The Broken Wing Act

[naphand]

Much talk on the Forum about playing good hands strongly as opponents expect you to slow play big hands. I certainly found this to be good advice at $1/$2, but in the games I am playing post-flop is definitely better, players more definable. This hand seems to merit building the pot and the players have been running scared when I raise, except when they have me beat /images/graemlins/mad.gif. With the relatively safe board, and a fish calling along giving me value-overcalls, am I justified in waiting for the River here to raise?

TABLE CONDITIONS: UTG is a V$IP 70% fish, MP is loose but OK post-flop, BB is unknown but has a silly name /images/graemlins/smirk.gif. In these games, a Turn CR usually means exactly what it says and getting to SD with a decent hand is not easy.


Interpoker $2/$4 Holdem (6 max, 6 handed)

Preflop: Naphand is SB with 8/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 7/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
UTG calls, MP calls, CO folds, Button folds, Naphand (SB) calls, BB checks.

Flop: (4 SB) Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 7/images/graemlins/club.gif (4 players)
Naphand checks, BB checks, UTG checks, MP bets, Naphand calls, BB folds, UTG calls.

Turn: (3.5 BB) T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif (3 players)
Naphand checks, UTG checks, MP bets, Naphand calls, UTG calls.

River: (6.5 BB) K/images/graemlins/club.gif (3 players)
Naphand checks, UTG bets, MP calls, Naphand raises, UTG folds, MP calls.

Final Pot: 11 BB


Caviar or just prawn coctail?

[imported_stealthcow]

i like this play a lot. i think its a safe way to slowplay a hand and maximize the money in it. check raising the turn would probably be in order if an ace fell, but you were safe the whole way down.

something i'm definetly going to add to my game when i go back to 5/10 sh

[muzungu]

naphand-

I like this play in general, and I like it here if the turn is a total blank. In this case I think the board is getting a little too coordinated for it. Any diamond or A-9 has the potential to be problematic, and there is some chance MP flopped nothing but picked up a draw on the turn, so it might get checked through.

I probably try to c/r if I feel sure MP is gonna bet. If you feel the c/r is too transparent, I like leading out as well. With all the draws popping up, this is certainly deceptive. You might even get to 3-bet if MP thinks you are semibluffing.

Also, I am not sure if I like the preflop call, but that is another matter.

-muz

[kalooki45]

with only 2 possible hands to beat you, i think the slow play is right here.
AJ might give an indication pre flop, and J9 will raise the river, so I think you're as safe as you'll ever be here.

MP had a pair of Qs? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[naphand]

I think you mean AJ, not A9 or do you mean J9? These really are the only hands that beat me bar QQ/KK (no chance). AJ or J9 limping PF was certainly possible with these loose players, but MP does not have either, he has a Q.

The Turn was obviously a draw card and the question is, what would I get from this by betting? I don't think AJ is folding nor J9 for any bets, nor any 2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif, which is good reason to raise, of course. At the time, I figured a bet gets called at best, very unlikely to be raised with the scary board unless MP has exactly QT. A Turn CR would scream trip 7s and it was very possible both would dump a lot of hands they pay one more each on the River. These two were looking out, playing cautious and waiting for the raise that meant trips.

There is a chance the Turn gets checked through but this is quite small with MP leading, MP generally bet through his made hands. They were typical bet with a made hand, raise 2-pair or better on the Turn, and call any draw for any bets or 2nd/3rd pair for one bet types.

The Turn bet is quite possibly the only viable alternative to waiting, and I will be considering this as an alternative to CR but only against players who are more aggressive IMO. Here UTG may fold his overcard A, and MP calls this and the River with his Q (so no raise possible). Of course, he may have 2-pair but that means exactly QT. When the board co-ordinates on the Turn this way, I usually bet out but with only the run-run flush and straight draws possible, I am less concerned here, esp. as I feel safe MP has a Q and UTG is a big fish who calls with just about anything. With very loose callers I think it is not so important to worry about big draws hitting, especially runner-runner. You have to suck it up when it does happen in these chook games. Even though I figure MP could fold to a Turn CR, I also read he calls the River CR, the pot is big, he is confused/annoyed. Nice when your reads work out... /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

I make this PF call against 2 bad players. I don't always play it but, in this type of game (loose PF, tighter post-flop) it does a lot of good for you, image wise, to show down some garbage every now and then. They notice your aggression, they notice you are in with premium hands. I get to steal quite a few Axx flops raising JTo OTB etc. but hands like this can be good too if you can get to SD (which is another reason not to raise the Turn, though easily over-ridden by other considerations). More than 2 players and I will only play suited connectors this low as mid-pairs are far less likely to hold up.

Crypto do not show the hands when players muck, recovering hand histories works through the auto-download route (used by PT), so I never see them.

MHIG (which is clear from MP's call).

[kiddo]

Bet this flop if u hit Q or 7, the Q(Q77) will borrow strenght from u betting 777 and 7(Q77) will borrow weakness from the Q.

If MP is loose but ok postflop he is betting something, he would have called all way and maybe raised somewhere if thought he had a better hand.

Against 1 aggressive player capable of folding I can understand this slowplay, and maybe against 2 (but I would bet against 2 100%), but against 4 (and 1 of them a callingstation) I think its a misstake.

[naphand]

Not on these tables, they are terrified of the nuts and clam up when faced with bets on 3-suited or paired flops. MP had already folded to a few Turn CR when he lead the flop. It may be if I bet out UTG and MP calls all the way, but there is about a cat in hell's chance they raise me at any point except with the nuts (straight or A7/Q7). I have found by playing every hand straightforward, these guys just fold on me when I raise. The fish will call down, but the typical loose-PF tight post-flop low aggro players do not give you much chance to raise them and get to SD.

On a more aggressive table, when players are capable of raising without at least 2-pair, then I like the more straighforward play. You make less money by always playing ABC on these tables IMO. Any aggression shown is usually what is says it is, those players that bluff or are genuinely LAG stand out from the crowd and you can "talk the talk" Peter_Rus style (if you read the post). This is not a post about playing this hand standard against unknowns, it's about extracting an extra bet against unsophisticated players, but who know what a CR means.

Playing trips cannot be the same as playing a set, one is disguised and the other smacks the opposition in the face (they will assume that is what you have, because they certainly would not CR without trips here).

[Your Mom]

I think against halfway thinking players who are folding mediocre/decent hands, betting out on the flop is the best play. A flop bet just seems too suspicious to them to be trips. Of course you may have a read that that isn't the case, in which case your play is good. It must have been the right play against this field, because it sure as hell worked.

[ALL1N]

I think you were very lucky that UTG bet out on the river here, and could have stood to have missed many bets after slowplaying it so.

After checkcalling the flop, I would bet out on the turn.

[naphand]

The action shuts down when I raise, so the question is where to raise?

Raising the Turn is the most obvious way to tell them I have a 7, it is what they expect and they will read it as exactly that, so I really do not want to do that. Betting out the Turn is a real option though. But if I bet the action most likely goes: fold, call and the River bet, call. No extra bets. The bet on the Turn will probably be somewhat confusing, and is unlikely to be raised. I sometimes suspect that a lot of posters here seem to think that anyone capable of betting TP SH, must also be aggressive enough to raise. That is not the case on these tables, for the majority of players. I certainly think I should bet the Turn if (i) the player is aggressive enough to raise TP here, or (ii) there is a reasonable chance of it getting checked through (esp. the case if MP takes shots at the pot when checked to). My read was that neither of these was very likely. So we are left with the River.

It sure was nice that UTG bet out the River, and it is possible MP would have checked behind, though I think that is not likely. MP always bet through his hands, there is no flush on the board, no A and the straight is not immediately obvious.

Things went right on this hand, I took a chance and it paid off. The advantage of calling through and CR this River is that I will get free cards and free SD's on other hands, as they now know I am capable of slowplaying them this way. This is not just about this hand, and I am coming to the belief that ABC 4-tabling posters are not understanding some of the meta-game considerations that should be considered when 2-tabling.

[ALL1N]

[ QUOTE ]
This is not just about this hand, and I am coming to the belief that ABC 4-tabling posters are not understanding some of the meta-game considerations that should be considered when 2-tabling.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
but MP does not have either, he has a Q.


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
MP always bet through his hands

[/ QUOTE ]

Heh, well, you picked that I am a (mindless) 4-tabler, and I've never player the 2/4 interpoker game, but seriously, if you knew that MP had a queen and knew that MP would bet the river, why post?

[naphand]

I did not say 4-tablers are mindless, what I said was that too many posters concentrate on the standard line, as if each hand had no special characteristics that merited any other approach. In many casesthe standard line is right, in some it is not.

That I could put MP fairly hard on a Q does not alter anything about this post, in fact I would be surprised if anyone did not agree with this. With the type of players described, what else would you read? What I was looking for was some analysis regarding alternate plays and perhaps discussion of the merits EV-wise of each play. This I got in some degree, but posts that adopt the standard line of "raise the Turn" clearly do not take into account reads. While I appreciate this is necessary when 4-tabling, it does not make it maximum EV in cases where you can make a read, particularly given the tendency of players to fold Turn CR without the nuts, as here.

Betting out on the Turn would appear to be better against an aggressive player. I absolutely don't accept that I was "very lucky" to get away with this, I believe it was a valid play and was hoping for discussion of the merits of other plays and the risks. You may be surprised where discussion leads, take the EV and Variance poll I posted earlier; plenty of discussion around all sorts of aspects of the game.

I post because I have some uncertainty, and would like to discuss. If I conclude that my line was good after this discussion, and you conclude it was not it does not really matter. At least it was discussed and the relative merits looked into. What I see too much of on this forum is answers and responses that appear to involve little in-depth thinking. I agree completely that (and there are plenty of them) "no reads" posts need standard responses. Where I post a read, I like some discussion around that read, perhaps I did not give enough information in the original post, but I certainly gave more than in your repsponse.