Lots Goin' On with A4s

[W. Deranged]

So I decided I wanted the 100% Eurobet bonus they've been yelling at me about and I have rakeback there and so on and so forth so I have a Eurobet/Pokerroom.com hand for y'all...

The table is playing pretty tight in general.

Reads:
-UTG+1 type is kind of loose/fishy/weak/weird (40/6/1.3 over 30 hands or so).
-UTG+2 is tight but super-passive (16/1.3/.67 over 70 hands or so).
-CO is pretty much of a fish from what I can tell.(53/3/1.1 over like 35 hands).

Eurobet/Pokerroom $5/$10 (9 handed)

Deranged is on the button with A /images/graemlins/club.gif 4 /images/graemlins/club.gif.

Pre-flop: one fold, UTG+1 calls, UTG+2 calls, two folds, CO calls, Deranged calls, SB calls, BB checks.

Flop (6 players, 6 SB): K/images/graemlins/heart.gif A/images/graemlins/heart.gif Q/images/graemlins/club.gif

Two checks, UTG+1 bets, UTG+2 calls, CO calls, Deranged calls, blinds fold.

Turn (4 players, 5 SB): 9/images/graemlins/club.gif

UTG+1 bets, UTG+2 calls, CO folds, Deranged raises, UTG+1 calls, UTG+2 calls.

River (3 players, 11 BB): A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif

UTG+1 bets, UTG+2 folds, Deranged...?



I think every post-flop street is interesting.

[toss]

I like calling on the flop since our kicker is pretty weak and two have called. See what the turn brings for us.

Good turn card. I like your raise for a free showdown and it also extracts value from the guy in the middle.

On the river I'd just call hoping to split it. I don't see too much value in raising here.

[Pharity]

It's good to just call the flop to see where you'r at before committing to the hand. If the turn goes gonzo or another broadwaycard appears (with some agression), you'r happy to get out cheap.

I think the chance he does not hold an ace on the river is very small. And the chance he has a better hand is also very small, its a rare player who doesnt push AQ or A9 harder than this. But i don't think raising has much value, i'd just call. My guess is that he infact in this particular case didn't have an ace, thats why you posted. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Nick C]

On the flop, I like the call. You can't really protect (unless UTG+1 3-bets, which I think we'd prefer not to see), and I'm not really sure a raise would be for value. That's a scary flop for UTG+1 to be firing into, though of course at this point he could just have KTo or J /images/graemlins/heart.gif 8 /images/graemlins/heart.gif.

On the turn, I'm okay with the raise, though it would suck if UTG+1 3-bet with JTo. I'd be tempted to call and hope the river action went bet, call on a club, but I guess maybe that's a lot to ask for.

On the river, I think I'd just call. You wouldn't think UTG+1 would call with less than trips, but I suppose maybe he'd pay off with KQ, if he played that hand this way for some reason. I'd hate to get 3-bet here, though, and find myself in a position where I'm calling, hoping to chop.

[mack848]

[ QUOTE ]
Turn (4 players, 5 SB): 9/images/graemlins/club.gif

UTG+1 bets, UTG+2 calls, CO folds

[/ QUOTE ]


What's your play if the 9 wasn't a club?

Just curious, with same flop, but no club on the board, would you have even called, or would you have folded, assuming your kicker is too weak

[Webster]

I'd just call the river. If that was NOT a 9 /images/graemlins/club.gif I would have folded.

Not sure I like the raise on the turn. You are only getting 2 extra bets. If there were MORe then 2 players yea but with 2 I'm not sure it was wise.

[br549007]

I would have to fold the flop, but having gone this far make a crying call in case some one was chasing a flush or str8

Every post flop street seems standard.

Assuming you call the river.

[damaniac]

Flop is standard.

I didn't think I liked the turn, but now I do. Since we're already tied with A2-A8, which is probably a decent portion of UTG+1's holdings, we are often on a freeroll, plus we get to charge the fish tagging along. We're only behind A9-AK, and those are less likely due to the boad and no preflop raise. Plus we have a lot of outs against them anyway.

River is a pretty easy call, I expect you'll chop most of the time, and you aren't folding another ace.

[private joker]

[ QUOTE ]
Flop is standard.



[/ QUOTE ]

Is it? Everyone loves the flop call, but I'm not crazy about our reverse implied odds if we're outkicked. I'm not sure the backdoor flush adds enough value to our hand to continue with TPNK on a board with 3 broadways and 2 hearts. What are you doing when the 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif hits the turn? Raising and calling a 3-bet, then folding if you don't fill up?

I think some consideration can be giving to folding.

[einbert]

I hate your turn raise, I can't see why everyone is saying it is standard. It basically accomplishes no purpose. It never folds out a better hand or a hand that is drawing live, it often simply makes it more expensive for us to draw and we are getting three-bet a decent amount of the time here. If we hit our flush on the river we are getting checked to instead of probably bet into, meaning we win 1 or 2 bets instead of 2 or 3 or 4. UTG got called on *that* board by three players and still bet out on *that* board into three players. He has you beat like 90% of the time here, maybe more. Best case scenario is that he also has an ace with no kicker and you are splitting the pot with him, but I see him checking that hand on the flop or turn an awful lot.

I would like to hear an explanation of what you think the turn raise accomplishes and what range of hands you put UTG+1 on when he bets the turn. Specifically what in the world can you beat that he might hold.

I thought it was standard.
We have 20 outs to improve against AT,AJ on the turn.

9 to the flush, 8 to a halve (1[A],2[Q],3[9],2[K]),and 3 to 2pr.

We're already freerolling every other Ace.

We have outs against every possible hand out there.

I think the raise is for value.

[einbert]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought it was standard.
We have 19 outs to improve against AT,AJ on the turn.

9 to the flush, 7 to a halve and 3 to 2pr.

We're already freerolling every other Ace.

We have outs against every possible hand out there.

I think the raise is for value.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Kwaz,

If we are freerolling every time, the raise is great of course. Because we can never have the worst hand, so we should raise the turn until we are all in. But the times that we are freerolling, when weighted with all the times that we are behind (frequently far behind), add up to a pretty serious equity deficit. Also considering the fact that if we are freerolling against another naked ace playing the board for kickers, it doesn't seem very likely that a loose and fishy player would bet into us on this board after getting called on the flop in three spots. It seems to me that we are much more likely significantly behind. Even with the middle player in between who, yes, is most likely drawing, I don't think we have 33% equity overall in this pot. UTG+1, who was stated as being "loose and fishy", which I take to mean fairly passive after the flop, has to have the lion's share of equity by far in this pot to bet the turn on this quite intimidating board. I think he just has two pair or better way too often, and he will definitely have JT or aces up a high percentage of the time, against both of which we are drawing very slim (more than a 4-1 dog, with additional reverse implied odds if we improve to a second best hand on the river which will be often).

Sure our hand is pretty and the turn is a really good card for us. But just because our hand has improved and there is a third player in who we are most likely ahead of, doesn't mean that raising is right. We have to strongly consider this passive player who continues firing despite the scary board and multiple players remaining in the pot. These players don't play this way with naked aces--if so it is only rarely. I still would like to see a reasonable range of hands for him that doesn't have us crushed the vast majority of the time.

Good luck,
einbert

[brettbrettr]

I agree with Einbert here. I don't necessarily think that we're behind 90% of the time, but certainly a significant amount of the time. I also really like the idea of getting in two bets on a good river rather than the one. Yes, its the same as getting them in on the turn but there you don't have all the risk of being three-bet.

If I were you I'd play post-flop in a call-call-call type way. If I were me I'd raise the river because it would have been a club.

[einbert]

Hi Brett,

[ QUOTE ]
I don't necessarily think that we're behind 90% of the time, but certainly a significant amount of the time

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to clarify, I meant that I think of the times we aren't splitting the pot currently, we are behind 90% of the time. And I still think that that is pretty accurate.

Good luck,
einbert

[brettbrettr]

Good clarification. Yes, I think in that sense it might even be higher than 90%.

[badbill7]

i guess with implied we have odds to call on flop.i think we are getting about four outs at this point. i might even go with a three but i guess i still peel. I like the turn raise but i dont know if it was the best play. Please explain why this has a positive ev if it does at all. I think we probably check fold river. dont see tighty as calling two cold on turn without having an ace and us outkicked at the very least

[TheDelChop]

Why are you not raising the river, you obviously have the best hand.

Dont you often see players with hands like K-10 bet cause they have a pair and a straight draw? When he board pairs on the end and you didn't raise the flop, I can see him thinking his pair is the best hand on the river. I doubt he has A-K, A-Q, or A-9, as you would have heard about it on the turn, so if he has an Ace you are probably splitting anyways.

If he turned up K-10 I woudl be pissed about missing a value raise.

[einbert]

Honestly, I'm not sure but I think the flop is awfully close to a fold. I haven't played full much in a long time, but it seems like we are beaten without much chance of drawing out the vast majority of the time. And the pot isn't really large. A loose and passive player bets out on what I consider to be an intimidating flop into four players, and two of them have called already, both of which could easily be ahead of us. I don't see us being ahead here except very rarely, and of the times we are ahead we are going to get draw out on extremely often. A4s is a tough hand to play even from the button, and this is a tough decision, but I think that I lean towards a fold here.

[damaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
Why are you not raising the river, you obviously are either behind or chopping.

[/ QUOTE ]

[thejameser]

IMO, i don't see that turn raise, without the merit of fold equity, being anything other than spewing. why charge yourself to draw?

[ QUOTE ]
I like calling on the flop since our kicker is pretty weak and two have called. See what the turn brings for us.

Good turn card. I like your raise for a free showdown and it also extracts value from the guy in the middle.

On the river I'd just call hoping to split it. I don't see too much value in raising here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep.

UTG PFR stats are 6%. That almost certainly includes AA, KK, QQ, AK and AQ a vast majority of the time.
I think we can discount these holdings a fair amount.
Leaving A9, KQ, JT. I don't think he bets the flop with K9, Q9.

Considering the worst possible scenario is he holds JT. We still have 20% equity.
With the overlay from the other villian I think the raise is fine.
If this fish 3bets, if you thought he was ahead before - you can be sure now, and can fold the river UI. If he 3bets, he's betting the river aswell and you have same/higher implied odds for the flush outs.

If he calls your turn raise and checks to you on the river, you earn the same from your flush anyway.

It also allows you to take a free showdown a nonzero amount of time when we don't improve on the river.

I'll conceed it may not be standard or possibly not the best play, but this can never be as bad as you're making it out.
I think it comes down to how certain you are that UTG the fish has you 'crushed'.

[einbert]

Hi Chop,

[ QUOTE ]
If he turned up K-10 I woudl be pissed about missing a value raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he turned up KT I wouldn't be pissed about missing a value raise, but I would be extremely surprised. I think if he even bets the turn with KT, we need to accept the fact that our player read is very very far from correct. I don't think our player read will be this far from correct very often at all.

Good luck,
einbert

[brettbrettr]

[ QUOTE ]
If this fish 3bets, if you thought he was ahead before - you can be sure now, and can fold the river UI. If he 3bets, he's betting the river aswell and you have same/higher implied odds for the flush outs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't like paying three bets to showdown a hand I could have for two. I guess, another question is comparing the % of the time he three bets to the % of the time you hit your flush. While I agree you can take a FSD a nonzero (love the word) amount of time, a greater nonzero amount of time you raise and face a river donk.

There also exists the possiblity that he three bets the turn and checks a club river.

Overall, I don't think its a horrible play, or even that bad. I just think it might be unwarranted and not as good as simply calling.

And honestly, its really hard to discount those top holdings that much when his PFR is so low.

Just for kicks. I stoved a whole bunch of scenarios.

If 2nd Villian holds a heart FD.
And UTG holds.
AJ,AT
The raise is nuetral EV.

If he holds Ax where x is 9>
Our equity is 48%.

If UTG or Villian2 hold anything that crush us
Our equity is ~20%.

Villian has to have us beaten ~58% for the raise not to be correct.
I'll conceed that this is probably so.

I raise the River. I don't put villain on AK or AQ due to preflop behavior. I think the vast majority of the time you have a chop pot. I raise and hope he folds AT thinking he has kicker issues

[brettbrettr]

Thanks for doing the grunt work!!!!

Instead of raising the turn couldn't we :

A) call here, and raise a river flush / call a non flush?

wouldn't this be the most profitable way to play it? You put 2 bets (maybe more) in with the flush and don't have many worries about being 3-bet with a better hand.

Would this also charge UTG+1 as if he called one, he will probably continue to call? I guess the only problem with this is we don't charge UTG+1 to pay for his flush / straight draw and we miss the value on the turn (however if he has a sd/fd he would often have as many as 12 outs. Not a huge equity edge?)


That way when we make flush we commit a total 3 bets as a huge favourite. On the turn if we raise we commit a total of 3 bets when we make our flush but may also get 3-bet on the turn and it may end up costing us far more.

True

[W. Deranged]

Thanks for all the responses guys. I think this generated some really interesting discussion.

1. Flop:

I agree with Brett and Einbert that this is awfully close to a fold. But we are getting 9-1 here and we're effectively closing the action here as the blinds are unlikely to have hit that board hard and often wouldn't check-raise because of the pre-flop action anyway. We have 2-3 outs to 2 pair and 1.5 outs for the back door draw, and if you factor in the chopping possibilities and such I think we can certainly presume 4.5-5 outs which is a very marginal call getting 9-1 with a couple of possible callers behind us.

I think the major point about the flop call is the chopping question. The fact that the board is so scary means that we are not really that "dominated" by a lot of better As. We have effectively 3 chop outs against AJ, 5 against AT, 7 against A9 and so on. UTG+1 is sort of passive pre-flop but he's still a 6% pfr and so I'm really not that worried about AQ, AK, KK, or QQ. The only real concern is JTo but I think giving that too much credit is seeing monster under the bed.

2. The turn is the really interesting street here. My major thought here is that the super passive guy between me and the bettor is often on a draw here that in general my equity is going to be much better relatively speaking while he still is in the pot rather than on the river if he misses and gets out. Putting in one bet on the turn and then one on the river when I miss and the passive/drawing dude misses as well seems very obviously much worse than putting in two on the turn with the guy still drawing, with me still having tons of opportunities to improve, and then taking a free showdown unimproved. The fact that the guy in early position is passive and is almost never three-betting with a better A and often not with a two pair hand like KQ makes this more viable. Again, the only hand he could have against which I really don't want to be raising is exactly JT.

I think some of the numerical work done on the turn question is very helpful, but the 58% number that was derived I think is too low in that it's neglecting the fact that if we take a free showdown after our raise it really doesn't matter if we're ahead or behind on the turn as we're putting those same two bets anyway. Obviously this is mitigated somewhat by the possibility of three-bet, but, again, there aren't many hands that villain could have that merit three-betting other than exactly JT. (I think Brett and Einbert are probably both overestimating the likelihood of a three-bet and hence underestimating the free-showdown value of this play).

I think it should also be considered that the weird bettor doesn't necessarily have to have us crushed to beat us here. With stats like that, he could easily just have a medium A and be chopping with us on the turn and/or holding a hand like AT against which we are drawing very live.

3. The river is kind of interesting too. Everyone is right that we're chopping the vast majority of the time. I have a hard time putting villain on either a better hand or a worse hand that'll call a river bet (sometimes this is a last-ditch bluff with a missed heart draw or something). The decision between raise and call comes down to weighing those two minute quantities, and, ultimately, it's not a hugely crucial decision because the vast majority of the time the question is entirely moot. The fact that I would get three-bet by a boat and often not called by a worse hand (and hence needed to be 66% or more confident that I had the best hand) led me to call the river.


Results: Deranged calls.

UTG+1 shows KQo and MHIG.