AQ SB Playalong

[Amaryllis]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Checking looks suspicious and might result in the flop checking through.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is that a bad thing? Especially if we agree on the principles that, A) neither opponent is ever folding a better hand than your AQ, and, 2) that neither opponent is ever folding a halfway decent draw. And by "halfway decent" I'm including things like gutshots or 2 good overs.


[/ QUOTE ]

If you're talking about the flop, isn't the benefit of them (or one of them) calling with their junk outweighing the downsides of your two points?

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
If you're talking about the flop, isn't the benefit of them (or one of them) calling with their junk outweighing the downsides of your two points?

[/ QUOTE ]

If we believe that we are in fact ahead a significant portion of the time, and/or that one or more of them will call our flop bet with a weaker hand/unprofitable draw a significant portion of the time, then yes. But my opinion is that neither of these are often the case after a flop like this, nor is it at all likely that either of them will fold a better hand to our bet.

I think we're much better off allowing them to either let us draw for free or to make a bluff with one of those worse hands, especially if we can then isolate on that bluff with a check/raise. Or to allow them to bet, rather than raise our bet, with a made hand.

[StrictlyStrategy]

I bet and I'd call, but if someone told me calling a raise was terrible here I would believe them. It'd just be such a weirdo line for him to get all passive and then try and bluffraise a river.

Who bet-folds the river anymore? I dunno I'm betting the river though. Screw that guy.

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Checking looks suspicious and might result in the flop checking through.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is that a bad thing? Especially if we agree on the principles that, A) neither opponent is ever folding a better hand than your AQ, and, 2) that neither opponent is ever folding a halfway decent draw. And by "halfway decent" I'm including things like gutshots or 2 good overs.



[/ QUOTE ]

i agree a better hand is close to never folding. but any hand with outs that folds is a good thing.

more importantly, why don't you want to collect bets from worse hands with "decent" draws that are willing to pay to play? so in answer to your question, "why is that a bad thing"(in ref. to the flop checking through), because we lose value! if they want to call, fine. if they want to fold, fine. i don't think my money goes in significantly different(in terms of equity dog or fave) by betting versus c/r. betting just makes SURE it goes in.

as for the ranges, i took the top 50% taking out premium holdings or anything that they would raise/3bet pf. for the bb it's conceivable i could have added more suited hands, but i don't think that it's a big deal for the overall outcome. my equity is pretty robust, and on that flop(this is key) alot of worse hands are calling. we had might as well realize it through betting.

fwiw, i gave these ranges to my opponents:
button(i think he raises anything better):
55-33,A4s-A2s,K9s-K2s,Q9s-Q2s,J3s+,T5s+,95s+,86s+,75s+,65s,A5o-A2o,K9o-K4o,QTo-Q6o,J7o+,T7o+,98o,87o

big blind:
JJ-22,A9s-A2s,KTs-K2s,Q2s+,J3s+,T5s+,95s+,85s+,75s+,65s,ATo-A2o,KJo-K4o,Q6o+,J7o+,T7o+,97o+,87o

[James.]

okay so i raise A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] from the SB, they all call.

Flop(6sb): 4 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]5 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]6 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

it's on me, i bet, they both call.

Turn(4.5bb): Q [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

it's on me again. i obv. bet obv. BB folds, button calls.

River(6.5bb): 8 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

i check, he bets, i call.

nothing is standard in poker.

that being said, this is a typically aggressive opponent. my "standard" line with a good(not great) hand when first to act on the river against a typically aggressive opponent is as follows.

on a board with multiple draws present, and the primary draw misses but a possible secondary draw completes, i check and call.

i do this because this type of guy bets more hands than he calls with. as a result, this collects value from the busted draws that would fold if i bet in addition to the worse made hands(while simultaneously losing less when behind since i can't bet/fold). these aggressive opponents will valuebet/valuebluff/bluff close to all worse hands that would call a bet. these guys will often feel inclined to widen their betting range and fire on the scare card as well since, based on previous action, there is such a tremendously low probability that i had one of the draws that came in(in this case the straight draw).

it's not like i'm against a good or passive player that will only bet when i'm crushed. also, if this opponent's aggression level was higher, this would be a decent spot to bet with the intention of inducing a bluffraise. while i'm not saying this opponent isn't capable of bluffraising, the frequency with which he(specifically) would do it versus the frequency he's raising a completed draw is too low to attempt it.

[Rico Suave]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Checking looks suspicious and might result in the flop checking through.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is that a bad thing? Especially if we agree on the principles that, A) neither opponent is ever folding a better hand than your AQ, and, 2) that neither opponent is ever folding a halfway decent draw. And by "halfway decent" I'm including things like gutshots or 2 good overs.



[/ QUOTE ]

i agree a better hand is close to never folding. but any hand with outs that folds is a good thing.

more importantly, why don't you want to collect bets from worse hands with "decent" draws that are willing to pay to play? so in answer to your question, "why is that a bad thing"(in ref. to the flop checking through), because we lose value! if they want to call, fine. if they want to fold, fine. i don't think my money goes in significantly different(in terms of equity dog or fave) by betting versus c/r. betting just makes SURE it goes in.

as for the ranges, i took the top 50% taking out premium holdings or anything that they would raise/3bet pf. for the bb it's conceivable i could have added more suited hands, but i don't think that it's a big deal for the overall outcome. my equity is pretty robust, and on that flop(this is key) alot of worse hands are calling. we had might as well realize it through betting.


[/ QUOTE ]

James:

I understand what you are saying here about your equity being robust and all based on their preflop ranges and that board. I understand that. A bet going in on the flop, in general, is probably a good thing. But...

On that particular board, you are getting raised here a pretty healthy percentage, imo. That board is unlikely to have hit you as the preflop raiser...so many will test you with their pair (not unlikely given loose open limp and BB call) decent draw, or (stretching a bit) overcards. Even when you don't get raised, you will be called in 2 spots a very high % of the time b/c if the flop didn't touch them..then they likely have 2 overs and will peel. So, on the flop, there is almost no chance of taking this down with a bet, a decent chance we get raised, highly probable that we get called in 2 spots (admittedly, we are quite often ahead in this situation). So, I can see that overall betting is probably best, but when we consider the turn.

If we bet and get raised, then we are giving up on the turn without a Q or A. OK.

If we bet the flop and get one caller, then we are likley betting most turn cards. OK. But I think there are tons of turn cards where we aren't getting folds, and then we are going to be in a spot on the river where we be putting in another bet on the river on a thin call.

But what are we doing if we bet and get 2 callers and the turn is a K,J,T,9,8,7,3 or a diamond. Are we still betting the turn 3 way with any of those cards?

Now, don't get me wrong, I don't think I am necessarily right here. And just b/c a hand is difficult to play doesn't mean we should take a more passive or "weaker" approach. But being out of position on that board sucks; lots of turn cards are gonna suck; and we have virtually no chance we can take the flop down with a bet. That makes me lean toward considering Harvs line even if and are passing up on a bit of value on the flop.

-Rico

[Amaryllis]

[ QUOTE ]
on a board with multiple draws present, and the primary draw misses but a possible secondary draw completes, i check and call.

[/ QUOTE ]

This has a lot to think about...or maybe I'm just a noob.

[Amaryllis]

[ QUOTE ]
If we believe that we are in fact ahead a significant portion of the time, and/or that one or more of them will call our flop bet with a weaker hand/unprofitable draw a significant portion of the time, then yes. But my opinion is that neither of these are often the case after a flop like this

[/ QUOTE ]

I appreciate all your feedback Harv.

I underestand your point. I think I would be more prone to agree on a 79J flop. On a 456 flop vs a btn open limper and a BB, I think you're better off betting the flop, as you're happy if they fold their junk, and you're happy if they (or better one of them) call with their junk.

When you c/r the btn, what hands do you want to BB to fold when he's faced with the two bets? Over card --> I don't might him calling. Gutshot --> I don't mind him calling. Oesd --> he's not folding anyway.

[James.]

Rico,

good post. i'm at work so i'm going to throw out some quick points and for anything more indepth, i'll have to address later.

don't you think most of the hands that are raising my flop bet are 3betting my c/r?

i'm a showdown monkey. that includes AQ on a draw heavy board against an aggro opponent. if this pot gets HU, i'm showing down UI most of the time for the reasons you stated above(the fact i might get "tested" on the flop an appreciable amount of the time).

sure alot of scarecards come on the turn, but after c/r and getting 3bet i'm in no better shape than simply betting and getting raised. if i bet, get called and then lead the turn and get raised, i can usually find a fold. if i bet the flop, get raised and it gets HU after the flop(say the BB folds the turn), i'm showing down more than you might be assuming. remember, James is a showdown monkey. he doesn't fold many better hands. trust me, my opponents learn this quickly.

[Rico Suave]

[ QUOTE ]
Rico,

don't you think most of the hands that are raising my flop bet are 3betting my c/r?


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this is necessarily true. I don't know the button well obviously, but most run of the mill guys are going to raise a flop bet with a much wider range than they will 3-bet a c/r by the sb preflop raiser. I agree that putting in 3-bets on the flop sucks on a drawy board. But the reason I liked considering the c/r is that the button is likely to bet a huge range on that board once checked to him; so I am more willing to put in an extra sb in those instances to shut out bb and get it HU with the loosey. If we don't expect him to bet most of his range on the flop, then I don't care too much for the flop c/r.

[ QUOTE ]
i'm a showdown monkey. that includes AQ on a draw heavy board against an aggro opponent.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is perhaps why we see things differently and why I most likely suck. I am not much of a showdown monkey and I am not necessarily looking at showing down once the flop comes down and we are 3-way. But even so, if our intent is showing down a lot, I wonder if the flop check is still better--given our option to get away if the BB and button show interest, and the ability to isolate the loose (aggro?) button a healthy % of the time. I don't know if the downside of getting 3-bet quite a bit offsets these up sides.

[ QUOTE ]
if i bet, get called and then lead the turn and get raised, i can usually find a fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

By the way, this happens to me about 95% of the time I have ace high oop, HU on a drawy board in a smallish pot. I imagine that I am getting pushed off the best hand a healthy % of the time when this occurs (opponent specific) and I would expect this here to some degree. Not that folding is wrong, just that the whole scenario sucks b/c of board and position.

[ QUOTE ]
if i bet the flop, get raised and it gets HU after the flop(say the BB folds the turn), i'm showing down more than you might be assuming.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems reasonable to me.