Check raised on the turn

[rzk]

you misunderstood what i was trying to calculate. i only calculated the cost of the free card, which should be balanced with the value of inducing bluffs, cost of folding to the check/raise etc. etc.

in other words, my point is that to prove this statement:

[ QUOTE ]

EV from checking and give freecards > EV from betting and folding to a raise.


[/ QUOTE ]

you have to show how the cost of betting and folding to a raise overcomes a pretty heavy cost associated with giving a free card, for which i provided an approximate estimate.

[vmacosta]

what the heck is going on in this thread! Obviously if you knew your oppponent had a draw you would bet and it's not close. sheesh!

If you don't know what to do when raised then hopefully that means it's close which means he's only bluffing ~ 1/5 of the times he c/r's. So if he c/r's like 1/5 of the time then you lose 1/25th of the pot when he c/r's which is about .45 bb after you factor in the 2 outs you give up.

*Highly* doubt he has
-a worse hand
-that would have correctly folded turn
-that misses the river
-AND bluffs

enough to make up the other .35 bb.

I guessed on most of the numbers in this post cuz I knew it wouldn't be close.

[mattnxtc]

This is an awful bluff card for the villain after the strength you have shown in this hand...If he pulled a bluff more power to him...but at these limits...its better to just fold and move on. Most at these low levels cant pull off all these marginal bluffs.

[JerBear77]

Two overs that hit alot of your AQ, KQ, AT combos makes me fold this.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
i didn't think i was making a controversial statement [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
a 10 outer comes in roughly 1/5. so his equity share in the pot is 1.2BB. if you bet and he calls, his equity share in the new pot is 8/5 = 1.4 BB, but that includes 1BB of the extra money he had to put in, so by charging him to draw you reduce the equity share from 1.2BB to 0.4BB, i.e. giving him a free card costs roughtly .8BB

[/ QUOTE ]
AK/AJ have 10 outs against 44 cards.

(34/44 * 2) - 1 = 0.55 BB

That's the cost of not betting the turn assuming he calls and ignoring the river action.

In practice betting the turn against AK/AJ won't really work against most opponents. Cases:

1. Villain bluff checkraises. You lose the pot while checking would have preserved your equity.

2. Villain calls, a third Broadway hits the river, and you lose. Betting has lost a bet because the river is now a clear fold even if you didn't bet the turn.

3. Villain calls and busts on the river. Maybe you take the free showdown here and even if you don't he isn't likely to payoff on a third barrel. Whereas after checking the turn you'll usually win a bet by inducing a bluff or through a curiosity call.

Cases 1 and 2 heavily favor checking the turn versus AK/AJ while in case 3 the check usually breaks even.

Betting into the 14-outer KJ gains 0.36 BB if he calls and would not have bluffed the river. If he would have bluffed the river then betting accomplishes nothing and loses an extra bet versus A/K/J river (ten outs, -0.23 BB). Betting and getting checkraised bluffed costs about 4.8 BB. So if Villain is at all aggressive betting into KJ is a disaster.

Naturally there is nothing to be said in favor of betting into a better hand and you will often lose an extra bet or your spike outs.

You will gain a bet by betting the turn and river against a smaller pair such as 66, 44, or A7.

Overall the turn bet seems really bad. The decisive factor compared to many similar deals is the two small Broadways on board. Unlike the typical turn value check you don't have to payoff this river when another Broadway hits. Your hand is almost never good and when it is good you'll get a free showdown because it appears you just hit your hand.

[milesdyson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
in a 6BB pot giving a free card to a 10 outer is _very_ expensive.

[/ QUOTE ]
can you make basic assumptions and show some math to prove this statement?

[/ QUOTE ]

i didn't think i was making a controversial statement [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
a 10 outer comes in roughly 1/5. so his equity share in the pot is 1.2BB. if you bet and he calls, his equity share in the new pot is 8/5 = 1.4 BB, but that includes 1BB of the extra money he had to put in, so by charging him to draw you reduce the equity share from 1.2BB to 0.4BB, i.e. giving him a free card costs roughtly .8BB

[/ QUOTE ]
read stellar's post above, but i wanted a bit more than this. he's gonna have J9/KJ here a decent amount and you're going to fold the best hand, which is devastatingly worse than giving a free card to a hand like AK/AJ that will give you a bet on the river unimproved anyway.

[Absolution]

So value check against the LAGTAG here? This seems like a common spot. Does anything change if the card is an A or K?

[vmacosta]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
in a 6BB pot giving a free card to a 10 outer is _very_ expensive.

[/ QUOTE ]
can you make basic assumptions and show some math to prove this statement?

[/ QUOTE ]

i didn't think i was making a controversial statement [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
a 10 outer comes in roughly 1/5. so his equity share in the pot is 1.2BB. if you bet and he calls, his equity share in the new pot is 8/5 = 1.4 BB, but that includes 1BB of the extra money he had to put in, so by charging him to draw you reduce the equity share from 1.2BB to 0.4BB, i.e. giving him a free card costs roughtly .8BB

[/ QUOTE ]
read stellar's post above, but i wanted a bit more than this. he's gonna have J9/KJ here a decent amount and you're going to fold the best hand, which is devastatingly worse than giving a free card to a hand like AK/AJ that will give you a bet on the river unimproved anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

miles, see my post above. if folding the turn to a c/r is breakeven, it is not *that* expensive. It costs less than .5 bb.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
miles, see my post above. if folding the turn to a c/r is breakeven, it is not *that* expensive. It costs less than .5 bb.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually it is less than 1 BB. Many correct folds cost more than 0.5 BB.

Strictly speaking, a fold is correct if your EV after calling would be less than or equal to the price to call. This assumes raising is not a better option. A fold can be better than calling but still incorrect.

By the cost of a fold I mean the cost relative to not having to face a bet. In essence this is the penalty for allowing yourself to be bet off your hand when you could have avoided it. Your EV after calling a bet includes your share of the money you just called with.

Typical example: The pot is 8 BB and your winning chances are 10% if your opponent checks instead of betting (or calls instead of raising). Your EV is 0.8 BB. If instead your opponent bets 1 BB then you can call and create a 10 BB pot with EV of 1 BB. Or you can fold and keep your 1 BB. It's breakeven and whatever you do you've lost 0.8 BB compared to getting a free card.

The value 0.8 BB depends on the pot size. As the pot gets very large the cost of a breakeven fold approaches 1 BB. Redo the example with a 98 BB pot and a 1% winning chance if you don't understand what I mean.

When betting the river from the button, a popular analysis error is to ignore bluff checkraises because "it's correct to fold". It may be correct but it isn't free. Any pots lost to bluff checkraises reduce the EV of a value bet. The fact that you don't have pot odds to call the raise is completely beside the point.

[vmacosta]

stellar,
in general i agree with much of what you wrote. i also think iwas too hasty in hypothesizing that betting was correct and it wasn't close. Much more careful analysis is needed, imo. We need to consider each hand in his range and we need to agree on a reasonable range (for instance, mist 40/20's i know will cap pf with AK/AQ most of the time and will at least peel the flop with any overcard + bd draw, two overcards, str8 draws, and pairs.

However, I think that folding to a c/r in this spot (assuming we are indifferent) is less than .5 bb mistake. Please verify whether my reasoning makes any sense:

he is offering us ~ 5:1 on the calldown so if we are unsure of what to do then it must be because he has roughly 4 made hands for every 1 draw. So if we assume he c/r's 1/5 of his range here (debateable) then he will have bluffed us off the best hand only 1/25 times. Multiply that by the size of the pot and fudge with the numbers a bit to reflect the outs we give up/the outs he has when behind, and i think you get that it is less than a .5 bb fold.

Now it is interesting to figure how much we can make up on the river by under-repping our hand on the turn. Maybe when I have more time I will work this out.