Understanding "Small Pot" and "Value Bet" conflict

[younghov17]

a good example of being forced to give free cards in no limit to control the pot, 6 max nl 1/2

utg and mp limp, you make it 12 to go with adac, sb folds, bb and both limpers call, flop comes

8h jh qc($49)

its likely you have the best hand, and the board is very drawy so you definitly need to bet, its checked around to you, a good bet size would be 35, so you bet 35.

everyone calls, turn comes

2s($189)

checked to you again. without a very strong read that your at a table full of donkeys you really can not bet at this situation because any bet that wont induce a bluff commits your stack to 1 pair on a terrible board. its extremely hard to tell if someone already has you beaten, and even if they dont half the deck could easily beat you on the river, and u have very little shot at improving, so u should check behind here and if an obvious draw hits you have to let it go facing any big bets. id probably call a bet up to 50, as i dont have to be ahead that often to show a profit.

[Jouster777]

Thanks Younghov, you make great points. I knew I missed value here and I think the minraise on the flop threw me off a bit. As for getting the money in...more on the flop, turn, river, or all of the above? I think the turn because of the FD...failing that, the river for sure.

[ThePortuguee]

[ QUOTE ]
in no limit sometimes u must risk giving free cards in order to control the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an enormously overrated, absolutely correct statement, IMO. The "free card" is dangerous, yes, and a lot of players have it in their heads that giving a free card with a hand that figures to be ahead is a mortal sin that will earn you a one-way ticket to hell (read: poker failure).

I don't see this to be true. Pot control is so important, even with one-pair hands, and often trumps the principle of "protecting our hand" in importance. Here's an example:

Youre playing 100NL and open to 4 with AA from position and get two callers. The flop is J35. Check to you. You bet 8 and get one caller. There are now 28 in the pot. What do you put your caller on? A J is likely, but given the board, your opponent could be putting you to the test with any pocket pair, or a hand liek A5s or A3s knowing that from positino you could easily have AQ-AK, AT, KQ, etc. Your opponet could also have 46s or 24s, which you wouldn't want to give a free card to. Or your opponent could have JJ, 55, 33, or 35, in which case you're in some [censored].

The turn is a 9, same suit as the J. Your opponent checks, what should you do? I'd advocate checking as your standard play. Some would say this is dangerous. Now there are two straight draws on board and a flush draw. Or, if opponent has a hand liek 46 or 24, you're giving a free card. So shouldn't you bet to protect your hand?

I dont think so. It's unlikely that opponent picked up a flush draw with the 9, since the 9 is the same suit as the J. QT is highly unlikely for villain, and while 46 is in his range it's not as likely as a PP or a jack. Villain can also have 99, JJ, 55, 33, 35, or J9, in which case a check makes perfect sense to try to get you to value bet. If you bet and get raised, what the hell are you going to do now? You bet 22 and get popped to 50? now you're facing a 28 dollar raise with 100 in the pot. Can you fold? What about on the river? Even here, you rhand has showdown value, but you dont want ot get stacked with one pair.

IF you check the turn behind, you're not ever going to get stacked by a huge hand. BUT NOT ONLY THAT, you're also giong to extract value from a whole world of marginal hands. A5s, 88, 77, and also weak jacks are all the types of hands that fold to turn bets. They'll likely check the river and call an extra value bet thinkign your FOS if a blank peels off on the end. OR, people who were just floating the flop might fire a barrel as a bluff on the river which you can gladly call, OR some might think abotu value betting TT. OR, a set fires his value bet at you, you call, and he wins a pot thats much smaller than it could have been.

In general I dont think betting three streets with one pair is a good idea, and when checking the turn is likely to induce action from inferior hands, and control the pot against huge ones, I think it's something you need to really think about. If you think I'm out o fmy mind, try it and see how well it works.

[younghov17]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks Younghov, you make great points. I knew I missed value here and I think the minraise on the flop threw me off a bit. As for getting the money in...more on the flop, turn, river, or all of the above? I think the turn because of the FD...failing that, the river for sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

i raise the flop here v most opponents, tho v more agressive opponents who will fire the turn i raise almost any non spade turn

[younghov17]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
in no limit sometimes u must risk giving free cards in order to control the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an enormously overrated, absolutely correct statement, IMO. The "free card" is dangerous, yes, and a lot of players have it in their heads that giving a free card with a hand that figures to be ahead is a mortal sin that will earn you a one-way ticket to hell (read: poker failure).

I don't see this to be true. Pot control is so important, even with one-pair hands, and often trumps the principle of "protecting our hand" in importance. Here's an example:

Youre playing 100NL and open to 4 with AA from position and get two callers. The flop is J35. Check to you. You bet 8 and get one caller. There are now 28 in the pot. What do you put your caller on? A J is likely, but given the board, your opponent could be putting you to the test with any pocket pair, or a hand liek A5s or A3s knowing that from positino you could easily have AQ-AK, AT, KQ, etc. Your opponet could also have 46s or 24s, which you wouldn't want to give a free card to. Or your opponent could have JJ, 55, 33, or 35, in which case you're in some [censored].

The turn is a 9, same suit as the J. Your opponent checks, what should you do? I'd advocate checking as your standard play. Some would say this is dangerous. Now there are two straight draws on board and a flush draw. Or, if opponent has a hand liek 46 or 24, you're giving a free card. So shouldn't you bet to protect your hand?

I dont think so. It's unlikely that opponent picked up a flush draw with the 9, since the 9 is the same suit as the J. QT is highly unlikely for villain, and while 46 is in his range it's not as likely as a PP or a jack. Villain can also have 99, JJ, 55, 33, 35, or J9, in which case a check makes perfect sense to try to get you to value bet. If you bet and get raised, what the hell are you going to do now? You bet 22 and get popped to 50? now you're facing a 28 dollar raise with 100 in the pot. Can you fold? What about on the river? Even here, you rhand has showdown value, but you dont want ot get stacked with one pair.

IF you check the turn behind, you're not ever going to get stacked by a huge hand. BUT NOT ONLY THAT, you're also giong to extract value from a whole world of marginal hands. A5s, 88, 77, and also weak jacks are all the types of hands that fold to turn bets. They'll likely check the river and call an extra value bet thinkign your FOS if a blank peels off on the end. OR, people who were just floating the flop might fire a barrel as a bluff on the river which you can gladly call, OR some might think abotu value betting TT. OR, a set fires his value bet at you, you call, and he wins a pot thats much smaller than it could have been.

In general I dont think betting three streets with one pair is a good idea, and when checking the turn is likely to induce action from inferior hands, and control the pot against huge ones, I think it's something you need to really think about. If you think I'm out o fmy mind, try it and see how well it works.

[/ QUOTE ]

ni the example hand you layed out, id actually have to say that is a turn you should bet. the pot is not big and the board is great.

generally when your considering whether to bet or check behind 1 important think that should always be on your mind is:

if faced with a good sized riverbet if i check behind on the turn am i going to call

if yes its usually better to bet the turn, if not you should check behind

[ThePortuguee]

[ QUOTE ]

if faced with a good sized riverbet if i check behind on the turn am i going to call

if yes its usually better to bet the turn, if not you should check behind

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is bad advice. Someone is giong to bet with a FAR wider range than they are likely to call with. If youre planning on calling a river bet, your opponent can be betting anything from the nuts to air, meaning you extract a substantial amount of value from a lot of weaker hands. When you bet the turn, you can, theoretically, get raised by weaker hands, but you can't really call anyway, and most of the time youre getting raised by better ahnds. Also, villain is going to fold all of his junk hands to a second barrel almost all of the time, so you lose the chance to extract value from that hand's blfuf on the end.

[younghov17]

the purpose of checking behind isnt to induce bluffs its to keep the pot small when you are unlikely to improve, u have a 1 pair hand in a big pot, or cant be sure your ahead.

[ThePortuguee]

[ QUOTE ]
the purpose of checking behind isnt to induce bluffs its to keep the pot small when you are unlikely to improve, u have a 1 pair hand in a big pot, or cant be sure your ahead.

[/ QUOTE ]

Incorrect. That is ONE of the purposes of checking behind, sure, but two others are to (a) induce bluffs, and (b) extract value from weaker hands, which are now far more likely to call river value bets. Take 77 for example, which would likely fold to a second barrel on turn but can easily convince himself that you're just desperately trying to take the pot away on the river. TT is a similar circumstance.

Incidentally, if the only thing we were tryign to do was to control the pot, I WOULD prefer a turn bet, but because we extract all this extra value from (a) and (b) above, I think it's clearly the better play.

[younghov17]

if your checking behind the turn in these situations your costing yourself a lot of missed bets, and pots when you get outdrawn

[ThePortuguee]

[ QUOTE ]
if your checking behind the turn in these situations your costing yourself a lot of missed bets, and pots when you get outdrawn

[/ QUOTE ]

Bleh, you're not getting it. It's just not a good idea to bet three streets with one pair. You don't really miss many bets, if any at all, because whatever bet you miss from a strong jack on the turn you pickup agian when your opponents bluff on the end or call your value bets with hands like 77. These are hands that would have folded on the turn, man.

Moreover, you're never going to lose your stack to a set or two pair, because you didnt inflate the pot with one pair.