Need help with pot size control

[derosnec]

Seems I'm building big pots with small hands because I'm trying to price out, what I think are, draws. This leads to trouble since I end up playing a big pot with one pair.

At work, so no HH. But here's an example of something I would do:




6 max, everyone has 100 bb stacks.

I raise 4xBB UTG with AQ, two callers.

Flop is QT7 two hearts.

I pot it, both call. Pot is now 48 bb.

Turn is blank but pot is so big now that any bet by me (1/2 pot, 2/3 pot, full pot) further inflates the pot. And I hate checking here and giving a free card.

NLTP says to generally bet less on teh turn than the flop because with only one card to go, I don't need to bet as much to deny correct odds to draws (assuming my opponent are drawing here, which maybe they're not). But a 1/2 pot bet still builds up the pot significantly.

Tips?

[mattnxtc]

two things:
1. is your ace a heart? I know it seems trivial but being able to get a more accurate view of thier exact odds can help

2. tptk isnt exactly a weak hand... You do need to be out an unfortunately the pot will get bigger..but that is just what is going to happen. betting at least 3/4 the pot is a good idea

[bilbo-san]

Couple of things:

1) As Diablo recently said in the Sklansky "You're playing as if there were antes" thread, the "Big Pots big hands, Small pots small hands" rule is a bit overrated. How much money you want to put in with any hand is not a reflection of how big your hand is, but rather how likely your opponent is to come along with you with a second-best hand (or call huge bets with draws, etc).

2) playing this OOP is hard. On drawless boards, I check the turn, hoping that a worse hand bets. On a drawy board, I bet at least 3/4th pot. Understand that a lot of the time you will win the pot outright, and this is a problem, but it's simply really hard to extract value OOP without making yourself very vulnerable. If called, I make a blocking bet on the river against a typical Villain.

It all depends on your game selection/villains, but there are plenty of Villains on NL50 and NL100 that you can play for stacks with for TPTK.

[Grunch]

In the scenario you just described (a nightmare, basically) I open-push the turn. I root for bad calls. I usually get them, and 2 times out of three I win a big pot. Prepare to reload however, becasue you'll get stacked frequently. This is a high-variance hand.

There are two major factors which cause you grief on this hand: your position, and the number of opponents. Becasue of the number of opponents, two bad things have happened. Your pot equity has gone way down, and the pot has gotten huge. You probably have the best hand now, and so you have an equity edge, but it's thin. So check-folding isn't an option.

Any bet you make will stick you or your opponent, but you can't just let the street go by. You have to bet. You have slightly more than a PSB, so if you bet anything less than all your chips, you'll have a miniscule fraction of the pot left on the river. That's bad too, so I just put them all in the pot now. I see no other viable play.

[derosnec]

Thx for the replies - very helpful.

I reread NLTP section on bet-sizing at lunch after I posted. So that helped too. Bit of a struggle between "small hand, small pot" and making my opponents play incorrectly.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
Thx for the replies - very helpful.

I reread NLTP section on bet-sizing at lunch after I posted. So that helped too. Bit of a struggle between "small hand, small pot" and making my opponents play incorrectly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically as someone already said, big pot, big hand has to evaluated in light of the strength of your hand against the board and the caliber of your opponent. As you know, TPTK is a monster against some, and worthless against others.

[west_eh]

I keep this post bookmarked: http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/show...part=1&vc=1

[derosnec]

I like the Matt Flynn post.

Honestly I think I bet the turn too much, even against tight players. It might be because I started poker by playing limit, and then switched to NL. Or it might be that in the back of my mind, when playing the hand, I think "well if I check the turn and a draw completes and post the hand on 2+2, I'd be called a fish for not betting the turn." not that i care what anyone here thinks, but that i care about not making fishy plays.

much to learn, i have [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Albert Moulton]

Well, since most aggressive 6-max players raise with a lot worse than AQo, this might be a pansy reply...but you can always limp AQo planning to play a small pot - and letting go TPTK if it gets big at any point after the flop.

The scenario might go like this:

6 max, everyone has 100 bb stacks.

I limp UTG with AQ, two limpers, SB completes and BB checks.

Flop is QT7 two hearts.

I bet 3BB, 2 calls. Pot is now 14 bb.

... the pot is now more manageable for betting 9bb on the turn and blocking or value betting on the river.

If some guy in LP raises, then fold if he's tight, and call if he's loose - then play cautiously post flop.


All this makes sense to me in full ring, but maybe its just silly at 6-max. Anybody at all limp AQo UTG 6-max?

[syphlix]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, since most aggressive 6-max players raise with a lot worse than AQo, this might be a pansy reply...but you can always limp AQo planning to play a small pot - and letting go TPTK if it gets big at any point after the flop.

The scenario might go like this:

6 max, everyone has 100 bb stacks.

I limp UTG with AQ, two limpers, SB completes and BB checks.

Flop is QT7 two hearts.

I bet 3BB, 2 calls. Pot is now 14 bb.

... the pot is now more manageable for betting 9bb on the turn and blocking or value betting on the river.

If some guy in LP raises, then fold if he's tight, and call if he's loose - then play cautiously post flop.


All this makes sense to me in full ring, but maybe its just silly at 6-max. Anybody at all limp AQo UTG 6-max?

[/ QUOTE ]

i think limping utg sucks just makes it a lot harder to play your hand later cuz now u have no idea of what anyone who limped behind you has