Hand from the casino

Location: Live 3/6 Hold Em' at Soaring Eagle Casino

Players Involved: Me $140, Villian(1) $80 (LAG), Villian(2) $220ish (very weak passive)

Preflop: I am in BB with A/images/graemlins/diamond.gifK/images/graemlins/diamond.gif -- Everyone limps to Villian(2) in LP who raises -- folded to Me, I reraise -- Villian(1) coldcalls both raises in MP, and Villian(2) calls -- 3 players to the flop

Flop: 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 8/images/graemlins/club.gif -- I bet, Villian(1) calls, Villian(2) calls.

Turn: K/images/graemlins/club.gif -- I bet, Villian(1) curses outloud and folds, Villian(2) raises, I reraise, Villian(2) calls.

River: 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif -- I check, Villian(2)bets, I call.

I'll post the results of the hand later. However, I have a couple of questions about my play during the course of this hand...

Preflop I think I played the hand fine?

On the flop, I think my bet is reasonable considering my draw and with that kind of low flop I figured my Ace high maybe good.

Turn, If I didnt hit my A, K, or /images/graemlins/diamond.gif, I was going to check and then fold this turn if I was bet into... When I hit my king, I felt it was probably the best hand and I should bet. When Villian(2) reraised it seemed very out of character and I felt she was trying to take the pot down or maybe was trying to protect a high pocket pair like 10's - Q's. So I felt my hand was still good and I reraised with the intention of getting her to fold her lower pair or give up her attempt to buy the pot. I was shocked when she called my reraise, and then I felt I might be up against a flopped set, and I wanted to see a showdown as cheap as possible unless I hit an A,K, or /images/graemlins/diamond.gif on the river.

River, I check when the blank hits with the intention of calling her river bet to see a showdown.

So my questions are; Is betting out on the turn wrong here? And should I have not reraised and instead folded? And then my river call, is this also a bad play, given the turn action?

Thanks in advance for all the analysis, I really appreciate it. I will post the hand results after I get some feedback. Thanks again.

[brettbrettr]

This hand is very nicely formatted.

(Bet the river.)

Thanks for compliment and the quick reply /images/graemlins/smile.gif

You say bet this river. Do you think the Kings are good? And what would you do if she raises again?

I'm curious because I honestly felt It was a calldown situation, maybe im playing too scared myself?

[1800GAMBLER]

I am going to reply to every thread in small stacks on the first page because i am drunk and can't sleep in this state.

You should post in more readable form, (number) is crazy, and bet the river, if you thought you were good on the turn to 3 bet, when he just calls you should be even more confident. You should also read TOP river play about being out of position on the river, you don't have to be winning 50% to justify a river bet here.

Good luck.

[brettbrettr]

The more I think about it the more I like the river action. I think the turn reraise was justified b/c of your diamond outs. But weak passives don't raise this turn all that often with hands that don't beat one pair and you do want to show this down. Check-call, I think, is the right river play.

[shark6]

[ QUOTE ]
Villian(2) $220ish (very weak passive)


[/ QUOTE ]

Given he/she is very weak passive and raised numerous limpers PF and then raised the turn after you showed that much aggression makes me think he/she has AA/KK or maybe another AK.

In any event, when a very weak passive player raises the turn it generally means they can beat top pair.

I'd call the turn raise because you have the flush redraw, and call the river because the pot is so big if you miss your flush.

[Nick C]

[ QUOTE ]
Turn, If I didnt hit my A, K, or /images/graemlins/diamond.gif, I was going to check and then fold this turn if I was bet into...

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not a good plan. Generally speaking, it's bad to fold flush draws, and here you have two big overcards to go with your nut flush draw. Plus, the pot isn't small, and the board isn't even paired.

Up until this hand, I dont think I had seen her raise in the 2 hours she had been at my table... So thats why the turn raise was very out of character for her. After she raised I figured I was behing in the hand and drawing to my diamond outs or another K, and honestly I don't even think I would have been comfortable spiking an A on the river as I put her on a set at that point in time.

Anyways the results are listed in white below for anyone that cares, and hopefully I can get some more analysis on this hand.
<font color="white"> I call her bet and she reluctantly shows her QQ Shocked I flip over my AK. I guess my original turn read on her was correct. Even knowing the outcome, I still dont think I could have been comfortable leadinng out on this river here. Is that a problem?</font> <font color="#666666"> </font>

-----EDIT-----

Ok, I can see why my plan to check fold might be a little weak considering my hand and possibilites, I just figured when they both called the Flop I might have been behind in the hand. Sometimes I play scared and a little weak myself, thats a whole in my game Im still trying to work on. I just don't know if I could have even felt comfortable leading or check calling a turn bet with out hitting anything? Ill have to work on that aspect of my game.

[Piiop]

[ QUOTE ]
The more I think about it the more I like the river action. I think the turn reraise was justified b/c of your diamond outs. But weak passives don't raise this turn all that often with hands that don't beat one pair and you do want to show this down. Check-call, I think, is the right river play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh, she didn't cap preflop and there are no other broadways for her to have a set with. I'd bet.

[chief444]

If you bet the river and the opponent calls you're ahead more often than if you check the river, the weak tight opponent bets, and you call. This is why you should bet the river even if you think you're behind. Worse hands will call but not many worse hands will bet for you.

[Nick C]

[ QUOTE ]
When I hit my king, I felt it was probably the best hand and I should bet. When Villian(2) reraised it seemed very out of character and I felt she was trying to take the pot down or maybe was trying to protect a high pocket pair like 10's - Q's. So I felt my hand was still good and I reraised with the intention of getting her to fold her lower pair or give up her attempt to buy the pot. I was shocked when she called my reraise, and then I felt I might be up against a flopped set, and I wanted to see a showdown as cheap as possible unless I hit an A,K, or /images/graemlins/diamond.gif on the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think if her turn bet was out of character, that probably means she likes her hand, not that she's trying to buy the pot. So I don't think you should be too surprised when she doesn't fold to your 3-bet.

By the way, if she had a hand like JJ (I doubt this, though), you'd be better off if she called than if she folded. Although she might get lucky and river a set, she wouldn't have the odds to call.

If there's a good enough chance that you have the best hand (versus, say, your opponent's KQ) or that you and your opponent have the same hand and you're freerolling (since you have a flush draw with your AK), then I think the 3-bet is all right. But if it's a good 3-bet, it's good because it's for value. I really doubt she's folding a better hand, and I also doubt she has (and will fold) a hand like T9 or 98 that you'd like to drive out. People do silly things at a poker table sometimes, but I don't see raise-fold turn lines in big pots all that often, and when someone does take such a line, I figure that person's hand probably wasn't very good and didn't have much in the way of potential outs.

Thanks again for all the analysis and information so far, I really appreciate it.

I see what your saying Nick C, and I think your logic makes a lot for sense then mine did at the time haha. I guess I got a little flustered having a lady the age of my mom playing back at me like that (I'm 18 and this was my first time ever playing limit hold em' and playing in a casino hah)

I see what your saying about not wanting a hand like JJ to fold here. And the more I think about it, it was a bad read of me to put her on a bluff attempt consdiering her weak passive nature. Your analysis really helped, Thanks a lot.

I'm still confused on why its acceptable and the right move to bet this river though, I can't figure it out. I guess my noobishness and hidden passive nature is coming out haha.

Thanks again guys and keep the advice coming.

[brettbrettr]

See Chief's post above. It e3xplains the river play quite well.

[chief444]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess I got a little flustered having a lady the age of my mom playing back at me like that

[/ QUOTE ]
Just think how she felt.

As for the river, this is one where if you had position and she's that passive you could probably check through after 3-betting the turn. But being OOP against a very passive player (especially a loose/passive player) it's pretty much always correct to bet any hand on the river that you think might be good as opposed to check/calling. I can't think of any situation against this type of player where check/call would be correct. Either bet/fold, bet/call, or check/fold. Just get check/call out of your mind against loose very passive opponents. Against an aggressive opponent check/calling is OK.

Thanks alot Chief for the explanation, it cleared some things up for me. And hopefully, this will help me from turning into the "calling stations" we see all to often at the tables in the future.

I understand why to be this river now though, thanks again. What would you guys do though if she raises again on the river, call or fold it?

CALL IT! The pot is too big to give up on it. It costs you one more bet to call, but you would certainly lose all those bets in the pot if you fold. But I am a beginner, so take my advice with a grain of salt.
Shoeguy

P.S. Don't keep us hanging too long what was the outcome?

[chief444]

If she's that passive you could probably fold. But that's really a judgement call. It's hard for me to say without actually being there. I'm just going by your description. Do you think if you bet the river she would have raised? I'm really doubting it. So probably fold. But really anything she just calls with on the turn she's just calling with on the river unimproved.

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I guess I got a little flustered having a lady the age of my mom playing back at me like that

[/ QUOTE ]
Just think how she felt.

As for the river, this is one where if you had position and she's that passive you could probably check through after 3-betting the turn. But being OOP against a very passive player (especially a loose/passive player) it's pretty much always correct to bet any hand on the river that you think might be good as opposed to check/calling. I can't think of any situation against this type of player where check/call would be correct. Either bet/fold, bet/call, or check/fold. Just get check/call out of your mind against loose very passive opponents. Against an aggressive opponent check/calling is OK.

[/ QUOTE ]

Check/call is often the right move OOP against any type of player. However, for a loose/passive player, the cutoff is 37.5% having the better hand. Getting a ballpark percentage can be difficult; however, I think we're good here more than that so we should bet.

If we felt that we are not good 37.5% of the time, check/call is better against a passive opponent. If we are at least that, we should bet.

The pot size does not matter at that point.

An example from King Yao's book shows this example:

Pot contains 6 big bets. If you bet, opponent calls. If you bet and have the better hand, you win 7 bb. If you check, your passive opponent bets only is sure he has better hand. He bets 25% of the time and checks 75% of the time. (Assume we call). The other 75% of the time he checks, whether or not he has the better hand.

Bet: (25% x 7) + (75% x -1) = + 1.00 bb

Check: (25% X 6) + (25% x -1) + (50% x 0) = +1.25 bb

If you changed the estimate to being good 50% of the time, it looks like this:

Bet = +3.00
Check = +2.75

[brettbrettr]

a cameo...

[chief444]

Owen,

What better hands do you think are checking behind here? I don't think too many. Although I think if you've check/raised the previous street your logic does apply since this opponent will check a two pair type of hand at times fearing the worst. But generally speaking, I don't agree with this. I realize it's straight from the book and I will give you that what I said may not be true all of the time. But I don't really agree with what you listed in general. Does he give any examples?

Matt

Edit...Also, what does pot size have to do with it since he's assuming no raise and no one folds?

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
Owen,

What better hands do you think are checking behind here? I don't think too many. Although I think if you've check/raised the previous street your logic does apply since this opponent will check a two pair type of hand at times fearing the worst. But generally speaking, I don't agree with this. I realize it's straight from the book and I will give you that what I said may not be true all of the time. But I don't really agree with what you listed in general. Does he give any examples?

Matt

Edit...Also, what does pot size have to do with it since he's assuming no raise and no one folds?

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's an example from the book:

[ QUOTE ]
Preflop: I am in BB with AK

Flop: 7 3 8 -- I bet, Villian(1) calls, Villian(2) calls.

Turn: K -- I bet, Villian(1) curses outloud and folds, Villian(2) raises, I reraise, Villian(2) calls.

River: 2 -- I check, Villian(2)bets, I call.

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

no....I'll have to go back and check it out again. I'll look it over and get back to you.

[chief444]

Maybe I will read that one sometime, even though I disagree with the first piece I've seen from it. /images/graemlins/grin.gif Looks interesting.

Yeah definitely let me know if there are any examples or even just post an example if you find one. And make sure it's for against a loose/passive since that's really what I'm thinking is not correct. Thanks.

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
Owen,

What better hands do you think are checking behind here? I don't think too many. Although I think if you've check/raised the previous street your logic does apply since this opponent will check a two pair type of hand at times fearing the worst. But generally speaking, I don't agree with this. I realize it's straight from the book and I will give you that what I said may not be true all of the time. But I don't really agree with what you listed in general. Does he give any examples?

Matt

Edit...Also, what does pot size have to do with it since he's assuming no raise and no one folds?

[/ QUOTE ]

He just used a number...pot size doesn't matter in the math there....it could be any number.

I think you're assuming that any time she bets, we're beat, and I don't think that's the case. Sure, the chances are better that she has the better hand if she bets when checked to, but that doesn't really change anything.

The more I'm typing the more I'm getting a little fuzzy with all this....let me write this hand down and do some work.

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Turn, If I didnt hit my A, K, or /images/graemlins/diamond.gif, I was going to check and then fold this turn if I was bet into...

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not a good plan. Generally speaking, it's bad to fold flush draws, and here you have two big overcards to go with your nut flush draw. Plus, the pot isn't small, and the board isn't even paired.

[/ QUOTE ]

Man...I just caught that statment as well....please don't fold that turn....ever....

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
Owen,

What better hands do you think are checking behind here? I don't think too many. Although I think if you've check/raised the previous street your logic does apply since this opponent will check a two pair type of hand at times fearing the worst. But generally speaking, I don't agree with this. I realize it's straight from the book and I will give you that what I said may not be true all of the time. But I don't really agree with what you listed in general. Does he give any examples?

Matt

Edit...Also, what does pot size have to do with it since he's assuming no raise and no one folds?

[/ QUOTE ]

I shut down my system, went to bed, just thinking, and now I'm back /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Anyway, your logic in this hand I agree with. There are not many better hands checking behind here. I bet this as well as I'm sure we're ahead here at least 40% or chopping anyway...

How about this example I just thought of...

We're in the BB with A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif4 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

EP raises, loose passive lP cold calls, folded to us and we call.

Flop: A /images/graemlins/spade.gif 4 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 7 /images/graemlins/club.gif

EP checks, loose-passive bets, we raise, EP folds, lp calls.

Turn: T /images/graemlins/heart.gif

We bet, loose passive calls

River: 7 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

I think the check makes sense here given King Yao's reasoning.

Thoughts?

I think you were correct to check call the river, you were afraid of trips, but you are getting good pot odds, you cant throw your hand away here. It is heads up and there is a chance you are ahead.

[Jake (The Snake)]

Chief,

King Yao actually had the River section from his book put up online.

http://bj21.com/ads/weighing_the_odds/Weighing%20chap%2015.pdf

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
Chief,

King Yao actually had the River section from his book put up online.

http://bj21.com/ads/weighing_the_odds/Weighing%20chap%2015.pdf

[/ QUOTE ]

Awesome! Thanks Jake for the link!

[chief444]

Sure there checking makes sense because you're never ahead and sometimes chopping. So I'll agree with that one. Good example.

[chief444]

I just glanced quickly at the section Jake gave the link for (thank you Jake BTW) and didn't see the 37.5% anywhere. Did he change that to 25%? Anyway, I'll read it tonight. I need to get some playing in now. Basically I'm assuming (on a fairly drawless board as this is) that this player has you beat almost all of the time when she bets and ALSO that most of the time she checks behind she checks a worse hand that she probably would have called with.

One other comment for now is that this was a live game. Passive live players are really passive as opposed to passive online players who are a little more prone to take an occasional stab especially HU, IMO.

Anyway, I'll give this some more thought as well. But for now as I said I do admit that my advice to NEVER check/call was probably not correct. However, I still think the example in this thread is a clear bet. I also think that if you always bet as opposed to check/call you'd be much better off than vice versa. But that doesn't really contradict the advice you listed from the book.

See you at the tables.

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
Sure there checking makes sense because you're never ahead and sometimes chopping. So I'll agree with that one. Good example.

[/ QUOTE ]

I still think there's a decent chance that they bet JJ or something like that.

[Sarge85]

I'm betting the river approximately 100% of the time.

Sarge/images/graemlins/diamond.gif