Best strategy with AQo against calling station when miss

[thwang99]

What's the best way to play this, say you have AQo preflop, and open-raise. Folded to one loose CS who calls with any piece of the flop. Say you flop cheese, do you bet till the river and check the river? Say he bets when you check the river, do you call knowing you're beat?

I'm thinking the best strategy might be check-fold if you miss the flop, since he'll only bet if he hits some part of the flop.

For example, you raise AQo PF, flop 769 two spades. You bet, he calls. Turn Kh, you bet, he calls. River 8s. You check, he bets. What do you do? I folded.

- Tony

[thwang99]

I just want to add, he calls almost all his flops that you just know he'll bust out eventually and he does.

I later have KT and board is KK33A, he calls me till river with A9o, for example.
- Tony

[John Feeney]

Without knowing more I suspect your fold was correct. About your bets though...

You can bet it all the way *if* he'll call with nothing (such as his own ace-high or some weak draw or whatever). You're betting for value. This value betting with no pair gets tricky though and requires a very good feel for the opp's play.

But if his initial call signals to you that he has some pair, then you don't want to keep betting his hand for him. And you wouldn't want to check-call if his bet (or previous call) tells you with great confidence that he has a pair and will not be raised or bet off of it, right? There check-folding is right. So you might take one shot at the flop, then revert to check-fold if his action tells you to.

[thwang99]

That's what I thought, but it seems so weak, I am afraid he'll pick up on it (he was "pairing against my missed AQ AK's" a lot). - Tony

[John Feeney]

Just keep in mind that against a true calling station, one who is very hard to bluff off a hand, your profit comes from your value bets. If, whenever you have something (sometimes maybe even a just a good ace-high), he'll call with almost anything, and won't bet unless he has a pair, he's just a nice passive, easy to read opponent. (Your profit also comes from your correct reads leading to correct folds.) You'll know where he's at most of the time, and will know what to do.

If he starts bluffing because he's begun to realize that if he bets you'll put him on a pair and fold if you don't have one, then he's started to change (against you), and you just need to be aware of that and adjust accordingly. To try to pervent him from beginning to bluff you could lean toward the occasional looser call when it's close. But typically a player like that adapting to you that way is not a major concern. Such players tend not to do a lot of thinking, adjusting, and changing their play. If they did they wouldn't be calling stations, you know? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[onegymrat]

thwang,
Folding was the ONLY thing to do in your situation. You must bet, and I can't stress enough, must bet when headsup even if you miss with AQ on the flop and turn. You know that soon enough, he'll run into you when you have a monster hand...

[John Feeney]

[ QUOTE ]
You must bet, and I can't stress enough, must bet when headsup even if you miss with AQ on the flop and turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

gymrat,

Frequently this is true, and is probably even a good rule of thumb in heads-up (non-ring game) play. But I think the case described is an exception. Let me see if I can explain it: When you know the opp won't fold, and is in fact calling with a better hand, betting is simply putting chips in the pot when you're behind and (as I recall the current case) lack the pot odds to bet your draw (overcards which may or may not be good if they hit) for value. Depending on the degree to which this opp is a true calling station, as described, betting will cost you here. The exceptions would be appropriate bets for value with your good ace-high, and initial bets on the flop (when you don't yet know if he has anything and would like to take the pot). Note as well that even in heads-up play (not a heads-up situation in a ring game) letting a very aggressive opp bet your hand for you can be a legitimate and profitable tactic. So you don't want to fall victim to it, even against an opp who's employing it unwittingly.

That said, you can make a case for betting here to disguise those times, and get paid off, when you do have something. But I think (a) that's too costly against a calling station, and (b) this guy's going to pay you off anyway. Whaddaya think?

[TBone]

Hmmm...this is a tough one, that I've fallen victim to many times. I think the best approach to this, especially if you're at a good table (ie. money-making table) is to mix it up--especially if you're going to be there an hour or more? Sometimes when you have AK, AQ, maybe AJ or KQ and raise, get no piece of the flop, bet it all the way. Sometimes check it. Sometimes check when you raise pre-flop and get hit upside the head with the flop, (with the intent of check-raising) and sometimes come out betting. A good thing to try would be to bet to the river against a non-calling station type, fold on a raise if you haven't paired up. Check-fold against a calling station type. I've lost a lot of money trying to value bet/bluff a calling station, even though I've known they'd call me down. I doubt your opponents would be astute enough to pick up on the fact you're selectively choosing where to make these moves and not. This goes along with the Fundamental Theorem of Poker--your opponents make mistakes when they play differently than they would if they could see your cards. If you mix up your play a bit in this situation, you could wind up making more money, and minimizing losses.

Am I giving too much credit to the other players at these tables--assuming they may actually watch, and pay attention to your actions? Perhaps? Thoughts?

T

[onegymrat]

John,
You are absolutely correct. Good explanation. I think my nickel's worth of advice was based on my own experience at a 6-12 level at my usual stomping grounds. I have witnessed various types of "calling stations", but they do seem to wise up after losing three or so costly hands due to poor chasing habits. I guess my intention was to express my view about not letting a "calling station" deter you from playing an aggressive type of poker. I do well in games where it gets a bit passive for an extended period of time and I adjust and step on the gas a bit, similar to the hand described. And I'll ease off when a few start calling more often, or someone decides to see my raises aggressively. T-bone is also right on about adjusting your game at a table with numerous "calling stations."

[JTG51]

That said, you can make a case for betting here to disguise those times, and get paid off, when you do have something. But I think (a) that's too costly against a calling station, and (b) this guy's going to pay you off anyway.

Part (b) is exatly what I was thinking. You don't need to give a calling station any more reason to call, that's what he does already.

[onegymrat]

TBone,
You are right on the money (pun intended). Although I think the average player (at least where I play) is not as attentive as you give them credit at the end of your post. The unattentive, weaker regulars are changing seats or tables so much (to get a luckier seat!?) it's hard to hone it on them for a long profit. There are a few grinders who watch me as close as I watch them, but only a few. But I agree totally with your post. I feel it's good to give off a tight/aggressive persona, with tight selective preflop play, so the bluffs will work better when the time comes. Do you agree?

[thwang99]

That's the way I see it now. AGainst a player that will call with 56s to a preflop raise and call down to the river on a K62r flop when I have AQo, I'd bet the flop, see him call, then go into check-fold mode unless I hit on the turn.

ONLY against predictable calling station types.

- Tony

[Drunk Bob]

you were right to fold if this was a true calling station.....

[Drunk Bob]

Who won the over/under ?