Standard Blind Steal Situations

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
the second hand is a clear bet on the turn because you are ahead here way too often to give a free card that he will incorrectly pay for.

[/ QUOTE ]

a bet isn't bad at all. my issue is the large % of time i get c/r on that turn.

when i have some time later i'll lay my thoughts out as to why i think it's a good spot to value check.

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
james I'm fine checking the turn in hand 1 as this guy will be bluffing all the time and thus insuring that a bet is going in either way (also, he's never a folding a better hand if you bet). the second hand is a clear bet on the turn because you are ahead here way too often to give a free card that he will incorrectly pay for.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is pretty much exactly my thinking.

-McGee

[Fnord]

[ QUOTE ]
one is short and one is FR. can you tell which is which?

fwiw, i don't think it will effect the ranges much since even the FR game was pretty tight with(on avg.) only a few to the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know from first-hand experience this isn't true. Full ring players (particularly in smaller stakes games) tend to defend tighter and tend to play their hand striaght up post-flop more often barring a read. They're used to running into hands and not having to defend against wide ranges.

[Hobbs.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the second hand is a clear bet on the turn because you are ahead here way too often to give a free card that he will incorrectly pay for.

[/ QUOTE ]

a bet isn't bad at all. my issue is the large % of time i get c/r on that turn.

when i have some time later i'll lay my thoughts out as to why i think it's a good spot to value check.

[/ QUOTE ]
without a specific tard read on the guy I'm going to feel really good about bet/folding the turn.

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
one is short and one is FR. can you tell which is which?

fwiw, i don't think it will effect the ranges much since even the FR game was pretty tight with(on avg.) only a few to the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know from first-hand experience this isn't true. Full ring players (particularly in smaller stakes games) tend to defend tighter and tend to play their hand striaght up post-flop more often barring a read. They're used to running into hands and not having to defend against wide ranges.

[/ QUOTE ]

i generally agree with this point, Fnordy.

my above quote was being "game specific" not "game-type specific".

the table was tight so many steal scenarios were playing out in very aggressive fashions. for this reason i said it wouldn't effect the ranges much; it was in reference to this particular table. not FR versus SH in general.

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
without a specific tard read on the guy I'm going to feel really good about bet/folding the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hobbs.,

good to see you posting. seems like it's been a while.

when i'm playing online, most of the games inwhich i play require the assumption that most average/basic opponents are aggrotards. this profile is highly prevalent in today's online environment at the small/mid stakes tables(both 6max and FR).

for that reason, not showing this hand down(ESPECIALLY on such a drawy board) is probably giving up too much in the long run.

you state that an incorrect call on his part will possibly be made when i bet. this means he often holds a 2-6 outer. if that's the case, i don't think i give much up by checking the turn(when ahead) assuming he will bluff the river a decent amount when he misses. since i asserted earlier that the avg opponent in a small stakes online game is far too aggressive, it stands to reason on this board, in this situation against an aggressive opponent the river will be bluffed a relatively high percentage of the time. this seems to support the fact that checking is a viable play.

the pot is less than 4BB on the turn so i'm less concerned about "protecting" my hand with a bet. on that board(because of all of the draws possible), if i'm checkraised i must call down a good portion of the time. don't get me wrong; most of the time i get checkraised i'm behind, but because i see a semibluff often enough due to my opponent's aggression factor i'm forced to see a showdown.

this also has the effect of lessening the frequencies of the turn checkraise in my opponent's postflop aresenal. he will be forced to risk the turn checking through, or resort to donking the turn. this helps me read his hands later because most of his checks will be his "giving up".

if the pot was bigger i would bet. if my hand was a bit weaker, i would feel better about bet/fold. in this situation, on that board with this guy i am of the opinion i give up less and thwart his strategy more correctly by checking behind.

the other benefit of checking is that some reasonable amount of the time i actually gain from the free card by improving on the river and outdrawing my opponent's hand when i was behind on turn. when this is the case, i also avoid being checkraised on the turn when behind.

taking all of this into account, i'm checking behind a good portion of the time here. probably over 60%. to mix my play, i'm betting turns or my strategy becomes too obvious. but in general, i think the benefits(and cost) of checking outweigh the gains/risk of betting. i'm open to being proven wrong, though.

[Hobbs.]

James,

Nice post.

There's kind of lot of stuff I want to respond to, but my thoughts are kind of jumbled right now so I don't quite now how to start getting things out in a coherent manor.

I'd say the big thing is I'm not convinced even if he need to bet/call the turn here that betting isn't the best play. Writing out the math isn't really helpful because we will end up just assigning arbitrary weights to each scenario. A quick back of the envelope calculation though that seems conceivable is as follows:

assume there is a balance between the money made from hands he calls the turn and folds the river with and times he bluffs the river when you check behind the turn. This seems like a decent assumption to me as he's likely to going to call a bet on the turn with fairly little equity and I doubt he's bluffing with every hopeless hands that he sees the river with.

Now we are left with the balance between the 2 bets we collect when we value bet both streets with the best hand, the 2 bets we lose when we bet turn/river with the worst of it, and the 3 bets we either when or lose when he raises the tunr and we call down. Of course this is way too simple but these seem to be the major considerations. So looking the above it just seems that if we are forced to call down a turn raise from this guy it's because he is bluffing too often and considering this guy is kind of a monkey turn EV from betting twice and getting called twice should be pretty close to 2bb (maybe 1.5) that betting seems like the better option.

I hope I was at least clear enough in that ramble that some decent thoughts can be extracted from that.

[James.]

i don't know hobbs. you bring up good points.

given the action, i just don't think we have 2 streets of big bet value in this hand.

let's take a look at what BB has done, and try to combine that with what we know about him to see how this hand is likely to play out most often. he only called the raise pf, knowing i raise a pretty wide range. that's usually a sign of a pretty weak hand because ALOT of hands can be 3bet in that spot. i think he's a 9% PFR which is fairly tight, but probably still wide enough to show some possible understanding of position and adjusting his 3betting and calling range to fit the situation at hand.

as far as the flop goes, he check/called. for someone of his postflop AF and also from my experiences with him, he would be betting or checkraising a good draw or pair on that flop. so if this is the case, it would weight his range towards hands that are making a loose peel and plan on folding the turn UI(or those waiting to spring to life with a checkraise for either value or bluff/semibluff). at least more often than showdown bound hands worse than my MPTK.

when i check the turn, he's betting the river alot. my sign of "giving up" will result in an autofire by many players, especially when they think it's the only way to win the pot.

another thing, i stoved his range on the turn and river and was a bit surprised at the equity my hand held against his range. so i took a closer look at the hands in the range, and i don't know how many are paying off on the turn and the river.

what i'm saying is i'm usually getting a fold or one big bet in after the flop is called. if that's the case, all of the benefits that go along with checking the turn(that i mentioned previously) might put it at least as an equal choice in terms of the EV of leading the turn and river, having to call down if raised.

[ProfessorBen]

Hand 1: Preflop is thin, but fine. I like the c/c on the turn. It's terrible if he checks behind with his 6-15 outter. As played, river is fine, but history and opponent dependent. There are still 5 cards that are bluffs for him (A, K, Q, 9, 8), though he should be checking behind most aces.

Hand 2: I bet/fold the turn, but a value check is not bad. As played, fold this river. Very few hands that are calling this flop are behind you at this point. This is a not a bad time to turn-value check, but you don't have to call all rivers. This and a K or a T are the other ones.

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
Hand 1: Preflop is thin, but fine. I like the c/c on the turn. It's terrible if he checks behind with his 6-15 outter.

[/ QUOTE ]

so do you like a turn bet or check? i'm confused. and i really doubt he's not betting a hand with equity as significant as an 8-15 outer(and much, much worse).

[ QUOTE ]
Hand 2: I bet/fold the turn, but a value check is not bad. As played, fold this river. Very few hands that are calling this flop are behind you at this point. This is a not a bad time to turn-value check, but you don't have to call all rivers. This and a K or a T are the other ones.

[/ QUOTE ]

i can't comfortably bet/fold the turn in this situation without risking the folding of a winner too often. so if i'm resigned to calling down, i want to expand the range of my opponent(since i have a "marginal" holding this has the effect of increasing my equity in the hand since it skews his holdings to include much weaker hands than would simply call my turn bet).

when i check that turn, i absolutely must call any river. that turn check opens up his range considerably. he will often fire any two cards in an effort to pick up the pot. to combat that, i'm showing down every time in that scenario.