Failed screw play [Archive] - Two Plus Two Older Archives

Nietzsche

11-14-2005, 05:51 PM

Opponent is almost certainly a 2+2'er. Stats 25/15/2.5. Haven't seen him get out of line.

Party Poker 10/20 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx (http://www.zerodivide.cx/converter)

Preflop: Hero is SB with A/images/graemlins/club.gif, Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
1 fold, MP raises, 2 folds, Hero 3-bets, 1 fold, MP calls.

Flop: (7 SB) 9/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, A/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif (2 players)
Hero bets, MP calls.

Turn: (4.50 BB) 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif (2 players)
Hero checks, MP bets, Hero raises, MP 3-bets, Hero folds.

Looks wierd, felt wierd but how often am I good here? Is this not a set or two pair 90% of the time?

DCWildcat

11-14-2005, 05:53 PM

Why the turn c/r?

DrSavage

11-14-2005, 06:06 PM

I don't think you can fold here.

brazilio

11-14-2005, 06:08 PM

I can't fold here, I've seen way too many 2+2ers go almost maniacal on turn checkraises like this with hands they'd likely just call the turn with. I don't understand the turn c/r, though.

Fianchetto

11-14-2005, 06:11 PM

Bad fold. I think you need to take this to showdown.

Catt

11-14-2005, 07:29 PM

I don't think you should fold when you decide to employ the screwplay. The line looks somewhat strange to your opponent -- either a risky but tricky method to squeeze an extra BB out of someone who will see a SD; or a goofy line by someone with air trying to fold out the opponent. If the guy doesn't know a lot about your play, he could easily be three-betting a worse hand here.

Nietzsche

11-14-2005, 08:00 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think you should fold when you decide to employ the screwplay. The line looks somewhat strange to your opponent -- either a risky but tricky method to squeeze an extra BB out of someone who will see a SD; or a goofy line by someone with air trying to fold out the opponent. If the guy doesn't know a lot about your play, he could easily be three-betting a worse hand here.

[/ QUOTE ]
Interesting analysis. My thoughts are that a screw play from a TAG is a very powerful move, almost never a bluff. I would think this is his thinking too. He knows I'm a TAG with a very similar playing style and similar stats. This is the reason I thought I could fold to a 3-bet. I just can't see a TAG bluffing here. And I thought there was almost no chance he would do this with a hand like AJ.

But of course it is dangerous to think your opponent thinks exactly like you so maybe I should have called down.

aK13

11-14-2005, 08:04 PM

Just a consideration...why would you want to screwplay a 2+2er? They can make folds -- so why would you want your opponent to fold a worse hand here when he might otherwise just call/call the rest as WA/WB?

setjes

11-14-2005, 08:10 PM

This is a line I often take against aggro's. Once villain calls an A-high ragged flop (rather without fd possibilities) he bets the turn about 95% when checked to with smaller aces, pp's or nothing. Easy way to get more value out of ur big aces. Besides, it may buy u a free card later on because ur opponent may be scared for another c/r.
I'd call his 3bet down btw.

donger

11-14-2005, 08:58 PM

This might not be the best place to screwplay. If the guy is a thinking player, he might check a lot of worse hands here, planning to call the river or bet if checked to. You also get yourself into scenarios like this one where you deny yourself a showdown.

I am a huge proponent of the screwplay, but I like it against the dumber, more aggro types who do a lot of cold-calling preflop.

mmcd

11-14-2005, 09:52 PM

In this particular type of spot (A-high ragged board, you have the lead out of position against a decent opponent and your flop bet was called), it's MUCH better to wait until the river to get the checkraise in.

flawless_victory

11-15-2005, 03:15 AM

this fold is truly horrible.
like, just laughable.

Shillx

11-15-2005, 03:34 AM

I would usually bet-bet-check/raise AK and AQ here. I would also pick another hand to do it with (KQs or red TT or something) so that he is put in a tough spot on the river with AJ or AT (or even AQ). I don't really like checking the turn against the guy you describe if he will take a WA/WB line against you too often. If he will always bet a worse hand on the turn, then this play begins to make more sense. But again you have to be capable of making this move with a hand worse then a pair of aces.

It also depends a lot on what you will do with a worse hand. If you will always fold TT to a turn bet (but put a bet in on the river), then it makes no sense for him to bet the turn with Ax (obviously he would have to do it sometimes but certainly not everytime). If you will calldown with KK-TT then he should bet the turn everytime here with Ax.

MAxx

11-15-2005, 08:16 AM

What is the purpose of going for a turn cr here?

11-15-2005, 09:50 AM

I dont understand it either. I dont really understand this play in any context though.. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

nfscreech

11-15-2005, 10:21 AM

This is a good play vs good players.

Since we will occassionally check the turn OOP with nothing, we have to occassionally check/raise it with a strong hand too. This way, our observant opponents cannot peel the flop with weak holdings, and then bet the turn with impunity when we check to them.

mmcd

11-15-2005, 10:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I would usually bet-bet-check/raise AK and AQ here. I would also pick another hand to do it with (KQs or red TT or something)

[/ QUOTE ]

Better to balance with a hand like JTs that can't win if the river goes bet/call or check/bet/call.

mex78753

11-15-2005, 11:24 AM

this is a bad fold because alot of players' ego's will get in the way and they'll 3 bet u with a flush draw, worse ace, or even a pp because they're mad they fell for the play. I've done it plenty of times myself.

If you call down and lose you still get the benefit of telling your opponent you will check/raise strong hands on the turn.

Nietzsche

11-15-2005, 02:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
This is a good play vs good players.

Since we will occassionally check the turn OOP with nothing, we have to occassionally check/raise it with a strong hand too. This way, our observant opponents cannot peel the flop with weak holdings, and then bet the turn with impunity when we check to them.

[/ QUOTE ]
Metagame reasons is another factor, yes. But as another poster mentioned the screw play is way better against a LAG than a TAG. A TAG is capable of folding decent but worse hands he would otherwise have called down and will check behind more often than a LAG when he is not ahead.

I actually now think that the decision to use the screw play in this situation against this opponent is worse than the fold, which I don't think is that bad, still not sure it is even a mistake.

DMBFan23

11-15-2005, 03:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is a good play vs good players.

Since we will occassionally check the turn OOP with nothing, we have to occassionally check/raise it with a strong hand too. This way, our observant opponents cannot peel the flop with weak holdings, and then bet the turn with impunity when we check to them.

[/ QUOTE ]
Metagame reasons is another factor, yes. But as another poster mentioned the screw play is way better against a LAG than a TAG. A TAG is capable of folding decent but worse hands he would otherwise have called down and will check behind more often than a LAG when he is not ahead.

I actually now think that the decision to use the screw play in this situation against this opponent is worse than the fold, which I don't think is that bad, still not sure it is even a mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

the screwplay for value is a better play against LAGs because they will bet more hands for you. but the screwplay for shania by TAGs [censored]s with me hardcore. for example, if (as the assumption always goes) I'll fold so many hands he beats or check behind, then he should do it with weaker hands or with draws that want free cards. then I catch on. So then he has to do it with strong hands or I'll just 3-ball his ass. but now I can fold more cause he's got the goods. so he cathces on. then he can do it with draws, or as a bluff. but now I'm calling or 3-betting or checking behind and he can force me into some pretty big errors. helps to nullify the positional disadvantage.

11-15-2005, 03:30 PM

Yea I see that this can be great vs good players who are on the LAG side but I feel that doing this vs a TAG that you will play like 200 hands against at the most is kind of pointless. Bet your strong hands and check the weak ones until you develop a history. Or do you think this play is so powerful that I should do it kind of often, like 1/3 of my strong hands?

donger

11-15-2005, 03:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Yea I see that this can be great vs good players who are on the LAG side but I feel that doing this vs a TAG that you will play like 200 hands against at the most is kind of pointless. Bet your strong hands and check the weak ones until you develop a history. Or do you think this play is so powerful that I should do it kind of often, like 1/3 of my strong hands?

[/ QUOTE ]

HEPFAP recommends checking the turn A LOT vs aggro players, for screwplay reasons:
[ QUOTE ]

Therefore, to avoid giving your hand away, you also must check a lot of good hands. Specifically, when first to act, you probably should check on fourth street as much as 60 percent of the time with your good and bad hands alike, as long as free cards are not a major problem and your opponents are aggressive.

[/ QUOTE ]

11-15-2005, 03:49 PM

mmcd

11-15-2005, 04:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yea I see that this can be great vs good players who are on the LAG side but I feel that doing this vs a TAG that you will play like 200 hands against at the most is kind of pointless. Bet your strong hands and check the weak ones until you develop a history. Or do you think this play is so powerful that I should do it kind of often, like 1/3 of my strong hands?

[/ QUOTE ]

HEPFAP recommends checking the turn A LOT vs aggro players, for screwplay reasons:
[ QUOTE ]

Therefore, to avoid giving your hand away, you also must check a lot of good hands. Specifically, when first to act, you probably should check on fourth street as much as 60 percent of the time with your good and bad hands alike, as long as free cards are not a major problem and your opponents are aggressive.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

JV started a thread on this subject in Mid/Hi a couple of month's back, and basically his point (that agree with) was that because of the overaggro juiced up nature of today's online games, in situations where you can screwplay the turn and get called down, you'll likely be able to bet/3-bet and get called down as well.

Personally, as far my metagame goes, for purposes of getting more bets in the pot, I prefer to checkraise flops, bet/3-bet turns, and checkraise rivers (not all in the same hand of course)

11-15-2005, 04:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yea I see that this can be great vs good players who are on the LAG side but I feel that doing this vs a TAG that you will play like 200 hands against at the most is kind of pointless. Bet your strong hands and check the weak ones until you develop a history. Or do you think this play is so powerful that I should do it kind of often, like 1/3 of my strong hands?

[/ QUOTE ]

HEPFAP recommends checking the turn A LOT vs aggro players, for screwplay reasons:
[ QUOTE ]

Therefore, to avoid giving your hand away, you also must check a lot of good hands. Specifically, when first to act, you probably should check on fourth street as much as 60 percent of the time with your good and bad hands alike, as long as free cards are not a major problem and your opponents are aggressive.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

JV started a thread on this subject in Mid/Hi a couple of month's back, and basically his point (that agree with) was that because of the overaggro juiced up nature of today's online games, in situations where you can screwplay the turn and get called down, you'll likely be able to bet/3-bet and get called down as well.

Personally, as far my metagame goes, for purposes of getting more bets in the pot, I prefer to checkraise flops, bet/3-bet turns, and checkraise rivers (not all in the same hand of course)

[/ QUOTE ]
So what you are saying is that you bet/3bet some of your bad cards from time to time? Seems awefully expensive.

donger

11-15-2005, 06:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yea I see that this can be great vs good players who are on the LAG side but I feel that doing this vs a TAG that you will play like 200 hands against at the most is kind of pointless. Bet your strong hands and check the weak ones until you develop a history. Or do you think this play is so powerful that I should do it kind of often, like 1/3 of my strong hands?

[/ QUOTE ]

HEPFAP recommends checking the turn A LOT vs aggro players, for screwplay reasons:
[ QUOTE ]

Therefore, to avoid giving your hand away, you also must check a lot of good hands. Specifically, when first to act, you probably should check on fourth street as much as 60 percent of the time with your good and bad hands alike, as long as free cards are not a major problem and your opponents are aggressive.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

JV started a thread on this subject in Mid/Hi a couple of month's back, and basically his point (that agree with) was that because of the overaggro juiced up nature of today's online games, in situations where you can screwplay the turn and get called down, you'll likely be able to bet/3-bet and get called down as well.

Personally, as far my metagame goes, for purposes of getting more bets in the pot, I prefer to checkraise flops, bet/3-bet turns, and checkraise rivers (not all in the same hand of course)

[/ QUOTE ]

You never get free cards when you want them this way, though. Screwplaying is better for that reason alone. It also gets an extra bet from an opponent who had planned on folding the turn, but changed course when you checked. I play 5/10 6max FWIW.

mmcd

11-15-2005, 06:41 PM

No. Check/raising the turn balances check/folding. Bet/3 betting the turn is balanced by bet/folding, but that's really immaterial here. Bet/3-betting the turn is better than checkraising when you have a hand that wants more bets in the pot.

For example: If I have AK in the sb and 3-bet UTG's open, and the flop comes A 6 2. I'll bet the flop, bet the turn (and 3-bet if raised), and check/raise the river (if he just called my turn bet). The hands that UTG could hold that would definately call a turn checkraise and river bet (say AT-AQ for the sake of argument), will likely raise a turn bet and call down when you 3-bet so you make more. Other hands that may call down a turn checkraise but won't raise a turn bet (say A9-A2) will bet the river when checked to and pay off your river checkraise, so you don't really lose anything by going for the bet/3-bet on the turn.

I'm not saying you should never checkraise the turn with the lead, I'm just saying that HPFAP's advise regarding often checkraising the turn with your decent/strong hands is a bit dated since today's typical oppononents are often willing to put 3 bets in on the turn with weakish hands.

mmcd

11-15-2005, 06:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You never get free cards when you want them this way, though. Screwplaying is better for that reason alone. It also gets an extra bet from an opponent who had planned on folding the turn, but changed course when you checked. I play 5/10 6max FWIW.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is definately much more applicable to higher more aggressive games where you are unlikely to get free river cards anyways and your opponents are more willing to put 3 bets in on the turn with top pair ok kicker type hands. And with regard to picking up an extra bet when your opponent had planned on folding the turn, it's much more advantageous to fire the 2nd barrel more often and sometimes pick up the whole pot with the worst hand.

Danenania

11-15-2005, 06:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
No. Check/raising the turn balances check/folding. Bet/3 betting the turn is balanced by bet/folding, but that's really immaterial here. Bet/3-betting the turn is better than checkraising when you have a hand that wants more bets in the pot.

For example: If I have AK in the sb and 3-bet UTG's open, and the flop comes A 6 2. I'll bet the flop, bet the turn (and 3-bet if raised), and check/raise the river (if he just called my turn bet). The hands that UTG could hold that would definately call a turn checkraise and river bet (say AT-AQ for the sake of argument), will likely raise a turn bet and call down when you 3-bet so you make more. Other hands that may call down a turn checkraise but won't raise a turn bet (say A9-A2) will bet the river when checked to and pay off your river checkraise, so you don't really lose anything by going for the bet/3-bet on the turn.

I'm not saying you should never checkraise the turn with the lead, I'm just saying that HPFAP's advise regarding often checkraising the turn with your decent/strong hands is a bit dated since today's typical oppononents are often willing to put 3 bets in on the turn with weakish hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice post. This is my approach as well.

"Betting is underrated." -CDC

11-15-2005, 06:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
No. Check/raising the turn balances check/folding. Bet/3 betting the turn is balanced by bet/folding, but that's really immaterial here. Bet/3-betting the turn is better than checkraising when you have a hand that wants more bets in the pot.

For example: If I have AK in the sb and 3-bet UTG's open, and the flop comes A 6 2. I'll bet the flop, bet the turn (and 3-bet if raised), and check/raise the river (if he just called my turn bet). The hands that UTG could hold that would definately call a turn checkraise and river bet (say AT-AQ for the sake of argument), will likely raise a turn bet and call down when you 3-bet so you make more. Other hands that may call down a turn checkraise but won't raise a turn bet (say A9-A2) will bet the river when checked to and pay off your river checkraise, so you don't really lose anything by going for the bet/3-bet on the turn.

I'm not saying you should never checkraise the turn with the lead, I'm just saying that HPFAP's advise regarding often checkraising the turn with your decent/strong hands is a bit dated since today's typical oppononents are often willing to put 3 bets in on the turn with weakish hands.

[/ QUOTE ]
Point taken. But I think you have to do some check raising to balance the check folding. On what type of hands do you do this? I could see myself doing it with flush draws and exactly a hand like you described. This 3-betting with TPTK feels too aggressive for me. Which limit do you play? I am at 3/6 and I feel that calling down is the play if I get raised with TPTK.

mmcd

11-15-2005, 07:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Point taken. But I think you have to do some check raising to balance the check folding. On what type of hands do you do this? I could see myself doing it with flush draws and exactly a hand like you described. This 3-betting with TPTK feels too aggressive for me. Which limit do you play? I am at 3/6 and I feel that calling down is the play if I get raised with TPTK.

[/ QUOTE ]

This stuff is more applicable to the more agressive 10/20 and higher games. You're right that 3-betting the turn with TPTK at 3/6 probably isn't a good idea since more passive players need a strong hand to raise your turn bet in the first place.

I honestly don't do a whole lot of check/folding on the turn when I have the preflop/flop lead out of position, but I'll certainly bet/fold there though.

Besides, balancing just isn't that important until you get 30/60 or maybe even 50/100 or higher. Your opponents at the lower limits are unlikely to be sophisticated enough to notice/take advantage of minor systemic imbalances in your game.

donger

11-15-2005, 07:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You never get free cards when you want them this way, though. Screwplaying is better for that reason alone. It also gets an extra bet from an opponent who had planned on folding the turn, but changed course when you checked. I play 5/10 6max FWIW.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is definately much more applicable to higher more aggressive games where you are unlikely to get free river cards anyways and your opponents are more willing to put 3 bets in on the turn with top pair ok kicker type hands. And with regard to picking up an extra bet when your opponent had planned on folding the turn, it's much more advantageous to fire the 2nd barrel more often and sometimes pick up the whole pot with the worst hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think, that if you keep blindly firing OOP in aggro games, you're going to be forced into folding the best hand way more often than you'll be picking up the pot.

The other benefit of the screwplay that I forgot to mention is that it gets your opponent psychologically involved in the hand. Most people who get screwplayed don't fold, even though they should.

mmcd

11-15-2005, 07:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You never get free cards when you want them this way, though. Screwplaying is better for that reason alone. It also gets an extra bet from an opponent who had planned on folding the turn, but changed course when you checked. I play 5/10 6max FWIW.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is definately much more applicable to higher more aggressive games where you are unlikely to get free river cards anyways and your opponents are more willing to put 3 bets in on the turn with top pair ok kicker type hands. And with regard to picking up an extra bet when your opponent had planned on folding the turn, it's much more advantageous to fire the 2nd barrel more often and sometimes pick up the whole pot with the worst hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think, that if you keep blindly firing OOP in aggro games, you're going to be forced into folding the best hand way more often than you'll be picking up the pot.

The other benefit of the screwplay that I forgot to mention is that it gets your opponent psychologically involved in the hand. Most people who get screwplayed don't fold, even though they should.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not like I'm blindly firing the turn with no hand. Since I already have the lead going into the turn, that means I've already either:

Check-raised the flop against an in-position preflop 3-bettor.

Checkraised the flop against a preflop raiser in a bb defense.

Bet the flop after 3-betting a preflop raise out of the sb.

or

Bet the flop into a preflop cold-caller.

When you checkraise the turn, your opponent has to call 2 bb's to see a showdown in an X bb pot. When you wait until the river to checkraise, your opponent only has to pay 1bb to see a showdown in an X+2 bb pot. And turn bet/3-bets are more likely to commit your opponent to calling down than turn check/raises both psychologically and mathematically.

ErrantNight

11-15-2005, 07:36 PM

if it's two pair you have a lot of outs.

SteveY

11-15-2005, 07:43 PM

I havent read this thread, but Nate made a good thread about screwplaying: http://tinyurl.com/7gr3h

my memory is fuzzy, but i remember him saying something like he employed the screwplay most during his 10/206max as a balancing play, and also in the thread he admits it might have been FPS.

donger

11-15-2005, 10:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You never get free cards when you want them this way, though. Screwplaying is better for that reason alone. It also gets an extra bet from an opponent who had planned on folding the turn, but changed course when you checked. I play 5/10 6max FWIW.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is definately much more applicable to higher more aggressive games where you are unlikely to get free river cards anyways and your opponents are more willing to put 3 bets in on the turn with top pair ok kicker type hands. And with regard to picking up an extra bet when your opponent had planned on folding the turn, it's much more advantageous to fire the 2nd barrel more often and sometimes pick up the whole pot with the worst hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think, that if you keep blindly firing OOP in aggro games, you're going to be forced into folding the best hand way more often than you'll be picking up the pot.

The other benefit of the screwplay that I forgot to mention is that it gets your opponent psychologically involved in the hand. Most people who get screwplayed don't fold, even though they should.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not like I'm blindly firing the turn with no hand. Since I already have the lead going into the turn, that means I've already either:

[/ QUOTE ]

You're confusing me.

mmcd

11-15-2005, 10:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You never get free cards when you want them this way, though. Screwplaying is better for that reason alone. It also gets an extra bet from an opponent who had planned on folding the turn, but changed course when you checked. I play 5/10 6max FWIW.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is definately much more applicable to higher more aggressive games where you are unlikely to get free river cards anyways and your opponents are more willing to put 3 bets in on the turn with top pair ok kicker type hands. And with regard to picking up an extra bet when your opponent had planned on folding the turn, it's much more advantageous to fire the 2nd barrel more often and sometimes pick up the whole pot with the worst hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think, that if you keep blindly firing OOP in aggro games, you're going to be forced into folding the best hand way more often than you'll be picking up the pot.

The other benefit of the screwplay that I forgot to mention is that it gets your opponent psychologically involved in the hand. Most people who get screwplayed don't fold, even though they should.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not like I'm blindly firing the turn with no hand. Since I already have the lead going into the turn, that means I've already either:

[/ QUOTE ]

You're confusing me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Button open-raises, I 3-bet K /images/graemlins/spade.gif T /images/graemlins/spade.gif out of the small blind. Flop comes J /images/graemlins/heart.gif 8 /images/graemlins/spade.gif 2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif. I bet and get called. Turn is 5 /images/graemlins/club.gif. I'm betting again. At this point, there's 4.5bb in the pot, and betting again has enough fold equity to justify it. If he raises, I fold, but I'll have a real hand (that 3-bets or calls down a raise) often enough in this spot that he can't profitably auto-raise my turn bet as a default.

This is actually the type of hand where a bet/bet/checkfold line is warranted.

*Just to clarify, my KTs is ahead of the buttons open-raising range, so even though I missed the flop, I'm not exactly firing on the turn with "no hand". I could very well be value betting against a 10-out 2 live cards/gutshot combo (i.e. 97), and possibly induce a horrible fold.

Lmn55d

11-15-2005, 10:23 PM

you've posted a lot of really good stuff in this thread. Post more often in HUSH please.

Lmn55d

11-15-2005, 10:35 PM

2 Good Posts about negatives of screwplay. I pretty much totally agree with mmcd in this thread. If I was gonna checkraise I'd checkraise the river. Also when you take an odd line like this on the turn you must see the showdown against most players.

Nate Tha' Great : http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/show...o=14&fpart= (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Board=&Number=2421225&page= &view=&sb=5&o=14&fpart=)

J_V: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Number=3385454&page=

Enjoy!