Uncle Earnie

[Tommy Angelo]

$30-60. The cutoff openraises, the small blind calls, and I call in the big blind with Ad-9c. The reason I didn't fold is because the cutoff is an open book and the small blind has an open nose.

The flop comes all diamonds, 8-6-2. I have the nut flush draw. It's threehanded with me in the middle. The small blind checks. I check, thinking shoot-em-in-the-nest, and the cutoff bets.

The small blind checkraises. To heck with the nest. Maybe I can shoot'em on the fly. I make it three bets. As ideally scripted, the cutoff folds and the small blind calls. Headup now.

The turn is a black seven. I pick up an openender.

The small blind checks and I check behind.

The river card is ....

Does it matter? Not really. Whatever earn was to be earned on this hand, already was. Ya think?

Okay okay. I hit the flush on the river and the small blind had flopped a flush so he checkraised the river in frustration and called my reraise. Woohoo!

Tommy

[Jim Brier]

I think your preflop call is correct but marginal. I would fold a weaker, unsuited ace in this situation.

I like your aggressive play on the flop. I hate your play on the turn. I would bet every time in this situation and give my lone opponent a chance to fold. If he calls, I have a boatload of outs. I think there is an inconsistency in your approach. You make a marginal call preflop, play almost overly aggressive on the flop, and then take your foot off the gas pedal when you get it heads-up with position.

Who is "Uncle Earnie"?

[The Prince]

Tommy,

I would follow through with a bet on the turn every single time, unless I have spotted some super tell. You have a gazillion outs if beat and after 3-betting the flop like that, your lone opponent should fold often enough to show a profit.

[DeezNuts]

I like the way it was played the whole way. I just don't see the point in betting when the SB is check-raising(and calling a 3rd bet). What would he do this with, when you have the nut draw? I think he jams with any paired hand. You have position, you are definitely behind, and possibly only drawing to a few outs if he has the flush. I think the turn check, in this situation, is correct given the board. A check-raise just seems too likely on the turn, and it is very likely you dont have as many outs as it first appears. Perfectly played, IMO.

DN

[Tommy Angelo]

"I hate your play on the turn."

Yikes. That was the only street where I thought the correct action was unquestionable. It's all your fault, Jim, for getting me to think in terms like "correct" in the first place! :-)

"I would bet every time in this situation and give my lone opponent a chance to fold."

I was hoping that "open nose" would mean "a player who no way in hell is going to checkraise the flop and then checkfold the turn."

"If he calls, I have a boatload of outs."

If I was sure he would meekly call, I might have bet if for no other reason than to setup and gauge a river bluff. What I didn't want to do (and would have had to do as it turns out) is pay two big bets to see the river. After all, I've got five small bets in already, before the turn, and I've got, what, ace-high, and not a good ace-high at that. Right or wrong, its seems to me like checking the turn in a spot like this is pretty much the reason I go through so much trouble to get in spots like this.

"I think there is an inconsistency in your approach."

Yes and no.

"You make a marginal call preflop, play almost overly aggressive on the flop, and then take your foot off the gas pedal when you get it heads-up with position."

Change "call preflop" to "raise preflop," and remove "almost," and you described exactly what I do, over and over. I guess it's consistently inconsistent.

You want consistency, how about this? With no pair I jam the flop when it rates to buy last position, as with this hand. Then I check the turn for the same reason, because I have no pair!

Tommy

[J_V]

"Does it matter? Not really. Whatever earn was to be earned on this hand, already was. Ya think?"

Not at all. You still have one more crucial street to play. If you fold incorrectly on the river when a blank hits, all the earn is flushed down the toilet. If you call incorrectly, there goes 1 BB in total -EV, for this particular hand.

Insert a grand old yoda quote here......i couldn't think of a good one.

[The Prince]

If there's really no way your can make a profitable semi-bluff, i.e. he's not folding any hand, then checking is fine, although there is a chance your hand is actually good.

But I like betting also, since you can extract 2 bets if you make your hand, or check behind and show if you miss.

[budman]

I think you should bet the turn every time after three betting the flop. By checking, I think you are inviting a bluff bet on the river, unless you catch your flush card, in which case your opponent is unlikely to call.

If I were your opponent, I would call a turn bet, but fold on the river if a fourth flush card came and I had a small flush.

You have position and had just three bet the flop; you should be able to control the hand. Betting the turn allows you to have your choice of betting or checking the river.

[skp]

Your turn decision depends on what you intend on doing on the river if you miss and your opponent bets. If you are hell bent on calling the river (because of your opponent's propensity to bluff once you check the turn), then betting the turn and checking the river seems better. If, on the other hand, you are sure that the dude with the open nose will not fold on the turn (and may even checkraise) and that there is very little prospect of the guy bluffing the river, then checking the turn seems better (and probably folding to a river bet).

Against most players, a turn bet followed by a river check would appear to be the way to go (although you may even want to bluff on the river with your ace high if you check the turn and a card like an offsuit 4 comes out which puts 4 cards to a straight on the board).

[LotusX]

I love the flop three bet becuase when the preflop raiser folds, you are now almost certain an ace gives you the winner. However, if the preflop raiser is still in, an ace is probably outkicked.

On the turn you have a ton of outs, which to me would be a reason to check it. Who is going to check raise, call a 3 bet on the flop, and then fold when a blank hits the turn? I'd check the turn like tommy, and if the river is a blank then fold to a bet.

IF he checks to you again on the river I might try a stonecold bluff


I see the flop as a perfect example of implicit collusion. By three betting there, although you are clearly behind, you increase your chance of winning by driving out the AJ or AQ or A whatever the preflop raiser had.

I see almost no reason to bet the turn.

[brad]

'Does it matter? Not really. Whatever earn was to be earned on this hand, already was. Ya think?'

i think so too although i usually dont play as well on the flop. heh.

brad

[skp]

I think your river reasoning is a little off.

When you check the turn, it gives your opponent incentive to bluff on the river. So, you will often have to call that bet. On the other hand, if he checks the river, you will be hard pressed to bluff him out as he has put you on a draw and will call with any pair and perhaps even a strong Ace. I might bluff with Ace high only if an offsuit 4 comes making the board 8764 and whatever the other card was which I have now forgotten.

If I am right with the river analysis, then betting the turn with the intention of checking the river is usually the better play as it costs you the same amount i.e. one big bet except now there is a chance that:

a. Your opponent may fold on the turn

b. You go on to make your hand on the river and therefore earn a call on the turn in addition to the river.

[Boris]

If you had a stronger hand I would tend to agree with you. But in this case your unimproved A-9 is so weak that IMO you could fold to a river bet and not worry about it. Also consider that Tommy has the nut flush draw which reduces the number of weak hands with which Uncle Earney would get frisky.

[skp]

Good point.

I stand by my earlier post in general terms but on this particular hand, you may well be right that a river bet can probably be met with a fold as it's unlikely that the bb checkraised the flop with a hand worse than A9 in which case, Tommy's check on the turn may be the better play after all.

[deadbart]

Betting the turn makes a lot more sense with a hand that can fold to a raise. With the nut draw, you have to call, so the bet is just charging yourself to draw when almost certainly behind. If you think the BB actually has a good chance of folding, a bet is probably worth it.

[Rick Nebiolo]

Tommy,

How come you didn't answer Jim's question? Who is Uncle Earnie?

Regards,

Rick

PS I sure do miss having free time during hours where I could actually throw in my two cents and someone would be awake to read it.

[Tommy Angelo]

"How come you didn't answer Jim's question?"

I forgot.

"Who is Uncle Earnie?"

Uncle Ernie molested his helpless young nephew and then later, for profit, became the deaf-dumb-and-blind boy's champion, but neglected to change his name to Uncle Earnie, so I did. :-)

Tommy

i assess this situation just like you do, however I am also quite confident that the sb isnt going to fold any hand he'd call 3 bets with on the flop here

[angry young man]

"How you get so big eating food of this sort? hmmmmm?"-Yoda

Wouldn't it be a good idea to bet the turn and your open ender? Even if you don't steal the pot, it's still a good value bet in case you do hit one of your many outs on the river. Am I right or wrong?

[brad]

check bet call on turn and betting river when hit is breakeven if youve got all 15 outs.

now if you get checkraised ...

[John Cole]

Tommy,

Write this down and tack it to your wall: "A foolish consistency is the hobgobblin of little minds." Ralph Waldo Emerson


John