2 bets to me on the turn with top pair.

[deepsquat]

What do you think about folding this turn? No reads but my feeling is that perhaps villain tried to get tricky with a 7

Party Poker 0.5/1 Hold'em (10 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is MP2 with K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
UTG calls, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, MP1 calls, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, SB calls, BB calls, UTG calls, MP1 calls.

Flop: (10 SB) 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 7/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">SB bets</font>, BB calls, UTG calls, MP1 folds, Hero calls.

Turn: (7 BB) Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">SB bets</font>, BB folds, <font color="#CC3333">UTG raises</font>, Hero folds, SB calls.

River: (11 BB) T/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
SB checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, SB calls.

Final Pot: 13 BB

[NAU_Player]

My play is 90% read specific. If I think UTG is tight and is raising with a Q then i usually call the turn hoping the SB comes along for the ride. If I think he's tricky and somewhat loose I usually fold.

Against random opponents, I'd probably fold and wait for another hand to take their money.

[Kevin K.]

Without reads, the fold on the turn seems fine.
Maybe I'm wrong but the last thing I would do on the flop is call. Raise or fold depending on the read on the SB.

[Aaron W.]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I'm wrong but the last thing I would do on the flop is call. Raise or fold depending on the read on the SB.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have three questions:

1) What's the value of raising the flop when you're closing the action?
2) What's the value of folding the flop when you're closing the action?
3) What's the value of calling the flop when you're closing the action?

Let's try to clear up that "maybe"...

[scotty34]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I'm wrong but the last thing I would do on the flop is call. Raise or fold depending on the read on the SB.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have three questions:

1) What's the value of raising the flop when you're closing the action?
2) What's the value of folding the flop when you're closing the action?
3) What's the value of calling the flop when you're closing the action?

Let's try to clear up that "maybe"...

[/ QUOTE ]

1)Possible free river
2)If you are not getting odds to call on (at best) 6 outs, fold
3)If you are getting odds to call on 6 outs, then call (I don't really like it though)

[ArturiusX]

Those outs need to be discounted because you could be dominated, and someone could have a 7, in which case they're not hand winning outs.

[SCfuji]

i fold this flop. a bettor a caller and an overcaller is enough heat for me, even if i assume these guys call lightly. overcards has been a continuing struggle/leak in my game but with a crowd i dont care if i have position. i have king high trying to hit a pair on a paired board.

[Aaron W.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I have three questions:

1) What's the value of raising the flop when you're closing the action?
2) What's the value of folding the flop when you're closing the action?
3) What's the value of calling the flop when you're closing the action?

[/ QUOTE ]

1)Possible free river
2)If you are not getting odds to call on (at best) 6 outs, fold
3)If you are getting odds to call on 6 outs, then call (I don't really like it though)

[/ QUOTE ]

You didn't quite answer the questions the way I was expecting. It wasn't meant to be an abstract thing, but a very concerte look at this hand and the situation that's presented.

The free card play alone is *NOT* enough to justify raising. In fact, you generally should avoid a free card play with a weak draw. It's too expensive when it fails. The free card play is not too likely to work because you have a larger field.

Raising opens yourself up to a 3-bet, which is bad because you're compelled to see the turn by then due to the pot size being quite large.

The only other reason to raise when closing the action is that you have a strong hand or strong draw that you want to raise for value. This hand clearly does not satisfy that condition.

Raising is the worst of the three options.

Folding and calling are close together, with folding being slightly better. You don't have 6 full outs, but it's probably closer to 3 because of all the callers. You have almost the right odds to make a call for 3 outs, but you've got reverse implied odds working against you (you don't want action if you hit your hand because it probably means you're beat). These two things make folding look better than calling.

But calling here would be a "loose flop call", and not a complete disaster.

You've got to be careful with the "raise-or-fold" line, because there are lots of places it simply doesn't apply, and this is one of them.

[LuckyStrike]

Without any reads I think this is a good fold. You're only getting 5:1 to call and there is the possibility of more action behind you, plus you're almost certainly going to have to pay one more on the river.

Postflop, I don't think there is a more predictable behaviour among typical microlimit opponents than slowplaying flopped trips to the turn.

[davelin]

[ QUOTE ]
Without reads, the fold on the turn seems fine.
Maybe I'm wrong but the last thing I would do on the flop is call. Raise or fold depending on the read on the SB.

[/ QUOTE ]

I concur with Aaron, the last thing I would do here is raise. The only benefit of raising is getting a free card which doesn't work enough times here to warrant it. I want to see a cheap turn if possible.

[Kevin K.]

[ QUOTE ]
The free card play alone is *NOT* enough to justify raising. In fact, you generally should avoid a free card play with a weak draw. It's too expensive when it fails. The free card play is not too likely to work because you have a larger field.

Raising opens yourself up to a 3-bet, which is bad because you're compelled to see the turn by then due to the pot size being quite large.

The only other reason to raise when closing the action is that you have a strong hand or strong draw that you want to raise for value. This hand clearly does not satisfy that condition.

Raising is the worst of the three options.

Folding and calling are close together, with folding being slightly better. You don't have 6 full outs, but it's probably closer to 3 because of all the callers. You have almost the right odds to make a call for 3 outs, but you've got reverse implied odds working against you (you don't want action if you hit your hand because it probably means you're beat). These two things make folding look better than calling.

But calling here would be a "loose flop call", and not a complete disaster.

You've got to be careful with the "raise-or-fold" line, because there are lots of places it simply doesn't apply, and this is one of them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I shouldn't have said raise or fold. I was going back and forth between here and playing and didn't take the time to elaborate. I read through the OP's post quickly and that was my initial reaction.

What I should have said is without a read it's a clear fold imho.

But I still believe that raising is better than calling although I wouldn't do either one here. This is not just a weak draw, this is a case where you are drawing nearly dead if someone has a 7. I wouldn't be raising for value. I know I don't have equity here. I wouldn't really be raising for a free card in the traditional sense of a free card, either. IF I decided for some reason to continue in the hand, I would be raising not for a free card towards my draw as much as I would be raising in an attempt to get to the showdown cheaper. Here's why:

Calling invites a bet on the turn and river. If your card comes off on the turn, you have to call again and of course you are going to be calling the river as well unless your miracle boat card comes off. If either one of these guys has a 7, you need runner runner KK or QQ to win this pot. The only possible reason for continuing in this hand would be that we are reasonably certain that neither one of these guys has a 7.

If you raise the flop and it's 3-bet, fold. It costs half a bet more than calling and without a read, you can be pretty sure that you're up against trips. For that half a bet extra on the flop, though, a few good things can happen. Maybe they both fold. You never know. .50/1 PP players do strange things. Also, we may take control of the hand and buy ourselves a couple of options on the turn. Maybe a blank comes off and it gets checked through, which is good for us. Maybe it gets checked through even though one of them has a 7 and they were hoping to checkraise the turn. Maybe a K or Q comes off and it gets checked to us.

I believe that the benefits of throwing in the extra .5 BB on the flop outweigh the benefits of getting to the turn cheap because I believe that it will save bets on the turn and possibly the river as well.

There are no reads here, so what do we think here as far as whether or not the SB has a 7? Coinflip? If we're thinking that it's 50/50 then are we going to call hoping to hit a weak draw that is guaranteed to not be good half the time even if we hit it? Whatever we decide the odds are that one of these guys is holding a 7, we need to discount our outs accordingly. It's a clear fold to me.

[GrunchCan]

Interesting.

I raise the turn because I think I have the best hand nearly 50% of the time.

Discuss.

[tiltaholic]

you 3-bet this turn?

with no reads on SB or UTG, i'm folding.

i doubt I am good &gt;50% of the time here...and why do you bring up "50%" with 2 opponents? shouldn't it be &gt;33%?

trying to explain my confusion in the spirit of thinking out loud...

[homebrewer]

I'm with SCfuji on this. I'm really tempted to fold this flop too - (3 others still in the hand).

Is this weak? Or is this fixing a leak?

[waynethetrain]

I fold the flop.

The best case scenario is that you have 6 outs which would make it fine to call. However, with the SB leading out into 4 other players I think there is a reasonable chance you are either behind or he has similar/better overcards (AQo) -possible domination.

I discount the overcards and fold.

Given that you played and caught the Q, I think it gets tough because it's possible UTG slowed played trips and you still have to worry about the SB having AQ or better and reraising. I think I would call and see if the SB raised back (which he didn't). Then I would call down. However, it's not clear cut. It's a close call between calling and folding.

[KaiShin]

[ QUOTE ]
you 3-bet this turn?

with no reads on SB or UTG, i'm folding.

i doubt I am good &gt;50% of the time here...and why do you bring up "50%" with 2 opponents? shouldn't it be &gt;33%?

trying to explain my confusion in the spirit of thinking out loud...

[/ QUOTE ]

Work out the probability that any of your three opponents has a 7. Then work out the probability that any of your three opponents has exactly AQ. Add the two, it should be less than 50%.

I'd post my workup but I have to run now.

[GrunchCan]

[ QUOTE ]
i doubt I am good &gt;50% of the time here...and why do you bring up "50%" with 2 opponents? shouldn't it be &gt;33%?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and you have inadvertantly explained my reasoning, in a way. In order to raise for value, we need at least 34% equity in this pot given that there are 2 opponents. I feel we have the best hand close to 50% of the time, which is obviously higher than the requisite 33%.

Therefore I raise to extract more best from SB. If SB folds, then we have also increased our chances to win the pot by taking it HU. I see nothing but good coming from 3-betting.

I'm not saying this is right - it might be wrong. Which is why I called for discussion.

[tiltaholic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you 3-bet this turn?

with no reads on SB or UTG, i'm folding.

i doubt I am good &gt;50% of the time here...and why do you bring up "50%" with 2 opponents? shouldn't it be &gt;33%?

trying to explain my confusion in the spirit of thinking out loud...

[/ QUOTE ]

Work out the probability that any of your three opponents has a 7. Then work out the probability that any of your three opponents has exactly AQ. Add the two, it should be less than 50%.

I'd post my workup but I have to run now.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes. but not the point. when unknown player springs to life on this board does not the probability he holds a "7" increase by a lot?

[tiltaholic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i doubt I am good &gt;50% of the time here...and why do you bring up "50%" with 2 opponents? shouldn't it be &gt;33%?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and you have inadvertantly explained my reasoning, in a way. In order to raise for value, we need at least 34% equity in this pot given that there are 2 opponents. I feel we have the best hand close to 50% of the time, which is obviously higher than the requisite 33%.

Therefore I raise to extract more best from SB. If SB folds, then we have also increased our chances to win the pot by taking it HU. I see nothing but good coming from 3-betting.

I'm not saying this is right - it might be wrong. Which is why I called for discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

oh, cryptic punchbowl...
(i thought i was going crazy there)

ok. i think 50% is waaay high. seeing that SB checked the river biases me. but had the action stopped at our decision point on the turn i'd say that it's pretty close to 1 in 3 that either of the two of them has a 7. but I could be wrong about that... (and i feel like i'm not giving enough respect to turn raises these days). any read would help...

[waynethetrain]

[ QUOTE ]
when unknown player springs to life on this board does not the probability he holds a "7" increase by a lot?


[/ QUOTE ]

IMO Yes.

I think it is a common analysis error to assume random distribution. I see the same thing when people analyze the flop when estimating the chances a player has an A or K etc...

Once a hand is actually played, the chances it contains an A or K is higher than random because a high percentage of playable hands contain those cards.

Actually coming up with a percentage is often one part numerical and one part art.

[Isura]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The free card play alone is *NOT* enough to justify raising. In fact, you generally should avoid a free card play with a weak draw. It's too expensive when it fails. The free card play is not too likely to work because you have a larger field.

Raising opens yourself up to a 3-bet, which is bad because you're compelled to see the turn by then due to the pot size being quite large.

The only other reason to raise when closing the action is that you have a strong hand or strong draw that you want to raise for value. This hand clearly does not satisfy that condition.

Raising is the worst of the three options.

Folding and calling are close together, with folding being slightly better. You don't have 6 full outs, but it's probably closer to 3 because of all the callers. You have almost the right odds to make a call for 3 outs, but you've got reverse implied odds working against you (you don't want action if you hit your hand because it probably means you're beat). These two things make folding look better than calling.

But calling here would be a "loose flop call", and not a complete disaster.

You've got to be careful with the "raise-or-fold" line, because there are lots of places it simply doesn't apply, and this is one of them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I shouldn't have said raise or fold. I was going back and forth between here and playing and didn't take the time to elaborate. I read through the OP's post quickly and that was my initial reaction.

What I should have said is without a read it's a clear fold imho.

But I still believe that raising is better than calling although I wouldn't do either one here. This is not just a weak draw, this is a case where you are drawing nearly dead if someone has a 7. I wouldn't be raising for value. I know I don't have equity here. I wouldn't really be raising for a free card in the traditional sense of a free card, either. IF I decided for some reason to continue in the hand, I would be raising not for a free card towards my draw as much as I would be raising in an attempt to get to the showdown cheaper. Here's why:

Calling invites a bet on the turn and river. If your card comes off on the turn, you have to call again and of course you are going to be calling the river as well unless your miracle boat card comes off. If either one of these guys has a 7, you need runner runner KK or QQ to win this pot. The only possible reason for continuing in this hand would be that we are reasonably certain that neither one of these guys has a 7.

If you raise the flop and it's 3-bet, fold. It costs half a bet more than calling and without a read, you can be pretty sure that you're up against trips. For that half a bet extra on the flop, though, a few good things can happen. Maybe they both fold. You never know. .50/1 PP players do strange things. Also, we may take control of the hand and buy ourselves a couple of options on the turn. Maybe a blank comes off and it gets checked through, which is good for us. Maybe it gets checked through even though one of them has a 7 and they were hoping to checkraise the turn. Maybe a K or Q comes off and it gets checked to us.

I believe that the benefits of throwing in the extra .5 BB on the flop outweigh the benefits of getting to the turn cheap because I believe that it will save bets on the turn and possibly the river as well.

There are no reads here, so what do we think here as far as whether or not the SB has a 7? Coinflip? If we're thinking that it's 50/50 then are we going to call hoping to hit a weak draw that is guaranteed to not be good half the time even if we hit it? Whatever we decide the odds are that one of these guys is holding a 7, we need to discount our outs accordingly. It's a clear fold to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree with your reasoning for raising the flop. For one, the free card play is overused and not very effective in small stakes games. Players will still bet the turn hands if they hit a pair: expect to be bet into if an overcard 8-J comes. Also, you want to see a free showdown, but what's the advantage of having a free showdown? There's no value in getting to showdown King, and you would probably call with a pair in this pot anyways. And call the turn after a raise is horrible. How many outs do you think you really have when someone bets the turn. Less than 3 I would say.
Check out Clarkmeister's LL Post (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&amp;Number=321233&amp;page=&amp;view=&amp;sb=5&amp;o =&amp;fpart=all&amp;vc=1) for a good discussion of the free card (and other topics).

[deepsquat]

UTG shows 66
SB shows 33

UTG wins 13BB

WTF??

dont knows whose dumber me, utg or sb

[Aaron W.]

[ QUOTE ]
But I still believe that raising is better than calling although I wouldn't do either one here. This is not just a weak draw, this is a case where you are drawing nearly dead if someone has a 7. I wouldn't be raising for value. I know I don't have equity here. I wouldn't really be raising for a free card in the traditional sense of a free card, either. IF I decided for some reason to continue in the hand, I would be raising not for a free card towards my draw as much as I would be raising in an attempt to get to the showdown cheaper.

[/ QUOTE ]

Going for a cheap showdown from the flop in a 4-handed pot is a bad idea with KQ. You don't have showdown value unless you improve, so trying to get to the showdown doesn't do anything but lose money.

[ QUOTE ]
Here's why:

Calling invites a bet on the turn and river. If your card comes off on the turn, you have to call again and of course you are going to be calling the river as well unless your miracle boat card comes off. If either one of these guys has a 7, you need runner runner KK or QQ to win this pot. The only possible reason for continuing in this hand would be that we are reasonably certain that neither one of these guys has a 7.

[/ QUOTE ]

In a pot that was raised preflop, "reasonably" certain could be as small as 25%. We're fighting for big pot that was built by raising preflop.

[ QUOTE ]
If you raise the flop and it's 3-bet, fold. It costs half a bet more than calling and without a read, you can be pretty sure that you're up against trips. For that half a bet extra on the flop, though, a few good things can happen. Maybe they both fold. You never know. .50/1 PP players do strange things. Also, we may take control of the hand and buy ourselves a couple of options on the turn. Maybe a blank comes off and it gets checked through, which is good for us. Maybe it gets checked through even though one of them has a 7 and they were hoping to checkraise the turn. Maybe a K or Q comes off and it gets checked to us.

I believe that the benefits of throwing in the extra .5 BB on the flop outweigh the benefits of getting to the turn cheap because I believe that it will save bets on the turn and possibly the river as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

The argument here is starting to fall apart. I wouldn't gamble in this spot on "strange things". The reason is that collectively, your opponents will probably end up playing decently. The liklihood of them all folding is basically nil even though it's entirely possible that the one of them will fold. While the initally bettor may not bet the turn, it's pretty likely that someone will bet the turn. This raise-and-a-prayer move isn't going to be a long term winner.