30-60 Commerce Question

[ZeroGee]

30-60 at Commerce. Folded to you in middle position, you raise with QQ. Very good player to your left 3-bets. SB folds, BB calls, you call.

Flop is T 9 3, rainbow. BB checks, you check, planning to check-raise. VGP checks.

Turn is a 4. BB bets, you raise, VGP folds, BB just calls.

River is a K. BB checks. Your move.

I was extremely surprised at the results of this hand.

ZG

[astroglide]

i would bet.

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
30-60 at Commerce. Folded to you in middle position, you raise with QQ. Very good player to your left 3-bets. SB folds, BB calls, you call.

Flop is T 9 3, rainbow. BB checks, you check, planning to check-raise. VGP checks.

Turn is a 4. BB bets, you raise, VGP folds, BB just calls.

River is a K. BB checks. Your move.

I was extremely surprised at the results of this hand.

ZG

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting hand here. i like a challange. now lets start with what matters most: which 2 cards are in the bb's hand? First since its 30-60 at commerce i'm going to make a few assumptions about this player's play. 1) he/she (hereafter he), like you, realizes that Mr. 3bet is a VG player and will therefore only enter this fray with a top notch hand, ats being the minimum that i could see with a bet on the turn. i would have said tt or 99 but think that is almost impossible since your raise on the turn indicates a willingness to call/raise the river so he'd lose $$ with those sets by not betting them (i'm also assuming here, as is implicit with that last sentence, that the bb understands these concepts). Now, back to the hand. i don't think jj is out of the question, but aa or kk seem very unlikely given the action. kk would bet flop to not give an "a" a free card. similarly, this player might check that ats to manuever a c-r as you were planning to do after being 3bet (clearly i think its obvious what two cards the button holds, or held...AK AQs and thats about it b/c he gave himself a freebee to catch one of em rather than try to pick up the pot (but a VG player would usually bet here which is why you checked assuming the preflop raiser would bet)...).

On the turn, the 4 hits and, surprise, bb bets out. could the 4 have helped his hand? only if he held 44 and was willing to call $60 cold on his blind w/ only 2 players who appear very aggressive. i'd say that would be a surprise to me, ESPECIALLY since he checked! the river. In fact, that check on the river makes me truly believe he has the minimum ats and was going for the same c-r you were.

so i'd have to say that based on his action the flop hit him, he went for a c-r, missed it, bet the turn and the k scared him. so NORMALLY i would conclude ats jj or the like since he called $60 cold yadda yadda. BUT those hands WOULD NOT BE SURPRISING! so now we need to factor in your surprise. i can't imagine what would surprise you unless he bet and called a hopeless hand and did the 'ol bet out turn after good players check as a bluff and maybe he had an out, missed and you got him but can't bet b/c hed likely only call with a better hand. but then again that not betting is only in that latter case. I still am having trouble thinking what the surprise was...so i'll end my pondering there.

PERSONALLY i'd bet the river as confidently as any other value bet seeing as hed call with at, a9 (if you're lucky, so probably less likely). he'd also call with jts so i'd say bet. BUT again b/c of that surprise i say you might be beat and he shows down AK or kq or something like that.

do tell later on, thanks.

questions? comments?
-Barron

[DcifrThs]

LOL, i love it astroglide. you came to the same conclusion i did but it took you 1/1000th the # of words.

good stuff!! and sorry i'm so longwinded.
-Barron

[astroglide]

heh /images/graemlins/smile.gif if the queens lost, i would expect them to be losing on the turn. i doubt the king drove the last nail.

[ZeroGee]

I think you deserve to hear the results after all the thought you put into it. :-)

As you said, the VGP obviously had a top notch hand that missed - AK. He was also confident that we were most likely planning to check-raise, and so he checked, and folded when he still missed the turn.

The surprise is the BB's hand -- AA. It was absolutely horrendously played, in my mind. Had he 3-bet the turn, and bet the river, he gets 2 more BBs out of me. I checked the river simply because I thought this was an example where instead of betting for value, I would only be called if beat.

I raised preflop, so the raiser knows I have a decent hand. I then attempted to check-raise the flop, and failed. I then raised his turn bet. He has to put me on a premium hand. Had I been the one holding the ATs, etc., it's unlikely I would have played my hand this way.

Yet if the BB recognizes all this, why does he not bet out the river? He tried to check-raise, and again failed.

I thought this was just an interesting hand and decided to post it. You say that at this level the "VGP" would bet his AK, but on the contrary, good players know when not to futilely throw bets in. Had he bet, he would have been raised by the blind, and 3-bet by me, thus throwing money away. I noticed the past few sessions that almost every hand at 30-60 is check-raised -- it's almost a given. There's so much aggression that you can safely check a wide variety of hands confident that one of the idiots who missed preflop will nonetheless bet into the field, allowing you to extract more juice.

Once the table changed a bit, this game last night played like 3-6 with $10 chips, by the way. Tonight I'm playing $3-$6 with some friends at an indian casino where that's the highest limit. Will it seem like $30-$60 with $1 chips? Most likely.

People talk about "first forays" into different limits. In my experience, it's rare to find a 20-40 or 30-60 in California that doesn't play like low-limit, except you make a lot more money.

[DcifrThs]

i clearly agree with you and was trying to factor in the surprise of the poster. hands that beat her on the turn are:

aa?, kk?, tt, 99, 44?, 33?, t9, t4?, t3? and thats all folks. guy could be betting a draw jq (you got two q's so thats less likely) j8?...oh, those questionmarks mean "what the hell is he doing calling 2 cold with these hands?" aa, kk is reraise probably preflop, and bet river. i really am at a loss, especially if the k ends up winning but then again no info was provided as to the proclivities of the bb.

hope we get to hear the answer lol
-Barron

[astroglide]

i think the botchery of his aces is further evidence that a value bet was in order

[DcifrThs]

Very true. I am not a certifiable 30/60 player...never even sat in a game of that size but have walked away from vegas a consistent winner at 10/20 mirage and 15/30 bellagio (due to rigorous study, patience, and more patience for the right game to open up). i ended up giving a few big bets back here and there in both instances but posted a nice win overall.

anyway, AA was GROSSLY misplayed in my opinion. if that was me in the bb i would probably call and bet out the flop hoping to get raised by another premium hand. OR i would reraise preflop and tack on those extra bets. and i certainly would r-r the turn and bet river, what in the world was this trickster thinking?

i know...."mmmm....aces aahhhh" lemme get a few c-r's in and show my prowess lol, BACKFIRE dot com.

-Barron

[DcifrThs]

again astro i agree. i bet the river here most if not all the time expecting to win by a nose (at, jj)

[Zele]

Why not bet the flop? I don't know why you'd want to checkraise two players with only QQ overpair. Plus if he's very good, you can't be sure he'll auto-bet the flop (of course I have the benefit of hindsight here.)

[Jeffage]

Bet...you could easily be called by a ten or worse hand.

Jeff

[elysium]

hi zero
of course you know that you need to bet the flop when checked to. you want to represent AA which is a continuation of the pre-flop line which should have been you going for a cap. well, that wasn't done.

zero, QQ needs your loving protection on the pre-flop. you must reraise with it every time unless it's a situation where you find yourself heads up against a UTG limp reraiser or perhaps when you're on the button, have an aggressive SB and your reraise would cap it. then, in the first instance, against the UTG limp reraiser you could be against a bigger pair and you don't want to give the strength of your hand away if he doesn't have a bigger pair in this heads up scenario. and in the case of you being on the button with an aggressive SB in there, well you don't want to slow him down by capping. you really botched up the pre-flop zero because here reraising or capping is a must. what, the LP 3 bets? great, now 4 bet. and yes, the BB will then check to you. and then you bet.

i know, you thought by calling the 3 bet you were setting up the aggressive button for a 4 bet. but you can't rely on aggressive buttons for anything zero. had you 3 bet and the button called your 3 bet pre-flop, since he would then read you as reading him to be weaker than the strength behind your betting pressure, an average knowledge button could then be relied upon to bet when you check since he would assume that you think there is a chance that he would check it down. so an average button would bet thinking that since he is a threat to check it down, but you checked anyway, that you want him to check, so he therefore bets. if he is a knowledgeable button, he will not think that.

a knowledgeable button who has called a 3 bet will find your check into him to be suspicious. he will think that you think that he thinks that you think that he wants to check. so when you check into the knowledgeable button, he will quickly see that you think that he thinks he has not given away the strength of his hand, and that furthermore you think that he thinks that you think he may check. so since he thinks that you want him to think that you would never leave the decision up to him on whether the round gets checked around or not because of the fact that he might actually check it down, he realizes that you expect him to bet because he thinks that you think that he thinks if you want him to check, he will bet for that reason alone. but the knowledgeable button knows all this. and since he thinks that you think that he thinks he is a risk to check it down, and knows that you know that, but doesn't think you know that he knows that as well, he instead does the very thing that he thinks you think that he thinks he is at risk of doing, and he checks it down even though it looks like that's what you want him to do. but for the same exact reason the average button falls into the trap and gets check-raised. and that check-raise is always called because the button always has a strong hand, but also a hand whose strength he thinks perhaps is concealed.

so when do you go for a check-raise of the button in this situation on the flop when you have a stronger hand than his and don't want it checked around? if it's an average button, you go for the check-raise when he has a strong hand whose strength he thinks he has slightly concealed. you go for a check-raise of a knowledgeable button, therefore, when the strength of his hand has not been concealed because the more knowledgeable button would anticipate your expectation of his certain bet and think that you would never expect him to fall into such an obvious check-raise trap. and so he bets reasoning that a stronger hand would have gone for a 3 bet, not a check-raise. and since a check-raise precludes his being 3 bet, the button reasons that he has the stronger hand, and he bets when checked to.

but this button is an average button who doesn't think the strength of his hand is concealed. so his thinking is simple. he thinks that you think he will bet when you check. so, since he realizes that you want him to bet, he checks. if he were more knowledgeable, he would see that he should bet. why? because if you thought that he would bet when you checked, you might not have evaluated your hand strength correctly either. he might be able to take control of the hand by the opportunities betting might offer him.

the button (LP) is an average player. since an average opponent will check it down in this spot, you should bet the flop.

the easy way to understand all this without getting analytical is simply; if you're acting first and the LP is average, if the LP has reason to think that the strength of his hand is hidden (due to action, etc.), go for a check-raise with a stronger hand. if the LP is very knowlegeable, and the action pre-flop is such that an average LP would think that the strength of his hand was hidden, do not go for a check-raise, instead bet into the knowlegeable LP, even if you have the nuts. only check-raise the knowledgeable when the strength of his hand is not hidden.

if you're in LP, base your action on how knowledgeable the EP is, and whether the strength of your hand is hidden by average standards. if he's knowledgeable, and the strength of your hand is hidden by an average opponent's standards, and he has a strong hand, when he checks, check it down. but if he's knowledgeable and the strength of your hand is not hidden, when he checks, bet. instead of a check-raise, the more knowledgeable would have gone for a 3 bet. but of course, if he is average, check it along.

so there are exact opposite courses of action to take based on your opponent's knowledge, when both of you have shown strength pre-flop, and the LP has an average opponent's grounds to believe that the strength of his hand is slightly hidden.

on the flop, you left some bets on the table.

[mikelow]

I would have bet the flop, and try for a checkraise on the turn. And when the king comes on the river, it's a close decision to bet or not after the BB checks. I'd flip a mental coin and check behind, which is what I would do here.

[ike]

QJ wouldn't be terribly surprising would it?

[SA125]

You have no idea what he has or why he called 2 raises from BB.

Two downside bets outweigh one upside bet.

I couldn't turn my cards up fast enough.

[SA125]

"The surprise is the BB's hand -- AA. It was absolutely horrendously played"

"I checked the river simply because I thought this was an example where instead of betting for value, I would only be called if beat"

"You say that at this level the "VGP" would bet his AK, but on the contrary, good players know when not to futilely throw bets in"

Nice ch on river. Agree 100%. Love analysis & aggressiveness but, when faced with hands like this, sometimes the best play is to just see who wins.

Great post.

[Diplomat]

I have not read the responses yet, so I'll give it a wing and then respond again.

It looks like a pretty clear bet, most of the time. I doubt the BB has KT, since they checked twice, and called a re-raise from the blinds. I also doubt AK would call the turn when you checkraise, even for one more bet.

I guess you might be worried about QJ. But with two queens in your hand, and the fact that the big blind called a re-raise makes me think QJ is unlikely.

I dunno. Maybe they flopped bottom set and freaked out? AA that freaked out? It looks like he chickened out, if you lost.

-Diplomat

[Diplomat]

[ QUOTE ]
i think the botchery of his aces is further evidence that a value bet was in order

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. I agree. 110%.

-Diplomat

[DanZ]

Online 20-40 10 handed. There is a late blind and 4 limpers to me. I raise AdQd on the button. Blinds plays, all call.

One of the later limpers seems borderline insane, raising several players with awful off suit aceson other hands and playing way too loose.

Flop is AsKc8h. Checked to me and I check. Turn is 6c. Checked to crazy player who bets, the late blind raises, and I 3 bet. Crazy folds, late blind calls.

River is a 9. Check , check.

Comments appreciated.

Dan Z.

[DanZ]

[Tommy Angelo]

"what in the world was this trickster thinking?"

Seems obvious to me that he had a hunch that he was beat. That his hunch happened to be wrong doesn't mean he was wrong to follow it.


Tommy

[vkotlyar]

I would bet 100% of the time. I give the BB a 10. If he has K10, well, good for him
vitaly

[Schmed]

I know this isn't any ground breaking response and I haven't read what other's have said but I have to think that you need to bet that flop. If I didn't bet the flop I check the river for fear of the jq or a k.

[DcifrThs]

Tommy,

I must here respectfully disagree with you. I can understand the cold call for deception. but with a 3 bet preflop its quite likely somebody's got a pair. the bb should certainly bet out given the non-cap. he would then get raised and could reraise, "stop and go," or c-r the turn when a blank hits...but either way there would be bets he didn't get that should be in there. there are no pairs that can beat him other than tt 99 that our hero would raise with. Then on the turn (still no reason to fear he's beat) he bets, gets raised by our hero representing those ladies (or jj kk tt 99) and the bb misses another bet (this time a full size one) by not reraising. THEN the bb decides to check the river probably with the intention of checkraising. MAYBE the bb thought he's beat on the river for some reason but the flop & turn play of those aces suggests more FPS than thinking he's beat.

and to all those who suffer from FPS every now and again (me included), lets do some easy addition:

we'll assume no cap preflop for deception. 3*3 +.5 bets=9.5 bets on flop. checked around=0. if he bet and was raised and he called again for deception thats 1 big bet or 2 small bets he missed (not including his) bringing it to 13.5 sb's on the burn. turn comes blank he bets out (which if he bet the flop would now probably be a c-r but we'll stay with this scenario even though there'll be an "extra bet" here b/c the c-r would not get reraised as we'll see now) when he does this our hero will raise and he should have reraised for the extra big bet. thats 1 big bet on the turn he missed, now up to 2 full bets missed on 1 hand and it aint even the river. On the river clearly a bet is in order but again he wanted the c-r or thought kk and tt would beat him and qq, jj would call so its even money to win (assuming he mis-evaluated it and did not attach correct bayesian coefficients to each hand combinatorically). yet another bet missed. So i get he missed 3 FULL BETS at an 80-160 game when those aces only come up .45% of the time, i'd call that some "horrendous" play as our hero described. fear he was beaten? maybe....

but i say FPS at its worst. (by the way, i do realize the cursory nature of this analysis and that each street's action is not independent and therefore cannot be viewed in discrete time but rather i should look at each hand as a whole subset of results and do a fuller analysis. but time is of the essence. therefore 3 bets may have to be discounted, lets say by 1/3, for that implicit error. so he missed 2 $160 bets.)

so while it is possible he was just scared, its clear that his scared or FPS play cost him dearly and you REALLY profited from this situation b/c it was heads up on the turn. he saved you a bet there and on the river (even though a 3 bet on the turn and a bet on the river may cause you to fold...but either way he saved our hero a bet by not betting river)

sorry to draw out this well discussed subject. questions? comments?
-Barron

PS- from our hero's perspective a bet on the flop is probably better than the c-r now that i have read some of the responses b/c the very good player won't 'futily' throw bets in the pot when beat so hero can't rely on him to bet. but hero's play was much better than bb's (not too hard). the check on the river must have been instinct, a good read, or thinking the "value bet" would actually be an unprofitable 'only called when beat' bet (which is what our hero states). so good check, although i would have bet expecting to get called by ats or jj, and if bb's got the kts well whoopdy-doo for him lol.

[nykenny]

i will also bet close to 100% of the time. unless i pick up a tell indicating he liked the river card. you can beat many hands that he could bet the turn but couldn't reraise with.

all said, he could still have QQ or KK (LOL) or even a small set like 44 to surpprise you, it's commerce, and i was there before... /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Kenny

[nykenny]

why u guys keep saying he wanted to C/R with AA? of course he didn't. he is just one of those bad players that played badly, simple as that.


Kenny

[Tommy Angelo]

"I must here respectfully disagree with you."

I read your post very carefully and I did not see anywhere where you disagreed with anything in my post.

Tommy

[DcifrThs]

lol. that sounded like the gore bush debate from saturday night live: "uh governor bush, i listened very carefully to the vicepresidents remarks and nowhere in them did he 'mess with texas'"

i guess where i disagreed i thought he wasn't playing scared just badly, as in FPS badly. i did, however, state that he MAY have been scared at some point but more likely i thought it was a bad case of the fips (fps). in any case, funny response!

-Barron