3betting with 77

[pauliewalnuts]

I had no reads on villian, as it was only his third hand at the table. Should I just fold PF against an unknown? After he caps, my hand obviously shrinks up a bit. Should I just fold the turn or is calling down acceptable here?

Party Poker (10 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is CO with 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 7/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
<font color="#666666">1 fold, Villian Raises, 4 Folds, Hero 3bets, 3 Folds, Villian Caps, Hero Calls[/i]</font>.

Flop: (4.5BB) 2/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 5/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Villian bets, Hero calls

Turn:(5.5BB) 8/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Villian bets, Hero calls

River:(7.5BB) 6/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Villian bets, Hero calls

Final Pot: 9BB

[Bodhi]

easy fold preflop.

[Nick C]

I think calling down is fine. Among other things, the wheel potential may be encouraging Villain to semibluff ace-high.

I wouldn't expect to win, though.

Preflop, I would have folded, but I'm not really sure what's best. The limit the hand takes place at (which I don't know) could affect what's best, too.

[ebranig]

Fold preflop.

Raise flop, or raise turn, and fold to 3.

[brettbrettr]

[ QUOTE ]
I had no reads on villian

[/ QUOTE ]

Then this is an easy fold.

With no read I say you have to fold. After the flop you didn't make your trips you have no reason to call this bet. Especially after the preflop action and again with no read.

[sfer]

There are a lot of ways to play it but I think this is fine.

[Dariel86]

You could reraise this if you thought it were a steal attempt, but it probably isn't when he's raising from UTG

[Kailia Marie]

[ QUOTE ]
Fold preflop.

Raise flop, or raise turn, and fold to 3.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi ebranig,

Once you make it to the turn, I think raising the turn (in what I'd assume is a free showdown play) is probably a mistake.

1) Raising costs 2 big bets when it's not entirely sure you are showdown committed in the first place.

2) Having to fold to a 3-bet takes away your chances of spiking a 7 on the river. Yes, it is rare, but it does happen enough times where it would/should make an impact in the "long run".

The main reason to raise turns in these types of hands are for free showdowns. The correct usage is when you have a marginal holding that you would call a river bet with anyways, but are positive enough that being three bet means you are beaten and can fold.

However, there are many cases where this free showdown play is NOT correct, mainly because you are not sure that you would call a river bet if faced with when. This is a completely different scenerio because it can save you up to a full big bet.

In some situations it would be correct to call the turn and fold the river. Yes, that sounds somewhat strange, but against certain players you can almost always fold this river. Even if you couldn't, you could still call down, which isn't significantly worse (if at all) then the free showdown play.

Also keep in mind that you may still get a free showdown without even having to raise the turn since many players become weak on the river and check a lot of hands they should be betting (which is part of the reason why some rivers can be folded even after calling a turn bet.)

As for this particular hand, with my experience in the Party 2/4 games, I would call/call/fold as a default postflop line on this board.

/images/graemlins/heart.gifKailia

[Kailia Marie]

Hi everybody,

I'm a little suprised that everybody is against the preflop three bet. Yes, it is a bit unorthadox, but we're not required to play from a book, and believe it or not, it isn't much of a mistake if at all to do so here.

If a player would always raise all forms of AK and some forms of AQ,AJ,KQ, i.e. non-pair hands, then 77 is a favorite over a probable opening range for a typical player. Being capped of course is a different matter, but that is independent from the initial decision to three bet. 3-betting here becomes attractive if you can play well postflop (as most posters here should be able to) and if the opponent is weak and can be easily controlled and/or will misplay his hands.

While I think folding is fine, I don't think it is terrible to play this pot. I've certainly 3-bet hands like this before and have had good results/feelings about it. If 3-betting is a mistake, it can't be by a lot especially considering your preflop equity against a typical hand range is in your favor (though it may be skewed in the other direction because it beomes harder to play postflop).

/images/graemlins/heart.gifKailia

3 bet pre-flop is ok.

in this hand, if you call the turn, you should call the river. calling the turn is ok against a lag, otherwise you should fold the turn. since you have no information other than that this guy will cap the third hand he's seen, i don't think its awful to guess he is a lag. thus, call the river.

[TheHammer24]

I don't disagree with the way you played. Postflop on this board you have a ton of options, none of which is much better than the other.

I'm inclined to raise the flop, but villian capped pf, so he'd 3-bet a lot of hands. Calling down is find IMO, but raising the flop is what I, personally, would do

[sfer]

Kailia, it's good to see you posting here again. I think the fact that the villain is unknown makes the hero showdown committed when he calls the turn, basically to any river card. I think I probably do this too much but I want to know villain's capping range.

[Argus]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
I'm a little suprised that everybody is against the preflop three bet. Yes, it is a bit unorthadox, but we're not required to play from a book, and believe it or not, it isn't much of a mistake if at all to do so here.

[/ QUOTE ]
Depending on the limit, most unknowns don't raise preflop enough, meaning 77 is a dog against their range. People's UTG raising standards are usually tighter still; I read a thread once where Schneids posited that it's about half their overall PFR%. Taking both of these into account 3-betting 77 can be pretty bad.

Remember the gap concept: you don't want to get into a hand with a holding that is only a coinflip against the PFR's range. You're getting only slightly better than 1:1 on your money by 3-betting and I don't see a significant expectation of making money postflop. In fact, I think you're more likely to lose money as villain will release his unimproved high card hards, but you're inclined to go to showdown in case he continues with them.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
In some situations it would be correct to call the turn and fold the river. Yes, that sounds somewhat strange, but against certain players you can almost always fold this river. Even if you couldn't, you could still call down, which isn't significantly worse (if at all) then the free showdown play.

[/ QUOTE ]
I like your argument against the free showdown play, but I don't think folding the river is correct here. Decide on the flop whether or not to take this to showdown. If you decide to take it to showdown then call a river bet, because many players will bet AK one last time for value. They might be hoping to fold another AK, but folding your 77 is a coup.

The main problem I have with your arguments is that they necessitate a particular sort of opponent and are plays that should only be made with a specific read. This villain is unknown, and while he might fit the criteria chances are he doesn't and there's no way of knowing without playing more hands with him.

[pauliewalnuts]

One poster mentioned knowing the limit might help. It was party 3/6 FWIW. Lately I've started 3betting a lone raiser in position with 77 and 88 sometimes. Maybe I shouldnt try this on an unknown, as a few posters mentioned. Also, as Sfer mentioned, since villian was unknown, I was curious to see what his capping standards were.

Thanks for the replies.

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
Depending on the limit, most unknowns don't raise preflop enough, meaning 77 is a dog against their range. People's UTG raising standards are usually tighter still; I read a thread once where Schneids posited that it's about half their overall PFR%. Taking both of these into account 3-betting 77 can be pretty bad.

Remember the gap concept: you don't want to get into a hand with a holding that is only a coinflip against the PFR's range. You're getting only slightly better than 1:1 on your money by 3-betting and I don't see a significant expectation of making money postflop. In fact, I think you're more likely to lose money as villain will release his unimproved high card hards, but you're inclined to go to showdown in case he continues with them.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are thinking much too narrowly about this.

1. You have position.
2. When you flop a monster your hand is disguised, not the villain's.
3. On some boards it is obviously that you have been outflopped. Sometimes those boards will convince the villain that he has been outflopped and he will fold JJ for a single bet.
4. You have position.
5. You can more easily induce a FToP mistake from AK/AQ/whatever if he folds the turn unimproved.
6. You have position.

You are giving me hot/cold arguments for folding. 3-betting medium pairs is fine in the right context, not unambigiously bad as you're suggesting.