Going for a double

[Coilean]

I have 8/images/graemlins/heart.gif7/images/graemlins/heart.gif in the BB, a generally reasonable player limps UTG, a fairly new player UTG+1 raises, folded to me, I call, UTG calls.

The three of us see the flop of K/images/graemlins/diamond.gifT/images/graemlins/heart.gif9/images/graemlins/club.gif. Checked to UTG+1 who bets, I call, UTG folds.

The turn is the 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif. I check, UTG+1 bets, I raise, and UTG+1 thinks for a while before calling.

River is the A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif. I check. Comments?

[PokerBabe(aka)]

Hi Coilean. Did you put your opponent on exactly J,Q for the higher straight? /images/graemlins/confused.gif I think you can bet this river and that your hand is most likely good.

LGPG,
Babe /images/graemlins/heart.gif

[SoBeDude]

I assume since you titled this post 'going for a double' you were hoping for a check-raise, thinking the ace helped out your opponent's hand to the point where they might bet it.

But I think many people are afraid of betting in to someone who just check-raised them on the turn, so this type of play has to be very player-specific.

I think in many cases, your LP opponent will check behind and you miss collecting a bet on the river. So over the long-run, you'll make less money by checking and going for the check-raise, than you would by betting out.

-Scott

[elysium]

hi coil
what are you doing checking the river? terrible coil. how could the A have possibly helped him? he checked it down on you dang it. you've got to bet it. you're a 100% guaranteed winner. you can't lose. he will call or raise. bet.

[risen]

It's kind of hard to get someone to fall for a check raise twice. Once you've checkraised someone, all the aggression and intiative is on your side. Your opponent must realize that he's beaten on the turn, or he would have popped you for 3. It takes a very special kind of fish to get themselves check raised on the turn and river. Just go ahead and bet the river, You'll probably get called out of curiosity, but even if you don't, you're going to get 1 BB out of this situation quite a bit more than you'll get 2.

[Gabe]

He was asking if he should go for the second check-raise.

[mikelow]

I would have bet. I think it's going check-check.

[PokerBabe(aka)]

Yes, re-reading the post, it's clear that Coilean was asking if his river check to induce a bet was correct. I say NO way. I think the opponent checks it if given a free ride. At least I would check it through there.

LGPG, Babe /images/graemlins/heart.gif

[J_V]

I really don't like what the other posters have said here. Most are right that you shouldn't go for the double here, but there logic is hazy and a little off track, IMO.

The problem is that most opponents aren't thinking. They should be thinking, "no one tries for the double so the Ace scares him." Look at the other posters comments here, they are happy to check anything so they can see your hand, they really aren't worried about making . They aren't thinking about what your river check means. Now while that is hurting their bottom line, it's helping them in this rare spot where you were actually going for the double c/r.(Obviously).

They are only gonna bet if the ace actually hit them, and it's unlikely it did. The double works best when you can put your opponent on a hand so big, that as much as he doesn't want to bet it, he psychologically can't stop himself. Most players are too weak in this spot to go for more. I've learned by breaking Dave Kingman's strikeout record in this department. Good post.

[skp]

Well, if I were Coilean's opponent, he would induce me to bet the river with KQ or better once he checks the river.

Whether Coilean should go for the double depends most on whether his opponent would call the turn checkraise with an underpair to the King (which he probably would given that QQ and JJ would leave him with a gutshot). So, I think that Coilean should bet in this spot.

[Coilean]

My opponent bet the river after I checked, and I raised. She called all-in for 4 more chips (my mistake that I hadn't noticed how short her stack was at the time) and I won the pot.

Clearly the consensus is against me on this one, but since there seems so little respect for turn check raises in this game (the Commerce 40-80), I thought I might be able to get away with this type of play every now and again. The value betting can be pretty aggressive here, and my opponent might put me on just a K or an abandoned move, and if she has little herself I might get another bet from a desperation bluff. Any thoughts on this from others who play in this game?

[andyfox]

"there seems so little respect for turn check raises in this game (the Commerce 40-80), I thought I might be able to get away with this type of play every now and again. The value betting can be pretty aggressive here, and my opponent might put me on just a K or an abandoned move, and if she has little herself I might get another bet from a desperation bluff. Any thoughts on this from others who play in this game?"

Just so. mike l. alluded to this in my 30-60 post. The 40-80 games at Commerce usually feature a much higher percentage of loose/aggressive players than the 30-60 game. [Note I say "games" for the 40-80 and "game" for the 30-60. During the afternoon, there is usually only one 30-60 game going and three or four 40-80 games. More on this below.]

Check-raising the turn is common. It can mean a monster, a picked-up draw, a bluff or any combination of the above. So when a check-raiser now checks the river, this encourages a value bet (or bluff) behind. This is especially true when an ace hits on the river.

The 30-60 game is the first step towards higher stakes for the 20-40 players; there are usually three or four 20-40 games going. So the game is populated by a good percentage of the more conservative 20-40 players either takinga shot or moving up. The 40-80 games have a bunch of players who sometimes play higher but are either temporarily slumming (running bad) or waiting for the bigger game. There is a much bigger player pool of regular 40-80 players than 30-60 players at Commerce. The game is usually much looser and more aggressive than the 30-60.

Hope you're enjoying your stay both pokerwise and otherwise.

[Ian M.]

Does anyone dislike this call on the flop? It looks like there may be only 4 good outs w/ the backdoor flush draw.
Just curious what others thought about the call.

[andyfox]

I don't even like the pre-flop call.

[Gabe]

Yes, I too, would strongly advise Coilean not to try to check-raise the PokerBabe again.

[DrSavage]

If she is so shortstacked you should bet. Most likely she will raise you all in anyway with any kind of decent hand, at least that's what these kinds of players have been doing in my experience.

[J_V]

It doesn't take a special kind of fish - it takes a good player that realizes what's going on.

[karlson]

Hm. I'm surprised many people think that the A will scare UTG+1. Why isn't AK a reasonable holding? But of course with AK, most players will raise you on the river, and I think you can probably put in a third bet fairly safely.

Given this, and given that most players will check behind with KQ or KJ, but will still call a bet, I dislike the check.

I would have consider betting out on the turn. You will probably get raised by AK or KQ, and a number of opponents will check JJ behind you, but might be very confused if you bet (and probably call, since that's generally what people do when they're confused).

Oh, and as far as inducing a desperation bluff, that may be a decent point. However, given that most players in your position will call a river bet with a K, if you think this player will bluff bet, consider if he/she will also bluff raise.

[Coilean]

Ian,

I think folding on the flop here getting 7.5:1 would be horrible. These are nearly good enough odds to call with just a gutshot (given implied odds), even should you choose to entirely discount my dirty outs. According to twodimes I have 35% equity here against AK, and 27% equity against KK.

[mike l.]

"Clearly the consensus is against me on this one"

youre kidding right? i didnt look at the other posts and i wasnt going to post myself but i wanted to say that you played this expertly. getting those extra bets in when the opportunity arises (like with the river ace falling here) are a hallmark of expert play.

from the quality of your posts and plays, it's clear that you are a player who can get away with playing 87s in the bb for a raise against an early position raiser in a tougher than usual game. most of the people who post here, includnig me, are not.

[Ian M.]

Yes personally I think I would've made the call. I just wanted to see what others thought, because at first glance it looked pretty marginal. Note that your implied odds are much worse in a small 3 handed pot, with the 3rd player behind you who will probably fold. This player folding makes it less likely that you're only drawing to 4 live outs though, so I think it works itself out /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[nykenny]

Don't be so modest mike l. you are as good as them if not better. and Commerce 40-80 isn't that tough. anyone who plays in it will confirm, hehe...

I just love the 20-40 in commerce, seems unlimited action to me. and our hero is right, turn check-raise is surely not well respected in these games, because of the overwhelming population of us (wild asian players, lol)...

[bobgreen]

Coilean. I'm not real familiar with twodimes. It appears to report the % of wins without any consideration for the money won or lost.

When you call on the flop, there are two players still in the hand. If UTG has the Q he will likely call.

When the J comes on the turn, if no one has the Q, you will likely get one call from the set and otherwise nothing. (Also If UTG flopped the set you'll likely have to pay the additional bet on the flop).
When the J comes on the turn, in anybody has the Q (and plays well) you'll likely lose two big bets.
When the 6 comes on the turn, a few times you'll be beat already and sometimes you'll suffer the suckout.

The flop call appears to me to be the chipburner.

[Coilean]

bobgreen,

You are correct, future bets are not accounted for on twodimes: it's just an enumerator which can show your exact pot equity against a given lineup of hands. Even so, when your equity exceeds your offered pot odds by more than 50%, you almost always have a call as long as the pot isn't tiny and/or you don't anticipate excessive future action.

For example, even given your somewhat pessimistic assumptions, you should be able to show a profit calling on the flop here as long as a J is a good out at least 20% of the time. Assuming X as the probability a J is a good card for you, we'll use your assumptions and say you only win 1BB more when you hit a 6 (or make a runner runner flush, which we'll count as 1 additional out, for simplicity), never win any more bets when your J is good, and always lose 2.5BB more when the J is bad. So then, your EV here is roughly: 4/46(X(+3.75BB) + (1-X)(-2.5BB)) + 37/46(-0.5BB) + 5/46(+4.75BB). Solving for your EV > 0, yields X > 0.19.

In reality, I think you can expect to win more than 1 additional BB if you hit the 6 or runner runner flush, and will sometimes be paid off when the J is good for you. And in any case, I think the J is a good card for you quite a bit more often than 20% of the time. This is a fairly simplified analysis as it doesn't account for any redraws or drawing nearly dead scenarios, but even so, I think it shows that the call on the flop, if not a huge bread winner, is by no stretch a chipburner.