Free Showdown

[James.]

i've noticed a bit of misunderstanding recently in regards to the free showdown play. thought i would give an example of when i made it in a recent session. this isn't the best example, but it should suffice.

online 5/10

i raise in the HJ with 9 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]9 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], button coldcalls, sb folds, bb calls(32/14/2 over 2300 hands).

Flop(6.5sb): T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]7 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]2 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

bb checks, i bet, button folds, bb checkraises, i call.

Turn(5.25bb): Q [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

bb bets, i raise...

a)i can fold to a 3bet
b)i might get a Ten to fold on occasion
c)i have an aggressive opponent that can bet a wide range of hands
d)the board is drawy

note if the turn was an 8 or J i would need to call the 3bet so i wouldn't raise. if the flop was rainbow and less connected it woudl narrow the range of holdings that bb would give action with. here, i'm charging the draw the max while ahead. an argument can be made against this particular opponent that i have alot of bluff equity against his range by only calling, and this is true. that is why this isn't the perfect example, but as i said hopefully it illustrates a point. comments or questions?

[elindauer]

You know James, I rarely think the free showdown play makes sense, and this hand is no exception.

You say "the board is drawy', but IMO that's actually an argument against the free showdown play, especially against an aggressive opponent. Folding in a spot where there are so many possible big draws that might 3-bet feels wrong.

The main thing though is that you have so little chance of folding a better hand. I think this is the key point for the free showdown play to be effective... you must believe that you can fold a fair number of better hands.

I think the most common example of this is a wheel draw with ace high. For example:

You raise the button with A4o. BB calls. Flop 238. BB donks, you call. Turn K. BB bets... you raise, planning a free showdown.

Now you can fold all kinds of pocket pairs that fear they are drawing to 2 outs, not to mention better ace highs. Note that you can safely fold to a 3-bet here, and will not have given up much against the kind of hand that is likely to 3-bet (very rare 2-pair / set type hands).

So, to sum up, you should make free showdowns when the putting in the extra bet on the turn buys significant fold equity.

-Eric

[shuinthehouse]

I thought in addition to a-d above another consideration was hero is planning to call most rivers anyway? So we see a showdown for the same price UI, and hopefully get an extra bet from villain if we improve, in addition to the potential to fold a better hand.

[Niediam]

I like James' example much more than Elindaur's.

Very few villians will 3bet the turn with just a draw. Obviously if you suspect your opponent is one of those villians you don't make the play. Having the board be drawy can be a plus if you charge your opponent extra money to beat you.

In E's hand I don't like it because we have outs and are getting 8:1 on a call. We have four outs to the virtual nuts with the gutshot (and maybe we get paid big if he hit) plus we have an overcard which will often be good. If our hand was something like AJ instead then I'd like the play here a lot more.

I do agree that the play gets better as the chances that your opponent will fold a better hand increases.

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
I like James' example much more than Elindaur's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Neh. Mine is way better.

[ QUOTE ]
In E's hand I don't like it because we have outs and are getting 8:1 on a call. We have four outs to the virtual nuts with the gutshot (and maybe we get paid big if he hit) plus we have an overcard which will often be good.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are contradicting yourself. You can't say that an ace is often good against a player 3-betting a K823 board, and also say that players rarely 3-bet draws. The kind of players that 3-bet KQ will also 3-bet a draw. I don't think you can reasonably argue with this.

So in the two examples, you are giving up a gutshot in one and a two outer in the other if you assume villain will 3-bet only big hands. But in my example, you have much more fold equity. If you think villain will 3-bet aggressively, my example is still better, because there is much less chance that villain will 3-bet with a hand we can beat on a dry 832K board, so we lay down the best hand much less often, while again picking up much more fold equity. In my hand, villain is much less likely to like the turn card as well, making an aggressive 3-bet less frequent.

much much much much much. there. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
Having the board be drawy can be a plus if you charge your opponent extra money to beat you.

[/ QUOTE ]

What makes you think you are charging a draw more? You're not going to bet the river. Raising against an aggressive player who holds a draw is a poor play, in that you are going to get the exact same amount of money in, but risk being pushed off the pot.

This assumes of course that a missed draw will bet the river, but in my experience this is a pretty safe assumption.

-eric

[Niediam]

I have never in my life seen any small stakes game (I mean in general - not a specific session), live or online, where players regularly 3bet the turn with draws.

I have ceratinly seen players 3bet solid but far from great made hands quite a bit.

I don't have a problem at all with calling down hoping to induce bluffs.

[Harv72b]

We have a pretty solid read on this villian as being loose/normal. Or in other words, I sincerely doubt that he's ever 3betting the turn with a worse hand. In fairness to your (elindauer's) points, you are correct that he's never folding a better hand, and to bring up a new point in the argument against our turn raise, this seems like a very good way to get him to fold a worse one.

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I like James' example much more than Elindaur's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Neh. Mine is way better.

[/ QUOTE ]

I, like you, think the free showdown raise (or even bet) is overrated. (Checking the turn helps induce river bets that I don't mind calling.) And, like you, I'd like to see hands where I have better fold equity to raise the turn.

But, unlike you, I don't think there's a big chance of an opponent 3-betting a draw on the turn.

[James.]

i think this example might have been better if we had a hand like 55 or something.

note to elindauer or niediem or whoever else is reading this thread. i have previously acknowleged that this isn't a prime spot for the FSDR. truth be told, i don't really like FSDR that much and only mix them in to help balance my turn raises with made hands and bluffs/semibluffs alike. in this particular hand i actually rivered a red 9 and valuebet it. villain called and showed down A7s.

the primary point i'm trying to drive home is that the free showdown raise is best when:

*you don't need to call a 3bet
*the probability of villain betting a worse hand on the river is low
*you have little chance of improving if behind
*you have the possibility of folding a better hand

in this particular hand, i do think if villain is c/r and leading the turn with a hand like A7 the value of him folding his 5 outer some % of the time is more than nonsignificant.

i also think when a paint card comes on the turn it's not outside the realm of reason a player like this can find a fold with a weaker ten as often as 3-5% of the time(there is a very distinct argument towards this point and i'll see if someone brings it up before i mention it).

i do think it's going to be a minority of his drawing hands that 3bet the turn. at this level players don't play strong draws as tenaciously on the big streets as they do at higher stakes. at about(online) 10/20 or higher i think this turn will be taken to 3town far more often by a drawing hand than you will see in a smaller stakes game like 2/4-5/10. fwiw, the line i've taken promotes MUBS in alot of smaller stakes players(it's important to see things from their perspective) because it is the exact line alot of them take(incorrectly IMO) with big hands like sets/two pair. as a result of this, i'm pretty sure this will help mitigate the aggression level this type of player would show on the turn with a draw if he was capable of 3betting it against a guy like me(who FYI is a showdown monkey in most of the games i play online).

finally(and most importantly i think), if he's going to fire the river anyway calling down is mostl likely the superior play. this effectively increases the equity of our hand against this particular opponent's distribution because he will bet such a wide range(versus what he will call with).

there's actually alot more about this particular hand i could comment on, but for now this is enough. primary point being what i outlined above. i am in the camp that generally dislikes the FSDR and think it's actually one of the more misapplied concepts on the forums these days.

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
I have never in my life seen any small stakes game (I mean in general - not a specific session), live or online, where players regularly 3bet the turn with draws.

I have ceratinly seen players 3bet solid but far from great made hands quite a bit.

I don't have a problem at all with calling down hoping to induce bluffs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whatever, I think you guys are missing the main point I'm trying to make here.

Raising for a free showdown is effective when the decision to put the 2nd bet in on the turn increases your fold equity over just calling the turn and calling the river. In the OP, this fold equity increase is miniscule. James himself describes it as at best a 20:1 shot that we will fold a better hand.

That's terrible! You should not be willing to take any risk at all of folding the best hand to eek out that kind of edge. It's just not worth it on that board.

In other hands, it can be worth it. This is especially true when getting a fold from ace high can win you the pot. It's just not worth it on this board. Bad hand for this play. Look for dry boards where you think your opponent can have under-pocket-pairs and ace high hands that beat you, but his range is still wide enough that you can't fold.

You don't raise for a free showdown to charge a draw. You raise for a free showdown to get extra folds.

-Eric