Play a Hand With the Masters #3 Flop B

[grossmeyer]

My question is:

What's so bad about getting him to fold and just taking the pot? Personally, if I had played this out, I would have 3-bet here and been happy to simply win a nice pot with 7-5.

-Gross

[MLG]

you are assuming that 3-betting wins the pot. It doesnt,it wins it against hands you are beating and bad draws, and wins a bigger about 50% of the time against good draws (since he will push and you will have to call) and loses a bigger pot the small % of the time he has a bigger made hand. There's nothing wrong with winning a nice sized pot, but betting here prevents you from winning a bigger pot the times you have the best hand, it prevents you from increasing the chances you win a nice pot when you are about even money, and it prevents you from saving chips in the off chance you are behind. The negatives clearly outweigh the positive of winning this pot now (the times your bet actually wins the pot).

[grossmeyer]

Thank you for the explanation. Funny how the fear of losing this hand manifested itself by aggression!!

Anyway, you converted me to the call camp. Now if I can just ingrain this advice into my game... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

-Gross

[mts]

good series of posts. lets see this turn card [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[gergery]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1. Call. I can’t imagine why you’d do anything else. His hand range is pretty wide here since this board looks scary so fold is bad, and if you raise and are played with then you’re even money or behind.


[/ QUOTE ]

Everything you said. I think its a little bit of a closer decision than you do though. There are a handful of hands that probably will get all on with us on the flop that we have a lot of equity against that slow down on the turn. Specifically flush draw and two overs and pair+straight draw hands. Those types of hands think they have a lot more outs than they do, but will look to play a smaller pot on the turn. Still though, thats not enough to make a reraise appealing given how often he can get off a worse made hand, or get all-in with a better one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, after reading the thread thru, I think it’s a bit closer. Raising is a reasonable choice here – I still think calling is clearly better – but raising is an option.

-g

[THEOSU]

I'm going to bring a bit of a different perspective...

I've had reasonably serious talks with a player who I find decent (but who thinks he's better than I do) who uses this mini raise to take control of the hand. His theory is that he will miniraise in a spot where he thinks his opponent has nothing, then lead out the next street. He finds this method extremely successful in winning a number of pots. I've seen a few pros use this sort of play in tournaments, too, although not quite as inexpertly as the player of whom I speak.

That may be the sort of thing that's going on here. Villain may be thinking he can get a little more in the pot, then bet any "safe" turn card (read: non-ace) and induce a fold. A call here allows Villain to continue his shenanigans, and therefore allows us to extract chips.

As others have said, raising here will allow villain to get away from a number of his weaker hands, while jamming with hands that we can only hope we're flipping against. In addition, the range of hands I'd simply call villain's checkraise is awfully big, and I don't really want to tip the strength of my hand with a raise here. The reason we raised with this hand in the first place is to play a well disguised hand in position. Why stop that now?

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't really want to tip the strength of my hand with a raise here.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you call won't your opponent put you on "likely high pair" And since you have bottom 2 this is almost exactly the same hand (the minimum hand that beats AA on this board is 57). So if he puts you on a hand in that area, chances are he'll play his hand correctly past the turn anyway. Because he'll put us on the wrong hand, but chances are he'll still make the right decisions.

[THEOSU]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't really want to tip the strength of my hand with a raise here.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you call won't your opponent put you on "likely high pair" And since you have bottom 2 this is almost exactly the same hand (the minimum hand that beats AA on this board is 57). So if he puts you on a hand in that area, chances are he'll play his hand correctly past the turn anyway. Because he'll put us on the wrong hand, but chances are he'll still make the right decisions.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can call this miniraise with a wide range of hands, not just JJ or 57. A call is in no way giving him information.

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
I can call this miniraise with a wide range of hands, not just JJ or 57. A call is in no way giving him information.


[/ QUOTE ]

You don't think the opponent will put you on "probable over pair"?

What range do you think the opponent will put you on after you
-bet preflop
-make a standard continuation bet on a very ragged board
-call a raise

What range does the opponent have you on?

[grandgnu]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can call this miniraise with a wide range of hands, not just JJ or 57. A call is in no way giving him information.


[/ QUOTE ]

You don't think the opponent will put you on "probable over pair"?

What range do you think the opponent will put you on after you
-bet preflop
-make a standard continuation bet on a very ragged board
-call a raise

What range does the opponent have you on?

[/ QUOTE ]

Once again, we are applying our own thought processes to our opponents. There are plenty of people out there who don't even try to figure out your potential holdings. All they see is their own cards (I've got a pair of 9's, woo-hoo!)

There are also plenty of terrible players who see on the flop that they have a "straight draw" or "flush draw" (when in actuality they need to catch running cards to make such a hand)