I hate my play with this overpair OOP

[Heist]

[ QUOTE ]

I respectfully disagree with calling the flop/turn and folding to a river bet. The 8 on the river doesn't aid our opponent's range in any way. I would agree with folding to an overcard, but calling the flop/turn and then giving up on the river for the same 2/3 pot bet is spew imho.

With the exception of a possible set, the opponent is betting the same hand he's had since before the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, thats not true. He could have bet 88 (thin value) or overcards (double barrel) on the turn. His range evolves through all streets. It could have started with any2 on the flop. Ill play it the same and fold river. On the river, I would be more inclined to call on an broadway card vs a given villain than on a blank. Turn is probably thin vs villain, but necessary.

[Learning]

[ QUOTE ]

A quick question or two.
Do you fire two barrels as often as you cbet?
Do you send the third barrel as often as the second?

[/ QUOTE ]

PT says I cbet around 80% of the time, but I'm double/triple barreling quite rarely due to my lower stakes (commonly considered spew to 2/3 barrel at uNL). If I had to guess I'd say my frequencies on cbet/2/3 barreling is something like 80%/10%/3% in applicable situations.

[ QUOTE ]
No, thats not true. He could have bet 88 (thin value) or overcards (double barrel) on the turn. His range evolves through all streets. It could have started with any2 on the flop. Ill play it the same and fold river. On the river, I would be more inclined to call on an broadway card vs a given villain than on a blank. Turn is probably thin vs villain, but necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

Alright, so everyone agrees that TT is no good for a river call. What I'm trying to say is that calling on the flop/turn is no good if we don't want to go to showdown when blanks hit while avoiding aggressive play (raising etc). We're obviously not calling to draw to a better hand. I understand that it's very likely villain may be bluffing if a facecard hits, but I can't see many players firing 2/3 pot bets with ace-high on a nine high board. I would expect bluffs to look stronger here.

I think Hero needs to be aggressive at some point before the turn (with the exception of an OOP float, but I'm pretty sure that's bad) in order to define a hand for the villain. It's possible this is something like 89s that made two pair on the river, but we'd never know without some aggression.

Restating the fact that I'm a visiting uNLer and may be over my head in the discussion due to player tendencies at higher levels. If so, please correct me!

[Michaelson]

89s is pretty much out of the question against this nitty villain.

What everyone is saying, Learning, is just that because frequencies for double barrelling air are much lower than c-bets, and tripple barrelling lower still, TT has a much better chance of being ahead on the flop when his range is still fairly broad than it does on the turn or river, when his actions have strongly indicated that he's going to value town with an overpair/set. Basically, his range of possible holdings gets narrower and weighted much more heavily towards JJ+ on every street. For this reason I think c/c the flop sucks ass, you have no dexterity on later streets, instead you just have to hope he checks down his overcards...

[Learning]

Oh Alright.

I guess I just would rather c/r on the flop (3.8 AF assures a cbet) to further narrow his range rather than calling the flop/turn and then folding to a river bet.

Raising his flop bet costs nearly the same amount that calling the flop/turn does and seems to do the same thing (narrow a range). I guess I just assumed the aggressive path was the better as it gives him an opportunity to fold his overcards. I also assumed the only reason to call was to go to showdown cheaply, rather than define a range.

Awesome. I see that calling in this situation served a different purpose than what I had thought and now clearly see the other side of the situation.

Thanks guys.

[Michaelson]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh Alright.

I guess I just would rather c/r on the flop (3.8 AF assures a cbet) to further narrow his range rather than calling the flop/turn and then folding to a river bet.

Raising his flop bet costs nearly the same amount that calling the flop/turn does and seems to do the same thing (narrow a range). I guess I just assumed the aggressive path was the better as it gives him an opportunity to fold his overcards. I also assumed the only reason to call was to go to showdown cheaply, rather than define a range.

Awesome. I see that calling in this situation served a different purpose than what I had thought and now clearly see the other side of the situation.

Thanks guys.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you;re spot on about the CR, btw. You just also seemed to be saying that there's no point calling the flop if you're not going to call the turn and river as well, and that's wrong.

Villain had AA. I pretty much knew that on the turn but decided to be a huge payoff wizard for some reason. Cheers for responses.

[Oct0puz]

Doesn't c/r the flop turn our hand into a bluffa against this guy. There are no draws out there and I doubt he will ever call with overcards.

[Unknown Soldier]

[ QUOTE ]
fold turn plz.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Michaelson]

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't c/r the flop turn our hand into a bluffa against this guy. There are no draws out there and I doubt he will ever call with overcards.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think with this hand we're better off turning it into a bluff. How much value can we extract from overcards, or anything we beat for that matter? If TT is good here by checking we induce a standard c-bet, and by raising we protect from overcards. Against resistance we're out of dodge... Is my reasoning wrong with all that?

[Unknown Soldier]

putting more money in then you have to. if this guy is liable to double barrel bluff sometimes (but not often enough to call profitably) then it would be ok. Unecessary here though

[Michaelson]

And actually, saying it's turning our hand into a bluff is a bit misleading. By check-raising we wouldn't expect villain to fold a better hand, rather it would be an attempt to get value from overcards that are behind... whether or not they a large enough part of villain's range is another matter...