Check raised on the turn

[rzk]

vma and stellar - you calculate two different things, that's why the answers don't match.

vma's calculation is the cost against his whole range, stellar's calculation is the cost given the knowledge that he c/r'ed.

stellar is also correct in saying that the cost of giving a free card to a 10outer is 0.55 and not 0.8 as i wrote before. i made a stupid mistake thinking that 8/5=1.4.

however, other elements of stellar's analysis are debatable imo.

1. in your analysis for AJ/AK:
- he shouldn't have AK very often based on preflop
- he rarely check-raises AJ against a pf 3-bettor, who's probably more likely to reraise and charge than to fold in this large pot.
- i think you really overestimate how often we get a bet out of AJ on the river. he shouldn't be value-bluffing us because he should know we'll call, and he shouldn't c/c because he should know that we don't have any hands in our range to bluff with.

2. in your analysis for KJ:
- you are right that we lose a lot against this great semi-bluffing hand.
- however, just to keep it perspective, KJ is about 1/13 of his range on the turn
- most importantly though, while incorporating of dealing with the cost of bluffs on the turn, you do not incorporate a similar cost of dealing with bluffs on the river if we check (not necessarily against KJ but against other parts of his range). the point is: in both lines his bluffs always carry a cost.

3. betting into a better hand isn't too bad at all. you usually lose nothing and occasionally lose a chance for your 2 outs if he c/r.

4. a lot of marginal weak hands (44,66,A7,A5s) will call a bet now but you won't get a bet out of them on the river when certain cards fall, OR you will be too scared to bet yourself, OR they will bluff you out on certain cards.

5. in addition to 10 outers, he has some 6-outers in his range (A9,A8s), against which giving a free card is substantially more expensive.

overall, it's very unlikely that the turn bet is really bad. i have a feeling that good players whose videos i've seen routinely b/f in similar spots. examples of a typical free card play in stox's book feature much worse situations (like 3 overcards). but i'm not at all dismissing the possibility that checking is slightly better.

[milesdyson]

[ QUOTE ]
i think you really overestimate how often we get a bet out of AJ on the river. he shouldn't be value-bluffing us because he should know we'll call, and he shouldn't c/c because he should know that we don't have any hands in our range to bluff with.

[/ QUOTE ]
i think a good assumption for how often he c/c river ui with AJ is 100%

[ QUOTE ]
- most importantly though, while incorporating of dealing with the cost of bluffs on the turn, you do not incorporate a similar cost of dealing with bluffs on the river if we check (not necessarily against KJ but against other parts of his range). the point is: in both lines his bluffs always carry a cost.

[/ QUOTE ]
you fold a river J K or A and assume that he hand reads just a little and he should ~never be bluffing a worse hand on one of these cards.

[ QUOTE ]
3. betting into a better hand isn't too bad at all. you usually lose nothing and occasionally lose a chance for your 2 outs if he c/r.

[/ QUOTE ]
Qx gets c/red very often and he rarely has Tx, so betting into a better hand often gives up the chance at 2-outing him - not just occassionally

[ QUOTE ]
a lot of marginal weak hands (44,66,A7,A5s) will call a bet now but you won't get a bet out of them on the river when certain cards fall, OR you will be too scared to bet yourself, OR they will bluff you out on certain cards.

[/ QUOTE ]
again read my comment above about J/K/A rivers. if he hand reads at all your hand looks just like AK/AJ and that is way too many combos to attempt bluffing if he does actually fold 44/66/A7/A5s (which again is not many combos on its own). they also basically all call river bets on blanks.


honestly when i first posted in this thread i just wanted you to show some rough math (i wasn't convinced myself). then stellarwind posted and got me thinking about it more, and i think he's right. too bad i'm too lazy to really run a bunch of numbers.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
3. betting into a better hand isn't too bad at all. you usually lose nothing and occasionally lose a chance for your 2 outs if he c/r.

[/ QUOTE ]
Betting into a better hand is expensive.

1. Villain checkraises: You lose two outs. That's roughly -1/3 BB.

2. Villain calls: You lose a bet every time the river is A/K/J. That's roughly -1/4 BB.

[ QUOTE ]
4. a lot of marginal weak hands (44,66,A7,A5s) will call a bet now but you won't get a bet out of them on the river when certain cards fall, OR you will be too scared to bet yourself, OR they will bluff you out on certain cards.

[/ QUOTE ]
An important element of the turn check is that Hero is representing AK/AJ. They are pretty much the classic hands for 3-betting preflop and then wimping out on this board.

When the river comes A/K/J we are prepared to fold in part because our hand is rarely good, but primarily because our opponent will not think of bluffing. He expects us to have just improved to Broadway or some big split pair and betting 44 or 98s looks like just a waste of money.

On any other river card Villain may indeed bluff but then I call and get paid. Or he checks and I bet my hand. Now he is getting 7-1 and folding 44 is very hard because Hero seems to have unimproved overcards. I expect the pair hands to payoff almost all the time.

It is true that I lose a bet when A/K/J hits and I give the little pair a free showdown. All I can say is it doesn't happen very often and it's slightly offset by the occasional bets I save when he has something like A7 and an ace hits.

[ QUOTE ]
2. in your analysis for KJ:
...
- most importantly though, while incorporating of dealing with the cost of bluffs on the turn, you do not incorporate a similar cost of dealing with bluffs on the river if we check ( not necessarily against KJ but against other parts of his range). the point is: in both lines his bluffs always carry a cost.

[/ QUOTE ]
We're in great shape against KJ. We fold when he hits and pick off his bluffs when he whiffs. Calling a nine is our only error.

Moving onto other bluffing hands, incorporating the costs of bluffs is a two-way street. I've already explained why I don't expect to lose much to bluffing. I'm calling almost all the bluffs I actually expect them to make. How about you?

1. Any of those little pair hands or oddball draws could clobber you on the turn with a bluff checkraise. The fact that most of these hands have so few outs makes it even worse. Even if such accidents are quite rare the EV loss involved could easily exceed the small extra profit from value-betting the turn instead of value-betting the river.

2. What happens when Villain calls the turn and bets the river? If you payoff you'll frequently be losing 2BB to his queens and tens plus all the lucky hands he makes on the river. Or you can fold and lose the pot when he has a small pair (the popular value bet-fold) or some busted draw. There is no good answer to this situation. Whatever you do you are going to lose a lot of EV to a problem created by your turn bet.

Betting the turn creates great scope for Villain to make bluffs we aren't prepared to call. That's why I'm harping on it. If Villain were passive and well-controled betting would have a lot more going for it because if he steps out-of-line it's a pretty painless fold.

[ QUOTE ]
i have a feeling that good players whose videos i've seen routinely b/f in similar spots. examples of a typical free card play in stox's book feature much worse situations (like 3 overcards).

[/ QUOTE ]
Are they similar or do they just look similar? This hand has many special features. For example 974Qr looks like a very similar board but the analysis would have to change tremendously.

[Realyn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i think you really overestimate how often we get a bet out of AJ on the river. he shouldn't be value-bluffing us because he should know we'll call, and he shouldn't c/c because he should know that we don't have any hands in our range to bluff with.

[/ QUOTE ]
i think a good assumption for how often he c/c river ui with AJ is 100%


[/ QUOTE ]

Tell me 1 worse hand than AJ that hero could have. and dont tell me A9o, quote from op: co seems solid.Even if A8 or A9 would be in heros range a AJ call is idiotic.

Please get real, in this situation AJ is air, either beat by a better ace or a pair

[rzk]

stellar,

you make good points. i'll think about the hand some more but for now i have no choice but to agree that a check is probably better.

[sharpie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i think you really overestimate how often we get a bet out of AJ on the river. he shouldn't be value-bluffing us because he should know we'll call, and he shouldn't c/c because he should know that we don't have any hands in our range to bluff with.

[/ QUOTE ]
i think a good assumption for how often he c/c river ui with AJ is 100%


[/ QUOTE ]

Tell me 1 worse hand than AJ that hero could have. and dont tell me A9o, quote from op: co seems solid.Even if A8 or A9 would be in heros range a AJ call is idiotic.

Please get real, in this situation AJ is air, either beat by a better ace or a pair

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't matter that calling with AJ is bad if he'll call with it anyway.

[vmacosta]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i think you really overestimate how often we get a bet out of AJ on the river. he shouldn't be value-bluffing us because he should know we'll call, and he shouldn't c/c because he should know that we don't have any hands in our range to bluff with.

[/ QUOTE ]
i think a good assumption for how often he c/c river ui with AJ is 100%


[/ QUOTE ]

Tell me 1 worse hand than AJ that hero could have. and dont tell me A9o, quote from op: co seems solid.Even if A8 or A9 would be in heros range a AJ call is idiotic.

Please get real, in this situation AJ is air, either beat by a better ace or a pair

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't matter that calling with AJ is bad if he'll call with it anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]