KK 3 bets the turn!

[Mathieu]

Villain is a little LOOSE and aggressive preflop and on the flop. (22/7.4, with AF at ~1). I did not have these stats in front of me during the hand. I would have thought of him being aggressive since I had seen him overplay a hand.

1$/2$ (8 handed)

I open raise with K/images/graemlins/club.gifK/images/graemlins/heart.gif in utg+2, it's folded to CO who cold calls. Everyone else folds.

Flop: [J/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif] 5.5 SB
Hero bets, CO calls.

Turn: [J/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif T/images/graemlins/heart.gif] 3.25 BB
Hero bets, CO raises, Hero 3 bets

What do you think?

[Mathieu]

Alright no one replies... was this too obvious?

This is a hand that I felt good about because I did not just play it in auto-pilot saying "Oh he raised me on the turn, he must have a good hand.". In my mind his raise meant he was overplaying a weaker made hand or he was semi-bluffing some flush draw or gutshot that he picked up on the turn.

I thought JJ would have 3 bet preflop. JTs might have cold called (2 combos) preflop but would have raised the flop. TT would have re-raised preflop, or at least raised the flop. Only 77 beat me, and AhQh, AJ, KQ are all behind.

[MrWookie47]

A villain with stats of 22/7.4/1 I'd describe as rocky, not laggy. I don't like the 3bet here. JT is a very likely hand, and you may be in worse shape than that. I'd much prefer to call here, and either call down or fold a non-2, non-7, non-K river.

[TomBrooks]

I think CO had JT, but he cold have TP Js and two hearts so be playing TP and the flush draw hard so I'll call down with overpair. There are seven outs to make a set or non heart better two pair with 2 or 7.

He could already have a set, but without a pretty good read I think you want to call this down.

[SoftcoreRevolt]

I'm just calling this turn, he may be overplaying a flush draw or one pair, but not more than 50% of the time.

[Mathieu]

Stats are sometimes misleading. He was aggressive on the flop and preflop. He would have raised that flop with JTs. His aggression factor is probably low because he ended up calling too often with weak draws or A high. (sample size is 189 hands). All I know, is that this guy would most likely smooth call this flop with a weak draw or a monster. Among the possible monsters only 77 could match his actions. In my mind there are too many hands that this guy can have that I beat.

Ex:

KQ (8x), AhQh, AJ (12), the only hand I am worried about is 77 (3x). So, to be the safe side lets assume he plays KQ this way half the time and AJ this way 1/3 of the time.

We still get (4 KQ + 2 AJ + 1 AhQh) / (3 x 77) which is over 2-1, which is what we need to warrant this raise (since we risk a cap).

* I thought he could wait for the turn to raise AJ since it is much stronger than JT vs a preflop raiser.

[Mathieu]

Wow, I rarely 3 bet the turn with just an overpair HU, but I thought this one was pretty clear.

Anyways he *immediately* called my 3 bet. Now what is the best card for me to hit the river?

I am not fearing JT, and I think 77 might have capped or at least given it some thought.

[TomBrooks]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyways he *immediately* called my 3 bet. Now what is the best card for me to hit the river?

[/ QUOTE ]
Bet if the K /images/graemlins/spade.gif comes. Check/call anything else.

[Mathieu]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Anyways he *immediately* called my 3 bet. Now what is the best card for me to hit the river?

[/ QUOTE ]
Bet if the K /images/graemlins/spade.gif comes. Check/call anything else.

[/ QUOTE ]

The best card is Q that does not complete a flush draw! It allows me to get paid off by some KQ or AQ combination that he might have been semi-bluffing with. When someone calls your reraise immediately, it usually means that there are drawing. If he has a made hand, his decision is not so trivial.

[bozlax]

[ QUOTE ]
The best card is Q that does not complete a flush draw! It allows me to get paid off by some KQ or AQ combination that he might have been semi-bluffing with. When someone calls your reraise immediately, it usually means that there are drawing. If he has a made hand, his decision is not so trivial.

[/ QUOTE ]

Burn, Tom! Duh, don't you know anything?

I can't believe that you and Wookie both responded to this post, and both of you were wrong! I guess if you live long enough, you'll see everything.

[MrWookie47]

Give me an explicit range of hands that you think CO might have. Count them up. Count how many beat you, and how many are semi-bluffs like you describe. How many actually pull ahead of you because of a non-flush Q? How many do you remain behind? Being able to do this is a very valuable exercise, and something that every good poker player should be able to do.

[LoaferGee12]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, I rarely 3 bet the turn with just an overpair HU, but I thought this one was pretty clear.



[/ QUOTE ]
What makes this so much different? It's not like this guy is a LAG or anything.

[Mathieu]

[ QUOTE ]
Give me an explicit range of hands that you think CO might have. Count them up. Count how many beat you, and how many are semi-bluffs like you describe. How many actually pull ahead of you because of a non-flush Q? How many do you remain behind? Being able to do this is a very valuable exercise, and something that every good poker player should be able to do.

[/ QUOTE ]


OK, here goes:

CO was aggressive pre-flop and post flop. He would bet/raise liberally from what I saw. I know his stats don't support this... but he probably callls liberally too /images/graemlins/smile.gif. Anyways I gave him a semibluffing % of about 20% in this spot (with AQ and KQ), and I feel it is being realistic given what I had seen from him.

When he raised me on the turn I thought it was very unlikely that this raise meant strength because it was not consistent with the way I thought he would have played most of the holdings that beat me.

His range was:

77 for a set: 1 way
(3 ways but I discount it to only 1 way as I don't think he plays it like that more than 50 % of the time, so if we remove a 7, it makes only 3 possibilities, then there is only one way he can have a set).

AJ for TPTK: 2 ways
(12 ways, discounted to 2 because I don't think he plays it this way that often)

AQ: 3.5 (16 ways discounted to 3.5) ~22% semi-bluffing

KQ: 1.5 (8 ways discounted to 1.5) ~19% semi-bluffing

JTs for top 2: 0.50 (2 ways discounted to 0.50) he raises the flop with that, I feel 0.50 is being generous.

TT for a set: 0.50 (3 ways discounted to 0.50) he 3 bets pre-flop or raises the flop with that so again I feel 0.50 is somewhat generous.


I think other hands are unlikely enough that we can ignore them safely, even QJ, as I think he rarely plays it this way.

That gives him 9 possible hands, and I beat 7 of them!! That makes me more than 2-1 favorite and the raise is correct even if I have to payoff a reraise, when behind.

Once he called immediately, I was pretty sure I was against a semi-bluff, and was rooting for Q to fall.

The Q improves 5 semi-bluffing hands so that they can call me. The K improves 1.5 of them (KQ) but completes 3.5 others (AQ), costing me the whole pot /images/graemlins/frown.gif.

[milesdyson]

i don't mean to be condescending/rude/whatever, but that is a really good example of bad hand reading and improper use of calculating hand ranges. you don't just discount 14 of 16 combos because you think he "wouldn't play it that way."



your analysis says that 50% of the time he raises the turn he doesn't even have a pair... do you really think this?

[TomBrooks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The best card is Q that does not complete a flush draw! It allows me to get paid off by some KQ or AQ combination that he might have been semi-bluffing with.

[/ QUOTE ]Burn, Tom! Duh, don't you know anything? I can't believe that you and Wookie both responded to this post, and both of you were wrong!

[/ QUOTE ]
Yah, OP has a point. There's nothing like putting three Broadways on the board to get a lot of action for your overpair.

[Shillx]

[ QUOTE ]
i don't mean to be condescending/rude/whatever, but that is a really good example of bad hand reading and improper use of calculating hand ranges. you don't just discount 14 of 16 combos because you think he "wouldn't play it that way."



your analysis says that 50% of the time he raises the turn he doesn't even have a pair... do you really think this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Listen to this guy...he is good. Fwiw, I feel like 3-betting is suicide here. Even more so out of position when you can get popped on the river.

Brad

[Mathieu]

Shillx & Miles,

I have great respect for you guys and I value your advice.

I guess I got out of my way with this hand reading business. I think dicounting possibilities is ok and can make a range much more accurate in certain cases. It is quite possible that did it wrong. I will reconsider; I am here to learn after all.

I guess I got a little result oriented with this hand. I am still not convinced that 3 betting was not the right play but I will give it some serious thought.

Thanks for the advice /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[MrWookie47]

Discounting the exact number of hands from your range is a very good thing to do. However, you have to remember that there are a LOT of players who'll play 22 and 77 EXACTLY like villain did here. Waiting to the turn to raise sets and trips is so common that it is what I assume until proven otherwise.

[Mathieu]

I agree that there are a lot of players that would play 22 and 77 exactly like villain here. Especially in good Loose passive games /images/graemlins/smile.gif.

The player I was facing did not appear to be that loose. I thought that if he would play a mid pair against me, he would likely isolate me to get it heads up since he was aggressive. I was not sure about that, so in my analysis I gave villain about 50% chance of playing 77 this way (cold calling preflop). I thought this was like removing one 7 from the deck, so it would reduce his possible set combinations to 1, but I was wrong. It is more like 3 ways x 0.50 = 1.5 way. I thought 22 was really unlikely, but I could have perhaps given it some low probability.

The main reason why I 3 bet this hand was that villain appeared to be really straight forward on the flop. When he had a hand or a draw he would show aggression, otherwise he would peel or fold. So his raise on the turn mostly matched semi-bluffing hands that he would raise occasionnally, or monster hands that he would rarely cold call pre-flop. I also had to give some probability to a strong top pair hand like AJ which may wait for the turn to raise since it is in good shape vs big aces that I could be raising with.

[Jimmy The Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
Discounting the exact number of hands from your range is a very good thing to do. However, you have to remember that there are a LOT of players who'll play 22 and 77 EXACTLY like villain did here. Waiting to the turn to raise sets and trips is so common that it is what I assume until proven otherwise.

[/ QUOTE ]

And they're the same people who will cold-call two bets with a small pair, even heads-up when they're not getting pot odds. 22 is the hand I'd be most likely to put villain on, especially if he's LAGgier than his stats represent.

If you feel the need to throw another bet out there, consider saving it for a black-rag river checkraise. Me, I'd probably just call it down unimproved.

Follow-up question: if villain does indeed have the winning hand, does anyone show him what he's beaten? Make him feel good about an incorrect play, to encourage more of the same?

I call this turn and check-call river if uninproved. He's slowplaying bottom/middle set (ridiculous play, but micros love it to death, almost as much as waiting till the turn to bet AA) way too often and looking for a cap. I don't see him really playing j-10 that often in that position, but its also not out of the question. I doubt he's raising an unimproved turn flush draw, and I don't think he's donking with ak/aq here very often.