pocket pair with an overcard on flop

[sl4v3]

MP2 was 34/1 with postflop AF .86

Party Poker 5/10 Hold'em (7 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is CO with Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif, Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
<font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, MP2 calls, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, SB calls, BB calls, MP2 calls.

Flop: (8 SB) T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 6/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, SB folds, BB folds, MP2 calls.

Turn: (6 BB) 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
MP2 checks, Hero checks.

River: (6 BB) 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">MP2 bets</font>, Hero calls.

Should this have been an easy flop fold given that MP2 is so passive? If so, would this have been a reasonable way to play this hand against a more aggressive player? Thanks.

[einbert]

Betting the turn is much better. He could have a hand with a lot of outs against you, and you can safely fold to a checkraise from this passive of a player.

Against an aggressive player likely to checkraise the turn on a semibluff, my line in this hand is to bet/call the turn and call the river UI. I don't like checking behind the turn because villian could easily have 8 (QJ) or 6 (AJ,AQ) outs against you, and will almost always have at least 5.

[spydog]

I think the player has to be a lot more passive for me to fold this on the flop.

Your line looks OK, especially since there are no flush draws on the board. Another possible line is to bet the turn and check behind on the river.

[spydog]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like checking behind the turn because villian could easily have 8 (QJ) or 6 (AJ,AQ) outs against you, and will almost always have at least 5.

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that Hero has two Queens lessens these possibilities to a large extent.

[einbert]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't like checking behind the turn because villian could easily have 8 (QJ) or 6 (AJ,AQ) outs against you, and will almost always have at least 5.

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that Hero has two Queens lessens these possibilities to a large extent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. But he will still often have 5 outs I think, and I don't want to give him a free card (especially since he is passive and I can safely fold to a checkraise).

Against a very aggressive/tricky player though this (check behind turn call river UI) is becoming closer to the correct line in my eyes.

[littlejohn]

In clarkmeister spirit, I'm going to start replying (whether qualified or not...)

I agree with Spy. The opponent must be much more passive for me to consider laying this down on the flop. For me, it's odd that this "passive" player bets into you on the flop - since most will simply acquiesce to check/call the whole way - afraid that they are already beat by AK.

I like the flop line and like einbert says I bet the turn and consider a check behind on the river.

[which]

I am not sure why you would play it this way. I might play ATs the exact same way as MP2? I limp in hoping to have my loose call pay off, and get raised. I have middle pair top kicker,but with a K out, I need to know where I am. If I check the flop, PFR will almost certainly bet, and I will not know where I am? So the PFR raises anyway? Does he do this to chase me off, or because he has the King? I check the turn since it looks like I am beat,but.. PFR checks behind me? Looks like standard "move" now... So I bet the river figuring if he truly has the King, he would never let a "free" ace river him.

[sfer]

Ni han.

[Stack]

Option 1: Turn: He checks, you bet, he calls
River:He checks, you check

Option 2: Turn: He checks, you check
River:He bets, you call

Looking at these options, I beleive that there are more chances that the opponent has a king in option 1 than in option 2 (I am not saying that he is likely to have it - I am just comparing). That's because in option 1 when he calls the turn you know that he wants to call the river too, and the other reason is that in option 2 his bet can be a bluff/semi bluff induced by your turn check.

I like your line in this situation.

Hope my post made sense (I have trouble explaining with short sentenses in English)

[littlejohn]

[ QUOTE ]
I limp in hoping to have my loose call pay off, and get raised.

[/ QUOTE ]

You shouldn't limp in MP with ATs - but perhaps that's a matter of opinion.

[ QUOTE ]
I have middle pair top kicker,but with a K out, I need to know where I am. If I check the flop, PFR will almost certainly bet, and I will not know where I am? So the PFR raises anyway? Does he do this to chase me off, or because he has the King? I check the turn since it looks like I am beat,but.. PFR checks behind me? Looks like standard "move" now... So I bet the river figuring if he truly has the King, he would never let a "free" ace river him.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly why I bet the turn as hero. If villian has ATs like you say - then this is a value bet, and villian makes a mistake calling your bet here.

As hero, if villian calls the turn bet - and you know he's passive - you check behind the river. I guess you win or lose the same amount of money in the 2 situations and you learn something about your opponent, but if he folds a K9 or K8s or something to your turn bet then you've really forced him to make a mistake.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
In clarkmeister spirit, I'm going to start replying (whether qualified or not...)

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too.

Raising the flop is a must.

Depending on the opponent, I consider turn/river combos of bet/check, check/call(or bet) and bet/bet. I think the differences between them are all small, and the check behind on the turn then call a river bet/bet if checked to line is a solid one.

[sl4v3]

Sorry for reviving this old post, but I've done a lot of thinking about this hand since I posted it a few weeks ago.

As many of you have stated, betting the turn (and checking through on the river) makes it so I'm not giving a free card and gives villain the opportunity to fold. The line I took does not. This is a huge advantage over my line especially when you consider that each line costs exactly the same. So you are essentially getting the opportunity of immediately winning the pot for free (or charging him for his draw). Therefore, betting the turn must always be right if these conditions are met:

1) if I consider checking the turn, I would call a river bet anyway
2) I can comfortably fold a turn check raise

Now, as I write this, I am realizing I didn't take into consideration the case when villain wakes up and comes out betting on the river. If I will call this (I think I usually would), then the betting the turn line costs one more big bet that the checking the turn line. So I guess this is something to take into consideration.

Back to the flop play - it seems I'm the only one that thinks a flop fold isn't totally unreasonable. I think a passive opponent betting into the preflop raiser with 2 other people (besides the preflop raiser) still in the hand will have top pair (or possibly better) about 70% of the time. Don't you think?

[Guruman]

[ QUOTE ]
I think a passive opponent betting into the preflop raiser with 2 other people (besides the preflop raiser) still in the hand will have top pair (or possibly better) about 70% of the time. Don't you think?

[/ QUOTE ]

Harrington says that you should work in a 10% bluff factor to any player's bet. Also, a passive player could bet into you with JJ, AT, QT, 99, and maybe an OESD. 70% may be a touch high.