turn

[PokerBob]

villain is 40/9/1.35...haven't seen too much from him.

Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is MP with K/images/graemlins/club.gif, Q/images/graemlins/club.gif.
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, BB calls.

Flop: (4.33 SB) 5/images/graemlins/club.gif, 6/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, J/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, BB calls.

Turn: (3.16 BB) J/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
BB checks, hero does what and why?

[Peter Harris]

Continuation bets because of three reasons:
a) holding overcards in case opponent has a 5 or 6,
b) your flush draw,
c) plus the folding equity of the second jack.

If c/r, i call and fold a donk when i miss a flush.

[admiralfluff]

I bet, because we probably have an equity edge. I don't think villain will ever fold a better hand, but loose villain could peel that flop with any 2. If I felt a c/r was very likely from a huge LAG who likes to bluff scare cards, I would check and call river UI.

[imported_leader]

bet. Sometimes you have the best hand. Sometimes he folds. Sometimes you suck out.

[Jinx]

I used to always bet this, thinking that if I get C/Red it's no big deal because I have outs anyways. Then I eventually how stupid it was for me to pay 2 BB to see a river instead of 0 bb's. You can bet against this opponent since he doesn't seem aggro enough to C/R you with a 5 or a 6 or even 78o, but I'd still check it. The second jack changes nothing and he's not folding a pair here ever.

I might also call the river UI depending on what it is.

[Redd]

This seems like a great time to continuation semi-bluff to me, bob? The turn card likely didn't help the Villain (since we saw no aggression on the flop). Without all of our outs, we've got a good amount of equity padding if we get called/raised. We may even fold a better hand if Villain gets scared by the jack.

[Alexthegreat]

Bob

This is a good hand...

I usually follow through on the turn here because so many times the BB is just taking one off on the flop and will fold when you bet the turn. Also, I don't want to bet the flop and then give up on the turn in a heads up situation too much.

However, you do have a draw, and you don't want to be checkraised here, so you have to consider that as well.

Finally, you need to have a plan for the river, if it blanks. If you check the turn, he probably won't fold A high. If you bet the turn and he calls, he probably calls the river bet as well, with whatever he has.


Considering all this, I think I bet the turn.

[numeri]

While I'll often take a 'free card' here, I think we're too often giving a free card in this spot. Sure, we'll get check-raised sometimes, and we'll regret paying 2BB to see the river, but it seems like there are hands that will call again while still drawing that we're actually ahead of.

Now that I'm thinking about it, I can't come up with a lot of hands that we're ahead of that would peel. Of course, hands like 87/images/graemlins/diamond.gif or 98/images/graemlins/diamond.gif would peel, but they actually have more equity than us. Any paired hand also has more equity than us. I've convinced myself to take the free card. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[ QUOTE ]
I used to always bet this, thinking that if I get C/Red it's no big deal because I have outs anyways. Then I eventually how stupid it was for me to pay 2 BB to see a river instead of 0 bb's. You can bet against this opponent since he doesn't seem aggro enough to C/R you with a 5 or a 6 or even 78o, but I'd still check it. The second jack changes nothing and he's not folding a pair here ever.

I might also call the river UI depending on what it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you generally check here against this type of opponent? I would think that the things that Peter said as reasons to bet outweigh the fear of getting c/red.

If you do get c/red and you are fairly confident that it's not a c/r bluff, then you can easily get away from the hand on the river UI.

I dunno, it seems to be better to err on the side of aggression here. But then again, I think I'm too aggressive sometimes.

edit: I should note that it is a good point not to autobet so much as your post implied.

[POKhER]

Free card OR bet are equally ok i reckon(I've not done the maths so who knows).

Fold equity,
Numerous outs to improve,
Maybe ahead(value)
Vs
Calling 2bets because we have outs to call sucks.

I reckon i bet though.

[Jake (The Snake)]

I'd bet against this opponent and probably check against a more aggressive opponent who might bluff the river even if he has less than king high. I'd be more willing to check with an ace here instead of a king though, since I could be more comfortable calling a river bet... but nut no-ace is underrrated anyway.

I think this depends on the opponent. For example a solid player is never folding anything to that turn bet because he already picked up something on the flop.

yeah, I think we have lots of fold equity here, and outs if we get raised. I would bet this like 90% of the time against this kind of opponent.

[admiralfluff]

Lots of people are referring to fold equity, but what exactly are you talking about? Folding equity generally refers to equity gained when a villain makes fold that has lower EV than calling or raising. The value of folding equity is the difference in EV between villain's optimal decision and his fold, which is simply the EV of villain's most EV positive play. (His mistake becomes our gain).

In this situation, with this loose opponent, he is almost always seeing a SD with A high. He is never folding a pair. If he folds any of his 6-outers, he is making a correct fold. I agree that a bet is best, but on the grounds of pure pot equity. Sorry for being a nit, but I think it's important to clarify the fundamental factors driving our decisions.

[ QUOTE ]
I think this depends on the opponent. For example a solid player is never folding anything to that turn bet because he already picked up something on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's what I was thinking...read dependant. I think it's okay to bet if in question and against a passive player.

[POKhER]

Fold equity in my brain is the % chance of your opponent(s) folding. It reduces SHARPLY with more opponents.

So if he folds 50%... thats our FE in my mind anyhow.

[Chairman Wood]

[ QUOTE ]
So you generally check here against this type of opponent? I would think that the things that Peter said as reasons to bet outweigh the fear of getting c/red.

If you do get c/red and you are fairly confident that it's not a c/r bluff, then you can easily get away from the hand on the river UI.

I dunno, it seems to be better to err on the side of aggression here. But then again, I think I'm too aggressive sometimes.

edit: I should note that it is a good point not to autobet so much as your post implied.

[/ QUOTE ] If you get c/r do you call a river bet if you spike say the Q /images/graemlins/diamond.gif?

[DCWildcat]

We've got lots of outs. We're very often still ahead. Villain will often fold. I favor a bet.

[admiralfluff]

From a theoretical standpoint:

Equity is an actual measure of a portion of the pot. Pot equity is comprised of our hand equity + our fold equity. Our hand equity is the % that our hand will win at SD, times the value of the pot. Our fold equity is the equity gained by a fold of our opponent times the chance that he folds.

An example:

We are at SD with A8o HU OoP on a KQ526 rainbow board.

In order to make a bet profitable based on pot equity, we would want our opponent to have a worse hand more than 50% of the time when he called. If we knew our opponent would fold 70% of the time, we would require him to have a worse hand and call 15% of the time to make a bet profitable. Because there are 2 opponents on the river, 50% of the river bets is even equity. If we get 2 bets in on the river (1 from us, 1 from villain) and win more than 54% of the time. our equity edge is 4%*(bets in on river). Hence we get a positive return on our investment.

70% is not our folding equity. When villain folds a worse hand on the river, we gain no share of the pot. We only care when villain folds a better hand. Unlike our SD pot equity, our folding equity is a return percentage on the entire pot, not just the river round. If villain folds a better hand 1% of the time, our folding equity is 1%*(whole pot). So the complete requirements to make a profitable river bet, (are SD equity edge) * (bets in on river) + (fold equity) * (whole pot) &gt; 0.

So betting and folding a better A sometimes can add signidicant value to a bet, which could make a bet correct even if he has a better hand far more than 50% of the time when he calls.

Considering soley how often our opponent folds is meaningless from an equity standpoint. We must consider how this fold changes our long term share of the pot (our EV)

So back to the OP, if our opponent will never make an incorrect fold on the turn we have no fold equity, and how often our opponent folds to our turn bet should not be a consideration. Howver, when our opponent calls our turn bet knowing how often he folds is important, but for different reasons. Once he calls, how often he folds will reshape the probability distribution of all of his possible holdings, effecting future decisions, but not the decision to bet the turn.

Of course, there are other ways to evaluate any problem, but the above method is probably most copasetic for the human mind.

[POKhER]

I'll return to this tommor when i can process information /images/graemlins/laugh.gif.

Meanwhile, So you agree its the % chance the guy folds yeah?

In which case, I reckon he will fold INCORRECTLY (i.e. he holds a pp like 22 or something) gaining us $$$$.

[admiralfluff]

No, it is the actual long term value we gain from his fold. Try and get through my long post. Hopefully it is coherent.

[imported_leader]

[ QUOTE ]
So back to the OP, if our opponent will never make an incorrect fold on the turn we have no fold equity

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think that's entirely true. If say villian has T9 in OP hand, he is making a correct fold, but we still gain because he doesn't have the chance to hit the 9 or the T. We lose as compared to if he called, but we gain as compared to if we check.

[sthief09]

id check if i thought hed bluff the river a lot, since unpaired cards have only 4 outs. but i dont think you can, and i think he will bluff enough to make a difference, so i bet. likewise, if hed never bluff then id check also.

[admiralfluff]

[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So back to the OP, if our opponent will never make an incorrect fold on the turn we have no fold equity


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I don't think that's entirely true. If say villian has T9 in OP hand, he is making a correct fold, but we still gain because he doesn't have the chance to hit the 9 or the T. We lose as compared to if he called, but we gain as compared to if we check.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, sorry. Whenever we are not at SD and villain is not drawing dead we have some folding equity, but it doesn't matter if we want villain to call (never makes an incorrect fold). In these cases we will always have a pot equity edge regardless.

edit: And this isn't actually an always thing. There are some cases where we could have a pot equity edge HU and whether we bet or call is decided on fold equity. The only situations I can think if is when villain's tightness/looseness changes drastically between streets.