Fun With Value Bets... TT

[W. Deranged]

Cause y'all love this kind of thing...

UTG is mousish: 17/5.5/.6.

Party Poker 5/10 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Deranged is UTG+1 with T/images/graemlins/heart.gif, T/images/graemlins/club.gif.
UTG calls, <font color="#CC3333">Deranged raises</font>, <font color="#666666">7 folds</font>, UTG calls.

Flop: (5.40 SB) 9/images/graemlins/club.gif, 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
UTG checks, <font color="#CC3333">Deranged bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">UTG raises</font>, Deranged calls.

Turn: (4.70 BB) Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Deranged raises</font>, UTG calls.

River: (8.70 BB) J/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
UTG checks, <font color="#CC3333">Deranged bets</font>...

[hobbsmann]

UTG calls with 88 and YHIG.

[newhizzle]

and villan calls with 77?

an underpair is about all i can put him on unless he raises the river or just hit AJ or something, nice

[meep_42]

WtSD%?

What can he call with here, unless he puts you specifically on AK, that he's not beating you with by the river? will he pay off with 55-88?

-d

[baronzeus]

originally, i thought he had just called the flop and donked the turn. if that was the case, this hand is spewing. since he raised the flop, the rest of this hand is standard.

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
originally, i thought he had just called the flop and donked the turn. if that was the case, this hand is spewing. since he raised the flop, the rest of this hand is standard.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a very nice observation, Baron.

[toss]

Lets see. Villain should raise with JJ, more often has 88-66, maaaybe A9s. Does anyone think 3-betting the flop is a better play?

As for the river value bet I think it depends on villain's WTSD rate.

[brettbrettr]

I take this line a lot. Whether or not I bet the river depends on the river card. The J is ok, IMO, and I'd prob bet it. An ace and I might be more inclined to check behind.

[callmedonnie]

[ QUOTE ]
originally, i thought he had just called the flop and donked the turn. if that was the case, this hand is spewing. since he raised the flop, the rest of this hand is standard.

[/ QUOTE ]

The logic here being that a flop c/r could just be an attempt to steal the hand, and that the turn lead is a mandatory follow through of the flop c/r?

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
originally, i thought he had just called the flop and donked the turn. if that was the case, this hand is spewing. since he raised the flop, the rest of this hand is standard.

[/ QUOTE ]

The logic here being that a flop c/r could just be an attempt to steal the hand, and that the turn lead is a mandatory follow through of the flop c/r?

[/ QUOTE ]

The main idea is that the range of hands that he'll check-raise the flop with is really quite small... mostly pocket pairs, hands with 4s, and 9s.

There are many more hands (including JT and all the queens with Ts) that check-call and donk which beat us.

Paired flops are very useful in terms of info, since many fewer hands hit a paired flop than hit a non-paired flop.

[callmedonnie]

Gotcha. Makes sense. So most of the time your hand is still good and you can go ahead and raise. Folding to a 3 bet is a must I assume, especially vs. the maus.

[WillMagic]

Gorgeous.

Will

[W. Deranged]

Villain proceeds to call down with 55 and MHIG.

I'm consistently surprised how often opponents will call down turn raises and three-bets with under pocket pairs. I've started to open my river value-betting range a bit to account for this fact.

Given this guys aggression, he has to have a made hand. Wouldn't it be cheaper to find out if that made hand is trips by 3-betting the flop, and then folding to any more aggression?

[mtdoak]

So I take you read him for somethlng like 55-88? That or two spades. If he C/R's midpairs on a ragged flop, you probably should just value bet. If he C/R's flush draws on a scary board, i probably take my free showdown at the river as he's not calling if he missed both OCs.

[Aces McGee]

Hi Dub

What about just calling down, betting if checked to?

Reason being that he could conceivably have a nine here, but also that if he has a four, you'd hate to have him fold it.

Alternatively, why not wait until the river to raise this drawless board? I think he's more likely to call a river raise than one on the turn, knowing that he'll have to invest another bet (on the river) to showdown. Is it because he'll check the river too often?

-McGee

Hi Will-

Nice post. At first I was inclined to disagree with your reasoning, but I can see that you get a lot of value from the mid pocket pairs this way. What happens if you're 3-bet on the turn? What happens if you're 3-bet on the turn against a villain who has an aggression of 2 or 3?

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Dub

What about just calling down, betting if checked to?

Reason being that he could conceivably have a nine here, but also that if he has a four, you'd hate to have him fold it.

Alternatively, why not wait until the river to raise this drawless board? I think he's more likely to call a river raise than one on the turn, knowing that he'll have to invest another bet (on the river) to showdown. Is it because he'll check the river too often?

-McGee

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the following two observations are pretty useful for me here:

1. Small stakes players do not generally like getting aggressive on the flop when they flop monsters. With a 9, most normal villains might occassionally bet out here (hoping to get raised), but are usually check-calling the flop and check-raising the turn, and almost never check-raising the flop.

2. Players don't like to check-raise draws in heads-up pots. They tend to bet them or check-call with them. Sometimes you'll get a bonehead who'll check raise to try to psych you into checking the turn, but that didn't seem the case with this player.

This is an interesting case where, rather than suggesting that I might be behind, villain's flop aggression tells me pretty confidently that I'm ahead and have villain drawing to very few outs. Villain has a pocket pair below TT or a hand like A4s here a huge, huge percentage of the time.

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
Given this guys aggression, he has to have a made hand. Wouldn't it be cheaper to find out if that made hand is trips by 3-betting the flop, and then folding to any more aggression?

[/ QUOTE ]

The point is that my hand is too good for this. I'm raising the turn primarily for value. Putting in two big bets on my hand is not giving it enough action and will be loosing value in general.

As noted in another post, these paired, apparent "widow" boards are pretty easy to read. Much of the time that players start to get really aggressive on these boards, they're trying to protect small pocket pairs and figure you're big cards missed.

[Aces McGee]

I should have been a bit clearer in my post. I agree that you're ahead here quite often. The more important point is him folding a hand you'd like him to keep betting.

-McGee

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Will-

Nice post. At first I was inclined to disagree with your reasoning, but I can see that you get a lot of value from the mid pocket pairs this way. What happens if you're 3-bet on the turn? What happens if you're 3-bet on the turn against a villain who has an aggression of 2 or 3?

[/ QUOTE ]

I was going to suck it up and fold to the turn three-bet. I would hopefully be able to do this against any player with normal aggression for their pre-flop stats (including a tag with 2-3 agg.) Villain will recognize that my line indicates a real hand; a three-bet basically says that he can beat most decent overpair hands. Most players wouldn't even three-bet a hand like AJ here, so if I'm three-bet I'm probably up against trips or a boat here and can fold comfortably.

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
I should have been a bit clearer in my post. I agree that you're ahead here quite often. The more important point is him folding a hand you'd like him to keep betting.

-McGee

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. He has a .6 agg. factor. That means he's probably incapable of folding a hand. I could've checked WTSD and W$SD; I imagine they corroborate this opinion.

I was more afraid that he'd not bet the river than I was that he'd fold to a turn bet.

[mtdoak]

I agree with you on these points. His most likley holding is something like 55-88, or the nut/high flush draw. However, I don't like betting the river here. If he has a busted flush draw, he's folding. I don't think he's paying off with a hand like 88-66. There is value here, but not enough, IMHO.

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with you on these points. His most likley holding is something like 55-88, or the nut/high flush draw. However, I don't like betting the river here. If he has a busted flush draw, he's folding. I don't think he's paying off with a hand like 88-66. There is value here, but not enough, IMHO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Another important thing to realize is that given the pre-flop action, it's unlikely he has a Q or a J. Hence, he is unlikely to have improved on the later streets. If he called the turn and didn't reraise, he likely has a hand he's going to showdown with.

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
I was more afraid that he'd not bet the river than I was that he'd fold to a turn bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. As long as you're thinking of these things.

-McGee

[mtdoak]

We'll agree to disagree. Perhaps this has something to do with the pretty pink panties I seem to wear on the river.