. I think you are -EV either way, but it's too late, and you're out of position with too much in the pot to fold now unless a scare card (A/K, for example)comes and villain bets it big on the end, assuming you c/c the turn then check the river.

[mosta]

thanks, I think your analysis is really good. one point that may have been a confusion was that the pf raise was to $20 and went 4 or 5 ways to flop. the $50 was on the flop. I don't disagree with several things you question. But you might shade it a little less if I had conveyed how little they will play with (not that aggreessively) in a good live game.

[Albert Moulton]

[ QUOTE ]
thanks, I think your analysis is really good. one point that may have been a confusion was that the pf raise was to $20 and went 4 or 5 ways to flop. the $50 was on the flop. I don't disagree with several things you question. But you might shade it a little less if I had conveyed how little they will play with (not that aggreessively) in a good live game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I did misunderstand the raise size. I still think it's a fold. I think it is tempting, but incorrect, to claim that you should call in such a spot because of "pot odds." Instead you should be concerned with post flop implied odds. Or, as in this case, with this hand in this position in a multi-way pot, you should worry about reverse implied odds. So, I'd still fold. And if I limped, I'd still fold to the raise unless I was immediately to the right of button and would (1) be last to act preflop, and (2) therefore in good relative position post flop where most flops will check to the preflop raiser, and then I can see all others' reactions after the flop before I act. In that case, a call would be OK. But you want to flop more than top pair if you want to play a big pot. In this case, assuming you have a player between you and button, your relative (and absolute) position post-flop will be bad and you should fold.