Review: Hand 39, K8s

[MrWookie47]

SB open-completes. Hero raises, SB calls. Flop comes Axx, one spade. SB check/raises, Hero folds.

I used to play situations like this like hero here, but I've found that I much prefer checking here, and betting any flop when checked to.

[GrunchCan]

Depending on my read of the opponent & how well I think I can control him, I might be very likely to 3-bet the flop.

Your milage may vary.

Edit to add that Hero's line is also my line by default. I wouldn't change it without reads.

[GrunchCan]

By the way, this is hand 39, not 38.

[MrWookie47]

I went back to double check that I had the number correct, saw it was 39, and then typed 38 anyway. It's fixed now.

[jrz1972]

I agree with Wookie on this one. I've found that when it gets folded around to the sb, raising preflop is the poker equivalent of pissing on a wasp nest. It basically invites the other guy to take shots at you later in the hand.

A delayed steal (checking preflop and betting any flop) allows villain to give up the blinds while saving face.

[MN_Mime]

[ QUOTE ]
I've found that when it gets folded around to the sb, raising preflop is the poker equivalent of pissing on a wasp nest.

[/ QUOTE ]

ESPECIALLY in live games where a chop is expected and practical.

EDIT: I think Hero's line is reasonable because the pot is small and you didn't really hit. However, giving up this easily headsup is going to have metagame implications of people taking more shots at you when you raise. SB completed either with something (any ace) or attitude. Without a read, I don't know which. Therefore, the flop isn't really a value bet. I check behind and see what develops. I can auto-raise the turn just as easily as auto-bet the flop and it'll be more apt to pull down the pot right there.

[irishpint]

i disagree, i hate having SB limp on my blind. i'll raise a worse holding than K8s, that's for sure.

I find that when SB completes HU into the BB they are either holding a monster or are very weak but it is usually the latter. By raising I punish him for limping with weak crap and make him think twice about doing that in the future. Itmakes SB less likely to bet into me on the flop unless he hits it and my fold equity goes up when I bet the flop when checked to. This works very well at 2/4.

[tiltaholic]

[ QUOTE ]
I find that when SB completes HU into the BB they are either holding a monster or are very weak but it is usually the latter. By raising I punish him for limping with weak crap and make him think twice about doing that in the future. Itmakes SB less likely to bet into me on the flop unless he hits it and my fold equity goes up when I bet the flop when checked to. This works very well at 2/4.

[/ QUOTE ]

i agree with this completely. so he hit the flop hard this time...we fold

grunch - i thought your default play was check pf and bet any flop?

edit - don't know why i thought the flop was A99.

[MrWookie47]

I very strongly disagree with that sentiment. If SB was trying to steal, the overwhelming percentage of the theives will steal preflop, not on the flop. If he bets on the flop, it almost always means he has a hand, and if you don't, you fold. Easy peasy puddin' pie. If he checks, it overwhelmingly means he missed (he'll miss about 2/3 of the time) and will fold in this tiny pot. When you raise, you bloat the pot. He's much more correct to continue, even with hands that look completely unreasonable. I find my fold equity is much higher when I offer someone 3:1 than 5:1 on the flop.

Also, less likely to open complete when you raise? You give your opponents far too much credit for actually thinking.

[GrunchCan]

[ QUOTE ]
grunch - i thought your default play was check pf and bet any flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that would be OOP. In position, I tend to go for leverage.

But I guess this would depend on the situation and probably my mood. Do you have a link to where I said that?

[ QUOTE ]
If he bets on the flop, it almost always means he has a hand, and if you don't, you fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you serious? Wow that pretty weak tight duder. I expect HU villian's to bet the flop a huge % of the time if we just check in the BB.

[tiltaholic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
grunch - i thought your default play was check pf and bet any flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that would be OOP. In position, I tend to go for leverage.

But I guess this would depend on the situation and probably my mood. Do you have a link to where I said that?

[/ QUOTE ]

you're right. hero was out of position, and it wasn't a blind v. blind situation...

linky (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=micro&Number=3000133&fpart =1&PHPSESSID=)

[MrWookie47]

How often have you just checked in the BB after a SB open complete to even have a sample? I get people checking to me all the time.

Edit: And, seriously, even if you do think he'll bluff at you every time you check in the BB, sometimes you'll be looking down at a 5 high in the smallest pot imaginable. This is still an easy fold. You can't bluff him out of the pot every time, and it's awfully expensive when you fail.

[GrunchCan]

Well, wookie, I generally have felt that your advice is spot on. But if I understand what you suggest, then I just think its wrong here. I don't like all the passivity that you recommend in this spot, especially considering the fact that we are on the button. While I admit that my occasional line to 3-bet the flop is very dangerous, I think that we simply must be more aggressive than you are suggesting here.

We have the button. We have an above average hand. The pot is HU. The SB came in with what appears to be marginal values PF, usually something like 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif5/images/graemlins/club.gif. A rasie PF is good in three ways: 1) It's for value very often 2) It gives us FE on the flop when it misses the opponent, which is most of the time, 3) If the opponent actually has a hand, our PFR will force him to define it on the flop by either donking, CRing or smooth-calling. That is, if we bet the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif 9/images/graemlins/club.gif 2/images/graemlins/diamond.gif flop and the opponent calls, do we really still think he has 75? He might, but usually he has an A, and we can give up with some confidence.

When I've PFRed here and the flp comes, I'll bet most of the time no matter what comes. I'll bet close to 100% when it comes paint-high or somehow coordinated in an obvious way. If it comes raggy with no easily seen draws, I'll check half the time to give myself more FE the next time I bet the A-high flop.

[Shillx]

Depending on who is in the SB, you should sometimes call this down with just K-high. A good player will almost never have an ace in this spot (they usually won't have an x either). Bad player, yeah go ahead fold.

Brad

[MrWookie47]

Here are a few things to thnk about. One, the SB will very, very seldom fold after open-completing, so by raising here, you end up risking two bets to hopefully win three when the SB check/folds the flop. When you check, you're risking one bet to win two. Checking doesn't have to work nearly as often as raising in order for the two to have the same EV.

Two, I'm not saying check any hand here. I'm still raising (roughly, I'm still nailing down my exact range) 55+, A5+, and some better K's, but I think K8 doesn't have a big enough edge preflop to give up on exploiting a huge edge postflop when my opponent whiffs. Keeping the pot size small maximizes his mistakes if a loose, passive opponent chooses to continue in the hand.

Third, sure, this plan is weak against a SB who will open complete and bet any flop. If we're up against such a SB, hopefully any player here is aware enough to figure out what's going on. If that happens, raising preflop is obviously a better plan than folding any flop without a hand when bet into, especially if it induces more check/folds on the flop. One might also consider raising on the flop, though, if he's willing to fold there. Even so, I don't think I've ever encountered this type of opponent, and if I have, he hasn't stolen any more than a couple pots off of me. The really aggressive bluffing-stealing types love to raise preflop instead.

[Shillx]

The complete-bet line is very common in all types of poker (NL, SNGs, LHE). There are a good amount of players who will bet no matter what cards come. It is a very tough strategy to defend against, especially if they sometimes slow down on 4th street (game theory suggests bluffing less as the pot gets bigger, that is why).

Brad

[MrWookie47]

Well, there's a nonzero chance that my sample size is completely whacked, but the number of times I've seen the SB check and fold the flop after I check in the BB is huge. If I do encounter a situation where these complete-bet guys are running rampant, I realize I'll have to overhaul my strategy. Thus far, I like controlling pot size against overly loose, overly passive opponents.

[ QUOTE ]
How often have you just checked in the BB after a SB open complete to even have a sample? I get people checking to me all the time.

Edit: And, seriously, even if you do think he'll bluff at you every time you check in the BB, sometimes you'll be looking down at a 5 high in the smallest pot imaginable. This is still an easy fold. You can't bluff him out of the pot every time, and it's awfully expensive when you fail.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to clarify: what I do in these situations is I raise pf with my better hands. K8s was on the fringe of that line but good enough. I do not auto-raise every hand where I'm left with 5 high if I miss the flop. I do it with hands that have some showdown value. I think raising pf makes the SB more likely to give up on the flop if they miss even though the pot is bigger because they have to fear you have a better hand and will make it expensive to try to draw to a better hand or bluff you out. They likely completed with garbage and we force them to pay an extra BB to hit their hand before folding. It's a good way to grind your way back into the green in a session.

As far as how often have I been in the situation, countless times. This is 2/4 where players tend to be getting more aggressive than at lower limits and many of the tables tighten up considerably from time to time. I've played many tighish tables where I get squat in the BB and check it after the SB completes. I also see this exact pattern with others playing their blinds at the table frequently. The SB bets the flop well over 50% of the time. If the BB folded everytime he misses this is giving up too much to the SB who probably limped with crap. The reason why they are more likley to bet the flop and try to steal is that you show weakness pf and there is more money to be won on the flop.

In this example I had no problem folding to the C/R. Getting to showdown will cost me 2.5BB's if he keeps betting, the pot is small and it's highly likely he hit the flop or went into it with a big PP.

[deception5]

[ QUOTE ]
Here are a few things to thnk about. One, the SB will very, very seldom fold after open-completing, so by raising here, you end up risking two bets to hopefully win three when the SB check/folds the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

But this isn't really a problem. K8s has about a 60-40 edge over a random hand (and why isn't a better than random hand raising?). Why give your opponent a nearly free chance to outdraw you when you have a reasonably solid hand and position?

Additionally, raising here means you'll win more hands in the future uncontested. If I know you won't raise often in the BB I'm going to start completing a huge range in the SB and trying to outflop you getting 3:1 on my money. If I know that you are going to raise often then I really have to think "This might cost me 1.5 to win a 4SB pot, 96o doesn't look so good" and you start getting my folded SB uncontested with your 28o.

This is almost exactly the same concept from the shorthanded section of HEPFAP where Sklansky discusses whether to 3-bet or just call a late position raise with TT. If this were the last hand we were ever going to play he says he might just call and see the flop first. But that for future hands raising is far superior as the raiser will see that you won't give up easily and have to consider that it will cost 3SB to see the flop against you.

[deception5]

One more thing to think about...

[ QUOTE ]
I'm still raising (roughly, I'm still nailing down my exact range) 55+, A5+, and some better K's

[/ QUOTE ]

~150 ace combinations
~50 king combinations
~50 pp combinations

~250/1300 hands meaning 4/5 of the time your opponent sees a cheap flop against you.

[MrWookie47]

By calling your preflop raise, you're not making it any less likely that your opponent out draws you, or any more incorrect for him to do so. He is perfectly correct to call your raise with any hand that you do not dominate from the point of view of the Fundamental Theorem of Poker.

I disagree with your claim that raising makes it more likely to win more hands uncontested. The overwhelming percentage of players, even the ones that are thinking, are making their preflop decisions based on their own two cards. The tight ones will often give me their blinds, and the loose passives will continue to open complete. I have already ceded that this is not an optimal strategy against tough opponents. I'm arguing that it's a great one against bad, loose, passive opponents, and those are the kinds of opponents I encounter most often.

Lastly, I argue that there is a very large chance that this is the last hand you'll play like this against this player, particularly in a full ring game. It's not very frequent that it gets folded to the blinds at typical full tables, and it's not even a perpetual occurance at 6 max tables. Combined with the high turnover rate of the internet, you won't be playing all that many hands in this manner with your opponent. Now, if you're in a HU or 3 handed game, then yes, you will be in this situation a lot. Then it's time to look at mixing up the plan.

[DeathDonkey]

You are way off here Wookie IMO. With position and good postflop skills I would say it is more profitable to raise any two cards in the BB after a typical SB completes then to take the very tight strategy you have advocated in this thread. I think the best answer lies somewhere in the middle of course.

-DeathDonkey

[deception5]

[ QUOTE ]
By calling your preflop raise, you're not making it any less likely that your opponent out draws you, or any more incorrect for him to do so. He is perfectly correct to call your raise with any hand that you do not dominate from the point of view of the Fundamental Theorem of Poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Certainly, unless of course he folds. But you are making him put in more money when he is more than likely at a disadvantage. And while he is correct to call the raise, he has to call it because of an earlier mistake he made.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm arguing that it's a great one against bad, loose, passive opponents, and those are the kinds of opponents I encounter most often.

[/ QUOTE ]

These are the ones that you need to punish with relentless value betting. And that value starts preflop. The looser your opponent the more critical this raise is, because the larger your edge.

[ QUOTE ]
Lastly, I argue that there is a very large chance that this is the last hand you'll play like this against this player, particularly in a full ring game. It's not very frequent that it gets folded to the blinds at typical full tables, and it's not even a perpetual occurance at 6 max tables.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree this may be the case for a full ring table so I may be off base, but I know that I very often have a lot of blind vs. blind play at 6-max. I sometimes forget that not every game is 6-max /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Nfinity]

I have to put my $.02 in here.

I had always advocated this play in part in my BB defense strategy. If it was folded to the SM and he limped, I would just call with really weak hands. On the flop if villian checked to me it was an autobet for me with any 2 cards. This brought good results.

Later MrWookie enlightened me to this strategy of Blind steal and defense(yeah we also advocate limping in the SB with a lot of hands) I started checking more to a SB open limp and have found amazing results. I can't rightly espouse on it, small sample size and all, so I'll move on to other topics.

I would think(and please correct me if I'm wrong) that any non-pair hand that doesn't stand a very good chance of being exactly 2 overcards to his cards, then your edge on the flop HU is so slight that it might be profitable to pass it up, as long as in doing so we are more likely to steal the pot on the flop. And of course there is the point Wook brought up in that by raising, we are most times increasing the amount of correct plays our opponent makes by our actions, and bloating the pot for any draws he might take later on, thus furthering the amount of correct actions he will be able to take.

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with Wookie on this one. I've found that when it gets folded around to the sb, raising preflop is the poker equivalent of pissing on a wasp nest. It basically invites the other guy to take shots at you later in the hand.

A delayed steal (checking preflop and betting any flop) allows villain to give up the blinds while saving face.

[/ QUOTE ]

But you're missing out on value if you don't raise villain PF. Checking PF and betting flop could mean lost value in the long run, especially since you're lacking in information. That PF raise gives you a better idea of what range villain is holding, so why not bet PF and flop as well?

[ QUOTE ]
Here are a few things to thnk about. One, the SB will very, very seldom fold after open-completing, so by raising here, you end up risking two bets to hopefully win three when the SB check/folds the flop. When you check, you're risking one bet to win two.

[/ QUOTE ]

I got to this party a bit late, but I like this hand and the few replies I saw piqued my interest. Here are my two cents.

The key here is the effect of a check vs. a raise. He's getting the 3:1 regardless of a check or raise, but the raise forces more money into the pot. If he completed with a marginal hand, villain will not like committing himself to the pot and will fold.

The margin, then, comes from the number of times villain will fold after you raise PF or the number of times the flop hits you both and you come out with a higher hand. This is your value from this hand. Take away that raise PF and what happens?

Gained:
Less -EV on hands that you fold.

Lost:
Information on SB's hand range.
More +EV on hands you win.
All EV from hands villain folds to raise.

The information loss is key. This loss of information means you won't play the hand optimally, which leads to less +EV if the hand actually gets played out. It's all about that Fundamental Theorem, and that PF raise gets you one step closer to the ideal situation it puts forth.

So make the damn raise. You're getting monetary value as well as informational value that could lead to more +EV later.

[ QUOTE ]
Certainly, unless of course he folds. But you are making him put in more money when he is more than likely at a disadvantage. And while he is correct to call the raise, he has to call it because of an earlier mistake he made.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jesus. I spent such a long time on my reply, only to find that deception pretty much said what I wanted to say already--and much better at that.

What a night.

[DavidC]

[ QUOTE ]
If it comes raggy with no easily seen draws, I'll check half the time to give myself more FE the next time I bet the A-high flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Firstly, I'm assuming that we're getting a little ways away from the hand in question and dealing with a scenario where we opened in the SB, is that right?

Secondly, that's bloody brilliant (preserving future FE).

However, I'm just curious here how thinking your opponent has to be here, and how likely it must be that your thinking opponents are watching the table (many are multi-tabling or browsing 2+2). I mean, if this guy is just playing his cards and not his history with you (your image), then you should bet every time you have a narrow FE edge, right?

The times when this image-related FE really matters is when you have undercards like 98 on a flop of AKJ and Buddy's got something like Q5s. If your image blows, he calls, if he cares about that sort of thing. He thinks he has a gutshot, but he actually is ahead (and if you have 33, he still has 10 outs... it would be a real coup to get him to fold it!).