Too Aggressive or Good Value Bet?

Typical TAJ 5-10. I called with Q /forums/images/icons/heart.gif T /forums/images/icons/heart.gif 2-off button after 2limpers. CO folded, Button, a decent but predictable regular raised, both blinds folded. Button is capable of by-the-book raises. Blinds folded, everyone called.

Flop K /forums/images/icons/heart.gif 8 /forums/images/icons/diamond.gif 7 /forums/images/icons/heart.gif . Checked to me, I bet with my flush draw. Button raised. Based on my knowledge of him, I narrowed down his hands to AA, KK, or AK. Folded to me, I called.

Turn 9 /forums/images/icons/spade.gif . Now with and open-ender added to my flush draw, I felt my hand was strong enough to bet out and I did. Button raised again and I called.

River 6 /forums/images/icons/diamond.gif . I bet, he called. He turned up KK for a flopped set and said he can't seem to get me out.

[Homer]

Preflop: Fine

Flop: I don't understand why you bet. Your bet has no chance of taking down the pot. The button is likely to raise, given his raise preflop, leaving you heads-up with him. You don't want this, because you want to be paid off by others if your flush gets there. A bet would be more valid if there had not been a preflop raise (a bet now has a chance to win the pot immediately) and/or if your hand contained overcards to the board (if the flop were 9h4d3h, for example, a bet could take the pot down immediately or if not at least possibly clean up your overcard outs). I would definitely check-call here.

Turn: I again don't understand the bet. The button has shown nothing but power. Your bet is no good as a semi-bluff, as he will almost never fold in this situation. He may very well raise again, making you pay two bets to see the river with your draw. The best case scenario is that he will call with the intention of calling you down. Thus, I would again check-call.

River: Given the way you played it, I would likely checkraise the river against a weak or strong opponent. A weak player will only consider that he has a good hand, and will bet. A strong player will consider your actions throughout the hand, will not be able to reasonably put you on a T, and will likely bet. Against an average player, I would bet it myself, as it is likely to be checked through. If you had played it in the manner I suggested, I think a check-raise on the river is best, regardless of who your opponent is.

-- Homer

[davidross]

I really don’t like the bet on the flop. I want those limpers in the pot with me. I would check to the almost certain button bet, then if any one of the limpers called the buttons bet, I would raise trying to trap them for extra bets. If the button 3-bets (I presume he would) I would just call unless we get the limpers to call again. In a 3-way por I would continue to raise whenever possible.

With the strength shown by the button so far I don’t see why you bet the turn. This screams for a check-call. River I think I would go for the check-raise.

[travisand]

I don't agree with the way you played this. It looks like you did just about everything you could to cut down your odds. You are not going to win unless you hit your hand, so I would want all the limpers in that I could possibly get. I would try check-calling next time.

[marbles]

Check-call the flop.
Checkraise the turn, effectively representing JTs. You're unlikely to get 3-bet by KK, and you may get AK to fold unimproved on river.
Bet the river. Nothing quite frightens top set out of betting like a 4-straight board. Checkraising is not worth the risk.

[Homer]

Good point about possibly checkraising the turn (only if heads-up, though).

I don't think AK will lay down on the river, nor do I think KK won't three-bet (err...without the double negs...KK will three-bet), but you may very well get QQ/JJ/TT to fold. QQ might fold immediately to the checkraise, and JJ and TT will probably fold the river, assuming they don't make a straight or a set (a J or T for either hand).

-- Homer

As per my reply to Bob T's post above, I become aggressive with my flush draws on the flop and would bet out if first the first one in. This is one aggressive aspect of my game that I found effective especially when the weakies and new faces are around. I have generally a tight image to pull it off especially later in a game when I have showed some winning hands. In this particular game, I had a good read of my opponent that betting out on the turn after being raised on the flop was for added value (?) with the open-ender and confirming his holdings. If the open-ender did not come I would have checked/call and waited for the river to decide the next action. Guess I was a little too aggressive, but your points are well taken and I may have to re-assess a similar situation in the future. Thanks.

[Ed Miller]

You have the luxury of putting your opponent on a tiny set of hands when he raises the flop. Having done so, why do you bet the turn? Is he going to lay any of those hands down to a turn bet? Despite your big draw, you are a 2-1 dog to make your hand by the river... you lose money on every dollar that goes in the pot on the turn. Your turn bet was very dubious.

[marbles]

"Good point about possibly checkraising the turn (only if heads-up, though)."

--Actually, I figure it would be a good one either heads-up or with 2+ callers. Our hero could be looking at as many as 15 outs... Why not pump the pot?

[Homer]

Hmmm, I agree if the original bettor is unlikely to reraise. If I thought he was going to reraise I would just call.

-- Homer

[marbles]

"Hmmm, I agree if the original bettor is unlikely to reraise. If I thought he was going to reraise I would just call."

--Naturally. Thing is, I'm still playing as if we don't KNOW that he holds KK. It's tough to think of another hand that he could have where he would reraise here. And even KK is not an automatic re-raise given that board and the play to that point.

[leon]

"In this particular game, I had a good read of my opponent that betting out on the turn after being raised on the flop was for added value (?) with the open-ender and confirming his holdings."

I don't understand this statement. You're betting for VALUE on the turn, knowing you're behind? You already seem to have done a nice job putting him on a hand, all of which beat yours. Furthermore, the hands you're putting him on will not fold to a bet on the turn, nor a semi-bluff check raise. In fact, I like the semi-bluff check raise more here b/c at least there's some chance he'll let go. That being said, I would just check/call here, as I agree with your read and most players aren't folding to a check raise on the turn come hell or high water. You're simply putting more money in on the turn with the worst hand.

I actually like the bet on the river. A lot of players in your opponent's position would simply check it down, even with top set. From your play he has to give you a hand with outs after you call his turn raise. From his perspective you might have K10 and picked up an open ender to go with your top pair. Only against a true expert would I check raise the river. A weak player would become enamoured with his top set, but by definition he's weak, and might check this down too. Given you got there you gotta get at least one bet in.

All told, you consistently chose to put more money in with the worst hand on several streets. Ni han sur! /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

Leon

[Jim Easton]

I have to agree with David's advice for the flop. The last thing you want is for the button to raise and drive out your customers when you are on a draw. Check and call, or check and raise if a couple of the limpers to call.

Check and call on the turn, even with the extra straight outs, you're still the underdog.

Those of you following the Inside the Poker Mind threads in the books forum, his "Bad Plays Good Players Make" essay discusses semi-bluffing a flush draw into a sure raise.

[elysium]

played perfectly.

[Homer]

What was played perfectly and why? How about some insight...

-- Homer

Another leak to be plugged!

[Louie Landale]

Doesn't matter what he said: its how he feels, not what he thinks.

You should only bet out on the turn like that if there is some reasonable chance he'll fold; which isn't going to happen if he's got AK or better. Anyway, the bet looks suspicious: it would be a LOT more believable if you check-raised the turn.

Betting into him on the flop isn't so good. You are too likely to get a call or two even if nobody has a King, and if you check he'll probably bet any pair anyway. Again, you are better off check-raising the flop.

- Louie

[rharless]

If you have "confirmed" his holdings on the turn, then wouldn't it have been even more reason to go for a check-raise on the river?

I agree with the other posters' comments about the flop bet having the bad (and entirely predictable) effect of cutting down your odds that you want for your hand.