again

[NinaWilliams]

Villain is 30/20/3 or something like that. He seems to play pretty well. Do I have to sd here?

Absolute Poker
Limit Holdem Ring game
Limit: $5/$10
5 players
Converter

Pre-flop: (5 players) Hero is BB with 4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]
3 folds, <font color="#cc0000">SB raises</font>, <font color="#cc0000">Hero 3-bets</font>, SB calls.

Flop: 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (6SB, 2 players)
SB checks, <font color="#cc0000">Hero bets</font>, SB calls.

Turn: Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (4BB, 2 players)
SB checks, <font color="#cc0000">Hero bets</font>, <font color="#cc0000">SB raises</font>, Hero

[Sidomija]

I would fold because you have only 2 outs to improve. And you have to invest 2BB to win 8BB at SD. It is 8:2(25%) and I don't think you are better in 25% cases here.

[rzk]

i agree with sidomija. he could have 97, T9, or two diamonds but i'm guessing there are not enough semibluffing combos for you to have a profitable call-down, especially considering that they have additional overcard outs against you.

i'd consider value-checking the turn. you are giving him a free card, but the pot is not that big and you may already be behind, so the value of protection is not that big. still, he can have 10 outs and he doesn't bluff indiscriminantly, so maybe you still have to bet.

[shane88888]

[ QUOTE ]

i'd consider value-checking the turn. you are giving him a free card, but the pot is not that big and you may already be behind, so the value of protection is not that big. still, he can have 10 outs and he doesn't bluff indiscriminantly, so maybe you still have to bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Villain is very aggro. I would have checked the turn.

[sweetjazz]

Tough spot, you really have to go with your read whether you think the SB is an aggressive bluffer/semibluffer or an aggressive value bettor.

BTW, if you could only call down with one of AK and 44 in this spot and had to fold the other, calling down with AK is better. In fact, you could go pretty far down and find hands that are better to call down with (because they are ahead of his range equally often but have more outs when behind). I mean KJ is almost as good a hand to calldown with since your K outs are usually good and your J outs may be good. (But while 44 has less outs, they are cleaner in that they (1) beat 2 pair hands and (2) are safer to value raise.)

I don't think this is a good spot to check the turn. Your hand is too vulnerable and you don't have an easy river decision if you check the turn. You're either getting raised indiscriminately on the turn, in which you have an easy (though maddeningly high variance) calldown or you're not getting check/raised enough to make checking better than betting.

[MacGuyV]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think this is a good spot to check the turn. Your hand is too vulnerable and you don't have an easy river decision if you check the turn. You're either getting raised indiscriminately on the turn, in which you have an easy (though maddeningly high variance) calldown or you're not getting check/raised enough to make checking better than betting.

[/ QUOTE ]

A+ posting, turn check is awful.

I muck here.

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

i'd consider value-checking the turn. you are giving him a free card, but the pot is not that big and you may already be behind, so the value of protection is not that big. still, he can have 10 outs and he doesn't bluff indiscriminantly, so maybe you still have to bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Villain is very aggro. I would have checked the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think this is a good spot to check the turn. Your hand is too vulnerable and you don't have an easy river decision if you check the turn. You're either getting raised indiscriminately on the turn, in which you have an easy (though maddeningly high variance) calldown or you're not getting check/raised enough to make checking better than betting.

[/ QUOTE ]

A+ posting, turn check is awful.

I muck here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see what Sweet is saying, BUT the problem probably comes earlier in the hand - ie PF. This doesn't seem like a good 3b given the combo of VERY minor EQ edge if that, limited FE, and likelihood of getting played off the best hand on a board like this. SO, if I am 3-betting PF, it's with the intention of showing down strange boards cheaply.

[rzk]

[ QUOTE ]

You're either getting raised indiscriminately on the turn, in which you have an easy (though maddeningly high variance) calldown or you're not getting check/raised enough to make checking better than betting.

[/ QUOTE ]

it's certainly not an either-or situation. he could raise the turn often enough to make a call-down tough but marginally profitable (or a fold tough but correct). in the OP the villain is good, so presumably you have no way of knowing which is the case unless you have a better read than described in the OP.

both lines lead to tough decisions. a case could be made that we should go with the cheaper one in this case.

[shane88888]

[ QUOTE ]


A+ posting, turn check is awful.

I muck here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Turn check is less awful than being semi-bluffed off the best hand in a 7 BB pot. Folding the winner is the plane crashing into the mountain.

Based on the stats given [a 3(!) AF at 30/20], villain is probably capable of semi-bluffing the turn. Until we develop a read that says bet/folding is superior to the value check, I am checking the turn.

In this spot, I think hero has to fold the turn. The three-bet preflop, which I don't particularly like either, has built a nice-sized pot. At the same time, it lets us make a more confident fold since villain should know that we're going to showdown more often than not with most of our three-betting range. Discounting all metagame considerations, I think this is the best play.