|
|
#11
10-16-2006, 08:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: JJ - Top Set Raised on the River
[ QUOTE ]
I was afraid you were going to say that. A couple questions: 1. Are you convinced that this TAG wouldn't 4-bet here without the nuts, or is it like 90% of TAGs in general? (I'd agree that a 6-bet has us beat just about always, but I don't think I could fold it anyway). 2. Do you agree that this line is inconsistent for 89? If so, I assume you put more weight behind the 4-bet than the inconsistency. 3. If a 4-bet always has you beat, shouldn't you fold to it? Would you? [/ QUOTE ] 1 - mainly it's my read on this Villain here. We've played enough to know each other pretty well. When I raise preflop and bet every street, he's putting me on {AA, KK, QQ, JJ, TT, 77, AJ, maybe KJ or QJ also} When I 3-bet him, I think he's putting me squarely on {JJ, TT, 77} as the vast majority of my range. I'm also devaluing TT out of his range a whole lot, since I'm almost positive he's 3-betting that preflop almost all the time. 2 - his line is a bit inconsistent for 98s. I know he'd call preflop with 98s with that many people in. And then he flops the nuts on a rianbow board with the guy who's betting on his right. So I lead into him, and he just calls, thinking that he's relatively safe and will make more off of the other 6 players left calling. (Also he probably has the same read as I do on UTG, namely that he checkraises a lot) On the turn, same thing, 4 more players that may call. So his line does make at least some sense for 98s. So I definitely put more weight behind the 4-bet. Also, his play seems a bit inconsistent for any hand, as I think he'd play two pair or a set differently also. 3 - I don't think I can fold to a 4-bet, there's still a slim enough chance that I'm good. The question is, is there value in my 3-bet? Even if I'm 100% confident that I could fold to a 4-bet, or if I have to call it, are there still enough worse hands that he's playing like this, and that he's calling me with? 
|
|
#12
10-16-2006, 09:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: JJ - Top Set Raised on the River
[ QUOTE ]
CO - semi-tight/aggressive, he's a very good player. I play against him on average 2 or 3 times a week. We know each other very well. I'd say that he's tight/aggressive, except for the fact that he properly loosens up his hand range for this type of game. He knows how to play against these types of players, and his aggression is always warranted (strong hands, strong draws, protection in large pots, free cards, or a spot where a bluff has a strong enough chance of working). He rarely gets much out of line. I'd say that he and I know each other's playing style very well. He's definitely a consistent long term winner in this game, and I'd say one of the higher winners. [/ QUOTE ] If he is a TAG, there is just no hand he can have here that makes sense. Given the way he played his hand, he sucks. If he flopped a straight, with two overs on the flop, then just smooth calling the flop and turn are horrible. I 3bet this river all day. If he has the nuts, good for him.
|
|
#13
10-16-2006, 09:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: JJ - Top Set Raised on the River
[ QUOTE ]
If he is a TAG, there is just no hand he can have here that makes sense. Given the way he played his hand, he sucks. If he flopped a straight, with two overs on the flop, then just smooth calling the flop and turn are horrible. I 3bet this river all day. If he has the nuts, good for him. [/ QUOTE ] Except, ANY hand he has was played unconventionally. If he has AJ, he played it poorly. If he has TT, he played it poorly. So given that fact, I can't just 3-bet because "he played it weird" I still have to put him on some type of hand range
|
|
#14
10-16-2006, 10:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: JJ - Top Set Raised on the River
[ QUOTE ]
3 bet. A lower set is so much more likely than a TAG coldcalling 2 preflop with 89s. [/ QUOTE ] Absolutely. I think if you're confident in your read that he's a good player, then you have to discount him holding cards that make a straight...which means you need to three-bet. As far as range determining whether you should 3-bet, he either has cards that make a straight or he doesn't - it's that simple. If he has cards that make a straight, then your read was bad or he just happened to accidentally drop his chips in preflop.
|
|
#15
10-16-2006, 10:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: JJ - Top Set Raised on the River
[ QUOTE ]
So given that fact, I can't just 3-bet because "he played it weird" I still have to put him on some type of hand range [/ QUOTE ] Yes, but unless that range is more than 50% 98s, you still 3-bet. I think you are going to see a set of 7s here a lot more than 8-9s.
|
|
#16
10-16-2006, 10:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: JJ - Top Set Raised on the River
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but unless that range is more than 50% 98s, you still 3-bet. [/ QUOTE ] Considering that he'll 4-bet a straight but just call with anything else, that's not exactly true
|
|
#17
10-16-2006, 11:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: JJ - Top Set Raised on the River
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Yes, but unless that range is more than 50% 98s, you still 3-bet. [/ QUOTE ] Considering that he'll 4-bet a straight but just call with anything else, that's not exactly true [/ QUOTE ] At the risk of going in circles, this doesn't seem at all typical of a TAG to me. The longer we talk about this hand, the more it seems like CO somehow knows you have not only a set but exactly JJ when you haven't even put in a postflop raise. If he knows what you have, he knows what you have. If you know what he has, you know. He played the hand poorly postflop. His line really doesn't make any sense for a good holding, but it makes the least sense for the hand we're supposed to put him on. It kinda seems like you 3-bet, you got raised, you called, and now you're trying to convince yourself you shoulda known he had the nuts.
|
|
#19
10-16-2006, 11:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: JJ - Top Set Raised on the River
[ QUOTE ]
At the risk of going in circles, this doesn't seem at all typical of a TAG to me. [/ QUOTE ] Which is exactly what makes the decision difficult/interesting (at least in my opinion, anyway) [ QUOTE ] If he knows what you have, he knows what you have. If you know what he has, you know. [/ QUOTE ] But the whole point of poker is to determine how your hand ranks against the range of hands your opponent(s) may have, and react accordingly. What do I think he has. What does he think I have. How does that knowledge affect how he plays each of the hands he may have. [ QUOTE ] He played the hand poorly postflop. His line really doesn't make any sense for a good holding, but it makes the least sense for the hand we're supposed to put him on. [/ QUOTE ] But his line doesn't make sense for almost ANY hand that he might hold. Saying "that doesn't make sense, so I raise" will cost someone a lot of money in the long run. Since it doesn't make sense for any hand, but he does still have 2 cards, he must have something! Our job is to figure out his range and play accordingly, regardless of how difficult it may be to determine that range. [ QUOTE ] It kinda seems like you 3-bet, you got raised, you called, and now you're trying to convince yourself you shoulda known he had the nuts. [/ QUOTE ] Or I called, and got mocked for not 3-betting with the 2nd nuts. Basically, I wanted to get some feedback and some reasoning for a 3-bet versus just calling. It seemed that most people said 3-bet, but I wasn't convinced, so I play devil's advocate to pry more information out of people. The result is immaterial. Determining the right decision is the important thing.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
