15-30 Do you change your plan on the turn?

[Clarkmeister]

Commerce 15-30. Pure maniac in every sense of the word just left the table, but the table is still stirred up and in overaggressive mode. People have drastically changed their preflop raise-calling standards. Average pot is 3-4 bets preflop 3 ways.

Decent but tilting aggressive player raises almost all-in from EP. I 3-bet with black KK in MP. Overaggressive but thinking BB defends and EP calls. 3 to the flop for about 10sbs.

Flop: Ts 6h 3c. Checked to me, I bet, BB checkraises (this means a pair, could be top pair, bottom pair, pocket pair, but its definitely a pair), EP calls all-in for 3 chips. I decide that in this is a good spot for a "smoothcall the flop and raise the turn" play (something I'm using less and less often), especially since the sidepot will encourage the overaggressive BB to keep betting no matter what to get headsup with the all-in player.

So I call. 2 live players to the turn with a 1BB sidepot and a 6.5BB sidepot involving the EP all-in player.


Turn: Ac BB bets. Change plans?

Your move.

[elysium]

hi clark
go ahead and raise, check down the river. it'll cost the same and you may get the fold right now.

[Dynasty]

There is no reason whatsoever to check the river. You haven't even seen how your opponent reacts to your turn raise.

[Ed S.]

I think you can lay it down in this wild game. Guy has two pair or just made trips. Knowing when to release big hands in a game like this is key. It can save you your butt and your sanity. I would have to lay them down here. Unless you think he is pushingn top pair too far, then you can re-raise to find out. If he re-raise you just call down all the way here to look him up, but in this game you should already have a feel for this particular person.

Ed S.

[rtrombone]

This is a good, interesting hand.

At first glance, I'm not sure what to do. So I'd probably raise. After giving it some thought, though, maybe calling is the better play.

What do you hope to accomplish by raising? Usually, you want to reduce your opponents' pot odds. But you're heads-up here for the side. Sometimes you bluff-raise or semi-bluff raise. Again, not applicable here. So if you raise here, it's either (a) a raise for value or (b) a "check behind at the river unless you spike a king; you were going to call him down anyways" raise.

The ace ruins your plan to raise for value. It's a scary card if all he has is one pair. If you raise, most sensible players will fold. You're heads-up for the side. It's not likely you're bluffing. He's going to get to see your hand.

The raise planning to check behind unless you spike a king isn't a good idea here, either. This is a great play if the guy just calls you. Now you lose the same number of bets you would have had you just called him down, and you get an extra bet when you spike a king. The problem is that if he doesn't simply fold to your raise, you're getting 3-bet because he has two pair. He will definitely 3-bet with aces up and probably with any two pair, since it's not likely you have AT. Needless to say, he will 3-bet with a set.

So raising for this reason doesn't work, either.

I'd call and bet if checked to at the river. If bet into again, I guess I'd call and hope he has a pocket pair or busted straight draw. To induce a bet from a weak hand at the river, I'd think a while before calling the turn.

It seems to me the only hand he can have that makes raising the turn correct is 54s for a straight draw. Anything else, it's better to call.

[elysium]

hi dynasty
that's right. i need to paraphrase in there somewhere that if clark is not comfortable with the reaction by his opponent when he raises the turn, then check it down. naturally this would also include a card coming off on the river that doesn't help clark. i just want to point out dynasty, that it costs clark the same amount if for any reason he is deciding against raising the turn. i'm addressing primarily the turn raise, not the river bet if all looks well. but i should have included more river info than i did. thank you dynasty. by the way, every time we get in these little back and forths, i get disturbing pop up ads. that isn't you i hope dynasty. as i'm writing this they're popping.

[Dynasty]

The ace ruins your plan to raise for value. It's a scary card if all he has is one pair. If you raise, most sensible players will fold.

Actually, only weak-tight players will fold. Sensible players will call with one pair (like JT). The pot is way too big to be folding a 5-out hand. That, of course, makes raising a far better option than calling since some players will fold their one pair hand.

[anatta]

[ QUOTE ]
I decide that in this is a good spot for a "smoothcall the flop and raise the turn" play (something I'm using less and less often),

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems like a good spot. He will bet the turn like you said and your hand is strong. Why are you using this play less and less?

I think you should still raise on the turn. It would be really hard for even an overaggressive player to three bet you here without at least a good ace. When you raise the turn, he's got to make you for the ace, and he still has to beat the all in guy for most of the pot even if you fold.

[hutz]

Let me see if I have this straight: The game is still semi-tilty/over-aggressive, you are against an over-aggressive opponent, and you are likely perceived by your thinking opponent as hyper-aggressive.

Pre-flop:

BB thinks: "That damned punk kid is trying to isolate the all-in guy. I'll call with my [smallish (99 or below) pocket pair or two Broadway cards] and see what happens on the flop."

Flop:

BB: "I'd have bet my small set hoping for a chance to 3-bet. Instead, I've got [top pair or a smallish pocket pair bigger than the second card on the board], so I'm going to check-raise the punk kid off his stiff ace or overcards."

EP: "Darn, BB checked, so I have to wait to call off my last three chips before I go home."

Clarky: "I love my hand and I'd bet here with pretty much anything I'd have 3-bet pre-flop, so let 'er rip."

BB: "Ha! The punk kid fell for my trap. I'm going to raise and lead the turn regardless of what falls."

EP: "Finally! Now I can burn off the rest of my stack."

Clarky: "I'm going to pop this guy on the turn."

Turn:

BB: "That card should scare him. I'm going to follow through with my aggressive plan to bet the turn regardless of what fell."

EP: "I'm not in the hand anymore, let's check out the scenery. Wow, that chick's got a nice bod . . . ."

Clarky: "Hmmm . . . this guy had a pair of some sort on the flop, he's overly aggressive, and thinks I'm even more aggressive. Raise!"

[rigoletto]

Guy has two pair or just made trips.

How on earth do you read this from a checkraise and turn bet from an overagressive player? Of course he is going to bet the turn after just getting called on the flop, especially when a scarecard hits.

[Philuva]

I would raise. I don't think you can fear AT or a set. I think a pocket pair, 9T, TJ, etc. are more common.

If he 3-bets I would call down.

If he just calls, I would bet the river as well.

[gonores]

[ QUOTE ]
Why are you using this play less and less?


[/ QUOTE ]

If I remember correctly, Clark's theory is that three-betting the flop is way less likely to set off sirens than the smooth-call with a turn raise. The result of Clark's strategy is more call-downs.

As far as the hand goes, pocket pair is what I am sensing. I would call the turn bet, hoping to induce another bet on the river. You're putting in at least two bets anyways, he's not letting go of a better hand, and he's dropping his crappy 2nd pair or worse if you raise the turn, so you won't get more than two BB out of a worse hand.

Or maybe $2/$4 players like myself should stay out of the high stakes forum.

[JasonM]

Just a thought but it seems like you are more concerned with what the all-in player has. You don't want the BB to fold yet so if the all-in player has an ace you can make up the lost bets. I would just call the turn and raise the river.

[bruce]

Obviously folding is out of the question. I would either call the bb's bet and on the river if he checks, then bet, and if he bets I probably would still call or I might go ahead and raise the bb's turn bet and depending upon his reaction and the river card either check or bet. As to the
percentages I would play either way I'm not real sure right now, but probably I would raise the turn around 60% of the time.

Bruce

[andyfox]

The fact that the turn card is the ace of clubs makes a turn raise a bit more attractive, since BB might then have Tc-?c and have picked up a flush draw. Plus you say this is the kind of guy who will "keep betting no matter what."

On the other side of the equation, you say BB is a thinking player. You 3-bet pre-flop and then just flat-called his turn raise. Most players would put you on A-K. Yet he bets when an ace hits on the turn. If he has met beat, he may well 3-bet my turn raise since he's overaggressive.

All things considered, then, I'd just call the turn and call again (or bet if he checks) on the river.

[Georgia Peach]

I think you raise here as planned. KK is too good a hand to do otherwise. If re-raised, crying calls to the end.

[Ulysses]

Would this guy 3-bet w/ something like TcJc?

I think I like the Angeloesque "call down and bet if checked to on the river" plan here.

[Gabe]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, only weak-tight players will fold. Sensible players will call with one pair (like JT). The pot is way too big to be folding a 5-out hand. That, of course, makes raising a far better option than calling since some players will fold their one pair hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

He was playing at the Commerce.

[rtrombone]

This is true, but Clarkmeister described the guy as "thinking."

Dynasty is right that if the guy has a live 5-outer you have to raise. If he has a straight draw you have to raise. If he has a club draw you have to raise. You don't mind him calling or folding with any of these hands. Either you win the side pot or charge him two bets to draw out.

If he has a pocket pair, it's better to call.

If he has aces up you're drawing to two outs. If he has two small pair, raising becomes incorrect because you have the odds to just call and try to hit your 8-outer.

But it's not likely he has two small pair. He called two bets cold pre-flop. His most likely holdings are one pair or aces up.

I've changed my mind again. Given that you can probably safely fold to a 3-bet here, a raise is in order.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
Given that you can probably safely fold to a 3-bet here, a raise is in order.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't think pair + turned flush draw is a likely enough hand for the aggressive player to be 3-betting?

[Pot-A]

What a yucky turn card. I'd probably call it down, but I think folding isn't out of the question. A raise doesn't buy you anything unless he picked up the flush draw - he has the ace or he doesn't.

[rtrombone]

Basically, no. If the two clubs had flopped, I'd say yes.

What are the odds that he has two clubs? It's definitely possible, but they've gotta be considerably less than 50/50 right?

Plus, it would take a very aggressive opponent to 3-bet when Clarkmeister has basically announced he has AK or better. It's true that you will find these types of players at Commerce. I guess it depends on how likely you think a guy will make this play.

But again, I put him on one pair or aces up before I put him on a pair + club draw. Remember, a good, aggressive player will bet his one pair again when the ace hits.

[Maroon]

Hmmm. An "overaggressive but thinking" player would have capped preflop with AK or QQ, and the only hands containing a ten that they would both call 2 bets and then check-raise this flop with are TT, JhTh, or JcTc. Would anyone call two bets with AhTh if you were the BB here? I wouldn't.

Then an Ace comes with a flush draw, and he leads out anyway. Could the Ace have hit him? Wouldn't an overaggressive type reraise with AK preflop? And would any thinking player check-raise that flop with AQ or AJ? Seems to me he either has the club draw himself with precisely JcTc, he made an odd call preflop with AhTh, or he flopped a set.

I could be wrong, but if I am, I suspect this person is not as much a "thinking" player as you give him credit for being.

[AceHigh]

[ QUOTE ]
Turn: Ac BB bets. Change plans?

Your move.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the table wasn't so aggressive, I think I would do the raise the turn as the last money I put in the pot play. If you can safely fold to a 3-bet, I would raise the turn and probably check it down on the river. If you can't I would just call him down on turn and river.

[mikelow]

Back from torrid Europe (the weather--not my poker play).

I'd say a call on the turn, but no more. Game is tilted so I'm in this all the way. Raise is questionable as you could be up against Ax.

[Clarkmeister]

I thought this one was particularly tough because of the all in player. When the BB bets into me, there is 2BB in the side pot. I certainly could have BB beat. But the initial preflop raiser in EP, while on tilt, certainly could have an ace the way he played the hand.

So I thought all 3 options were possible. Headsup, I would never consider folding, but I think its an option given that even if I do have the BB beat, I still have to survive a possible ace from the all in player. With a mere 2BB in the side pot, I think this is a legitimate way to go.

Calling down is certainly a reasonable option, especially since I almost certainly have 2 clean outs, even if I am behind.

Raising is reasonable as well, but not if I can't fold to a 3-bet. Its even better if BB will muck a 5 out hand (unlikely, but possible). Many of you want to call down if BB 3-bets me on the turn, and I can't see that as a superior play to just calling down. I think raising is only viable if its with the intention of folding to a raise, and value betting the river if just called.

Anyways, I don't know what is the right option.

In the hand, I raised, she 3-bet and I folded. The river was a low blank. BB showed ATo for top two pair and won both pots. All-in lost with AJo for a pair of aces.

More than happy to see more thoughts on this one.

Thanks for the feedback.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I decide that in this is a good spot for a "smoothcall the flop and raise the turn" play (something I'm using less and less often),

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems like a good spot. He will bet the turn like you said and your hand is strong. Why are you using this play less and less?

I think you should still raise on the turn. It would be really hard for even an overaggressive player to three bet you here without at least a good ace. When you raise the turn, he's got to make you for the ace, and he still has to beat the all in guy for most of the pot even if you fold.



[/ QUOTE ]

1. I use it less and less because I find that people are willing to go 3, 4, 5, 6+ bets on the flop before they put you on TP/TK or an overpair. That night at Commerce on 3 separate occassions I went 7 bets on the flop with TP/TK or top two pair and I was good on all 3 hands at the time.

2. Your thoughts about the turn raise mirror mine. I think that my raise looks awful scary to any one pair hand, especially when the bulk of the pot is protected by an all-in player. That's why I raised, because I felt I could safely fold to a 3-bet. And while that read was correct this time, I am still not sure that raising is superior to callling down or even folding.

[elysium]

hi clark
you played it fine. good lay-down; cost the same.

[Clarkmeister]

Good analysis.

I am certainly betting for value on the river if I am called on the turn (especially since all-in could easily have an ace), so its not a free showdown raise.

What I think I need for the raise to be correct is for BB to muck a 5 out hand, something that I suspect won't happen very often, but might happen more often than usual in this spot because of the all in player. There is some small advantage to getting a 2 out hand to fold if that pocket pair won't put in any money on the river unless it improves.

[AceHigh]

[ QUOTE ]
I was good on all 3 hands at the time.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just curious, were your opponents on draws? Maybe they were thinking they were giving up a ton of EV by overplaying there draws. I dunno.

[ QUOTE ]
I am still not sure that raising is superior to callling down or even folding.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know if it's superior in this one instance or not. But I am thinking in the long run it's probably better in a meta-game sort of way. Opponents may have to call you down when you raise the turn with a set or other very strong hand, because of the way you sometimes play medium strength hands.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
Or maybe $2/$4 players like myself should stay out of the high stakes forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Definitely not. As you move up from 2-4 to 3-6 to 5-10 (especially online) you will find more and more players who play a decent mid-limit style of game. Posting in here can only help. Note that Dynasty, myself, vehn, majorkong and others were all strictly 4-8 players between 1 and 3 years ago. Taking shots at higher games and butting heads with the medium stakes posters helped us all advance.

gl

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
Would this guy 3-bet w/ something like TcJc?

I think I like the Angeloesque "call down and bet if checked to on the river" plan here.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know what, I don't think so.

I've found that my aggression makes people far less likely to try stuff like that against me on the expensive streets. The trick is using that information to make as many correct turn folds as I can without them noticing and taking shots.

I think you may be right about the correct course of action. As of this moment, I think calling is slightly better than folding which is slightly better than raising. But I think they are all razor close.

[Diplomat]

Hey Clark,

as I was reading your posts a thought drifted into the back of my brain from several months back about the whole raise-the-turn-and-fold-to-a-three-bet thing...I think a couple of the merits people mentioned were that calling the turn and calling the river costs the same, and you make him/her show down the hand, and you give yourself a chance to spike a king on the river. (even though it's a very thin draw)

I'm not sure if I support this line of play, but I'm wondering how closely you considered it. You might want to fold out a hand with five outs, but what about a hand like TcJc folding -you- out with a three-bet?

-Diplomat

[andyfox]

An opponent has shown power on the flop. Now an ace comes on the turn. She bets again. She either wants you to raise or he is trying to fake his way through to the pot. Which is it?

In general, in a medium stakes game, it's more likely the ace helped her hand or she already had a hand that beat a hand that the ace helped. As the stakes go up, it's more likely that the bet doesn't quite mean what it is representing. This is especially true when a flush draw in the suit of one of the non-top cards comes on the turn.

Here you 3-bet pre-flop and just called his check-raise on the flop. She will most likely, then, put you on A-K. Yet she bets when an ace comes on the turn.

Perhaps the deciding factor here should be the presence of the all-in player. If she doesn't have an ace, she might be tempted to bet this scare card, but the all-in player can't be scared since he's all-in.