Plan of attack with Mid Pair in Blind Battle?

[Surf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why? Seems like a super good time to let this guy keep the lead.

[/ QUOTE ]

He will bet the flop 100% of the time, and we have an equity edge. I don't think we can assume that this type of player will 3 barrel off with total trash all the time if we tend to play our pairs passively against him. He will pick up on it, and start checking behind turn and/or rivers with UI Ax hands he would pay off with. I think tending to is less exploitable than tending to c/c.

Though, I wouldn't be surprised if I'm wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah people need to quit assuming that their opponents are total jackasses that will autobet every street without thinking. You have a very nice hand with MPTK, the backdoor nut flush draw, and reverse domination against his Ax hands, and the T is a little bit too low to hit a large portion of his preflop capping range. I think this almost always a check-raise, with occasional exceptions made for balancing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nate,

It's been my experience that most players will bet the flop + turn before they stop and check if they have a pair, since we "have to" peel any flopped gutter or OCs b/c of the potsize.

Given that, we may choose to take a different line on the turn or river(donk, etc) to flatten that ratio (3sbs when ahead, 5sbs when behind) but in general this differential is a factor of position, not being outplayed - if this were bb vs sb we would be nearly always be 5sbs to 5sbs since he'll bet forced to bet stuff like AKo UI on the river OOP (safe-ish boards), because he has to call it anyway.

IMO, taking an aggressive line on the flop doesn't flatten the ratio so much as increase the magnitude, since he will still be able to take us to value-town with better hands and may find folds with worse.

Surf

[MacGuyV]

I really don't understand this thread [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]
I can only assume that the 45/26 Lagtards @10/20 are much smarter than those at 5/10 because they fold Ace high and don't 3bet flop checkraises with trash like oh, I don't know...all the [censored] time?

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]
I really don't understand this thread [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]
I can only assume that the 45/26 Lagtards @10/20 are much smarter than those at 5/10 because they fold Ace high and don't 3bet flop checkraises with trash like oh, I don't know...all the [censored] time?

[/ QUOTE ]

Forget about folding ace-high. I assume you're talking about the spot where I say I don't know how he'll react to a donk. That's just me being dumb.

As for 3-betting on the flop, what do you do when that happens? Do you let him take the free card? If he does, it's the same as check/call donk when you're ahead. But how about when you're behind? Are you claiming that when he 3-bets the flop and bets the turn, we're actually ahead close to 50%? Since we're assuming our equity is roughly 50/50 without any additional knowledge, this just can't be true.

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
Nate,

would you say that playing this hand aggressively vs. passively is slightly more +ev (because the lose:win ratio gets lower) and also comes with slightly more variance (because we're talking about more bets)??????

[/ QUOTE ]

It's absolutely higher variance but given this particular board/opponent I think it probably earns you a couple of bucks.

[milesdyson]

i'm watching family feud right now and god people are ugly.

[runway model]

c/r flop, then either c/c turn or keep betting depending on what lands.

41/25/2 types will still autobet turn (if that's what we want) once we provoke them by giving up the lead from the flop.

if an Ace lands, then we often get >1 extra bb using this sequence if they have the case AK.

if they don't 3 bet flop, this narrows their range at least a bit (compared to cc from flop), so this line gives us more info by the turn about whether we want to induce bluffs or lead the turn/ river in the hope of making an extra bet on the river for AK or similar.

and we are putting in more money on flop when we are prob ahead of their range

[Tryptamean]

wow, seems like this spot is genuinely close. I prefer a c/r for the following reasons:

1. It's a blind battle and I have a pair
2. It's a blind battle and I don't think capping narrows this dude's range that much
3. I have a pair vs. a LAG
4. I really don't like taking a passive/WA/WB line because I'm rarely way ahead
5. This line makes the most money when he's reverse dominated and an Ace comes.

I was planning on calling down a flop 3bet or turn raise most of the time as long as the board doesn't get too ugly.

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why? Seems like a super good time to let this guy keep the lead.

[/ QUOTE ]

He will bet the flop 100% of the time, and we have an equity edge. I don't think we can assume that this type of player will 3 barrel off with total trash all the time if we tend to play our pairs passively against him. He will pick up on it, and start checking behind turn and/or rivers with UI Ax hands he would pay off with. I think tending to is less exploitable than tending to c/c.

Though, I wouldn't be surprised if I'm wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah people need to quit assuming that their opponents are total jackasses that will autobet every street without thinking. You have a very nice hand with MPTK, the backdoor nut flush draw, and reverse domination against his Ax hands, and the T is a little bit too low to hit a large portion of his preflop capping range. I think this almost always a check-raise, with occasional exceptions made for balancing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nate,

It's been my experience that most players will bet the flop + turn before they stop and check if they have a pair, since we "have to" peel any flopped gutter or OCs b/c of the potsize.

Given that, we may choose to take a different line on the turn or river(donk, etc) to flatten that ratio (3sbs when ahead, 5sbs when behind) but in general this differential is a factor of position, not being outplayed - if this were bb vs sb we would be nearly always be 5sbs to 5sbs since he'll bet forced to bet stuff like AKo UI on the river OOP (safe-ish boards), because he has to call it anyway.

IMO, taking an aggressive line on the flop doesn't flatten the ratio so much as increase the magnitude, since he will still be able to take us to value-town with better hands and may find folds with worse.

Surf

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a very common problem and obviously there are a lot of different dimensions to it, the most important probably being how often the opponent will call down with a hand like ace-high, how often he'll continue to put bets in with an inferior hand if given the lead, and how often he'll reraise with a bluff or a worse hand. I certainly agree with the basic idea that the play is close, and that it increases variance, although at the same time it's probably superior for metagame.

With all that said, it's important to recognize that it's *not* as simple as saying that you're risking two bets to win one, as you might be in a parallel situation on the river, because out of position you have less control of the action on future streets.

FWIW, I think it should be fairly self-evident that check-raising is incorrect if you have less than 50% equity in the pot, provided that there is no chance of getting the opponent to make an incorrect fold. On the other hand, I would think that with certain rare exceptions, check-raising is almost always superior to check-calling down if we have at least 60% equity in the pot (though it might sometimes be inferior to other aggressive lines like check-raising the turn or call-call-donking). So the playing field is effectively between 50% and 60% equity, which is where considerations like opponent texture and board texture and metagame come into play, and our hand here falls right in the middle of that range.

[vmacosta]

[ QUOTE ]
I really don't understand this thread [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]
I can only assume that the 45/26 Lagtards @10/20 are much smarter than those at 5/10 because they fold Ace high and don't 3bet flop checkraises with trash like oh, I don't know...all the [censored] time?

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't think this spot is all that close and think the quoted post sums it up. I also think that c/r'ing the turn is a decent option against many lags.

Who cares if its higher variance--human poker is all luck anyhow.

[milesdyson]

[ QUOTE ]
human poker is all luck anyhow

[/ QUOTE ]