Semi-bluff CR Attempt

[spydog]

I have played around 120 hands with Villian. He's 28/8 but more passive than aggressive postflop. His WSD% is a very low 17%.

I thought my flop call was borderline.

On the turn, I thought this was a good spot for a semi-bluff CR. I was going to call 1 bet, but why not invest 1 extra bet and gain some fold equity?

Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (8 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is SB with K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
<font color="#CC3333">UTG raises</font>, UTG+1 folds, MP1 folds, MP2 folds, CO calls, Button folds, Hero calls, BB folds.

Flop: (7 SB) 6/images/graemlins/club.gif, 9/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, CO folds, Hero calls.

Turn: (4.50 BB) T/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>.....

[Fat Nicky]

I am iffy about the semi-bluff turn raise here. If UTG limped in here, I think I'd like it a bit more, but since he raised, it's more likely he has a big PP and will call you down.

Actually, this turn might be close to a fold. Comments on this??

[spydog]

[ QUOTE ]

Actually, this turn might be close to a fold. Comments on this??

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a close fold. Pot isn't huge and there is a strong chance that Villian has a PP that he will showdown. Because he raised from UTG, I should be more inclined to believe he is very strong. If he had raised from MP, I think it's not a fold.

But....if you decide to call this, is the CR better than calling?

[27offsooot]

If he were more aggressive post-flop, you would have more fold equity, but u described him as passive post flop, so i don't like it all that much. Do you lead a non-AK river? To Fat Nicky, i prefer this play against a pre-flop raiser, instead of a limper b/c many people feel compelled to bet the flop and turn with unimproved overs, but will fold to a c-r. Also, the board being paired is good for this move, b/c he may fold the turn thinking he's drawing dead with AK (although i'm not sure if he'll realize that u holding a 9 is unlikely). You won't get an overpair to fold here.

[bisonbison]

I would have folded twice before the turn.

[J.R.]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought my flop call was borderline.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fold preflop, fold the flop.

[spydog]

[ QUOTE ]
If he were more aggressive post-flop, you would have more fold equity, but u described him as passive post flop, so i don't like it all that much.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree with this. Against an aggressive postflop player, I don't do this because he'll 3-bet me with an overpair and I have to call.

I would only do this if
1) He folds too much
2) He won't 3-bet me with an overpair.

I felt this opponent matched this description.

Passive in this case means tight-passive, not loose-passive. Two different animals.

[MoreWineII]

You fold this preflop?

[spydog]

[ QUOTE ]
I would have folded twice before the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

My flop call was pretty loose, especially without a backdoor flush draw.

However, unless I'm at a very tough table, I don't fold this preflop. Usually, the BB will join the dance and I'm getting 4:1, easily enough for a top 10 starting hand against the typical 3/6 crowd.

[crunchy1]

I would think that a villian at 28/8 raising UTG would need more than 4:1 to make this play profitable.

[J.R.]

[ QUOTE ]
Usually, the BB will join the dance and I'm getting 4:1, easily enough for a top 10 starting hand against the typical 3/6 crowd.

[/ QUOTE ]


Do as you like but I will just note that hand values are relative, and 8 pfr type guy (a fairly in line raiser) raised UTG. This means your hand is no where near one of the top 10 hands you could have in this spot, and given your lack of position, I think putting in 1 2/3rds sbs here is worse than coldcalling, which isn't a good play either.

Ok, I'll say it, this is an easy preflop fold. But do as you like, there isn't anything to debate here. Seriously.

[spydog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Usually, the BB will join the dance and I'm getting 4:1, easily enough for a top 10 starting hand against the typical 3/6 crowd.

[/ QUOTE ]


Do as you like but I will just note that hand values are relative, and 8 pfr type guy (a fairly in line raiser) raised UTG. This means your hand is no where near one of the top 10 hands you could have in this spot, and given your lack of position, I think putting in 1 2/3rds sbs here is worse than coldcalling, which isn't a good play either.

Ok, I'll say it, this is an easy preflop fold. But do as you like, there isn't anything to debate here. Seriously.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can dig this. This call is probably slightly -EV. The better the players, the worse the call. If the players are bad postflop, this call is probably +EV. It certainly isn't a 'standard call', but a table specific decision.

[MoreWineII]

Well, if some people think it's ok to call and some don't then doesn't that by definition mean that there is in fact a debate here?

Doesn't SSH mention KQs specifically as a hand that it's ok to cold-call with? So what's different here? The PFR's stats? Because the raise came from UTG?

Do you fold TT in this spot?

I'm not saying what's wrong or right, I'd just like a little clarification, if you could.

[StellarWind]

Easy fold preflop and flop.

The turn decision is 3-way borderline. There are two problems with the checkraise:

1. The checkraise depends on your opponent betting overcards. It will definitely fail versus a pocket pair. Your somewhat passive opponent may not bet overcards on the turn and that cuts your chances.

2. This needs to be a two-step plan that includes betting the river. A big ace is likely to call the turn (7-1) hoping to either improve or be given a free showdown when you are bluffing. You need to invest 3 BB in this semibluff that doesn't have that many effective outs. You are also vulnerable to a 3-bet which is awkward because you have straight outs and need to call. The risk is very high for a pot that isn't that big.

[spydog]

I'm glad I posted this hand. I like StellarWind's response as to the validity of my turn thoughts.

I'm still baffled by the negativity of my preflop call. I don't mind people disagreeing with the call, but would prefer more constructive responses like:

'I fold this unless I have x more coldcallers'.

'If the UTG raise comes from someone with a PFR% &gt; x, I call'.

'If the openraise came from MP2 and the button coldcalled, I would call'.

[J.R.]

its a lot easier to respond to the sitation you posted than to imagine how our reponse would be given a tweak to the seemingly endless number of preflop variables we could alter. If you want to, post a different preflop situation. I'm not trying to be rude, but some do have a lot of other stuff going on.


To Morewine: domination, no showdown value and the inability to flop a set differneitate the two. SSH was written, IIRC, for live games where both the preflop and postflop play are looser and much worse than in the party 3-6, so coldcalling has more merit when your are more likely to be multiway against fairly bad hands and players who will push their bad hands too far postflop.

[MoreWineII]

[ QUOTE ]


I'm still baffled by the negativity of my preflop call. I don't mind people disagreeing with the call, but would prefer more constructive responses like:

'I fold this unless I have x more coldcallers'.

'If the UTG raise comes from someone with a PFR% &gt; x, I call'.

'If the openraise came from MP2 and the button coldcalled, I would call'.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. Apparently, the correct number of expected players is 5 or more. I would expect the BB to call here a large majority of the time. So that's 4, which doesn't seem to be enough.

[J.R.]

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't SSH mention KQs specifically as a hand that it's ok to cold-call with?

[/ QUOTE ]

BTw, in case I wasn't clear, I think you need a better hand to semi-coldcall with here given your positional disadvantage than you would need to coldcall with, even considering the 1/3rd of a small bet you already have invested in the pot.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm glad I posted this hand. I like StellarWind's response as to the validity of my turn thoughts.

[/ QUOTE ]

To many people on here looking for an ego boost... someone telling them how great they are....

I think the turn play here is horrible. You've stated that villian is passive post-flop.... but postflop in this hand he's betting into you for the second time. At this point what do you put him on? My thoughts would be 99-AA and AK. You're most likely severly dominated, if not drawing dead already. And if you're not already dead, your few outs plus his likely redraws constitute an easy fold here.

[ QUOTE ]

I'm still baffled by the negativity of my preflop call. I don't mind people disagreeing with the call, but would prefer more constructive responses like:

'I fold this unless I have x more coldcallers'.

'If the UTG raise comes from someone with a PFR% &gt; x, I call'.

'If the openraise came from MP2 and the button coldcalled, I would call'.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you're really baffled here. Each of the following statements you make pretty much sum up what others here are suggesting. You are correct: there weren't enough callers, the raise was from UTG and his PFR% wasn't severly out of line. Unless it's going to be a huge pot, let it go. And if you're gonna continue to call with these types of hands, do your roll a favor and let 'em go when you don't hit. (Although my gut tells me you ended up winning this hand one way or another?)

[27offsooot]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If he were more aggressive post-flop, you would have more fold equity, but u described him as passive post flop, so i don't like it all that much.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree with this. Against an aggressive postflop player, I don't do this because he'll 3-bet me with an overpair and I have to call.

I would only do this if
1) He folds too much
2) He won't 3-bet me with an overpair.

I felt this opponent matched this description.

Passive in this case means tight-passive, not loose-passive. Two different animals.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, so I didn't explain myself too well b/c when Stellar Wind said almost an identical thing,

"1. The checkraise depends on your opponent betting overcards. It will definitely fail versus a pocket pair. Your somewhat passive opponent may not bet overcards on the turn and that cuts your chances."

You agreed with him. I'll try to break it down so that you can understand my thinking better.

The reason u semi-bluff is b/c 1. there is a decent chance u will win unimproved if your opponent folds (or u actually have the best hand, which here isn't the case), but 2. you still have outs. I'm sure we can all agree on this.

So, if you're against a passive post-flop player, as you had described villain as being, what is the likelihood that villan bets overs both on the flop and turn into two people. Not very likely, IMO. So when u semi-bluff the turn, you are guessing that he has just overs because there is no way that he is folding an over pair. The chances of him having overs instead of an over pair drops significantly if he is a passive opponent. However, if he was aggressive post-flop, the chances of him betting unimproved overs is much, much higher. If he three bets, u can be 95% assured he has an overpair. If he just calls, u can bluff at the river unimproved and oftentimes take it down if a blank rivers. Or if he folds the turn, then even better.

If you are three bet here, that's the cost of such a play, and you're right that a passive player won't three bet here and an aggresive player will with an over pair, but risking three potential extra bets when u have a much better chance of taking the pot down is much better than risking two when u have little to no chance of taking the pot.

[spydog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm glad I posted this hand. I like StellarWind's response as to the validity of my turn thoughts.

[/ QUOTE ]

To many people on here looking for an ego boost... someone telling them how great they are....

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummm....his post made me realize my thought process was bad on the turn and that I made a mistake. Sorry if I worded it improperly.

It should have said 'StellarWind's response as to the invalidity of my turn thoughts'.


BTW, I did checkraise. Villian called with JJ and I rivered a K and MHIG.

Good read, but I didn't post because I won. I posted because I think I'm missing out on some +EV bluffing. This thread helped me see that this wasn't the spot.

Now, about the preflop call.....no one has made a convincing argument to fold this. If it's +EV with 2 coldcallers, it's probably close to breakeven with 1 coldcaller and the BB's dead money.

[spydog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If he were more aggressive post-flop, you would have more fold equity, but u described him as passive post flop, so i don't like it all that much.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree with this. Against an aggressive postflop player, I don't do this because he'll 3-bet me with an overpair and I have to call.

I would only do this if
1) He folds too much
2) He won't 3-bet me with an overpair.

I felt this opponent matched this description.

Passive in this case means tight-passive, not loose-passive. Two different animals.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, so I didn't explain myself too well b/c when Stellar Wind said almost an identical thing,

"1. The checkraise depends on your opponent betting overcards. It will definitely fail versus a pocket pair. Your somewhat passive opponent may not bet overcards on the turn and that cuts your chances."

You agreed with him. I'll try to break it down so that you can understand my thinking better.

The reason u semi-bluff is b/c 1. there is a decent chance u will win unimproved if your opponent folds (or u actually have the best hand, which here isn't the case), but 2. you still have outs. I'm sure we can all agree on this.

So, if you're against a passive post-flop player, as you had described villain as being, what is the likelihood that villan bets overs both on the flop and turn into two people. Not very likely, IMO. So when u semi-bluff the turn, you are guessing that he has just overs because there is no way that he is folding an over pair. The chances of him having overs instead of an over pair drops significantly if he is a passive opponent. However, if he was aggressive post-flop, the chances of him betting unimproved overs is much, much higher. If he three bets, u can be 95% assured he has an overpair. If he just calls, u can bluff at the river unimproved and oftentimes take it down if a blank rivers. Or if he folds the turn, then even better.

If you are three bet here, that's the cost of such a play, and you're right that a passive player won't three bet here and an aggresive player will with an over pair, but risking three potential extra bets when u have a much better chance of taking the pot down is much better than risking two when u have little to no chance of taking the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good post. This makes much more sense to me.

[J.R.]

[ QUOTE ]
If it's +EV with 2 coldcallers, it's probably close to breakeven with 1 coldcaller and the BB's dead money.

[/ QUOTE ]

7-1 in position verus @5-1 out of positon. Its not hugely +ev in the 2 coldcallers spot either.


[ QUOTE ]
no one has made a convincing argument to fold this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Domination. No position. Only @5-1. But do as you like.

[MoreWineII]

[ QUOTE ]


Now, about the preflop call.....no one has made a convincing argument to fold this. If it's +EV with 2 coldcallers, it's probably close to breakeven with 1 coldcaller and the BB's dead money.

[/ QUOTE ]

The arguments I've heard have been:

-Fear of domination

-Not enough callers

-Villian's stats

-UTG raise

Fear of domination is the strongest argument, I think. But suitedness overcomes some of that, no?

As for the pot not being multi-way, if you're regularly playing in games where you're getting 5+ cold-callers, then I'd really love to know where you're playing - I'd love some of that action. I expect BB to call here 90% of the time and for four players to see the flop.

Finally, 120 hands is a piddling amount of hands to make read-based folds on, imo.

I guess the question I'd most like to see answered is at what point do you consider semi-cold-calling with this hand? 5 cold-callers? 6? 7?

I hardly ever see that kind of preflop action, yet SSH tells me KQs is ok to cold-call with. Why? For the one billionth of one percent of times that this is my holding *and* someone raises *and* I have 6 cold-callers to me?

btw, I realize that SSH is just a guide and not the Bible.

[Richard Berg]

You neglect the most important factor in shorthanded play: position. 1 coldcaller and the button would make it an easy call against a 28/8.

[spydog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If it's +EV with 2 coldcallers, it's probably close to breakeven with 1 coldcaller and the BB's dead money.

[/ QUOTE ]

7-1 in position verus @5-1 out of positon. Its not hugely +ev in the 2 coldcallers spot either.

[/ QUOTE ]

I meant raise, 2 coldcallers, and you are in the small blind. Do you call this? What about 3 coldcallers?

I think you thought I meant raise, 2 coldcallers, and I call on the button. That's a no-brainer call for me.

And, you forgot implied odds on a hand like KQs, which is much different than KQo.

This preflop play is probably more of a style issue than anything. It happens too infrequently too make an impact on one's winrate. If it is negative, it's maybe -.10BB, which can be made up postflop if you have good postflop skills versus your opponents.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm glad I posted this hand. I like StellarWind's response as to the validity of my turn thoughts.

[/ QUOTE ]

To many people on here looking for an ego boost... someone telling them how great they are....

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummm....his post made me realize my thought process was bad on the turn and that I made a mistake. Sorry if I worded it improperly.

It should have said 'StellarWind's response as to the invalidity of my turn thoughts'.

[/ QUOTE ]

My bad for being attacking... I'm fairly new to these forums but I stop by daily. Day in and day out it seems like I'm always reading something asking how to play a hand when the really should say, "look how great I think and read and play".... It just get's old really quick and I don't want to see that kind of behavior/activity drive away the knowledgeable people who's posting really matters to a lot of us!

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If it's +EV with 2 coldcallers, it's probably close to breakeven with 1 coldcaller and the BB's dead money.

[/ QUOTE ]

7-1 in position verus @5-1 out of positon. Its not hugely +ev in the 2 coldcallers spot either.

[/ QUOTE ]

I meant raise, 2 coldcallers, and you are in the small blind. Do you call this? What about 3 coldcallers?

I think you thought I meant raise, 2 coldcallers, and I call on the button. That's a no-brainer call for me.

And, you forgot implied odds on a hand like KQs, which is much different than KQo.

This preflop play is probably more of a style issue than anything. It happens too infrequently too make an impact on one's winrate. If it is negative, it's maybe -.10BB, which can be made up postflop if you have good postflop skills versus your opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]

For some, this may be a borderline hand pre-flop. For me it's an easy fold. I think that after reviewing the way you played it post-flop it should now become an easy fold for you. You can call it style or whatever you want but the fact is that you missed your hand and failed to get away (while out of position and against a PF EP raiser and a scary board). That sounds like a leak to me. I think that it's a pretty standard (and respected) cliche that small pairs and suited-connectors play well in big pots when you have position. In this hand neither of these two rules applied and it's my opinion that a fold is in order.

Maybe these thoughts will convince you pre-flop (and I think I'm only reiterating what others have already said). The biggest problems pre-flop (in order of importance) are (a) you're out of position, (b) you are not getting odds (pot or implied) with only one cold caller, and (c) you have identified Villian as a certain type of player and are not respecting your own read.

As for making an impact on your winrate: every mistake makes an impact on your winrate. Anything that is producing results of -%BB is something that needs adjusting how many BB's you're losing is irelevant. What is lost is not won!! And I presume that you are playing to win.

I think that KQs is a great hand and it's at the top of my $$ makers in poker tracker. But, it got there by catching strong hands and winning big pots and also by picking up small pots against 1 or 2 limpers when nothing significant flops. The rest of the time, I let it go. These are the types of pots you are looking to win with this hand. Involving yourself in pots other than these types are not going to be +EV. Hope this all helps!!