Bad raise?

[SoBeDude]

converter isn't working for me.

MP to my immediate right raises, I 3 bet with A /images/graemlins/spade.gif K /images/graemlins/club.gif

SB calls, BB folds, MP calls.

Flop is A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 8 /images/graemlins/club.gif 8 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

checked to me, I bet. SB calls, MP folds.

Turn is 3 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

SB checks, I bet. SB check-raises, I 3bet, SB folds.

After he folded I thought about the play. If I'm behind to an 8 I lose more money because I'm not laying it down and he 3bets me. When I'm ahead, I make more *IF* he calls me down, or if he's semi-bluffing a diamond draw.

But my gut still tells me the raise is the right play, especially online, where some crappy ace will probably call me down.

Thoughts, opinions?

-Scott

[TStoneMBD]

i prefer smoothing the turn and raising the river instead.

[DcifrThs]

at higher limits i like a call here.

if he's bluffing or c'ring light or even w/ a draw its likely that you get another bet on river.

if you lose to the draw ev wise its less costly than the bets you earn and save etc.

-Barron

[lil feller]

I think this hand is one of the best examples in a while of what overaggression, programmed by online play, can do to hurt your game. Obviously this guy is a thinker, and is capable of folding a weaker ace. TOP and HPFAP talk about inducing/stopping bluffs, and being careful not to try and stop bluffs from habitual bluffers, rather to induce them to bluff more (hence increasing the size of their mistake). Obviously given the result calling was the better choice, but I think this hand brings up something we all need to remember. Its ok to let bluffers bluff, and you don't always have to raise or fold to make the correct play.

Another thing to consider, however, is that if the Ace on board wasn't the A of /images/graemlins/diamond.gif I think a 3 bet would be better then a call, as its possible that villians ace might contain a turned flushdraw, which we wouldn't mind him folding (not likely, but you never know), and certtainly want to punish if he intends to call.

Interesting hand...

lf

[SoBeDude]

given that this is an online game, I think a weaker ace will call my raise, say AT-AQ...or if he was semi-bluffing the flush draw...

-Scott

[lil feller]

[ QUOTE ]
given that this is an online game, I think a weaker ace will call my raise, say AT-AQ...or if he was semi-bluffing the flush draw...

-Scott

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't you think its a mistake to assume that your opponent is an idiot just because he's playing online. I play online, so do you, and BK, and Schneids and a ton of other smart, tight, thinking winning players. Just because its online doesn't mean the guys a complete tard, as was evidenced by his ability to fold what was either a weaker ace, or a good attempt at a move that he knew couldn't work.

lf

[mach3]

[ QUOTE ]
I think this hand is one of the best examples in a while of what overaggression, programmed by online play, can do to hurt your game. Obviously this guy is a thinker, and is capable of folding a weaker ace. TOP and HPFAP talk about inducing/stopping bluffs, and being careful not to try and stop bluffs from habitual bluffers, rather to induce them to bluff more (hence increasing the size of their mistake). Obviously given the result calling was the better choice, but I think this hand brings up something we all need to remember. Its ok to let bluffers bluff, and you don't always have to raise or fold to make the correct play.


[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent thoughts here...

[SoBeDude]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
given that this is an online game, I think a weaker ace will call my raise, say AT-AQ...or if he was semi-bluffing the flush draw...

-Scott

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't you think its a mistake to assume that your opponent is an idiot just because he's playing online. I play online, so do you, and BK, and Schneids and a ton of other smart, tight, thinking winning players. Just because its online doesn't mean the guys a complete tard, as was evidenced by his ability to fold what was either a weaker ace, or a good attempt at a move that he knew couldn't work.

lf

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure.

And if this player was well known to me, I'd have a better feel on how to play against him. But absent that information, all I can do is try to find the play that is correct in the long run.

So given this board, and the fact that he called the flop bet on a board with essentially no draw, I'm trying to figure out if the turn raise here or a call is the more +EV play.

I don't think an unknown will bluff here very often. I do think an unknown will raise here with another ace, and as a semi-bluff with a flush, both of which will probably call my 3-bet. Of course he will also raise with hands that beat me...

So this still leads me back to my initial question, which is better? the raise or a smoothcall?

-Scott

[hockey1]

A raise on this turn is not EV maximizing. Calling and raising the river gets you just as many BB as a turn raise if he has an A, and may get you one more BB if he's bluffing or has a middle pair or something that he'd have folded to a turn 3-bet but would bet the river with.

[SoBeDude]

[ QUOTE ]
A raise on this turn is not EV maximizing. Calling and raising the river gets you just as many BB as a turn raise if he has an A, and may get you one more BB if he's bluffing or has a middle pair or something that he'd have folded to a turn 3-bet but would bet the river with.

[/ QUOTE ]

True, but I lose the opportunity to collect another bet from him if he's semi-bluffing a flush draw he picked up on the turn. And if he's bluffing and I call, I think it is unlikely he'll take another shot on the river. And he certainly won't check then call my riverbet then.

But in your opinion this still doesn't overcome the loss of the raise encouraging a fold?

-Scott

[hockey1]

Fair points, but in this case I think the turn call is better since the only draw is a diamond draw, which is a relatively unlikely holding for an EP raiser. A pair or a decent A is much more likely.

[lil feller]

[ QUOTE ]
So this still leads me back to my initial question, which is better? the raise or a smoothcall?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you think there is a decent chance that the villian would make this raise w/ a flush draw, I think you have to 3 bet. My only contention is that such a draw is unlikely from a decent player, as he would have had to call the flop w/ 2 suited undercards to the board. If the Ace weren't the A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif, that would make a flush draw much more likely, IMO.

If the villian isn't the type to semi-bluff a flush draw (even if he is the type to raise with a weaker ace) this is a call. Raise the river.

lf

[lil feller]

[ QUOTE ]
And if he's bluffing and I call, I think it is unlikely he'll take another shot on the river. And he certainly won't check then call my riverbet then

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're forgetting about the times he's bluffing and doesn't know it (like when he has Ax).

lf

[SoBeDude]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And if he's bluffing and I call, I think it is unlikely he'll take another shot on the river. And he certainly won't check then call my riverbet then

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're forgetting about the times he's bluffing and doesn't know it (like when he has Ax).

lf

[/ QUOTE ]

I think if he has an ace, he's calling my 3bet well over 90% of the time. Oh and that doesn't qualify as a bluff.

-Scott