I get checkraised with TPMK and weak ass flush draw

[brettbrettr]

good party 10/20 game, I'm in MP3 with A/images/graemlins/club.gif9/images/graemlins/spade.gif, folds to MP2 who limps (300 hands: 24/5/1.81), I raise, blinds call

4 to the flop of 8sbs: A /images/graemlins/spade.gif5 /images/graemlins/spade.gif3 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

checked to me, I bet, MP2 calls.

turn(5bbs): T /images/graemlins/heart.gif

I bet, MP2 check raises. Plan?

[Nick C]

I would probably call it down, no matter what fell on the river.

[KDawgCometh]

something in me is telling me to three bet it for some reason. NOw this guy has an avg. ag factor. Is he capable of CR bluffing or CR semi-bluffing this turn here, if you haven't seen that type of action from him before, I'd call down

[Towelie]

Call down.

[Entity]

No one considers folding here?

[KDawgCometh]

[ QUOTE ]
No one considers folding here?

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't think I do. this guy's ag factor is high enough to say that he *might* not have a flush, and that our TPMK *could* be good. I just wonder how often this villian CR bluffs at this type of board

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No one considers folding here?

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't think I do. this guy's ag factor is high enough to say that he *might* not have a flush, and that our TPMK *could* be good. I just wonder how often this villian CR bluffs at this type of board

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll be honest and say I think you're drawing dead here a very substantial portion of the time.

Rob

[toby]

Can't speak for the 10/20 game, but in 2/4 and 3/6 I'm calling down and expecting to win. Now that I think about it, if I'm expecting to win, a 3-bet is better.

[bdk3clash]

I think this is a relatively easy call on the turn getting 8:1 with a potential flush redraw and outs to counterfeit some of MP2's flopped two-pair hands. I'm not showdown committed on the river necessarily (it depends...), and I'm too lazy/too bad of a player to figure out discounted outs and such, but 8:1 should be plenty to call the turn, especially when you add the river bet you'll collect if he check-calls a rivered fourth /images/graemlins/spade.gif with his two-pair/set.

[bdk3clash]

There is no way that you should 3-bet here. You'll get called by better hands and 4-bet by much better hands. Simple player profiling and hand-reading suggests that you are probably not winning at this point. You've probably got outs. Call.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
Can't speak for the 10/20 game, but in 2/4 and 3/6 I'm calling down and expecting to win. Now that I think about it, if I'm expecting to win, a 3-bet is better.

[/ QUOTE ]

A 3-bet is pretty terrible here. I geniunely think it's close between a fold and a call, intending to fold the river UI. I don't think calling down is a good idea period.

I'm doing the math right now but I think you're drawing dead a much higher portion of the time than most of you are giving credit.

Rob

[KDawgCometh]

what is your play UI on the river, fold to a bet?

[Entity]

Meh. So we're getting 8:1. Pretty decent odds actually. The strength of his hand alongside his passivity is almost always 2pr+, so I think we can fairly accurately identify his range of hands that he plays this way. I'm going with something like:

Suited midgrade connectors (T9s+) - these hands are often limped by a player who is fairly passive preflop but not particularly loose. Of those we have JTs, QTs, KTs, QJs, KJs, J8s, Q8s, K7s, K6s. I think KQs is generally a raise for this sort of player so I've tossed it. These estimates come from the stove but I think they're fairly close. These are the hands we're drawing dead to -- 9 hands total. 0 outs.

Of Aces, his limping range is generally A8o-AJo here, and all suited Aces. Again, an estimate based on hand values from the stove.

So we have: A5s, A2s, ATs -- 2 combinations of each smaller Ace, and two combinations of ATs. That's 6. That's 4 hands we have 15 outs against and two hands we have 7 outs against.

We also have 3 combinations each of 33 and 55, and a slowplayed AA for 2 more (discounted due to the likelihood that he'd raise it but not definite, since this sort of player likes to be tricky). We have 8 outs against each of those hands.

Overall my math guesstimates we've got about 6 outs, in general, against his range of hands. We need about 6.67:1 and we're getting 8:1, so we can call profitably. I'm not sure how to take into consideration reverse-implied odds, however, since my calculations assume that we're calling any /images/graemlins/spade.gif, Ten, or 9 on the river. 5.1 outs is about our breakeven point for calling here, discounting implied odds.

I'm really tired so my math may be a bit off on this one, but I do think it's worth sticking behind the points that I don't think we should be calling the river UI against this player, and that 3-betting is fairly terrible.

Rob

[arch12]

I'm actually very surprised you played this hand at all. I was expecting to see a number of posts questioning why you raised this preflop, as I was of the belief A9os is junk. Am I missing something? The way I see it, a somewhat tight, passive preflop player has limped ahead of you. Given his preflop passiveness it is quite possible you are predominated by A10-AQ and behind a multitude of his possible starting hands. You are also out of position. This leads me to believe you should muck this without a second thought. I really don't think there is anyway to play A9os in MP with a limper in.

[KDawgCometh]

this raise is pretty easy. We want to isolate the limper with what might rate to be the superior hand. even if we don't have a superior hand, we have fold equity so we can make up for any lost equity through being able to make him fold hands that could have us beat

[Nick C]

For what it's worth, 1.81 isn't really that passive, especially if Villain likes to checkraise a lot.

You may be right that folding UI on the river is best, though. I was thinking Villain could be checkraising the turn with a worse (probably suited) ace, but this may be unrealistic. I was thinking there's also some chance of a checkraise semi-bluff with, say, an otherwise unimproved pocket pair that contains a /images/graemlins/spade.gif. This could be unrealistic too.

I think it's hard to tell from the numbers alone, though. They suggest a preflop range, but I think the 1.81 is harder to interpret.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
For what it's worth, 1.81 isn't really that passive, especially if Villain likes to checkraise a lot.

You may be right that folding UI on the river is best, though. I was thinking Villain could be checkraising the turn with a worse (probably suited) ace, but this may be unrealistic. I was thinking there's also some chance of a checkraise semi-bluff with, say, an otherwise unimproved pocket pair that contains a /images/graemlins/spade.gif. This could be unrealistic too.

I think it's hard to tell from the numbers alone, though. They suggest a preflop range, but I think the 1.81 is harder to interpret.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're giving someone with 1.8 aggression credit for being way more aggressive than they are.

Brad and I both agree that there is minimal, if any, chance you are ahead right now. The question really is whether or not you have enough outs on average to continue against his range, obviously.

Rob

[Nick C]

[ QUOTE ]
Brad and I both agree that there is minimal, if any, chance you are ahead right now. The question really is whether or not you have enough outs on average to continue against his range, obviously.

[/ QUOTE ]

You and Shill are probably right.

Occasionally my memories of LAGgy Party 2/4 tables creep into my posts.

Also, I did misread the action at first and thought the pot was heads-up on the flop, which I think could make some difference if it were true (though, admittedly, one difference is that the pot would be smaller).

[arch12]

I think isolation plays should be reserved for late position and looser players. As I said, A9os doesn't stack up well against the opponent's likely holdings. Should a player overcall, or the blinds complete (as they did in this case) you’re in quite a problematic situation. The presence of other players also hurts your fold equity. If you are unable to win the hand early, it is highly unlikely you will win at showdown, even if you do manage to catch a pair. I believe A9os is too weak a hand to attempt an isolation play out of position; unless the table is remarkably tight. With that being said, I have very limited experience on 10/20, and thus my advice is based on my lower limits experiences. I’m curious to know if anyone attempts this sort of isolation play at 5/10 to 2/4.

[toby]

Do you think the limits make a difference? In practice I would call down and not 3-bet, but given the quality of players at 2/4 a 3-bet may be in order. 10/20 I suppose they are smarter on average and wouldn't have something like J /images/graemlins/spade.gifT /images/graemlins/heart.gif

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think the limits make a difference? In practice I would call down and not 3-bet, but given the quality of players at 2/4 a 3-bet may be in order. 10/20 I suppose they are smarter on average and wouldn't have something like J /images/graemlins/spade.gifT /images/graemlins/heart.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

A 3-bet is bad against all but the most LAGtastic opponents, regardless of what level you're playing. Given that this opponent isn't particularly aggressive, it doesn't matter much whether we're playing .25/.5 or 30/60 here.

Rob

[KDawgCometh]

ummmm, the HiJack is late position. The limper also open limped from MP2. these things are important. 10/20 in this situation is a much different game. Unlike in Entity's post where the turn play considering this opponent is not limit specific, here with the PF play, the limit does come into play.I would make this play at 5/10 for sure, and even 3/6, but I wouldn't make this play unless the blinds were tight at 2/4. A bad 10/20 player is miles better than a bad 2/4 player

[brettbrettr]

[ QUOTE ]
A bad 10/20 player is miles better than a bad 2/4 player

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. You're saying I should fold pre-flop?

[callmedonnie]

this sucks. I consider folding, but he's not quite passive enough for that. I think calling down might be best. this really sucks. i mean, really.

you think a 9 high flush is good? what is annoying is that he could be limping there w/ a suited broadway, like qj or kq. it doesn't look like he raises pf all that much. he would probably limp w/ suited connectors i'm assuming too though. maybe i'm wrong.

What do you think his range is?

[krimson]

To me MP2 looks like he has a semi-strong hand, but was looking for a safe turn card before c/r'ing us for value. A5s, A3s, 55 and 33 all fit into our read, and fit the line he took. I would call down with intention of folding the river u/i.

[Nick C]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Brad and I both agree that there is minimal, if any, chance you are ahead right now. The question really is whether or not you have enough outs on average to continue against his range, obviously.

[/ QUOTE ]

You and Shill are probably right.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oops. I didn't realize bdk3clash's name is also Brad and thought you were referring to Shillx.

So I wanted to correct my mistake, but if the discussion continues after this bump, that's fine by me. I think this is an interesting hand.

[KDawgCometh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A bad 10/20 player is miles better than a bad 2/4 player

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. You're saying I should fold pre-flop?

[/ QUOTE ]


not in the slightest. I'm raising that hand PF there all day and all night long

[brettbrettr]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A bad 10/20 player is miles better than a bad 2/4 player

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. You're saying I should fold pre-flop?

[/ QUOTE ]


not in the slightest. I'm raising that hand PF there all day and all night long

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand this then:

[ QUOTE ]
would make this play at 5/10 for sure, and even 3/6, but I wouldn't make this play unless the blinds were tight at 2/4. A bad 10/20 player is miles better than a bad 2/4 player

[/ QUOTE ]

The blinds folded to my flop bet.

[KDawgCometh]

[ QUOTE ]



I don't understand this then:

[ QUOTE ]
would make this play at 5/10 for sure, and even 3/6, but I wouldn't make this play unless the blinds were tight at 2/4. A bad 10/20 player is miles better than a bad 2/4 player

[/ QUOTE ]

The blinds folded to my flop bet.

[/ QUOTE ]


cause the guy who I was saying the 2/4-10/20 line to was saying that he wouldn't do this at 2/4. THe reason that I would do this is that because a bad 10/20 player is better than a bad 2/4 player is that they can fold. THe games are also tighter so, you need to utilize position, and A9o is a good hand to raise with in your position and an open donker in front of you

[arch12]

[ QUOTE ]
ummmm, the HiJack is late position. The limper also open limped from MP2. these things are important. 10/20 in this situation is a much different game. Unlike in Entity's post where the turn play considering this opponent is not limit specific, here with the PF play, the limit does come into play.I would make this play at 5/10 for sure, and even 3/6, but I wouldn't make this play unless the blinds were tight at 2/4. A bad 10/20 player is miles better than a bad 2/4 player

[/ QUOTE ]

When I said late position I was referring to the CO and the button, just to clear that up. I don't really understand the point you're trying to make here. I feel the fact that MP2 opted to open limp suggests a greater deal of strength than you give credit. Since he is opening it is unlikely he has a speculative drawing hand. It's also unlikely he has a small/med pair, or a marginal hand like KQ/KJ as he would tend to open raise these (this may be open to debate based on his low pfr). So what exactly are you ahead of? I think a limp in this situation suggests far more strength than a raise would. It appears to me he has a big hand, possibly a strong pocket pair, AK or a strong A suit, and is trying to induce players to call. I feel the action on the turn supports this.

I think the fact that players are generally better at 10/20 is all the more reason to fold this hand. While you're fold equity does indeed increase, the player's starting hands range decreases and thus it is highly likely you are behind preflop. I also think that if you give a player credit for playing a hand according to position, it's very likely his aware you are raising him with better position and thus he will adjust accordingly (i.e. Call down more, semi-bluff a draw, leading to a decrease in your fold equity). I'd also like to add that MP2 does not appear to a bad player (based on his stats) and it be would a mistake to treat him as one.

I thought based on your post; you would be more likely to attempt this play at 2/4. As it is more likely a typical 2/4er will open limp with a number of hands you are ahead of. While the blinds being loose does pose somewhat of a problem, I feel you are in a better position with this sort of hand against weaker opponents.

Sorry to reopen the discussion on this, but I'm curious to know what starting hands you put MP2 on when he open limps.

[arch12]

After reading entity's thoughts on his possible starting hands, it's probable I may be giving this player too much credit, and he may well open limp with a little suited Broadway. I'm still in strong doubt as to whether I would play this on preflop, as I still feel it can lead to all sorts of trouble. With that being said, I feel my previous post made some very valid points, and would still like to hear your thoughts.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry to reopen the discussion on this, but I'm curious to know what starting hands you put MP2 on when he open limps.


[/ QUOTE ]
Suited connectors, especially broadway ones; medium pairs; Axs with x being J and below; any two unraisible broadways, suited or unsuited.

A9o is an easy raise. Even if you narrow villian's range further than I did, his limp says he has a speculative hand and is susceptible to being pushed off a hand that doesn't hit/improve. The downside to raising here isn't that you're worried about villian, it's that if someone behind you calls or 3-bets, they'll have position and likely a better hand than you.