Basic HE Philosophy question

[gonores]

OK...I will try to keep this as broad as possible without rendering it irrelevant.

Let's say a loose (35/15/1.8) player limps under the gun in a 6-handed game. You raise on the button with any of your standard raising hands. Everyone folds back to UTG, who calls.

The flop comes [8d 5d 2s] (or a reasonable facsimily thereof).

It's checked to you and you bet with whatever you have (for the sake of this exercise, let's limit your holdings to two cards 9 and up and pairs 88 and up). Your opponent checkraises. You know he is aggressive enough to do that with all sorts of hands...flush draws, wheel-straight draws, 8 or 9-high straight draws, pairs, sets, and, if he's feeling feisty, a hand like JT. He is tight enough that you don't have to worry much about him holding a 5 or a 2 unless it is accompnied by an ace (or if he has a pair of 5s or 2s in the hole) He knows there is a good chance you are on overcards, and that some people fold to him when he clearly doesn't have the best hand when he checkraises flops like this.

At this point in the hand, I force you to take one of two hand paths.

1. You can 3-bet his flop c/r. After that, you are free to play out the hand however you see fit.

2. You can call his flop c/r and raise his turn bet (he bets the turn 100% of the time). After that, play how you see fit. Note: Your oppenent is capable of folding to this turn raise.

If you have to play all your raising hands in one fashion or the other, which way would you prefer to play this hand?

[arkady]

Interesting question, I think people's answers will differ depending on whether its 5/10 or 10/20...but I would be more inclined to wait for the turn. If I had to choose one, I choose 3-bet flop, lead turn line. Why? Because its a cheaper approach to get them to fold if they do not have anything.

[Alobar]

it depends... /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Gazza]

Of course 2 is a much more powerful statement but 1 is much cheaper.
If I had to play all my hands one way or the other then I would choose 2 as on this board it is much more likely that we have nothing.
The flop is for value and bluffing but the turn is for value in my games where such raises are not respected

Gazza

[fyodor]

I like the first approach for a cpl. reasons.

As has been pointed out, it is cheaper.

On the turn I still have a choice if checked to. I can bet if I have a hand or if I want to represent a hand. Or I can take a free river card if I think I am behind but have some kind of a draw.

In short, if I have to choose one or the other, this one gives me more options.

[srw5n]

Agree it depends.

Considerations:
What am I holding precisely? Do I have any diamonds in my hand?

Immediately a small selection of hands flashes through my mind: A-8/A-5, Flush draw with at least one over card, set, pocket pair (with over pair being highly unlikely because it's hard to see an open limp with 99+).

I personally raise to define my hand. Facing a cap I can narrow that to a flush draw or a set.

I bet the turn if he calls my raise. If I get check raised here I can release most hands.

[gonores]

You're missing the point of the exercise. With this kind of flop, there are not a lot of raising hands where you shouldn't be taking one of these two lines here (please note that is pretty game-specific for the 10/20 and up shorthanded games...If you're talking about 1/2 game, Either of these lines are probably chip-spewing). Against a semi-observant opponent, you should be taking one of the two lines I have laid out just about every time in order to keep your opponent guessing, regardless of whether you have overcards or an overpair.

[ QUOTE ]
Immediately a small selection of hands flashes through my mind: A-8/A-5, Flush draw with at least one over card, set, pocket pair (with over pair being highly unlikely because it's hard to see an open limp with 99+).

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't I tell you what hands should be flashing through your mind? You've defined his hand wayyy too narrowly.

[fsuplayer]

i like line #2, bc it sends more of an 'overpair' message, as well as having the benefits of not doing it if say the 6d, or some other horrid card comes off on the turn.

i need to do this more with my over cards. i am a big pussy too often.

[srw5n]

I'm giving you my line of thought. I clearly understand your question. I play 5/10 and 10/20 SH, so I'm speaking from those games and cannot speak adequately to 15/30+ SH (15/30 and 20/40 full games are different). I'm tell you I'm not going forward blindly in the hand, that's why I think there are more considerations (when I say flashes these are the hands I'm thinking about when the hand develops). That being said, LIKE I SAID: I raise the flop.

The reason I raise the flop is two fold:
1. to help define the hand
2. I play aggressively when I raise preflop. I want to get paid off when I flop huge hands. This will never happen if I'm not aggressive when I miss.
3. I don't want to slow down an opponent on the turn. The second line, in my opinion slows people down on later streets in subsequent hands. One of my strengths is my ability to play later streets, therefore I want action on those streets. I'm looking to get paid of big when I hit a hand. I want people betting into me on the turn in subsequent hands when I'm holding the nuts. I find constant flop aggression translates into poorer play on the later streets by my opponents.

Those are my thoughts.

[Apocalypse]

IF CALLED ON A 3-BET ON THE FLOP:
(does he cap hands like A8, A5 on the flop?does he lead them out on the turn a great deal with made hands but checks draws and overs?)

Lead the turn with any non-acehand:
-IF he folds any unimproved overs and weak aces almost a 100% of the time
-The board is pretty drawless

Check the turn with any ace-hand
-IF he will not fold any better hands on the turn
-BUT he will fire a riverbet as a stealattempt a great deal more than twice the percentage of the time he rivers you with a hand he would've folded to a turnbet(let's say about 40-60% of the times at least). If he checks rivered hands you are in even better shape of course
-The board is pretty drawless

Lead the turn with any Ace-hand:
-IF the board is drawheavy
-check-check on the river

What do people think? Im somewhat on a cafeine trip, and my brain feels like in a spasm. Don't have the patience to verify these statements on my own at this point, so ill leave you people to crunch them. Interesting post by the way, i should do more fictional strategy-questions like these. Im sure it would improve my game a great deal.

[fyodor]

After reading Shneids' reference to this thread and his own in FSU's thread, I am interested to hear what you have to say about this gonores.

Any final thoughts?

[Nate tha' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
You're missing the point of the exercise. With this kind of flop, there are not a lot of raising hands where you shouldn't be taking one of these two lines here

[/ QUOTE ]

I dunno about that. There are a fair number of scenarios in which I'd just call down all the way to a showdown, or wait all the way to the river and then raise, but I suspect that I use those lines more than most other players on here, except possibly your partner in crime from Minnesota.

EDIT: Between the two choices you've given, I prefer the first line better all else being equal, because I think it tends to conceal your hand a little bit better when you in fact have a good hand. By that I mean that I'd rather save my loose raises for the flop rather than the turn, because I think that I'll get more value out of my value raises on the flop rather than the turn against a thinking opponent.

[gonores]

I've been drinking tonight....someone remind me to address this tomorrow.

[djack]

Your reply might be more interesting now. I don't suppose you'll do both?

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]
I've been drinking tonight....someone remind me to address this tomorrow.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Trix]

Think I prefer waiting till the turn as the pot will be of a size at that point where I dont mind him folding.

He will also be less likely to bet out on the river.

[fyodor]

Waiting for gonores to reply I have thought about this some more.

With a hand, and with position, it seems waiting for the turn normally gets you more money. Unfortunately, given the parameters of the question, I think you will normally not have a hand, and will therefore be bluffing on the turn. Yes it will be a stronger bluff, but it's going to cost you more, and if he takes the "in for a penny in for a pound" route and calls you down, it's just a larger loss.

I guess it comes down to a question of will the extra money you make by waiting for the turn, outweigh the extra money you will lose by waiting for the turn.

The turn raise being the stronger play, it's more likely to knock him off a weak holding that beats your weak holding. Factor this in with the exta money you make on the times you actually have a hand and I think I have convinced myself to change my mind.

Next few sessions I am going to wait for the turn (with or without a hand) and see how it goes.

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you will normally not have a hand, and will therefore be bluffing on the turn. Yes it will be a stronger bluff, but it's going to cost you more, and if he takes the "in for a penny in for a pound" route and calls you down, it's just a larger loss.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is pretty much what I think which is why I think if we're talking an online game you shouldn't be making your plays revolving around trying to gain fold equity... People don't fold online. So instead, go for the greater value route with your strong hands, which would be giving a lot of flop action (since they will still often try to make a move on you on the turn).

If the game in question is a live middle limit game I think it's much more debateable and probably correct to be making your game into a more turn oriented one since you are more likely to get a few folds live.